Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: The "GR" stands for great!  (Read 2654 times)
gerafotografija
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 224



WWW
« on: November 20, 2013, 12:08:04 AM »
ReplyReply

Has anyone else tried the Ricoh GR and started to hope they come out with more of this line?

I haven't had much time with it yet, but I already like the controls at least as much as on the Fuji Xs. Within the limits of its 28mm f/2.8 lens, the image quality straight out of camera or with just a little work from DNGs in ACR and CS6, seems to surpass what I get after much more extensive WB adjustment, NR, and sharpening with an OMD's files.

After exploring the pretty much unique layout of buttons, dials and the lever, and then customizing a bit, I am now really hooked on how slickly it all functions.

These two OOC jpegs are not very refined images, but check out the "pop" in the quickly composed snapshot and the nonexistent noise in the sunset scene. It seems almost too easy.

Cheers!





I put a few more photos up on my blog along with some initial observations on shooting with it.
« Last Edit: November 20, 2013, 09:56:32 AM by gerafotografija » Logged

Telecaster
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 660



« Reply #1 on: November 20, 2013, 02:13:31 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm really impressed by all these recent APS-C compacts. Spoilt for choice, we are!

I have to say, if Fuji came out with an X100s variant with a 56/2 lens I'd strongly consider getting it along with the current 23/2 version and getting rid of a whole bunch of interchangeable-lens stuff. Same goes for this Ricoh and, say, a 45mm variant. Two small cameras, two fixed lenses, done & dusted. (But I'm probably too much of a lens nut to actually go through with it.)

-Dave-
Logged
tom b
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 858


WWW
« Reply #2 on: November 20, 2013, 02:32:09 PM »
ReplyReply

I've got a GR and the file quality was fine. The major problem is that it took up to 12 seconds to store a raw file. Sorry but that was a deal breaker, it spoiled the fun.

Cheers,
Logged

gerafotografija
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 224



WWW
« Reply #3 on: November 20, 2013, 08:54:29 PM »
ReplyReply

I've got a GR and the file quality was fine. The major problem is that it took up to 12 seconds to store a raw file.

Not sure what kind of SD card you were using, but I save RAW + high qual JPEG with almost instant write time using a class 10 card. A three frame bracket takes about 2-3 secs max. This is close to the same as my OMD EM5 alhough i save only raw with the Oly, so jpeg processing is skipped.

Your problem is definitely not due to the camera itself.
Logged

tom b
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 858


WWW
« Reply #4 on: November 20, 2013, 09:36:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Wikipedia quote:

Slow processing rate: up to 12 seconds between RAW shots, improved to 8 seconds with updated firmware


You must remember the camera was launched in 2005, I bought mine in 2006. So I was using the typical Sandisk cards of the day. I must admit that I hadn't heard of the firmware update until today.

The straw that broke the camel's back for me is that I left the battery recharger in a hotel somewhere in NZ and I didn't notice until I was back in Sydney and back at work. The other thing is that I had my Canon 20D so it wasn't that I didn't have a camera that I liked using.

Glad to see that you are enjoying your new toy though.

Cheers,

Logged

gerafotografija
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 224



WWW
« Reply #5 on: November 20, 2013, 10:05:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Wow, Tom, this is a pretty humorous misunderstanding. I guess manufacturers shouldn't reuse model names quite so often.

The GR I'm talking about was just launched in April this year. The original GR Digital must be the one you're talking about.

Glad to know write speeds have improved in the last 8 years.

Sorry for the confusion. Quite funny.
 Cheesy
Logged

tom b
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 858


WWW
« Reply #6 on: November 20, 2013, 11:46:24 PM »
ReplyReply

That is crazy, two models with the same name (sorry about the mixup). I think the most interesting thing is that the GR is made by Pentax after their merger.
Logged

mmbma
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 89


« Reply #7 on: November 21, 2013, 10:55:55 AM »
ReplyReply

Love the GR. I tried the Sony X100, and the Nikon V1 before I settled on the GR. Very happy with the choice. AF is slow but I put it on snap focus. File quality is so much better than X100, v1, or my OMD Em5. the bigger sensor matters.

Logged
Jim Pascoe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 713


WWW
« Reply #8 on: November 22, 2013, 12:56:42 PM »
ReplyReply

I love my new GR, very light, very quiet and superb image quality.  I use the Optical clip on Viewfinder mostly, though of course it has no information from the camera.

Here a couple of pics from last week.

Jim
Logged
gerafotografija
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 224



WWW
« Reply #9 on: November 23, 2013, 10:18:58 AM »
ReplyReply

Nice pics Jim. Which OVF do you use?

I read online that people don't see full GR frame coverage using the 28mm Ricoh viewfinder, and that there is a Voigtlander with 25mm coverage that works perfectly. Has anyone confirmed that?
Logged

Jim Pascoe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 713


WWW
« Reply #10 on: November 24, 2013, 01:20:10 AM »
ReplyReply

Nice pics Jim. Which OVF do you use?

I read online that people don't see full GR frame coverage using the 28mm Ricoh viewfinder, and that there is a Voigtlander with 25mm coverage that works perfectly. Has anyone confirmed that?

I have the Ricoh GV-1, which has frame lines for the normal lens and the wider attachment too - though I do not own that yet.  I find the OVF really good for most stuff hand-held and only use the screen if on a tripod (rarely) or on a wall say or for shooting from odd angles.  Focus of course is the problem so it works best when the focus subject is not too obscure!
Regarding the frame lines, there is space around the 21mm lines and of course even more around the 28mm lines - but this is good because I can see what is outside of the frame .

