On Image Quality Alone, GXR vs M8 vs RD1 ?

CameraQuest

CameraQuest

Head Bartender
Staff member
Local time
3:21 PM
Joined
Mar 1, 2005
Messages
6,600
Amongst the lower priced digital M sensor platforms

RD1 2004 6.1 MP CCD 1.5x crop factor
GXR 2009 12.30 MP, APS-C sized (23.6×15.7 mm) CMOS sensor
M8 / 8.2 2008 10.3 MP APS 1.3 crop factor CCD

How do the images compare?

When sensor is superior in what ways?
Each of these 3 sensors probably have their strong and weak points.

Your choices and observations are welcomed.

Best,
Stephen
 
For resolution of fine detail, the M8/8.2, with it's razor thin sensor cover, is probably the best in the world until the print size gets pretty large. At least that's my impression.

The GXR is very nice. :)
 
I remember seeing persuasive examples comparing the M8 and the GXR that revealed better color in the GXR, in addition to higher resolution.

Still, if B&W is the main usage, the M8 has an output that many prefer.

The lack of AA filter on both the M8 and the GXR gives them a decided advantage, IMO, over the R-D1.
 
at base ISO: M8
for everything else: GXR

the GXRs resolution is superb, but the M8 files have something thats hard to describe. Acuity or somebabble.
 
i used the gxr for years. the output was stunnung--it has no AA filter and unlike the m8, no trouble rendering black. theres no need for uv filters or coding and it plays nicely with almost every m lens. so on IQ you cant beat the gxr

but honestly, its not just about IQ. if you dont enjoy using the camera, if it inhibits your creativity or your enjoyment, what good is it? at the end of the day i personally sold the gxr and now most happily use the rd1. why? well compared to the gxr:

the rd1 has a huge optical vf at a 1:1 ratio that puts you right in the scene. i have never felt more involved in my scene or my photography. it is a true rangefinder, and for me personally, much much easier and organic to focus than the gxr where you have to press a button to magnify then focus then press button again to frame. by the end of it your scene has changed and left you behind. the results are really lovely. no it does not have the same level of microcontrast as the gxr or the m8. but it is sharp, it renders colors like film and unless youre making poster sized prints i promise you will not ever notice the 6mps in real life. you will be pleased with the results--really pleased. i just yesterday looked at some pix from this past weekend and thought 'why the hell do i need more mps'?

also, it produces results equal to the gxr and better than the m8 at iso 1600. vs the m8 the rf can be aligned at home vs sending the m8 out for a few hundred dollar few week operation, no uv filters, no focus or color shift etc etc
tony
 
Reminds me I need to get the GXR article on my website back up. It outlines how to set the GXR as a black & white camera. I'll get to that shortly.

Sometimes I'm thinking I shouldn't have sold mine, even though it got little use once I started using the D700 and D300 professionally...:bang:
 
I'm the proud owner of a 12x18 print made from a rd1 file by our own RichC ... I was very impressed with the quality
 
no more replies..therefore, even though out of the three I only have experience with the GXR, I dare to add some words. I like the Ricoh a lot and it sure makes me smile to read that the consensus seems that it gives the best IQ out of these three, specially considering that GXR + M module + EVF had just cost me, used of course, somewhere between 500 and 600 usd.
I prefer it's use and photos over that of my NEX5n even though the M Module's photos are more noisy even at base ISO. Lovely colors! The Sony has some other advantages more, the most prominent imo being that it's faster, has a higher res. EVF and a shorter flange distance, but the GXR simply is more fun and usually produces the more beautiful photos.
Tony you do make me want to try out the Epson for the rangefinder experience! ( my fist dSLR, Pentax *istDs used the same 6MP Sony sensor, and I really liked the photos it produced )
 
This thread makes me want to take out my GXR and use it again, after picking up a used Sony RX-1 it has just sat around unloved.

wbill
 
kuuan said:
Tony you do make me want to try out the Epson for the rangefinder experience! ( my fist dSLR, Pentax *istDs used the same 6MP Sony sensor, and I really liked the photos it produced )
Click to expand...

well, imo, its hard to replace being one with your scene, with never distorting or cropping the scene to focus, and seeing through the vf exactly what you would see without it. honestly, after years, i dont like coloring up my scene with red pixels, i dont like magnifying then recomposing, and i'm not so thrilled with cropped vf views.

honestly, on a qualitative basis at base iso, you cant beat the gxr. with no AA filter the microcontrast is stunning. but truth is i have an rx1 to get that look. when i look at my rd1 photos i dont miss the gxr at all because i just smile and smile again when i actually use it in the field. and again, imo, i like the rd1 results better than the gxr at 1600--and the m8 is disappointing at 1240. interstingly, 1600 on my rd1 is faster than 1600 on any other digi ive used in the last few years, so i can grab shots with aperture/ss combinations at 1600 that i'd need 3200 on say my epl5.
 
When I think of ''image quality alone'' I am not thinking of technical stuff. The R-D1 has something special...a signature look, especially when used with Voigtlander lenses.
 
Specifications suggest the order is: Ricoh, M8, R-D1.

I only have experience with the latter two that I used side by side for a few years. The M8 fares better, but the quality step is in practice often fairly insignificant. For over a year now, I have mostly used the M8 and Sony RX1R side by side. The practical difference is generally similar, obviously in favor of the Sony. It is the first small (fixed-lens or system) camera I have tried that I think provides a consistently meaningful image quality gain over the M8. (The full-frame Sony series and the new Leica M are in the same class. So is the M Monochrom, but it is a special case.)
 
GXR-M-1.jpg


So, which camera took this shot?
 
Given my experiences with these cameras, the GXR is the top of the heap. It's the most compatible with the widest range of lenses, has the most sensitive sensor, has the broadest feature set, and is the most adaptable. It has excellent controls too: a solid photographer's camera.

I had an Epson R-D1 briefly, after I'd been working with the GXR a while, and it didn't resonate with me at all. I didn't find its imaging output to be particularly great and it felt clunky in use.

After that, I looked at the M8 models, wasn't thrilled with the disadvantages, and bought an M9. The M9 isn't as compatible with some lenses as the GXR is, but is the next step up the scale when it comes to image quality.

G
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom