GRD III First Impressions

The GRDIII looks like all it's cracked up to be. Very nice shots.

leicashot said:
While this camera (previous GRD's) is compared to those cameras, none of those are as pocketable, except maybe the LX3 in a large pocket, or the new Canon S90, which even though it doesn't have a fixed lens, it's size and 28/2 starting focal length/aperture make it the GRD's nearest competitor.

Regardless, it feels like a pro camera in a small body. I doubt the Canon can pull of a similar feel and asthetic.
Click to expand...

The S90 certainly won't feel as solid, but then again it does let you zoom to ~105mm EFoV (stabilized to boot), which makes it more versatile. The Canon also isn't likely to give you as many options for customization and it probably won't have quite as nice of a lens, nor does it have a hotshoe or as many pixels on its LCD. On the other hand, the Canon gives you basically the same sensor for $270 less. You can even share cheap batteries with SD1200 owners.

Basically the GRD has no direct competition.
 
Rondo, Cris,

Thank you for the low light DNG's - I'll review them later this evening.

I can barely make out the vertical banding in the DPR samples but that said, if Cris has seen it in another camera, I am sure it exists.

The question would be, for me, how much does the aberration appear in print form because I'm not usually zooming to 100% on screen.

Cheers,
Dave
 
rondo said:
Thank you for the additional images. I may have not made myself clear: The crop you included is at the center of the frame, which is typically good-I would look at the background (beige/white wall behind, on the left side of frame. I only hope that the DPR people had a pre-production unit and the problem is resolved! But you can look here for what I mean:
http://a.img-dpreview.com/gallery/ricohgrdiii_preview/originals/r0010559.jpg
Thanks again,
Click to expand...

Here you go.....the pattern look you see is the pattern on the wall....no banding here or anywhere else in the frame on my particular unit at least.

Untitled-1.jpg
 
jarski said:
How is the shutter lag of this camera, say, compared e.g. to Canon PowerShot G-10?
Click to expand...

I only owned the G10 for a short time when it first came out and can't really remember. In terms or prefocusing, then hitting the shutter it's fast as one can hope from such a camera. Not quite a rangefinder in terms of shutter button sensitivity, but fine for me.

If you're talking about focusing and shooting it's so so, but whenevr I anticipate a fast shot I always prefocus anyway so it's not an issue. In terms of focus speed, it's faster than the EP-1 (of course, my M8 is faster) but a tad slower than a D-Lux 4, but not by much -just ensure your camera isn't set to full time macro focus and spot AF for fastest results.
 
AusDLK said:
As a former owner of two GRD I's, I now have the GX200.

Maybe not an apples-to-apples comparison, but I'm not going back the GRD. The image files out of the GX200 are great and gotta admit that the zoom is worth it.
Click to expand...

I guess you either want zoom or you don't. While I'd like a zoom every now and then, I don't 'need' one for this type of camera.

Bother are great cameras and in terms of usability Ricoh makes the best design on the market in this style.
 
AusDLK said:
As a former owner of two GRD I's, I now have the GX200.

Maybe not an apples-to-apples comparison, but I'm not going back the GRD. The image files out of the GX200 are great and gotta admit that the zoom is worth it.
Click to expand...

I have both the GRD2 and the GX200. I like them both, but I have a deeper fondness for the GRD2. There is something to its simplicty, and the lens is sharper and contrast higher. I want to use the GRD2 while the GX200 I'll use when I need a compact zoom.

I respect both cameras, but after my GRD3 arrives I'll sell my GRD2 and GX200. I don't use my GX200 too much and its sale will help fund the GRD3. I'll probably miss it, but so be it.

Wouter Brandsma is an excellent photographer who uses the the GX200.
 
dcsang said:
The question would be, for me, how much does the aberration appear in print form because I'm not usually zooming to 100% on screen.

Cheers,
Dave
Click to expand...

leicashot said:
Here you go.....the pattern look you see is the pattern on the wall....no banding here or anywhere else in the frame on my particular unit at least.
Click to expand...

Leicashot, thanks for the repost. As Dave points out probably even the worst examples won't be an issue for printing. My point wasn't pixel peeping-better forums for that kind of nonsense-but simply to make sure that GRD3 won't be victim of "faulty units" talk down the line.
 
rondo said:
Leicashot, thanks for the repost. As Dave points out probably even the worst examples won't be an issue for printing. My point wasn't pixel peeping-better forums for that kind of nonsense-but simply to make sure that GRD3 won't be victim of "faulty units" talk down the line.
Click to expand...

