GX100 anyone?

[Larky]

Hello everyone.

I'm in a muddle. I love film, and always will, but also want to add a new digital to my arsenal. I don't want another DSLR or tiny little compact as I have these, I'm looking for something to carry with me to compliment the SP35 I use. I wondered about the Canon G9 etc, but am now thinking about the Ricoh Caplio GX100. I wondered what others thought?

Take care.

Andrew.

 

[Epimetheus]

I think GX100 is the excellent. G9 would have been my second choice but I wanted a wider angel on the wide end and the 24mm on Ricoh is a lot of fun.

Check out my set from Paris with GX100: http://markuspuustinen.com/galleriat/07/12/weekend_in_paris/

 

[HansDerHase]

I have one. If you want a pocketable shooter with streetshooterish focal length go for the GX100.

If you go for picture quality take your DSLR. Even the quite good quality of the G9 will not come close. The GX100 has some issues in the picture quality department. I wish Ricoh had ignored the stupid Megapixel race and traded those megapixels for picture quality. Like a state-of-the-art 6MP sensor instead. The GX100 picture quality is really good in bright daylight though. And then. Picture quality is not the main concern if you are looking for some gear to complement your heavy gear.

The GX100 is much more pocketable than the G9 and the 24-72mm focal length is much more fun for candid shooting. At least for me. Responsiveness is very good for a compact digital as allways with Ricoh.

The EVF is .. well .. an EVF. Not the worst I've seen but nowhere close to a real viewfinder. But then. You don't have a choise these days. And as someone who doesn't warm up to "hold-the-cam-at-armlength-in-front-of-you" composition I appreciate that Ricoh offers a viewfinder. (Should be optical and integrated in the body of course.) I even wondered the other day if I should get the 28mm optical external viewfinder of the GR-D..

I like the zoom-step-mode of the GX100. I switched to it from the first day and never switched back. I now have 24-28-35-50-72 and nothing else. That way I can easily "pre-zoom". You don't actually need the in-betweens.

Some say the GX100 a tank. Its not. Not nearly. I don't expect mine to last much more than say the next five years. And - as I see you are an SP user - it just doesn't feel right in my hands. There is no joy in handling it. I sometimes catch myself winding one of my 70s RFs focusing and pressing the shutter just for the joy of doing so (though I tell myself it's just to make sure they don't rust, like exercisinf the shutter and stuff). I don't expect this to happen with the GX100.

-- Maybe it's because I'm an old-guy though.

 

[Tuolumne]

I will second the praise for the GX-100, especially if you are looking for a pocketable digicam in the 25-75mm range. I find this range excellent for almost all of the travel and street shooting I do. The camera is so light and easy to use that it has become my carry everywhere camera. I'm sure the G9 is excellent, too, from what I've read, but it is larger and its zoom range is 35-210mm, much better for tele-shooters. But if you aren't one of these, I would go with the Ricoh. In B&W you can shoot it up to asa1600 with no problem at all. Color above very low ISOs will require Noise Ninja.

/T

 

[__--]

For me the picture quality of the GX100 is good enough, although that of the GR-D2 is somewhat better. Have a look of my GX100 shot of Chartres and the chateaux of the Loire:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/sets/72157603089594785/show/

—Mitch/Bangkok
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/

 

[Larky]

I ordered myself one with the viewfinder and extra bits. Also just ordered a load of chemicals and changing bag and stuff. All this because my girlfriend wanted me to teach her the way of the lens. Now I'm back into it and approaching broke!

But it's fun. 🙂

 

[Larky]

My GX-100 arrived today, and although I haven't had a chance to use it for real, I did have a little play. All the bad mouthing about quality was, in my always wobbly opinion, wrong. Especially the black and white, it's incredible. The camera is tiny, fast, silent, and almost feels like a RF in my hand, apart from the fact it's smaller. Anyway, thought I'd share the fact that this little camera appears, at least after 30 minutes play time, to be a gem.

Update: Had a play with the camera in a low lit bar this evening, my meter was reading 1/8th at 2.8 so I wound the ISO up to 1600 and turned off the flash. Player in AP and had a wail of a time, this camera is fantastic. Can't wait to use it for real. I'd highly suggest everyone gets one as a pocket cam.

 

[Tuolumne]

It is truly outstanding in B&W. As I said, even at 1600 the B&W files look good to me.

/T

 

[BillBingham2]

While the zoom is tempting for some, the GR-D ROCKS. It has a great lenses, IMHO far better than the GX100. I just got a new GR-D and am very happy with my decision. If you love zooms, the GX100 might be a great way to go. I had the original R1 and loved it. I am starting to feel the same about the GR-D.

I feel the same way about moving away from film, it sucks. But all the research I did pointed to the fact that the GR-D was a close to a film camera handling-wise as there was and it seems to have been correct. I got a black metal 28mm CV Brightline finder for it and love it. I'm still about two months of shooting away from felling 100% with her.

I have replaced a Bessa L / 25/4 combo with it. My gut is telling me this might be my wide angle digital camera. The GR-D is the most solid digital camera I have ever held.

B2 (;->

 

[retow]

For me the picture quality of the GX100 is good enough, although that of the GR-D2 is somewhat better. Have a look of my GX100 shot of Chartres and the chateaux of the Loire:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/sets/72157603089594785/show/

—Mitch/Bangkok
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/

Mitch,

In your opinion, is the rootcause to the quality difference rather the lens or the in camera processing?

Reto

 

[Larky]

I'll buy the other one and compare, can't have enough gear! 🙂

Going on holiday, need another excuse!

 

[cbass]

Check out my set from Paris with GX100: http://markuspuustinen.com/galleriat/07/12/weekend_in_paris/

These are very good photos. I enjoyed the texture and composition. The grain effects were well done. Was the grain from a high ISO setting or post-processing?

Again, nice photo gallery. Paris is a truly wonderful city and you captured it very well.

 

[__--]

Mitch,

In your opinion, is the rootcause to the quality difference rather the lens or the in camera processing?

Reto

Reto, as I'm using only RAW the files the difference should be the lens, which seems to be sharper and higher contrast on the GRD2 than on the GX100, not to speak of less distortion from the primes lens.

—Mitch/Huahin
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/

 

[johnwnyc]

The EVF is .. well .. an EVF. Not the worst I've seen but nowhere close to a real viewfinder. .

I'm puzzled by statements like this.

The EVF is in fact better than any "real viewfinder" I've seen on other digital cameras. Ricoh's EVF gives live data information (including real-time exposure feedback), is -- for all purposes -- 100% accurate in framing, and, finally, hinged to allow a 90-degree angle of view.

The EVF will never match the brilliance of a Nikon high eyepoint finder, but given all its other capabilities and the fact that it is nicely detachable, well -- I'd take the EVF any day.

 

[Tuolumne]

I find the image in the EVF w-a-y too small to be useful. I can barely see any details of the scene. I never use mine.

/T