[boren]

[quote name='dave's clichés' timestamp='1317453084' post='12004']To me that makes total sense.So lets be optimistic and write plenty of comments on what we the CUSTOMER wants so at least Ricoh will know.[/quote]



As a Ricoh customer, I agree with most of what you say. Here's a summary of what I want Ricoh to do with Pentax technologies:

• K and Q mounts. It would be nice to see GXR modules for these mounts (with full AF and AE of course)
  
  
• Weather sealing in cameras and lenses. This applies to some of low-end products as well (the old K200D and the current 18-55 WR come to mind).
  
  
• Sensor shift technologies. Automatic tilt correction; Composition adjustment; Automatic correction for earth rotation when shooting night skies (using an optional GPS add-on)
  
  
• Green button. This could be a great addition to Ricoh's already excellent user interface.
  
  
• HyperManual. Specifically I'm interested in the ability to hold the AEL button and change aperture/shutter combinations with the dial while retaining the same exposure level. My KM 7D also has this, and it make M mode so much more convenient.
  
  
• HyperProgram. Basically the option to shift to A or S modes directly from P mode simply by turning the front or the rear wheel.
  
  
• JPEG engine. Much better than Ricoh. Less details smoothing, nicer color rendering, better chroma noise handling. However, the handling of reds at high-ISO can and should be improved.
  
  
• Video capabilities. Although Pentax is not a market leader when it comes to video functionality, it's still miles ahead of Ricoh. Videos have better resolution and less artifacts. It's also very nice to be able to use in-body IS during video capture.
  
  
• AA option. Makes more sense than AAA. Granted, Ricoh used to offer AA support in some of its older cameras (my GX8 being one such example).
  
  
• Rear dial that works reliably. Not that combo dial-button thingy that the GRD1 used.
  
  
• Digital preview. Better than taking test shots that get saved to the card for no reason.
  
  
• Wireless flash control. The Pentax implementation may not be an industry leading one, but it's still something that Ricoh lacks.
  
  

And here are a few things that Ricoh should avoid:

• SDM motors and other reliability issues. These include sensor stains, mirror overshoot or whatever its called and a few other annoyances. Ricoh already has enough reliability issues of its own. I hope the merged company gets its act together on this. For starters, all SDM lenses should be re-designed and the existing ones should be sold with a 5 year warranty. If Tamron can do it, so should Ricoh/Pentax.
  
  
• Firmware upgrade handling. Ricoh firmware upgrades are frequent, contain actual enhancements, and are better documented and communicated. If Ricoh does the same with the DSLR line, Pentax users are in for a treat.
  
  
• Lens selection and pricing. I hope Ricoh fixes some of the bad decisions made earlier (mostly by Hoya). To name but a few: Doubling the price of decades old 50/1.4 so that it becomes more expensive than all competitors (and to a lesser extent, doing the same with most other lenses); discontinuation of the 50/1.7 without a proper alternative; releasing a 35/2.4 that is both slower than the competition and with worse build quality; discontinuation of the very nice 35/2.0; discontinuation of the Tamron-based 18-250 without offering a proper alternative; releasing a poorly-performing and over-expensive 18-135; not offering any lens that's longer than 300mm; wasting efforts on releasing too many short prime lenses, most of which are slow and expensive compared to the competition ("Limited" as in /limited appeal/); Most obvious omissions compared to the competition: 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 400/5.6, 18-200 or 18-250. Release those (without SDM!) and there would hardly be any more complaints.
  
  
• Branding decisions. Choosing unpronounceable names for cameras ("[/b]ist" for some of the old DSLRs) and labeling some of the Q lenses "Toy lenses" are horrible decisions. I'm not sure they even make sense in the Japanese market, let alone anywhere else.
  
  
• Cooked RAW. What were they thinking? RAW should be RAW. Period.
  
  
• Unattractive menus. I know its only eye-candy, but both companies employ the least appealing menu design in the industry. I'm sure they can spruce it up a bit without negatively impacting usability (which is perfectly fine in both).
  
  

The way I see it the pros outweigh the cons by a large margin (even if not in word count), and as a (mostly) Ricoh user I'm very excited by the prospects of this merger.