Pondering a move from Epson RF to GXR M w EVF

[tuanvinh2000]

Hi guys,
I'm thinking of getting GXR M Mount to get a bit better low light performance. My Epson is gorgerous at low ISOs but at night time a few stops more would be appreciated. I know quite a few of you GXR users had the Epson in the past. Any advices on usability and image qualities. How is critical is the focus for a fast lens like 35mm f1.2?

 

[Godfrey]

Hi guys,
I'm thinking of getting GXR M Mount to get a bit better low light performance. My Epson is gorgerous at low ISOs but at night time a few stops more would be appreciated. I know quite a few of you GXR users had the Epson in the past. Any advices on usability and image qualities. How is critical is the focus for a fast lens like 35mm f1.2?

I owned an Epson R-D1 only briefly, but I think a move to the GXR will shock you somewhat with how much improvement there is in the GXR A12 Camera Mount sensor. It's not only double the resolution, but it's better optimized and produces quite clean output at up to ISO 1600 (I've even used 2500 and 3200 successfully).

The GXR with A12 Camera Mount has many optimizations for M-mount lenses and does a superb job with them. It is a very configurable camera with a lot of sensibly thought out options and controls. The TTL focusing system is very very accurate and has not only several levels of magnification to use as assist but two well thought out focus peaking assist modes as well.

Focus for a 35mm f/1.2 lens is always critical when near wide open apertures are used, but with TTL focusing based precisely on what the sensor sees, it's generally more accurate than most rangefinder systems are, particularly close up.

The Ricoh GXR is the best recent digital body for Leica M-mount lenses barring the digital Leica Ms themselves. The Epson R-D1 was the first, and it has its charms, but it's quite old and somewhat behind the curve now.

G

 

[tuanvinh2000]

thats good to hear on the ISO department. Thanks Godfrey for some great tips!
I have read a few issues here on the flash got caught or VF went crazy but i guess that could happen to any digital cameras. My Epson is quite rock solid with being a bit beat up.
How does it balance with a bigger lens as well?
Never use the contrast assist or magnification before so might need to take some time to get used to it but from the photos i have seen they are accurate. Yes i like the GXR Mount much better than the m4/3 or Fuji bodies even with a little less on megapixels and a bit lower ISO performance where others are quite clean at 3200.

 

[rhl-oregon]

I concur with G's elegantly outlined post. You will like the focus peaking through the EVF, I think. Take it off when it goes into the bag, or it may get stuck at 90 degrees (though I learned how to fix that, and there's a thread on it somewhere here). My EVF has been durable though, and I utterly depend on it.

One of my newer GXRs (had 3, sold the oldest here recently) however developed a Sudden LCD Grayout, so must be used with the EVF for shooting/view. I haven't found a solution, but its not bad in that I'm more likely to shoot without stopping to peep, but wait to select/edit in Lightroom. Sort of like film in that way. the discontinuation of GXRs may put us at the mercy of remaindered parts at CrisCam for more serious repairs; make sure you get a good body if you can control that at all.

The lighter the adapted lens the better. I can mount my heavy 85 Serenar on the M mount, but have to carry the rig by the Serenar barrel to be safe. CV Skopars work great and have great iq on the GXR.

 

[anerjee]

I moved in the other direction. Had the gxr, then sold and bought the RD1.

The gxr has a better sensor for sure. The ergonomics of the gxr are superb. It is a great camera, esp now with the low prices I have been seeing.

But I do not enjoy focus peaking . It is hard to nail focus confidently without using some form of zoom + peaking. The RF experience is direct and infinitely more pleasant, for me.

Also, at night the evf becomes unacceptably noisy for me. Comparatively, the bright RD1 vf is a joy to use in low light. I regularly shoot at ISO 1600, and find it ok with some lightroom processing.

Hi guys,
I'm thinking of getting GXR M Mount to get a bit better low light performance. My Epson is gorgerous at low ISOs but at night time a few stops more would be appreciated. I know quite a few of you GXR users had the Epson in the past. Any advices on usability and image qualities. How is critical is the focus for a fast lens like 35mm f1.2?

