Any life left in Ricoh GX200's?

[kshapero]

I still have one and really like it. Its biggest weakness is poor high ISO image quality. I use Noise Ninja to compensate. Anyone else still using the Ricoh GX200? Anybody have a work around for poor high ISO image quality? I wonder about the difference between the GX200 and the GRX with similar zoom?

 

[al1966]

I still use a GX100, it is nigh on useless above 100 ASA and it is slow if I shoot raw. Given all these foibles I love it, in the right light it is superb. They also are well designed cameras, the snap focus is great and I especially like the stepped zoom, feels more like using a set of primes. Most of all if it works enjoy it, the GX100/200 are great cameras, make me want a film gr but they go for too much.

 

[kbg32]

I still use my GRD and GX100. Love'em!

 

[sevo]

I always considered the 100 in the GX100 the appropriate naming for a ISO100 maximum camera. Nothing wrong with that - I don't shoot faster film in most of my film compacts either.

 

[mugent]

I used to have GX200, I didn't like it, it was lovely to use, but the shutter lag was terrible, and as others have said, the high ISO performance is poor.

MT

 

[umcelinho]

I had a GX100 and it was a joy to use it, felt so great in the hand. I ended up selling it to a friend as I had gotten an LX3 some time before and was using it more because of the better iso and brighter lens.

But I really really hope that Ricoh one day launches a GX300 with a brighter lens and good high iso. I would def get one. The GXR must be quite nice, but a big bigger than my idea of compact.

 

[capito]

For indoor photos the GX200 is useless. Since I've gotten the NEX 3 I've not taken one photo with it. Which is a shame because I really love its handling. Oh, and the lens is so much better than Sony's pitiful kit lens.

I can't really decide if I should sell it (it's pretty used) or keep it. I think it's only usable for landscape / city / architecture (as long as it's very bright) or for gritty BW photos @ 1600 ISO.