GRD IV to compliment X100

C

celluloidprop

Well-known
Local time
2:53 AM
Joined
Aug 29, 2005
Messages
873
Ordered a GRD IV on a whim from B&H when I saw they were in stock. It's arriving in the next couple of hours.

My main (only, once I sell the 7D I acquired in trade) digital body is a X100. Already reasonably compact, fine low-light performance, ehhhh autofocus, no snap focus mode.

I'm torn whether or not to keep the GRD. I won't be opening and playing with it and returning, I think that's kind of shady, I'll either return unopened or keep it.

Pros:
wider FOV than X100
can stay at f/1.9 in low-light situations and have plenty of DOF
decent enough performance for small prints and online up to 1600, maybe 3200
even more compact than X100, I could legitimately have it with me most of the time without needing a manbag

Cons:
such a wee sensor
need to buy a 28mm external viewfinder
limited DR and noise control at higher ISOs, owing to the wee sensor
even in good light, 10mp on a small sensor is going to limit print sizes

Torn... I guess I could open it and use it for a while and probably lose a minimal amount of money if I decide there's too much overlap with the X100 over a month.
 
Those Ricoh's can really take a shot at 1/4 sec with sharpness. There is no moral issue in opening up the Ricoh when it arrives. Just be very careful when you unpack so if you do return you do so as you found it. like to hear your comparison.
 
I use three cameras... a M9, a X100, and a GRD III. The M9 is my main camera, the X100 is for high ISO, etc. and the GRD is my take everywhere camera that is always in my coat pocket. I think you should keep it if you truly want a always have camera.
 
I'm with the jsrockit except for the M9 part (though not by choice :D). I have n X100 and the GRDIV (previously GRDIII). The GRD is my take everywhere camera too and I feel that it complements the X100 very well in terms of focal lenghts and size/portability, for example. Plus, the GRDIV has a pretty fast AF, which can be useful where the X100's (arguably) slowish AF is not enough.

EDIT: Regarding the OP's concern with dynamic range, I'm really liking the GRDIV's dynamic range compensation feature. I feel like it results in a noticeable improvement in dynamic range and can work on RAW files too. Coupled with a little negative exposure compensation here and there, I'm pretty happy with the dynamic range I'm getting from the GRDIV considering the sensor size. But, yes, it's never going to have the same range as an APS-C+ sensor.

jsrockit said:
I use three cameras... a M9, a X100, and a GRD III. The M9 is my main camera, the X100 is for high ISO, etc. and the GRD is my take everywhere camera that is always in my coat pocket. I think you should keep it if you truly want a always have camera.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Looks like we've got a few multiple-camera toters. I use a M9, Ricoh GXR with aps-c and M-mount modules, and GRD III. M9 handles high quality work, the GXR is for when I want a smaller camera with excellent image quality, and the GRD III can be with me everywhere I go.

As small as the GRD III's sensor seems to be, you'd be surprised at how good the images can be. And the IV's IQ is supposed to be even better. The GRD can go places that even the X100 can't, due to styling and size. The GRD can fit in your pocket and still create gorgeous images. And the Ricoh ergonomics and haptics are dreamy. If you open the box and start to handle the camera, you will know what I'm talking about.
 
I received my GRD IV on Thursday and it is an amazing little camera. It is fast and well designed, and perfect for street photography or for quickly "sketching" things that one sees visually, which is critical for me. If I want to embellish then I would use an Olympus EP-3 (for digital) or a Mamiya 6 (for film).
 
Grrr, sounds like I'll have to trade up from the III to the IV. All this talk about fast AF!!!! Damn you all to hell! ;)
 
I have a mostly film based setup, but I have started carrying around a GXR 28 or the M module in my camera bag. It's nice to have a digital option.

Toss in one of those wonderful OUFRO rings and your 50 can close focus to about .5 meters (when mounted on the GXR M module.)
 
I just ordered a grd4 with hopes of it actually overlapping my x100. Probably not a low light machine but looks promising for most of my other requirements. There aren't many pocketable cameras with a primary wide lens like the grd4. Focusing appears to be fast and accurate. Looks like a reliable street shooter to me. I'll likely sell the X100 if there is an overlap.

I admit to ignoring Ricoh for the longest time but have warmed up to them. They appear to be in part driven by function over form. Not a lot of splashing like most of their competitors. No mumbo jumbo. Single language manuals, how cool is that?
 
Keep

Keep

The Ricoh GR Digital series is one of the best handling digital cameras ever made.

You'll get shots you wouldn't otherwise, as it's so easy to have at hand.
 
I still keep my GX200 as my digital backup, small, all the right controls but alas that GRD IV looks really awesome. Remember these little guys actually fit in your pocket.
 
I've been enjoying the partnership of X100 and the Olympus E-P3. With the E-P3 and can play around with any number of lenses. When I go out for some street photography, I take the X100 (35mm f/2) and the E-P3 with their 45mm (90mm) f/1.8 lens. Perfect. :)
 
A small, fast 28mm camera can loosen your photography up.

I started using a GR1 when I felt my shots with my Leica and 35mm summicron were feeling a little too composed and stale. Something about the size and focal length encourages looser, quicker shooting. I go back and forth. I've got a GRD III also which I use less just because I don't take to digital as well but the idea is the same. There is definitely a difference being able to slip a camera into your pocket vs. having to throw it in a bag.
 
Tested the GRD IV recently and found the files to be unable to take any sharpening, even DNG files. I was under the impression that they were better files after reading Reid Reviews, but I was disappointed.

Files quality is well below what the X100 delivers so I don't believe they will be good together. A GXR with A12 is a much better match, even though the sensors render quite differently.
 
leicashot said:
Tested the GRD IV recently and found the files to be unable to take any sharpening, even DNG files. I was under the impression that they were better files after reading Reid Reviews, but I was disappointed.
Click to expand...

I've always found that the files don't really need any sharpening...can you elaborate? Small sensor P&S, as you know, can't compete with APS-C, but they have their place... especially when the only camera you can bring is one that fits in your pocket. I too am disappointed in some of the results from these cameras...but sometimes I am blown away. That can be said of every camera though.
 
jsrockit said:
I've always found that the files don't really need any sharpening...can you elaborate? Small sensor P&S, as you know, can't compete with APS-C, but they have their place... especially when the only camera you can bring is one that fits in your pocket. I too am disappointed in some of the results from these cameras...but sometimes I am blown away. That can be said of every camera though.
Click to expand...

I agree with you, and I do like the GR series, though not as much as I wished.....just for a tad more information in the files.

I just feel that to compliment an X100, meaning, to act as a 28mm, it won't match as the file quality is too far apart. As a camera, the GR with it's immense amount of depth of field is a great camera for what it does, on its own, and not as a compliment to the X100.
 
It could never complement the X100 if the criteria is equivalent IQ in both cameras. To me, the GRD4 does complement the X100 in the sense that it is very small, wider focal length, and great IQ considering the sensor size.
 
Last edited:
leicashot said:
As a camera, the GR with it's immense amount of depth of field is a great camera for what it does, on its own, and not as a compliment to the X100.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I have no argument for that. It is a very different camera with a different purpose. It's good for what it is though...which it sounds like you are agreeing with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom