zwarte_kat
Well-known
Just got it today, but took a few test shots.
Had to get used to focussing, but it's quite cool. The 2 focus modes really complement each other, where the grey one takes over when it's too dark.
I am now uploading some pics on flickr because I noticed there wasn't much online yet for you guys to see except for Ricoh's own promo pics and a few bloggers who borrowed one. Will probably take them off after a while.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rudyshots/sets/72157627522508637/
Overal I like the quality, but the high iso's are definitely not remarkable. One or two stops better then film at max, I think. Interesting is, however, that I could get quite a lot of detail out of dark images in Lightroom. The lack off aa filter helps here, I suspect. I put a few copies of files that are unedited, so that you can compare. The originals have a tag named "unedited".
I don't actually have Leica lenses...
The images were shot with a 40mm 1.4 Nokton SC, 50mm Zeiss Sonnar 1.5, and 75mm color heliar. The voigtlanders were all dirt cheap 2nd hand lenses with fungus in them. I think they perform good, though.
Let me know if you want me to shoot/test something specific.
Had to get used to focussing, but it's quite cool. The 2 focus modes really complement each other, where the grey one takes over when it's too dark.
I am now uploading some pics on flickr because I noticed there wasn't much online yet for you guys to see except for Ricoh's own promo pics and a few bloggers who borrowed one. Will probably take them off after a while.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rudyshots/sets/72157627522508637/
Overal I like the quality, but the high iso's are definitely not remarkable. One or two stops better then film at max, I think. Interesting is, however, that I could get quite a lot of detail out of dark images in Lightroom. The lack off aa filter helps here, I suspect. I put a few copies of files that are unedited, so that you can compare. The originals have a tag named "unedited".
I don't actually have Leica lenses...
The images were shot with a 40mm 1.4 Nokton SC, 50mm Zeiss Sonnar 1.5, and 75mm color heliar. The voigtlanders were all dirt cheap 2nd hand lenses with fungus in them. I think they perform good, though.
Let me know if you want me to shoot/test something specific.
rondo
Established
Thanks for sharing, some nice pictures in that series.
I assume you haven't played much with the colors here, and they appear much more natural than the nex files, to me ar least...
I assume you haven't played much with the colors here, and they appear much more natural than the nex files, to me ar least...
zwarte_kat
Well-known
Actually, I did some color correction, though a lot of it was reducing the contrast and sharpness that Lightroom adds upon importing.
Today I am taking it to work with the rokkor 40mm 2.0, and will post some unaltered images. Will try to post them directly here, or in the gallery, where I want to start posting anyway.
The GXR makes a nice little package with the rokkor. And I am getting the hang of this focussing. It's really a fun camera if you have a buch of M lenses! I just need a wider lens now, but was thinking about getting a 28 anyway, or maybe a 35 1.4, as somebody suggested on the RD1 Forum.
Today I am taking it to work with the rokkor 40mm 2.0, and will post some unaltered images. Will try to post them directly here, or in the gallery, where I want to start posting anyway.
The GXR makes a nice little package with the rokkor. And I am getting the hang of this focussing. It's really a fun camera if you have a buch of M lenses! I just need a wider lens now, but was thinking about getting a 28 anyway, or maybe a 35 1.4, as somebody suggested on the RD1 Forum.
rdeleskie
Well-known
Thank you for posting these images! The noise structure on the 3200 ISO shots is quite interesting - it's more like fine grain than digital speckle. Detail is preserved. This is encouraging.
All this said, the images I have seen so far from the M-A12 don't seem to have quite the "pop" of the images from, say, the NEX 5N. Mind you, the Sony jpegs also seem to have excessive CA and too much sharpening applied, so perhaps it is the jpeg engine rather than the native capabilities of the camera.
Do you have any other digital cameras you would compare the GXR with, in terms of OOC image quality? I appreciate your thoughts!
All this said, the images I have seen so far from the M-A12 don't seem to have quite the "pop" of the images from, say, the NEX 5N. Mind you, the Sony jpegs also seem to have excessive CA and too much sharpening applied, so perhaps it is the jpeg engine rather than the native capabilities of the camera.
Do you have any other digital cameras you would compare the GXR with, in terms of OOC image quality? I appreciate your thoughts!
zwarte_kat
Well-known
More images:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rudyshots/sets/72157627536265267/
Lenses uses (see tags):
Rokkor 40mm 2.0
Nokton 40mm 1.4
The images were shot on raw. I mainly used the "natural" image setting.
Not sure what OOC camera means in lightroom. It applies stuff when I import the images. So I tried the remove all those settings:
Turned down the contrast, noise reduction, blacks in the histogram, and sharpening in lightroom to zero. I put the tone curve to linear.
Mostly this improves the images for me, compared with lightrooms' basic settings. I just like that soft low saturation look, and it reminds me of film.
A color noise reduction of 20 was applied, forgot to turn that one of. There wasn't any significant color noise though. Besides that images are unedited, except for a few where I added a stop or so for exposure, or where I applied an auto white balance.
I am really loving this camera and the look it produces. It's not higher quality than my dslr, but the images have more atmosphere and are more gentle thanks to the lenses. Maybe if you put a sharp Leica on it it might surpass a Canon or Nikon crop dslr, but high iso grain is much worse. To really see the effect you have to look at the full size 3200 iso images on flickr, where ugly white grain dots start appearing amongst the otherwise gentle film-like noise.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rudyshots/sets/72157627536265267/
Lenses uses (see tags):
Rokkor 40mm 2.0
Nokton 40mm 1.4
The images were shot on raw. I mainly used the "natural" image setting.
Not sure what OOC camera means in lightroom. It applies stuff when I import the images. So I tried the remove all those settings:
Turned down the contrast, noise reduction, blacks in the histogram, and sharpening in lightroom to zero. I put the tone curve to linear.
Mostly this improves the images for me, compared with lightrooms' basic settings. I just like that soft low saturation look, and it reminds me of film.
A color noise reduction of 20 was applied, forgot to turn that one of. There wasn't any significant color noise though. Besides that images are unedited, except for a few where I added a stop or so for exposure, or where I applied an auto white balance.
I am really loving this camera and the look it produces. It's not higher quality than my dslr, but the images have more atmosphere and are more gentle thanks to the lenses. Maybe if you put a sharp Leica on it it might surpass a Canon or Nikon crop dslr, but high iso grain is much worse. To really see the effect you have to look at the full size 3200 iso images on flickr, where ugly white grain dots start appearing amongst the otherwise gentle film-like noise.
rdeleskie
Well-known
Thanks again for posting these images. Yes, they do have a very film-like quality to them. In comparison the NEX 5N images look a little more "digital" and perhaps even over-processed. But I don't want to be negative about the 5N - it looks like an excellent camera as well, and the images it produces with M mount lenses are very appealing, just different.
zwarte_kat
Well-known
Haven't shot with the nex 5 yet, so I don't really know. When I see images online, they look very sharp and colorful, very high quality too. When I bought the Ricoh, I already accepted that I might sell it after a short time and consider it a rent, then buy a Nex 7, or even a M9 if the Nex 7 doesn't do it for me.
Now I think I might keep it. It works really well for street style shooting, and I like the style (quality is not remarkably good or bad I think, but definately good enough for me). I guess what they say about keeping the signature of the lenses kind of makes sense. I am curious how a very sharp summicron would look on it, maybe it would be closer to the nex images, but it's not the style and atmosphere I pursue. Though I think when it comes to colors and saturation, most of it can be decided in post now.
I think the Ricoh M mount takes a nice place amongst the current and future options for shooting with m lenses, in terms of price, performance, and having a certain style niche. I had to decide between the RD1 and the Ricoh, and the Ricoh kind of feels like the RD1 of the current mirrorless cameras. A bit of an oddball on the side, but with it's own distinctive personality.
I am really liking the focus mechanism more and more BTW.
Now I think I might keep it. It works really well for street style shooting, and I like the style (quality is not remarkably good or bad I think, but definately good enough for me). I guess what they say about keeping the signature of the lenses kind of makes sense. I am curious how a very sharp summicron would look on it, maybe it would be closer to the nex images, but it's not the style and atmosphere I pursue. Though I think when it comes to colors and saturation, most of it can be decided in post now.
I think the Ricoh M mount takes a nice place amongst the current and future options for shooting with m lenses, in terms of price, performance, and having a certain style niche. I had to decide between the RD1 and the Ricoh, and the Ricoh kind of feels like the RD1 of the current mirrorless cameras. A bit of an oddball on the side, but with it's own distinctive personality.
I am really liking the focus mechanism more and more BTW.
bwcolor
Veteran
I just don't see the level of detail and contrast as I see with my X100. This is RAW converted in Aperture 3.0, Here is a full size JPG from a family outing. It is EI:800, F/4.0, 1/1100
http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6070/6048562644_516f9fdc24_o.jpg
http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6070/6048562644_516f9fdc24_o.jpg
Last edited:
zwarte_kat
Well-known
philosophy
philosophy
That is indeed a very sharp image. I still have the X100 in my mind as an alternative to buying a 28/35mm equivalent lens for digital crop factor. I didn't like the focussing (both auto and manual) methods of it when I tried it in the store though. I am kind of waiting to see if it's successor will improve on that. Or maybe I will upgrade my GRDIII to a GRDIV.