 

[segedi]

It is hard to nail focus confidently without using some form of zoom + peaking.

Luckily, the GXR has a nice implementation of the zooming. Way better than what Sony has.

I really like the GXR. Bummed I sold mine.
Stunning image quality:
as seen here

 

[johannielscom]

See my website for an article on how to set the GXR-M up as a small Leica Monochrom.

I love mine!

 

[rhl-oregon]

Hear hear, the GXR champion speaks. Johan gets the best out of his lenses, and his essay/examples are great.

 

[ricnak]

focus peaking makes fast glass focus a breeze

 

[Griffin]

focus peaking makes fast glass focus a breeze

I concur. It's the slow/stopped down glass that will require using the zoom to focus properly.

 

[anerjee]

I concur. It's the slow/stopped down glass that will require using the zoom to focus properly.

I was having issues focusing my 35mm c-biogon wide open at f/2.8.

I did a few tests for sharpness and noise in the period I had both cameras. I may still have them tucked away somewhere in my home computer.

There is no doubt in my mind the GXR is superior in IQ -- sharpness, color etc. But the heart wants what it wants, and in my case it was the RD1.

 

[Tom Diaz]

Great, but look at others, too...

Great, but look at others, too...

I love my GXR-M. It's a backup to a Leica M and allows me to carry a second body for use with those great lenses. I agree with everyone here about the great image quality. I also happen to think that focus peaking is a great feature (on the GXR and also on the new Leica M). It does add an extra measure of sharp, fast focusing, especially with the fast lenses that are so common with M mount systems.

Having said all that, I really suggest looking seriously at alternative mirrorless bodies, too. I would, if I were starting over. Here are some reasons.

1. The GXR-M is very solid, in my view. However, they do break and things do go wrong with them. I have had great service for mine, the one time something broke, but I would be concerned for the future. I raise this only because the camera system was discontinued by Ricoh, and the cameras are not plentiful. I realize I'm talking to a brave long-time Epson user, but still.... You may have noticed the GXR shooters here who own more than one body. I have been thinking I should get another one, too, just in case I have problems with the one I have.... There's a lot to be said for a brand new body with a manufacturer's warranty. It might be cheaper than a GXR-M, too.

2. Do you ever want to use anything except an M mount lens? I use my M lenses more than 90% of the time, but every so often I enjoy 21st century technology. Autofocus. Zoom. High speed and light weight. Etc. For a street shooter, an autofocus lens is a fine thing. Once you get off the M-mount module, the GXR's lenses are not its strong point in my view. They are great in terms of image quality but limited in number and type, expensive for what they are, and subject to all the caveats I mention in point 1.

3. There are better high-ISO cameras than the GXR, too. For me, 1600 is really fast and often looks better than ISO 400 film, so for me that is not a big problem, but you expressed an interest.

So, if you are a 100% M mount lens user and are sure you will stay that way and want to be brave about durability, the GXR may be your next camera. Otherwise, consider alternatives!

Tom

PS I agree about the beautiful images shot by some of the people in this forum. I think they are clearly talented people who would do beautiful stuff with other equipment also.

 

[rbelyell]

i will echo but not repeat the well deserved plaudits already given for this camera. i will address that it can only be used with m lenses. while i do primarily use it that way, it performs equally brilliantly with mf slr lenses. ive gotten simply amazing images from my biotar 75/1.5 in exakta mount used with two, count 'em, two, adapters. the results can literally bring a tear to your eye, if youre inclined to emotional reactions to that kind of thing. ):

as for other mirrorless cams, they simply do not have the specific micro lens arrangement that brings out the full individual charachter of rf lenses. thats not an opinion, its science. as for autofocus, sure thats nice to have if you want it. my solution was to get a high quality but inexpensive m4/3 set. or an x100 for $500. or get a couple of gxr modules.

addressing lack of support, we're used to that here, arent we? plus the gxr bodies themselves are really pretty inexpensive. i picked up a spare with the zoom module for well under $300.

i will also say that focus peaking is assuredly not the rf experience. its not as immediate and mode one aint that easy in bright or low light. mode two is akin to a whited out xray type imagery that i do use, is accurate, but has nothing whatsoever to do with any kind of traditional photography ive ever seen. its a useful tool, but to me it aint a fun way to shoot. and whilt the evf is both necessary and fine, its about as far as one can be from a 1:1 optical experience.

none of this however has even brought me close to trading in my gxr. it produces simply awesome results. but i do believe one should go into these things with eyes wide open, willing to accept the compromises necessary to use the tool.
tony

 

[bonatto]

I have an R-D1s, but have previously tried the GXRm+EVF.

I've also used a Panasonic GF1 extensively with its EVF.

The EVF is versatile in the sense that it gives you live view, field-of-view-accurate rendition of what's coming through the glass.

That being said, I passed on the GXR simply because coming from a 1:1 viewfinder and having previously also used an x100s, the GXR's EVF pales by comparison.

Two entirely different experiences, both very capable cameras, but I prefer the R-D1s, despite it having less MP count and slightly lower sensitivity (1600 on the R-D1s can be very useful depending on the light).

 

[tuanvinh2000]

I'm shooting film mainly these days so i only look for a digital back to my M Mount lens.
Dont plan to compare two cameras together at all since both have the charms. Just a quick thought on first day of trial with the gxr + A12:
+ Handling is superb so much better than expected (coming from trying a nex5 of a friend with M mount adapter, the nex 5 feels plain).
+ LCD is a nice improvement for me even though i'm the type who shoots and edits later.

- A bit overwhelming with the menus but it takes some time to get to my setup
- Writing files to card is slow but i have a really old sd card!
- How does Auto-ISO work, doesn't seem to work in Shutter Priority mode? I'm shooting at Manual now, Thanks to Johan's excellent blog post.

I believe in understanding the limitation of each camera and work on their strength. Been making memorable photos with the Epson, looking forward to more with the GXR. What a camera! Even has snap mode like other GRD. I got a sweet deal for the GXR EVF A12 and P10! all brand new.

 

[GaryLH]

Even if u have a faster sd card, it will only improve slightly. I have 95mbs sd card in mine. The only camera that is slower on sd write time that I own is the dp Merrill's. I believe this is due to the slow interface between the a12 module and the camera gxr body where the sd card resides.

I have my 35f2 v4 just about permanently mounted on that camera. I have the evf and use mag+peeking. I prefer this to both the Fuji and Sony implementation of focus assistance.

The Ricoh menus are a bit complicated... But the good thing is that they are surprisingly similar between their camera families. I have both the gr and gxr, it was pretty easy for me.. I really like Ricoh's implementation of custom setups the best of all the camera makers.

Gary

 

[tuanvinh2000]

finally found a place for my 50mm viewfinder. i find looking through optical viewfinder for composition and scale/peak focusing are working best for me. The EVF is taking a little more time to get used to.

 

[Tom Diaz]

none of this however has even brought me close to trading in my gxr. it produces simply awesome results. but i do believe one should go into these things with eyes wide open, willing to accept the compromises necessary to use the tool.
tony

Yup, yup, I agree with rbelyell, including this last part. I have a Panasonic (with some fantastic lenses) for those times when I want to shoot like a 21st century photographer, but it usually isn't with me.

The GXR-M is a really special thing, and it does look like the OP has the right mind-set. The GXR not only has the advantages rbelyell mentioned (microlenses and focus peaking) but also allows you to put in distortion and other correction factors for wide lenses. I don't know how many of us use that feature...? but it is nice to have it there.

When I went looking for a digital backup body (companion at the time for an M9) the best alternative I could come up with was a used M8. That was not a bad idea, but I decided I could not face life with those stupid UV/IR filters again. Then the GXR came out, and it was a superior solution. I'm blown away by the image quality.

The compromises amount to a) the GXR in my hands will eventually reach end of life, at which point I hope used Leicas are available at reasonable prices, b) I guess I will always have another digital camera system (the Panasonic, for me) so I can participate in newer technology at times or shoot with long autofocus lenses or whatever.

Pentax/Ricoh could solve this problem for us. C'mon you guys.

Tom