Panasonic or Ricoh?

S

sara

Well-known
Local time
10:44 AM
Joined
Dec 26, 2009
Messages
553
Sooooooo I'vebeen planning on getting a point and shoot digital kinda thing and had sort of decided to go for the Panasonic Lumix LX5 or something like that, but then I started reading some reviews and some people said that it was a crap camera...


...so I browsed through some threads here and people seem to be very fond of the Ricoh GRDIII??

Yes/no/it's better?
 
I can't speak to the GRDIII personally, but I do have a GXR which is incredible (I use the aps modules exclusively so I know nothing about the small sensor ones.) Ricohs seem to be well built and well thought out.
 
I had the Panasonic LX3 and the Ricoh GX100 which is Ricoh's similar zoom model. When it came to image quality I liked them equally and perhaps the Panasonic a little more. Handling wise I prefer Ricoh's cameras but Panasonic was not in anyway bad.

Let me put it this way

Image Quality:
Panasonic 5.5/5
Ricoh 5/5

Handling:
Panasonic: 4.5/5
Ricoh 5/5

Build Quality:
Panasonic: 5/5
Ricoh 5.5/5

Price:
Panasonic 4.5/5
Ricoh 4/5

You'd probably be happy either way. I ended up selling the Panasonic LX series because I like Ricoh's controls and honestly I just liked how the Ricoh's look like their old film GR1 cameras. :)
 
Tough call, depends on what you want in a camera. The GR-D III's strongpoint is that it is very photographer-centric, meaning it only has what most serious photogs would consider important, and not much else. No chrome trim, no extraneous markings, no situational modes, no fancy menus, no zoom - nothing. It doesn't hold your hand and it doesn't get in the way. If that's something you value, then you may enjoy it.
 
I can not speak to the LX5 but I've found the Ricoh GRD series works the way I think. I loved the Ricoh R-1 many years back and the GRD I melded into my hand like it was a natural part of me. The GRD III is even better, faster lens, the added features actually add value rather than just menu selections. If you are looking for a pocket P&S Ricohs have been my favorite for film and digital hands down. Simple, strong, great quality.

Not sure this will help, hope it will.

B2
 
I've got a Ricoh GR-D (v1).
With the aditive wide (21mmm eq.), external VF and using it in jpeg mode BW @ 800 or 1600 iso,
I feel I have a Bessa L with a 2 stops pushed TriX in. I love it!

U20801I1292443320.SEQ.0.jpg


But : If you want to shoot in raw, forgot the GR-D serie…

Pro :
- very useless with wide additive and external VF
- exc ++ jpeg 800 or 1600 ISO (but maybe GR-D jpeg engine better for that than the GR-DIII one).

Cons :
- very sloooow with Raw
- capricious with contrast lights

IMO LX5 is more "conventional" and universal P&S (but less fun)
 
I have neither the Panasonic nor the Ricoh--although I do have a Leica Digilux 3, which, by the way, is an excellent little camera--but if you're looking for something in that range you might also want to check out the Olympus XZ-1. I actually handled one today and it's a pretty sweet little unit. Has some nice features, too: RAW capability, f1.8 lens, optional viewfinder. A bit of info here:

http://www.dpreview.com/products/olympus/compacts/oly_xz1
 
I had a GRD (the first one) briefly and while everyone raves about the black and white jpegs from it, the color I found kinda sucked. It's a pretty noisy sensor and while that lends itself to fake grain in black and white for some folks, it's makes the color shots unusable at all but the lowest ISO. The newer GRD III might be better in this respect.

Personally I prefer film for black and white so I'd look to something with good color for digital and get a used film GR-1 for black and white. They are great cameras.

People seem to like the LX5 and the Canon S95. I've seen some really nice color come out of the Leica branded Panasonics which have some different color processing software. If you're shooting RAW, it doesn't much matter but if you are shooting jpegs you might want to look at the results of these cameras on Flickr and get what pleases you.
 
Just my 2 cents.
I had an LX3, it is very good (lens and pic quality) except I always feel that it's slipping out of my hand all the time. I guess there's not enough grip.

I also have a Ricoh GR1s. If the GRD III has the same body design as the GR1s (from the pictures I've seen, the answer is yes), I know that I will love using it.

Now, both companies know how to produce good lenses, I think zoom lenses are neither here nor there in this camera class, so in this regard, the Ricoh wins too.
 
I love my GRDIII .

It's firstly a go anywhere pocket camera - and a great backup ( when the diopter broke on my Hasselbald WLF - out came the GRD ).
I tried a EP-1 but the size brought me back to the Ricoh.

The controls and UI are simply outstanding - I don't think anything else comes close to the degree of customization and photographer friendly layout.
Not many compact can be described as a pleasure to use - this one can !

Super close macro function.

GV-2 compact OVF and 6 frame RAW buffer make it great for stitched panoramas.

If you have not done so, check out Steve Huff's review here http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/01/22/the-ricoh-gr-digital-iii-review/
 
The LX5 is not a bad camera, but I did not get along with it. The 24mm wide angle is nice to have and in good light the pictures are really nice. But I had some odd interactions between the RAW and JPG files when I used the high contrast B&W JPG mode. And it is not as intuitive to me as a Ricoh. But still, a nice camera.

I'm a long time fan of the Ricoh GRD cameras. Very intuitive and easy to use and customize. Very easy to hand hold. The IQ is very good, better than the LX5, but of course it is only 28mm. I also use the 21mm adapter. The GRD3 also has a faster lens. I like the colors I get from my Ricoh cameras and they make pleasing B&W conversions.

The GRD3 is always with me.
 
shadowfox said:
Just my 2 cents.
I had an LX3, it is very good (lens and pic quality) except I always feel that it's slipping out of my hand all the time. I guess there's not enough grip.
Click to expand...

Yes I felt this way too. Had forgotten until you brought it up! Wile I never actually dropped my LX3, the way it felt when held did seem like it can happen. Less peace of mind! The GRD molds right to your hand in comparison.
 
Would you guys say that the GRD color photos/noise have improved with the GRD3?

I like the design and wanted to like the original GRD but found the image quality really noisy and to me it didn't look like grain.
 
nightfly said:
Would you guys say that the GRD color photos/noise have improved with the GRD3?

I like the design and wanted to like the original GRD but found the image quality really noisy and to me it didn't look like grain.
Click to expand...

That's really kind of a loaded question in some ways. For people who shoot in RAW it really doesn't matter, b/c color is dependant on your RAW developer and its settings, not the camera. For jpgs it's more relevant, and from what I've come across, yes, the GR-D III is better. Whether it's good enough for you or not, only you can determine. It's a small sensor camera and it's IQ is on par with other similar cams like the LX-5, G12, etc.

For my use, I only shoot my GR-D III in RAW and dump the jpgs as the quality difference is quite noticeable between the two files. I use LR3 to process everything and the results are quite excellent.
 
Looks like there's a bit of a yes to both kinda thing here haha!

Well the best way I think would be to go and try out the cameras myself, I mean just have a play with it to see how it feels blah blah

As for people mentioning RAW, I don't actually plan to shoot so much in RAW because I have my Canon DSLR and this was more of a camera for...blogging really. Unless I'm too lazy to carry my DSLR out...but in terms of "serious photography", I use my film cameras so I'm not so bothered about over-technical specs here.

But it sounds that either camera works. I don't think there's anything "major" about it features-wise, as it sounds like they're both nearly similar anyway! :)
 
For blogging you could probably get away with a much less costly camera. The GRD's are like $500 and the LX5 are about $400. You can get a Canon SD4000 which also has a nice sensor and f2 lens for $225, if that matters. More point and shooty if you are doing you're serious photography elsewhere.

I'm sorta in the same boat.
 
Cosmonaut will check that camera out thanks.

Nightfly...just checked out that camera...a big no. Staying away from those cameras. I dislike those cameras. Reminds me of my friend's "drunk party camera".

Haha! Nah, I still want a proper serious point and shoot! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom