Post your GXR A12M images

TKH said:
You and your 12mm lens do fantastic jobs! :)
Click to expand...

Thank you. TKH! I am really just like a kid now, needing to show off the toy in my hands! :p

I wanted to show how well this module is made, and what wonderful images it can create, esp. with this Ultra-wide heliar. It compliments my RD1s ... Wide angles use GXR. 28, 35, 50 i can always use that with a RD1s.

I know the NEX 7 is coming soon, and it's got a whopping 24M pixels with the typical low-noise sensors they have. But I just didn't like the idea of another adapter for E to M. But I know it's certainly more versatile with a wide range of possible adapters for all kinds of mounts.


Please bear with me, another shot - a Pana stitch in CS4 (3 shots), and the images are crisp, and sharp!

GXR + M-Module + Ultra-wide Heliar 12mm + GND 0.9 soft



iso-lo, f11, 1/5s

This is a smaller size image. For a slightly larger one, you may need to click on it.
 
Last edited:
hbjyeo, it's interesting that you note the GRX with M module complements your RD-1, because I've been looking at alot of pics on flickr lately taken with this module (and also adapted NEX), and the GRX pictures are, to my eyes, more "RD-1 like" in terms of colours and also by other "intangible qualities".

Since my lenese are mainly Leica M mount, I also like the idea of not needing an additional adapter with the GRX compared to the NEX. I plan to buy one of these cameras in about a year (can't afford now), and it'll be interesting to se NEX7 pictures as well soon (hopefully).
 
hjbyeo said:



Please bear with me, another shot - a Pana stitch in CS4 (3 shots), and the images are crisp, and sharp!
Click to expand...


A great picture!
Some weeks ago I have bought the 12mm too. The first experiments were with a IIIf, I have not yet decided to go wether NEX or Ricoh.
The results were not so very good, the full frame gives a wide, a very wide image. I have to invest more time (and patience).
Jan
 
Please keep in mind that the Ricoh M mount is the only sensor/shutter/bajonett combination that has exactly the (open) and free Leica M specifications!
The delicate backlens - sensor distance makes wide angle lenses on a m4/3 useless beside the 2x crop.

The AA-filterless sensor with it's tuned shifted microlenses is a one-of-a-kind design beside Leica's M8/9.

This is the now seen advantage of the splitted body/module system from Ricoh.
People have been waked up I guess..... ;-)
 
sleepyhead said:
hbjyeo, it's interesting that you note the GRX with M module complements your RD-1, because I've been looking at alot of pics on flickr lately taken with this module (and also adapted NEX), and the GRX pictures are, to my eyes, more "RD-1 like" in terms of colours and also by other "intangible qualities".

Since my lenese are mainly Leica M mount, I also like the idea of not needing an additional adapter with the GRX compared to the NEX. I plan to buy one of these cameras in about a year (can't afford now), and it'll be interesting to se NEX7 pictures as well soon (hopefully).
Click to expand...

Indeed. I've send my RD1 for servicing in Japan, and just couldn't resist getting another m body during its absence! And this one is really useful for landscapes, possibly more so than the RD1 (though it's quite capable of that).
 
Great images guys!

I pretty much shoot medium format these days, but due to having a 15mm Heliar and a 35mm Perar I have nothing to use with, I'm becoming very intrigued by the GXR.
The IQ I can perceive from the your JPGs looks unique and outstanding.

Would anyone be willing to send me a RAW file so I can have a squint at it through Lightroom? It doesn't have to be anything special anything will do, I'd just like to compare it to the M8 I used to own and the X1 and X100 I've tried recently.

Bob. :)
 
reaching out here

reaching out here

Hope this shows the flickr image. If it works I will post a few more.
(if it appears twice, then both methods work, in that case: sorry!)

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/rudyshots/6259925622/" title="R1144836 ISO 25001-80 sec at f - 1.0.jpg by Rudy Shots, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6050/6259925622_6c224afcd8_z.jpg" width="422" height="640" alt="R1144836 ISO 25001-80 sec at f - 1.0.jpg"></a>

Zeiss Sonnar, 2500 iso, 1.5, it was much darker then what the picture might show. Added 2 to 3 stops in Lightroom.
 
zwarte_kat said:
Hope this shows the flickr image. If it works I will post a few more.
(if it appears twice, then both methods work, in that case: sorry!)

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/rudyshots/6259925622/" title="R1144836 ISO 25001-80 sec at f - 1.0.jpg by Rudy Shots, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6050/6259925622_6c224afcd8_z.jpg" width="422" height="640" alt="R1144836 ISO 25001-80 sec at f - 1.0.jpg"></a>

Zeiss Sonnar, 2500 iso, 1.5, it was much darker then what the picture might show. Added 2 to 3 stops in Lightroom.
Click to expand...

Neither method worked. HTML image tags and links don't work in RFF to begin with, and when you use a vBulletin [ІMG] tag you need to put not the link to the picture's flickr page in there, but the link to the actual image, like this:

6259925622_6c224afcd8_z.jpg


(the code for which is [ІMG]http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6050/6259925622_6c224afcd8_z.jpg[/ІMG])
 
Zwarte, in Flickr, open your picture, click on actions, click view all sizes, click on the size you want, right click and "copy image address". You then go to your message here and click on the yellow icon with the small mountain and paste that address. Good luck.

6246498391_80e2c9dcb9_o.jpg
 
Last edited:
peter_n said:
Would be interested in your thoughts when you do the comparison Bob.
Click to expand...
direwolf101 said:
I'd be interested in your thoughts too, Bob!
Click to expand...


Thanks for your interest guys.

I've only had a quick look so far, but the IQ looks very good.
It has a level of clarity that the X100 didn't possess and reminds me of the M8. I'm guessing that this is down to the absence of an AA filter.

The X1 I shot was quite crisp, but of course was limited to just 35mm FL and came at a higher price. Also I found the focus lag to be simply awful for street use.

I also like that the file appears to have some of the film-like noise characteristics that I remember from my old Ricoh GRD, though nowhere near as pronounced.

Would anyone be able to give me a comparison between the GXR EVF and that of the X100?

Bob. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom