giellaleafapmu
Well-known
Anyone had the chance to compare the quality of these cameras one against the other?
GLF
GLF
Ricoh GRD IV vs Sony DSC-RX100 vs Samsung EX2F
- Thread starter giellaleafapmu
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 14
- Views 7K
stompyq
Well-known
Image quality? Handling? what are we comparing? I was considering these two cameras 2 weeks ago and handled them a few times at adorama and B&H. I think the GRD is much better when it comes to handling than the sony. Image quality i think should easily go to the sony from the examples i've seen. In the end i decided that neither was better than a m43 camera and got a epm1 for a 1/3 of the price.
kshapero
South Florida Man
Tried the GRD IV. A fantastic camera. Fits easily in your pocket. Easy to shot aperture preferred with one hand. Images up to 1600 ISO. B/W was superb. I have no idea why I did not buy it. Oh yeah it would have scraped against my knife.
kzphoto
Well-known
The RX100 runs circles around the GRD IV in most image quality tests, but the GRD IV has better menus and ergonomics. The main ding against the RX100 is that the camera feels like a bar of soap and my thumb always wants to hit the buttons on the back. I want a GRD with a larger sensor now!
David_Manning
Well-known
I'm thinking, RX100 with Franiac grip...
I'm shooting a Contax T3, and it's pretty slippery anyway. I guess I'm practiced for the RX100😉
I'm shooting a Contax T3, and it's pretty slippery anyway. I guess I'm practiced for the RX100😉
kshapero
South Florida Man
Archlich
Well-known
Ricoh filed patents earlier for 28mm equivalent lenses for M43 and APS-C sized sensors.
A GRD5 with M43 sensor next summer is very possible.
A GRD5 with M43 sensor next summer is very possible.
ruby.monkey
Veteran
The generous DoF, coupled with its snap focus and beautiful black'n'white rendering, is what makes my GRD3 such a good camera for fast chase-the-kids work. I think the addition of an appreciably larger sensor would take away much of the GRD's charm.
David_Manning
Well-known
One thing I've had to do to make my Contax T3 images more "real" and gritty for street is degrade the scans quite a bit. The negatives out of the camera look like they were shot with an M body and 35 'chron.
giellaleafapmu
Well-known
Well, thank you to all of you and...I am as confused as before.😕
Maybe I should have explained something more about the possible use.
I don't mind large cameras and I am getting rid of a lot of what I don't use to keep only one DSLR system, still sometimes I just don't want to bring out anything which cannot be put into a pocket. Right now I use a Samsung HMX-W200, that's a pocket camcorder which is barely able to take a still picture but is completely stealthy because it looks like a phone and is water resistant and shock resistant. I'd like something which could get me a reasonable pictures I could, say, print 8x10" size.
Of course a possibility are the M4/3 cameras but I just don't want to get into Olympus market again. I love their lenses but I don't like their habit of producing something for a while then stopping the update and eventually discontinue it altogether. They did this with the Pen, then the OM system, now almost completed the same operation with the 4/3 E-System (I am still a proud owner of two E-1 bodies). I am sure that when FF and APS "mirrorless" (sorry) will be the rule they will stop anythig conected with M4/3 as well, so no thanks.
I could be interested to APS mirrorless such as Sony or Samsung but probably not right now. They are nice but with a capable lens don't fit into a pocket and once I have to carry something I can as well carry a D4-sized camera which at the moment can do many more things which I like to do with a camera (in particular command many wireless flashes).
Now the three names I mentioned are the pocket cameras which caught my attention because they all seem nicely made and have a reputation for decent to good images. I know of course anything one can read in a test, I just hoped for a first hand impression which goes behind that. A 10Mpx picture seen at 100% on a computer screen looks almost always worst than a 20Mpx picture on the same screen but when one print at a given size (let say 8x10") the story can be different sometimes and could depend much more on the lens, the software etc. A camera can have a billion features which are all a pain to access because they are hidden into stupid menus or a pleasure to use just because it does what one expect it to do...
I was looking for such impressions (while at Ricoh develop their FF pocket camera, Sony makes a better menu for their NEX and makes a FF with a completely collapsible lens).
GLF
Maybe I should have explained something more about the possible use.
I don't mind large cameras and I am getting rid of a lot of what I don't use to keep only one DSLR system, still sometimes I just don't want to bring out anything which cannot be put into a pocket. Right now I use a Samsung HMX-W200, that's a pocket camcorder which is barely able to take a still picture but is completely stealthy because it looks like a phone and is water resistant and shock resistant. I'd like something which could get me a reasonable pictures I could, say, print 8x10" size.
Of course a possibility are the M4/3 cameras but I just don't want to get into Olympus market again. I love their lenses but I don't like their habit of producing something for a while then stopping the update and eventually discontinue it altogether. They did this with the Pen, then the OM system, now almost completed the same operation with the 4/3 E-System (I am still a proud owner of two E-1 bodies). I am sure that when FF and APS "mirrorless" (sorry) will be the rule they will stop anythig conected with M4/3 as well, so no thanks.
I could be interested to APS mirrorless such as Sony or Samsung but probably not right now. They are nice but with a capable lens don't fit into a pocket and once I have to carry something I can as well carry a D4-sized camera which at the moment can do many more things which I like to do with a camera (in particular command many wireless flashes).
Now the three names I mentioned are the pocket cameras which caught my attention because they all seem nicely made and have a reputation for decent to good images. I know of course anything one can read in a test, I just hoped for a first hand impression which goes behind that. A 10Mpx picture seen at 100% on a computer screen looks almost always worst than a 20Mpx picture on the same screen but when one print at a given size (let say 8x10") the story can be different sometimes and could depend much more on the lens, the software etc. A camera can have a billion features which are all a pain to access because they are hidden into stupid menus or a pleasure to use just because it does what one expect it to do...
I was looking for such impressions (while at Ricoh develop their FF pocket camera, Sony makes a better menu for their NEX and makes a FF with a completely collapsible lens).
GLF
Maximilian
Established
I own a GRD3 (not 4) and an RX100. Sorry no experience with the Samsung.
The RX100 takes nicer pictures, plain and simple. If I were to only have one, I'd choose the RX100, no doubt.
The one thing that I like much more with the GRD3, is that it feels like it could handle much more abuse. Not sure if this is actually true, but it feels this way. It's lighter and I throw it in any pocket or bag amongst other random hard objects without giving it a second thought.
I would not do that with the RX100, since it feels more like a fine, fragile camera. I'm actually getting a case for my RX100 to use when bringing it in a non-camera bag, which I've never thought about getting for my GRD3.
The RX100 takes nicer pictures, plain and simple. If I were to only have one, I'd choose the RX100, no doubt.
The one thing that I like much more with the GRD3, is that it feels like it could handle much more abuse. Not sure if this is actually true, but it feels this way. It's lighter and I throw it in any pocket or bag amongst other random hard objects without giving it a second thought.
I would not do that with the RX100, since it feels more like a fine, fragile camera. I'm actually getting a case for my RX100 to use when bringing it in a non-camera bag, which I've never thought about getting for my GRD3.
dogbunny
Registered Boozer
I own a GRD4. From what I've seen the rx100 takes better pictures, but it doesn't leave me wanting an rx100. I just want a GRD that can do that.
giellaleafapmu
Well-known
Thank you to everyone who helped me here. As the old saying goes: "I used to be confused, now I am not really sure anymore". 😕
GLF
GLF
Similar threads