Jim
« Last Edit: November 24, 2013, 05:17:07 AM by Jim Pascoe » Logged
gerafotografija
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 224



WWW
« Reply #11 on: November 25, 2013, 09:32:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Any idea if the GV-2 is a good alternative to the GV-1? Is there room around the 28mm lines on that one?
I would be more interested in a 28/35mm combo for use with the crop mode also, but I don't know if anyone makes it.
Logged

Jim Pascoe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 713


WWW
« Reply #12 on: November 27, 2013, 04:30:03 AM »
ReplyReply

I have no experience with the GV-2.  Regarding the 35mm crop mode, seeing as the camera just uses the centre part of the sensor and lens, I prefer to just imagine how the image will be cropped and do it after the event.  OVF's are not precise framing guides anyway and there seems no point in cropping the picture at point of capture rather than do it after the event.  The '35mm' option I think is most useful for portraits, where filling the frame at 28mm could lead to distortion.  So I just stand back a bit and know that I will be cropping in to the image.  One of the disadvantages of a fixed 28mm lens, but a reasonable trade I think for such a great little camera.

Jim
Logged
simonstucki
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 64


WWW
« Reply #13 on: November 27, 2013, 12:53:45 PM »
ReplyReply

I would love a 35mm (23/2.8 or better yet f/2) version with the newer 24mp sensor. 28 is too wide for me most of the time.
Logged
gerafotografija
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 224



WWW
« Reply #14 on: November 27, 2013, 08:33:57 PM »
ReplyReply

OVF's are not precise framing guides anyway and there seems no point in cropping the picture at point of capture rather than do it after the event.

Hi Jim, until I tried the GR, I only cropped in post as well, but there seems to be one advantage that I didn't notice previously.

If you use the RAW sensor crop mode on the GR, you get metering and focus that ignores the no longer relevant areas on the sensor. This doesn't matter in every case, but I've had a higher hit rate of sharp autofocus and OOC exposures that didn't need adjustment in post.

This isn't essential, but I am starting to use it more often. Even the more extreme 47mm crop mode is usable on the GR, although it still looks like a cropped 28mm image.
Logged

Jim Pascoe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 713


WWW
« Reply #15 on: November 28, 2013, 02:18:57 AM »
ReplyReply

I would love a 35mm (23/2.8 or better yet f/2) version with the newer 24mp sensor. 28 is too wide for me most of the time.

I agree that a 35mm EFV would be great, but of course you are then more limited and any camera is a compromise.  If I wanted that and I had the money I would go for the Sony RX1.  But in fact the Ricoh is very compact and in any case because I do most of my shooting with the OVF and my subjects are often people, I need a slightly greater depth of field to allow for the fact that I cannot easily see what is in focus.  So a 35mm f2, while possibly a great combination, in practise would not work for the way I use the GR.  F2 needs great precision in picking the focus point meaning using the rear screen, and possibly having an f2 lens would increase bulk.  For me, while the GR is not perfect, it is a workable compromise for such a compact device.

Jim
Logged
Jim Pascoe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 713


WWW
« Reply #16 on: November 28, 2013, 02:19:40 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi Jim, until I tried the GR, I only cropped in post as well, but there seems to be one advantage that I didn't notice previously.

If you use the RAW sensor crop mode on the GR, you get metering and focus that ignores the no longer relevant areas on the sensor. This doesn't matter in every case, but I've had a higher hit rate of sharp autofocus and OOC exposures that didn't need adjustment in post.

This isn't essential, but I am starting to use it more often. Even the more extreme 47mm crop mode is usable on the GR, although it still looks like a cropped 28mm image.

That is a point I had not considered so I will have a play!

Jim
Logged
barryfitzgerald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 549


« Reply #17 on: December 02, 2013, 05:46:33 AM »
ReplyReply

I would love a 35mm (23/2.8 or better yet f/2) version with the newer 24mp sensor. 28 is too wide for me most of the time.

I would tend to agree a 35mm f2 equivalent would be ideal for general use.
I'm not sure why they picked 28mm for a fixed focal length it's not as useful
Logged
Jim Pascoe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 713


WWW
« Reply #18 on: December 02, 2013, 10:10:55 AM »
ReplyReply

I would tend to agree a 35mm f2 equivalent would be ideal for general use.
I'm not sure why they picked 28mm for a fixed focal length it's not as useful

Hi Barry

But it is a tradition - I have the 35mm film Ricoh GR1 from the mid 1990's and it was a great camera with a 28mm lens.  It is all a compromise - but at least 28mm can easily be cropped down - you cannot go wider.
There are loads of choices now and the GR is just one camera that is excellent at what it does.  It is not trying to please everyone.

Jim
Logged
johnwolf
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 19


« Reply #19 on: December 04, 2013, 05:20:02 AM »
ReplyReply

I hadn't used a 28 much before the GR but am now enjoying the process of moving closer and trying to fill the frame. It's just a different way of working. In street shooting I find I'm also much more attentive to the setting. I now find that, if I were using a 35 or 50, I often would not have gotten the photo I wanted. The camera also has the most pleasing BW rendering of any small camera I've owned.

John




« Last Edit: December 04, 2013, 06:33:32 AM by johnwolf » Logged

Web site | New PDF book:  What the Light Does
Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad