Ricoh GR-D (I,II,III,IV): Post your photos!

Good. Then we're agreed.
I just bought both the GR-D (original) and the GR-D III (both for $450 total brand new!) and will have to decide which to keep... hmmm

andersju said:
Certainly more rewarding in the sense that's it more of a challenge to take a properly focused picture with a Leica M in fasting-moving situations. Which is fun, sometimes, but I often prefer the GRD when it's all about the picture rather than the process. Also, for me, the fact that the GRD is practically silent in most of my shooting situations makes it superior to the Leica for candids. Many of my favorite images would have been impossible with a Leica M and its comparatively loud shutter.
Click to expand...
 
leicashot said:
Ironic that the pictures in this one thread are better than those in most Leica M threads
Click to expand...
I've always thought that this is the camera that Leica would have built if it still were a innovative company, which it hasn't been — pick your decade before the 1970s.

On the other hand, you could equally say that the pictures in this one thread are better than those in any dpreview Ricoh Talk thread, where someone commented that he preferred "ordinary shots" because they showed him what he could do with the camera.

—Mitch/Bangkok
Paris au rythme de Basquiat
 
Last edited:
malland said:
I've always thought that this is the camera that Leica would have built if it still were a innovative company...

—Mitch/Bangkok
Paris au rythme de Basquiat
Click to expand...

I think a full-frame rangefinder (M9) is pretty innovative if you ask me.
Anyways, back to the pictures:

U19407I1267629002.SEQ.0.jpg



1195.JPG



U19407I1259433632.SEQ.0.jpg
 
chambrenoire said:
hexiplex: Are those images taken with the new preset B&W High Contrast mode? I really like them!
Click to expand...

Glad you like them! Most are JPEG in regular black and white, some are DNG. The three bottom ones is with rather harsh flash. I did try to use the B&W high contrast mode on occasion, but I found it was TOO high contrast, good for photographing text, but outside of that most everything just gets washed out.

Just to keep the pictures flowing, another shot:

4599463795_016b416793_z.jpg
 
Last edited:
splash_image06.jpg

"Luxury", Ninh Binh Province, Vietnam 2008 | GRD II
 
gekopaca said:
Ricoh GR-D. The original. It's my first serious digital camera. I still use it, I love it.
4845699324_b60781b501_b.jpg


4843385880_d77a15e5dd_b.jpg
Click to expand...

These two are very nice Gekopaca, very nice subtle tones! I am not familiar with the GRD, I assume you are using RAW to avoid the harsh look?
 
MikeAUS said:
How come the GRD got such a lousy review at Dpreview? Was it the price? The photos here look fantastic!
Click to expand...

I think the price was part of it - also they were judging image quality at larger than web-size. They noted the high noise levels and highlight clipping, among other things. Personally, the noise doesn't bother me in most shots I see - but the highly processed ones show unacceptable levels and FPN, IMO. Also, some of the shots here show that the highlight problem can be tamed by a careful user.


To me it looks like a great little camera that I maytry. But, I would first have to reconcile myself to the arms-length composition technique, or using the optional finder (which seems pretty expensive). The other problems aren't overwhelming to me..
 
gdi said:
These two are very nice Gekopaca, very nice subtle tones! I am not familiar with the GRD, I assume you are using RAW to avoid the harsh look?
Click to expand...

Sometimes I shoot in Raw with GR-D but it's very slow (several seconds between two shots); and those are not! It's only .jpeg .
With that wonderful camera you can have sepia jpeg, and very precise settings.
Those 2 pictures are made with my personal settings.
 
MikeAUS said:
How come the GRD got such a lousy review at Dpreview? Was it the price? The photos here look fantastic!
Click to expand...
Just shows you that you shouldn't believe aeverything your read. The dpereiview review is from the perspective of a typical point&shoot user, without an understanding that the GRD cameras are photographers' tools; that these are small sensor cameras that "draw" in a different way from larger sensor cameras — and are particualrly good for photographers seeking a certain aesthetic, as evident in this thread. On the dpreview forum most people want the GRD to have a larger sensor, withour raalizing that the small sensor is the basis on which these cameras have their appeal. The dpreview approch also reflects the tendency, with the advest of digital, to pixel-peep rather than to judge the quality of prints.

—Mitch/Bangkok
Bangkok Hysteria Book Project
 
Last edited:
gekopaca said:
Sometimes I shoot in Raw with GR-D but it's very slow (several seconds between two shots); and those are not! It's only .jpeg .
With that wonderful camera you can have sepia jpeg, and very precise settings.
Those 2 pictures are made with my personal settings.
Click to expand...

Ah, thanks for the additional information. Your jpeg technique is impressive !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom