Anyone still shooting the GXR in 2020?

[pixelvandal]

I had a GXR with M unit many, many years ago, and sold it off in the pursuit of better performance at high iso etc etc, but looking back through my library some of my favorite photos were taken with this little gem; it captured some very important life events brilliantly. I've been on the hunt for one for the last year (at a reasonable price) and in the last 5 years they have actually gone UP in price. (who knew some digital cameras actually hold value, go figure)

Thankfully, today, I found a GXR, M module, leather case, evf and Voigtlander 35mm Nokton for a very reasonable price. it should be here at the start of the new year, and I can't wait to have play with this little beauty again. I'm a bit rusty with the menu system, so it may take a while to get used to it again.

Anyone still shooting with this old girl?

 

[Godfrey]

A nice camera! I had one that I used from April 2011 to July 2013, made about 6000 photographs (about 300 of those posted to flickr.com) with it according to my Lightroom database.

It was a darn good performer and had quite nice controls and features. It performed very well with the M-mount lenses of a wide range of designs and such.

Certainly worth enjoying again, if you have found one in good condition.

G

 

[agfa100]

Gxr

Gxr

I still have mine and I really liked it back then. I now mostly use a Sony A7s with my Leica M lenses and all the weird Russian lenses I picked up when the USSR was falling apart.

Here's a link to one I shot with the GXR and a Ver 1 35 summicron

http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/wbill/R0012757.jpeg.html

 

[Archiver]

When my first GXR body died, I bought two to replace it, as I loved it so much. The second body is still going strong (touch wood) as are the three aps-c modules I have. While I haven't used it extensively this year, I used it last year as part of a kit for documentary purposes with a group of athletes. My main lenses were the Zeiss Sonnar 50mm, Voigtlander 35/1.4 and Leica Summarit 75, with the Voigtlander 15/4.5 v1 as a wide option.

I just love the way the images look; they are the closest I've seen to a Leica M CCD camera, despite being a 12mp CMOS sensor. There's something about the processing which gives the raw files a kind of depth and density that many other cameras lack. Handling and ergonomics of the GXR is just right for me, and it's disappointing that Ricoh discontinued it. I would love to see a refresh of this design, or at least the body style, in a future camera.

My only quibble with it was the shot to shot time, and very small buffer. The camera takes ages to reset itself between shots, and the buffer fills very quickly. I've been thinking of a Leica TL2 or CL as eventual upgrade/replacement for the GXR, or maybe a Nikon Z6 which appears to handle M glass well.

The 50mm and 28mm modules are really great, too. They have produced many pictures I love, again with that depth and density in the files that seems lacking in other cameras. The lens quality is excellent, too. And since it takes the same batteries as the Fuji X100, I can take both cameras out and only have to take one set of batteries.

 

[Godfrey]

... I've been thinking of a Leica TL2 or CL as eventual upgrade/replacement for the GXR...

Funny to hear you say that. Although I sold the GXR after I bought my Leica M9, and had an M-P typ 240 and M-D typ 262 subsequently, I've ultimately replaced them with a Leica CL (as of 2018) and couldn't be happier with it.

The Leica CL is missing some of the features of the GXR, for sure, but it's ultimately a simpler camera with a better set of controls and an even better sensor. I use it exclusively with Leica M and R lenses, and it is every bit the performer that my digital Ms were, and has the same good size and weight as the GXR. I even like the smaller format's dynamics more than the FF dynamics.

G

 

[vladimir]

I regret selling my GXR with M mount when I look at photos taken with it.

 

[Jbig]

These testimonies to the GXR are inspiring me to pull out my own GXR today and take it out. I used it extensively for a while and agree that it is a solid performer.

 

[pixelvandal]

From my understanding, Ricoh used their knowledge of designing rangefinder lenses (albeit a limited amount) into designing the GXR M module, with those specially designed little microlenses which optimise the use of wide angle rf lenses. I get zero colour shift or smearing with wide angles on that body.


my question is..... why wasnt thing something that was employed by other manufacturers? or more attention given to it? Did leica do this for any of the digital M bodies? i understand it would probably be harder to deal with on a FF sensor, but some of the ultra wides cause colour shift on the m240 etc.

I attempted to use the A7s (original) with some wide angle lenses, and whilst it performed better than the other A7 models, it still caused magenta corners etc with the voigtlander 21 skopar. Now it's not THAT big a deal, and there are work arounds...... but seems like something that might be possible to fix with these 'microlenses on the sensor'


im not a technical person, i just know what i like! haha

 

[james.liam]

The GXR is a crop frame sensor so the reason you don’t see color shift or edge ‘smear’ is because you’re not recording the lens’ native image corner.s.

 

[Archiver]

From my understanding, Ricoh used their knowledge of designing rangefinder lenses (albeit a limited amount) into designing the GXR M module, with those specially designed little microlenses which optimise the use of wide angle rf lenses. I get zero colour shift or smearing with wide angles on that body.

my question is..... why wasnt thing something that was employed by other manufacturers? or more attention given to it? Did leica do this for any of the digital M bodies? i understand it would probably be harder to deal with on a FF sensor, but some of the ultra wides cause colour shift on the m240 etc.

I attempted to use the A7s (original) with some wide angle lenses, and whilst it performed better than the other A7 models, it still caused magenta corners etc with the voigtlander 21 skopar. Now it's not THAT big a deal, and there are work arounds...... but seems like something that might be possible to fix with these 'microlenses on the sensor'

im not a technical person, i just know what i like! haha

Yes, Ricoh included microlenses in the periphery of the sensor to help increase performance. The GXR-M sensor has no AA filter and I suspect a very thin filter stack, resulting in extremely sharp and detailed images from M mount lenses. Being aps-c, the crop deals with any magenta edge issues.

The thickness of the sensor stack is largely what affects M mount lens performance on mirrorless cameras, particularly full frame models. Cameras like the Canon EOS R and Sony A7 aren't particularly good with such lenses, especially shorter focal lengths. Lots of corner smearing is one result. The new Panasonic S5 seems to be in this boat, too. The Nikon Z6 seems to be the best non-Leica full frame mirrorless for M mount lenses at this time.

For other manufacturers, there is little incentive to put design time and money into M mount optimization. The real money is in selling lenses, as new bodies get released every few years. Ricoh made the GXR-M specifically for M mount lenses, so it was in their interest to optimize it for such. Neither Canon nor Sony make M mount lenses, so there's no reason for them to support 'obsolete' manual glass. Leica has every reason to assume that users of the SL and CL systems already have M mount glass, so their cameras are optimized accordingly.

 

[Rob-F]

I feel that way about my Digilux 2. Only 5MP, only 400ISO. Terrible viewfinder. Great color, great pictures. Every once in a while I miss it.

 

[Godfrey]

From my understanding, Ricoh used their knowledge of designing rangefinder lenses (albeit a limited amount) into designing the GXR M module, with those specially designed little microlenses which optimise the use of wide angle rf lenses. I get zero colour shift or smearing with wide angles on that body.

my question is..... why wasnt thing something that was employed by other manufacturers? or more attention given to it? Did leica do this for any of the digital M bodies? i understand it would probably be harder to deal with on a FF sensor, but some of the ultra wides cause colour shift on the m240 etc.
...

The GXR M-Mount Camera Module is very successful because of several things:

- APS-C format
- Very thin sensor stack with no antialiasing filter
- A very thin corrective optic across the entire sensor format

Yes, Leica (and Olympus, and Nikon, and others...) have used various similar optical techniques to reduce/minimize color shifting and other artifacts derivative of the geometry of lens mount register and focal length. Sony has not, because they have no short lens mount register lenses to deal with. Leica in particular has developed the sensor in the M typ 240 and later models with aspheric micro lenses to help combat these geometric problems, and the lens profile firmware that they supply in their cameras is primarily tuned to reducing the issues of focal length vs geometry so that you can cross adapt M-mount lenses across most of their cameras and produce very close to identical rendering qualities. Of course, they can only do this sort of profiling with their own optical designs for which they have highly detailed data (and the motivation to do a great job since the customers are already their customers with their lenses...).

The smaller format alone is a large part of the advantage of the Ricoh M-mount camera module, so looking at it in comparison to FF sensor cameras is a bit unfair. Compared to Sony Nexus series APS-C cameras, the GXR-M performs significantly better; against the Sony A7 cameras that difference is exaggerated. (I cannot remember the precise sequence of my ownership, but I had the Sony A7 and Leica M9, M-P 240, and M-D 262 cameras: the Leica bodies easily outperformed the Sony A7's sensor with respect to color shifting and other sensor artifacts with my Leica lenses due to their sensor design and profiling, and to a lesser extent with Voigtländer lenses, but a couple of my favorites on the GXR-M performed noticably better on the Ricoh...) The Leica APS-C cameras (T, TL, TL2, and CL) perform on par or better than the Ricoh GXR with the same lenses (both theoretically and in my practical experience since I have owned and used both systems extensively).

Sensor to lens optical interactions are a complex problem. In general, you either design the sensor complex to fit the lenses you have, or you design the lenses to fit the sensor you're going to use, or you do both. Leica does both, because they sell lenses for their M cameras compatible across both film and digital bodies, because of the huge legacy of their lenses coupled with the value of Leica equipment to their customers. Ricoh did a superb job of designing the sensor to fit a wide range of user's existing lenses, since they had no control over the lenses' design and were riding on the popularity of those existing lenses to sell their camera. Other manufacturers don't emphasize designing sensors for legacy lenses so much because they don't have any particular reason to: they bank on selling cameras and new lenses designed for them primarily in order to make their profits.

G

 

[shadeofpale]

Yes- Me! Received a very good A12 50mm module today, which will become my lightweight gear along with my GR I. I normally use a pentax K-1 with a couple of good lenses- but is a heavy hunk. Oh I almost forgot my R-D1 which I don't want to give away.

 

[johannielscom]

https://johanniels.com/ricoh-gxr-the-piccolo-leica-monochrom/

Back then I was laughed at here when I likened the GXR to a Leica Monochrom...
The article also outlines how to set the camera up so that it acts like an all-manual camera.

I have since gone on to a Sony A7 (the first model, it's really good enough for what I do) and looking at the GXR files have often considered getting one again because I cannot for the life of me get the Sony files to look anything like the GXR files...

 

[shadeofpale]

A12 50mm macro is a very good lens. In Germany the plant is called Schneerose, I have not found the American name unfortunately.


Helleborus niger

 

[benlees]

I bought a gxr w/ the 28mm (equiv) 2.5 quite recently. Makes lovely looking files, for sure. Definitely from a previous age!

 

[Freakscene]

A12 50mm macro is a very good lens. In Germany the plant is called Schneerose, I have not found the American name unfortunately.

Christmas rose or black hellebore in English, not sure if the name in the US differs. Lovely photo.

Marty

 

[dourbalistar]

Does anyone use or have opinions about the S10 24-72mm F2.5-4.4 VC module? I'm guessing it's no better than compact digital sensors of its era, and probably a bit worse than the (pre-APS-C) Ricoh GR Digital III, released around the same time in 2009?

 

[hap]

never had a GXR but always wanted one. I am happy with the Nikon 1 v1 and I mount both m mount lenses and screwmounts with m adapters very easy and the results are very good. Cheeeep. The sharpness is probably enhanced as Liam mentioned due to the CX sensor size.

 

[JeffS7444]

Does anyone use or have opinions about the S10 24-72mm F2.5-4.4 VC module?

I thought performance was pretty much identical to the GX100, but the GX100 was a smaller and lighter camera and more to my liking. Noisy by ISO 283 but that can make for some nicely gritty black and white photos.