jjanek
Member
Hi everybody,
I use digital P&S for casual, „street“ shooting, often from hip. My main concern now is shutter delay of these two cameras – don´t mind focusing time, I work with zone focusing in manual mode. Some resources speak about 0,2 sec in case of lx3 and nearly „instant“ (0,03) with grd II, on other review page numbers are different and vice versa (lx3 cca. 0,08 grd II 0,14). Which is true and does it really mind? Isn´t 1/5 of second close enough to man´s reacting time that the results will be affected more by my responsivenes than by camera? Should I trade my brand new black
))lx3 for Ricoh, if I want to catch „decisive moments“? Help me, I´m weak-minded. Thanks a lot
Janek
I use digital P&S for casual, „street“ shooting, often from hip. My main concern now is shutter delay of these two cameras – don´t mind focusing time, I work with zone focusing in manual mode. Some resources speak about 0,2 sec in case of lx3 and nearly „instant“ (0,03) with grd II, on other review page numbers are different and vice versa (lx3 cca. 0,08 grd II 0,14). Which is true and does it really mind? Isn´t 1/5 of second close enough to man´s reacting time that the results will be affected more by my responsivenes than by camera? Should I trade my brand new black
))lx3 for Ricoh, if I want to catch „decisive moments“? Help me, I´m weak-minded. Thanks a lotJanek
stillshunter
unlearning digital habits
Not saying sell....but GRDII is great!!
Not saying sell....but GRDII is great!!
Tested the GRDII, LX3 and DP1. The GRD came well out on top. Complete utility of this camera won out at the end. Most portable, most user-friendly, most customisable, etc. I've found minimal - if any shutter lag. Thrown into snap, infinity or MF mode it feels almost instantanous. Even once she's found focus the lag is negligible....nothing like the DP1 that I shook with frustration.
Oh yeah, and the reason I bucked the trend on the LX3 (since everyone else loves it) is that as a manual shooter the buttons were just not in the right place. GRD, like dSLR, is aperture out front and shutter out back. And now that the new firmware offers Shutter Priority (of sorts) it's just perfect. Oh yeah and the images out of the LX3 - even after lens barrel correction just seemed far too plasticky.
Again not saying cash it in - as I'm not sure of your shooting style - but for me I am very happy with my GRD.
Not saying sell....but GRDII is great!!
Tested the GRDII, LX3 and DP1. The GRD came well out on top. Complete utility of this camera won out at the end. Most portable, most user-friendly, most customisable, etc. I've found minimal - if any shutter lag. Thrown into snap, infinity or MF mode it feels almost instantanous. Even once she's found focus the lag is negligible....nothing like the DP1 that I shook with frustration.
Oh yeah, and the reason I bucked the trend on the LX3 (since everyone else loves it) is that as a manual shooter the buttons were just not in the right place. GRD, like dSLR, is aperture out front and shutter out back. And now that the new firmware offers Shutter Priority (of sorts) it's just perfect. Oh yeah and the images out of the LX3 - even after lens barrel correction just seemed far too plasticky.
Again not saying cash it in - as I'm not sure of your shooting style - but for me I am very happy with my GRD.
Rick Waldroup
Well-known
I use my GRDII almost exclusively in snap mode for street shooting. If there is any shutter lag at all, I can't tell. It really is almost perfectly designed for this kind of shooting.
Bobfrance
Over Exposed
I find the GRD to be great for street/hip shooting.
I generally carry mine in my left hand with another camera in my right, giving me an instant 28mm/50mm range.
I must admit to being tempted by the LX3 recently, as its image quality at higher ISOs seems far superior to me (YMMV!).
I must admit - apart from always opening the aperture right up in the hope of getting some OOF areas - I don't really get shooting the camera in full manual mode. To me it only seems to give the illusion of manual shooting.
I generally carry mine in my left hand with another camera in my right, giving me an instant 28mm/50mm range.
I must admit to being tempted by the LX3 recently, as its image quality at higher ISOs seems far superior to me (YMMV!).
I must admit - apart from always opening the aperture right up in the hope of getting some OOF areas - I don't really get shooting the camera in full manual mode. To me it only seems to give the illusion of manual shooting.
stillshunter
unlearning digital habits
Hmmm...maybe I just like operating under the illusion I am the one in control of the camera...
So I don't entirely agree with Bob on this one. The GRD is a smart piece of kit but it won't always intuit the shutter speed I intend. Though I do agree the difference between f2.8 and f9 is pretty negligible (well DoF and that tiny sensor). Also I have found the GRD's tendency to overexpose. So to maintain something of my highlight information I like to rein it in a half stop or so. Spot on for my tastes. So I'm going to persist under my manual delusion a little longer I'm afraid.
But keeping to your thread, none of this detracts from user reports of non-issues with shutter lag.....so far anyway.
So I don't entirely agree with Bob on this one. The GRD is a smart piece of kit but it won't always intuit the shutter speed I intend. Though I do agree the difference between f2.8 and f9 is pretty negligible (well DoF and that tiny sensor). Also I have found the GRD's tendency to overexpose. So to maintain something of my highlight information I like to rein it in a half stop or so. Spot on for my tastes. So I'm going to persist under my manual delusion a little longer I'm afraid.