Until now I have mostly shot in aperture 2.8 or lower (my most used one is 1.4 I think), which reduced the sharpness somewhat. Most of the lenses I have used are cheap 2nd hand ones, which have some fungus in them. Perhaps one could get better results from a modern lens in good condition, and when stopped down a little.
I also turned off all the standard applied contrast and sharpness in Lightroom. I kind of like this mild dreamy look.
But I don't think one should buy a M-mount for the highest quality or sharpest image. It's not a camera for performance. I would never use it for my professional shoots. It's a camera to enjoy digital photography. To manual focus with nice lenses and check out the subtle differences in them, and to pursue a visual style. It's a camera to play around with, doing little experiments... How will this lens look? And this one?
It's a sensitive camera, small, quiet. If you are not careful with it, the image (focus) will be off.
It's for the hobbyist, who shoots for nothing but the passion of shooting. It's not for work or to make easy shots of your family. For artists, it's either not printable enough, or more then they need when they can get an easier solution cheaper. It's really a CEVIL camera Ricoh style. The kind of camera photographers use in their free time, to take the shots they really care about personally.
It's really a lot of fun to shoot, too!
Anyway, here a some more pics. Since I've been working non stop I've only had time to shoot during my commute. The people in the pictures kind of mirror my feelings during these times, burned out!
Will stop posting these links now, If you want to see more you can just check my flickr, and I am shooting almost daily.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rudyshots/sets/72157627698652058/with/6159300428/
philosophy
That is indeed a very sharp image. I still have the X100 in my mind as an alternative to buying a 28/35mm equivalent lens for digital crop factor. I didn't like the focussing (both auto and manual) methods of it when I tried it in the store though. I am kind of waiting to see if it's successor will improve on that. Or maybe I will upgrade my GRDIII to a GRDIV.
Until now I have mostly shot in aperture 2.8 or lower (my most used one is 1.4 I think), which reduced the sharpness somewhat. Most of the lenses I have used are cheap 2nd hand ones, which have some fungus in them. Perhaps one could get better results from a modern lens in good condition, and when stopped down a little.
I also turned off all the standard applied contrast and sharpness in Lightroom. I kind of like this mild dreamy look.
But I don't think one should buy a M-mount for the highest quality or sharpest image. It's not a camera for performance. I would never use it for my professional shoots. It's a camera to enjoy digital photography. To manual focus with nice lenses and check out the subtle differences in them, and to pursue a visual style. It's a camera to play around with, doing little experiments... How will this lens look? And this one?
It's a sensitive camera, small, quiet. If you are not careful with it, the image (focus) will be off.
It's for the hobbyist, who shoots for nothing but the passion of shooting. It's not for work or to make easy shots of your family. For artists, it's either not printable enough, or more then they need when they can get an easier solution cheaper. It's really a CEVIL camera Ricoh style. The kind of camera photographers use in their free time, to take the shots they really care about personally.
It's really a lot of fun to shoot, too!
Anyway, here a some more pics. Since I've been working non stop I've only had time to shoot during my commute. The people in the pictures kind of mirror my feelings during these times, burned out!
Will stop posting these links now, If you want to see more you can just check my flickr, and I am shooting almost daily.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rudyshots/sets/72157627698652058/with/6159300428/
bwcolor
Veteran
I believe that the X100 and GXR M Mount use the same sensor, so should ultimately produce images that are of the same "quality" with good glass in front of the GXR. My posted shot shows off the X100 since I'm using fast shutter speed, peak lens aperture and no great expanse of shadow to show noise. Your samples are from much more difficult lighting and as you point out large apertures and I assume rather slow shutter speeds. Your remarks regarding professional use seem perfectly valid.
silverbullet
Well-known
The exit pupil of the X100 'pancake' lens is very big in diameter to achieve a more telecentric way of lightrays. So I guess that the Ricoh sensor is more dedicated for the short register of the M system and achieves this by shifted microlenses. It's possible to use a Super Angulon on the M mount without any dreaded color shifts as with the Ms. Great!
Another hint for the taylormade sensor design are the results with the Voigtlander 15mm Ultra Wide. This lens is the proof for any digital M-system cam, disregarding the crop factor.....