Well for now I'm very happy with this camera. Sensor quality has now gotten to the point where I feel I can concentrate on the design and handling of the camera again, which is what I used to value most before Digital came along.

I'm so sick of sensor talk, so it's relieving to be able to shoot and enjoy without worrying much about the quality. I remember when I used to shoot film before digital came along, I would never shoot over ISO 800. I'd usually only shoot ISO 100-400 and the GR definately matches film in that area, albeit in a slightly different look to the images. To me, digital is more realistic than film, when I used to think the opposite before digital arrived. Film Images now look nostalgic to me, especially in black and white, which I prefer. But when it comes to colour digital has so many more options and looks better IMHO.
 
Here is another ISO 1600 shot in low light, no post processing, straight jpeg from camera.

R0010080_full.jpg


crop.jpg


These are jpegs from the camera. The RAW version shows a lot of noise in Photoshop RAW, and takes a bit of noise reduction to get out the colour noise (blue splotches on black top). Looks like I'll need to get a good RAW converter for use with RAW in low light. I'm impressed with the way the jpeg from the camera looks. Noise reduction was set to 'weak' in camera.
 
Leicashot, thank you for sharing your thoughts and the pictures.
Looks like those that raise the noise question-whenever the name Ricoh is mentioned- will be satisfied with GRD3.
At least the sensible ones...
Pixel peeping is similar to standing two inches away from a billboard and talking about image quailty.
People keep on establishing artificial benchmarks to judge the quality, and forget about final prints, ergonomics, portability and build quality.
Also looks like less time will be needed for PP and I am hoping that JPEGs will be very usable with GRD3-maybe certain tweaks in camera settings will be more than enough.
For RAW: try RAW Therapee, works well with Ricoh-and it is free...
http://www.rawtherapee.com/
 
Last edited:
rondo said:
Pixel peeping is similar to standing two inches away from a billboard and talking about image quailty.
People keep on establishing artificial benchmarks to judge the quality, and forget about final prints, ergonomics, portability and build quality.
.
Click to expand...

I agree fully with the above. Well said ;-)
 
rondo said:
Leicashot, thank you for sharing your thoughts and the pictures.
Looks like those that raise the noise question-whenever the name Ricoh is mentioned- will be satisfied with GRD3.
At least the sensible ones...
Pixel peeping is similar to standing two inches away from a billboard and talking about image quailty.
People keep on establishing artificial benchmarks to judge the quality, and forget about final prints, ergonomics, portability and build quality.
Also looks like less time will be needed for PP and I am hoping that JPEGs will be very usable with GRD3-maybe certain tweaks in camera settings will be more than enough.
For RAW: try RAW Therapee, works well with Ricoh-and it is free...
http://www.rawtherapee.com/
Click to expand...

Thanks for the recommendation, but there is no MAC version :bang:
 
Thanks for posting pictures and telling about the camera, cute pug too 🙂

Finally got the chance to have my fingers on a GRD III today, one of the camera-stores had it in stock, actually the whole line,
GRD, GRD II and III side by side in the cabinet 🙂
First i noticed was the different layout in the menu, actually no problem at all and if you survived Olympus (C8080wz) then everything is manageable . . .
but the camera it self is a bit taller, thicker and the lens builds a bit more out of the camera-body.
Minor and totally unimportant, but it bugs my aesthetic a bit, it was not as the other two in the form factor.
Kind of fine too that I dislike the form now since i should not afford one either ;D

Any thought on this except mine?

vha
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
What is the MOST gear you've ever carried on a trip?
2
Replies
34
Views
578
spatumba
spatumba
Godfrey
It's the Season - Light L16
Replies
0
Views
251
Godfrey
Godfrey
J
  • Article Article
The Rise, Fall, and Resurrection of the 110 Format By 2009, 110 was kaput. Lomography brought it back! Part 2: A selection of fascinating 110 cameras.
2 3
Replies
41
Views
3K
Timmyjoe
Timmyjoe
Mark240590
NIKON L35 TWAF - the Ugly step Brother of the L35AF
Replies
2
Views
831
Mark240590
Mark240590
J
  • Article Article
Shooting with the half-frame Olympus Pen D3: Last of the “viewfinder Pens,” it delivers fun plus superb performance
Replies
7
Views
866
wlewisiii
W
Back
Top Bottom