But keeping to your thread, none of this detracts from user reports of non-issues with shutter lag.....so far anyway.
Bobfrance
Over Exposed
Ha, fair enough Stills.
I concede the shutter speed control does make a difference to the exposure, though personally I find it hard to judge on the little screen. However I'm not even sure the aperture control is connected to anything
The camera has delivered some good results for me though.
I concede the shutter speed control does make a difference to the exposure, though personally I find it hard to judge on the little screen. However I'm not even sure the aperture control is connected to anything
The camera has delivered some good results for me though.
Last edited:
stillshunter
unlearning digital habits
Can't argue with you there Bob! Although there's a sweet spot around the f4-5.6 mark, your DoF stays deep through the range. Having said that I was amazed at the bokeh I get on macro...very pleasing.
But back to street shooting. You are right this little unit just feels right for the task. One thing I did find comparing the DP1, LX3 and GRD2. Admittedly others have said once you get used to the Sigma (oh the IQ!!) and the LX3 that they are great, but the Ricoh feels right in your hand straight from the get-go. I don't know if others have found this, but the GRD just begs me to keep shooting. While I found myself shying away from the shot because of the UI of the others - whenever the opportunity comes up the prospect of aiming the GRD is pleasant one.
Again wholly subjective...and a complete segue from the original shutter lag question. But over the years I am crediting more and more to the feel of a piece of kit in your hand.....and that relationship and the increased likelihood of getting that shot.
But back to street shooting. You are right this little unit just feels right for the task. One thing I did find comparing the DP1, LX3 and GRD2. Admittedly others have said once you get used to the Sigma (oh the IQ!!) and the LX3 that they are great, but the Ricoh feels right in your hand straight from the get-go. I don't know if others have found this, but the GRD just begs me to keep shooting. While I found myself shying away from the shot because of the UI of the others - whenever the opportunity comes up the prospect of aiming the GRD is pleasant one.
Again wholly subjective...and a complete segue from the original shutter lag question. But over the years I am crediting more and more to the feel of a piece of kit in your hand.....and that relationship and the increased likelihood of getting that shot.
stillshunter
unlearning digital habits
Bob, I didn't see the pix first time around. Very impressive. What are you using for your B&W conversions - because that first one is niiice!...and I like the contrast.
Bobfrance
Over Exposed
Thanks! That was shot as a colour JPG and worked over in Lightroom (just greyscale conversion, some curves and maybe a bit of burning-in). I have started using RAW a bit more now with the hope of retaining a greater tonal range on these kind of shots.
For some reason I always get good results shooting into the light with GRs. It was the same with my film GR1.
I must say that these little Ricohs frustrate me. I feel cooler toting around a nice RF, but for some reason I seem to have taken the most 'keepers' with the GR1 and the GRD. I don't even like the 28mm focal length that much! I'm sure having the camera with me far more than any other has a lot to do with it, but I can't argue with the results they give. Seems like I'm stuck with them.
Good tip about the sweet spot in the aperture settings - I'll give it a try.
Might have a mess with macro too. See if I can get some bokeh.
For some reason I always get good results shooting into the light with GRs. It was the same with my film GR1.
I must say that these little Ricohs frustrate me. I feel cooler toting around a nice RF,
but for some reason I seem to have taken the most 'keepers' with the GR1 and the GRD. I don't even like the 28mm focal length that much! I'm sure having the camera with me far more than any other has a lot to do with it, but I can't argue with the results they give. Seems like I'm stuck with them. Good tip about the sweet spot in the aperture settings - I'll give it a try.
Might have a mess with macro too. See if I can get some bokeh.
stillshunter
unlearning digital habits
Hey Bob. Be keen to see if you find a sweet spot around that f-stop.
I shoot RAW only, I wasn't impresed with the jpgs straight out of the GRD2, but you had nice capture with your B&W shot.
I know it's certainly not street, but here's a sample of the bokeh I got in macro (attached - I hope it works??)...forgive the sappy subject matter - but it was for the purposes of testing only
I note we've not had a response from the thread's father - jjanek. I'd be interested to hear how the deliberations are going?
I shoot RAW only, I wasn't impresed with the jpgs straight out of the GRD2, but you had nice capture with your B&W shot.
I know it's certainly not street, but here's a sample of the bokeh I got in macro (attached - I hope it works??)...forgive the sappy subject matter - but it was for the purposes of testing only
I note we've not had a response from the thread's father - jjanek. I'd be interested to hear how the deliberations are going?
Attachments
Bobfrance
Over Exposed
You're right - there is definite bokeh there!
I wonder if I can you street shoot in marco?
Do you use any kind of workflow to reduce noise? Whist the GRD has nice noise for a digital it's not as endearing as grain.
To answer the OP's question regarding shutter lag. I know that I don't find it a problem in the GRD. I haven't used an LX3 enough to comment, but I think if he changed to a Ricoh, he'd have to give up on the Panasonic's superior image quality. You can't have everything I suppose.
As Elvis said, "We're caught in a trap"
Bob.
I wonder if I can you street shoot in marco?
Do you use any kind of workflow to reduce noise? Whist the GRD has nice noise for a digital it's not as endearing as grain.
To answer the OP's question regarding shutter lag. I know that I don't find it a problem in the GRD. I haven't used an LX3 enough to comment, but I think if he changed to a Ricoh, he'd have to give up on the Panasonic's superior image quality. You can't have everything I suppose.
As Elvis said, "We're caught in a trap"
Bob.
jjanek
Member
Hi everybody,
I´m sorry not to reply before, but I´ve read everything carefully. I do not mind if sometimes topic is slightly changed - we are having fun, not definitely at school. I can´t say from "hard (real) use" now (I´m waiting for reduction tube and UV filter - the front lens element isn´t recessed at all), but I´ve done some really un-scientific tests and shutter lag seems good enough (I usually try to "catch" the ball falling from the table - primitive, I know, but if I try several times, diferences between e.g. DSLR and compact are obvious). It seems quite important to unable image stabilization (in my "ball test" it is about "30 cm of falling"). Hope sooner or later I´ll post some pictures (not of the balls)
Janek
I´m sorry not to reply before, but I´ve read everything carefully. I do not mind if sometimes topic is slightly changed - we are having fun, not definitely at school. I can´t say from "hard (real) use" now (I´m waiting for reduction tube and UV filter - the front lens element isn´t recessed at all), but I´ve done some really un-scientific tests and shutter lag seems good enough (I usually try to "catch" the ball falling from the table - primitive, I know, but if I try several times, diferences between e.g. DSLR and compact are obvious). It seems quite important to unable image stabilization (in my "ball test" it is about "30 cm of falling"). Hope sooner or later I´ll post some pictures (not of the balls
)Janek
stillshunter
unlearning digital habits
Good to hear from you Janek, I feared our segues had put you off.
I'm all for your 'unscientific' tests. At the end of the day if you can capture an image of the falling ball as your vision intends then what more can you ask for? I think you'll gain more from these exercises than being reassured by clinical results from the good people at dpreview, luminouslandscapes, etc. Anyway in my opinion its the relationship between you and the world - and subsequently you and the camera - that is ultimately responsible for what you represent in the limits of your frame. The greater you understand the camera in your hand, the better the results of your interactions with your subject. Well that's my take on things anyway. So I look forward to your results.
Bob, I suppose my take on the GRD noise and image quality runs in the same vein as the above. I'm starting to be convinced that IQ is a very subjective thing. For those obsessed with pixels the DP1, LX3 and G10 probably net better results than our little Ricohs. But in my experience with the LX3 the colour rendition just didn't look right ("to me" - must emphasise the subjectivity here!). Compare this with the results from the GRD (and malland's work is a great example) that as a 'whole image' has a pleasing character ("to me"). So I don't entirely agree that the LX3 IQ is "superior", but then again my meters are wholly unscientific. Now the Sigma's IQ is a very different story...
....oh yeah and I don't often reduce noise unless I'm really boosting the contrast. In this case it's a matter of darkening the shadows and eliminating the noise that normally lurks there. Irrespective it's always my very last step in PS. Normally the 'film look' I'm after will dictate any sharpening or noise reduction. So with the image attached I was going for the Ilford FP4 look and the noise complemented ("to me") the graininess...I would never claim noise is, or ever as good as, grain. But I don't find the GRD's noise at all offensive ...except maybe the one coming from the lens at start-up.
I'm all for your 'unscientific' tests. At the end of the day if you can capture an image of the falling ball as your vision intends then what more can you ask for? I think you'll gain more from these exercises than being reassured by clinical results from the good people at dpreview, luminouslandscapes, etc. Anyway in my opinion its the relationship between you and the world - and subsequently you and the camera - that is ultimately responsible for what you represent in the limits of your frame. The greater you understand the camera in your hand, the better the results of your interactions with your subject. Well that's my take on things anyway. So I look forward to your results.
Bob, I suppose my take on the GRD noise and image quality runs in the same vein as the above. I'm starting to be convinced that IQ is a very subjective thing. For those obsessed with pixels the DP1, LX3 and G10 probably net better results than our little Ricohs. But in my experience with the LX3 the colour rendition just didn't look right ("to me" - must emphasise the subjectivity here!). Compare this with the results from the GRD (and malland's work is a great example) that as a 'whole image' has a pleasing character ("to me"). So I don't entirely agree that the LX3 IQ is "superior", but then again my meters are wholly unscientific. Now the Sigma's IQ is a very different story...
....oh yeah and I don't often reduce noise unless I'm really boosting the contrast. In this case it's a matter of darkening the shadows and eliminating the noise that normally lurks there. Irrespective it's always my very last step in PS. Normally the 'film look' I'm after will dictate any sharpening or noise reduction. So with the image attached I was going for the Ilford FP4 look and the noise complemented ("to me") the graininess...I would never claim noise is, or ever as good as, grain. But I don't find the GRD's noise at all offensive ...except maybe the one coming from the lens at start-up.
Attachments
andrewteee
Established
GRD is great for quick snaps, plus it can be used with one hand.