Ricoh GR III?

The LCD is the standard viewfinder, I have no need to make phone calls with my camera. I have the Ricoh optical clip-on 28mm viewfinder as well. :)

Not that I'm thinking of buying another camera, but it looks like a very nice upgrade to the GR digital cameras. If I were in the market, I'd pre-order one and the matched wide lens adapter too. But I'm not in the market at present...

G
 
The GR series is so ergonomic that it is one of the few where you don't miss an OVF. Even when I had my GR1 I would sometimes not use it. Having a 28mm lens also helps in this regard...
 
After using the GR cameras with 28mm view, I find it very difficult to return to a 28mm on a film M.
With the GR LCD to frame, so often I hold the camera at arms length ; up , down , sideways etc. to get an interesting perspective. The eye level OVF on the rangefinder crunches down this freedom.

I’ve been trying to use a TL2 with 18mm as a GR alternative, but it does weigh considerably more, so it’s more likely to be carried in a bag rather than pocket and that minor difference in effort to deploy does lead to missed opportunities.
 
benlees said:
The GR series is so ergonomic that it is one of the few where you don't miss an OVF.
Click to expand...

Well, ask people who need reading glasses to see a sharp picture in the display. Glasses on/off on/off on /off... you get the idea. And optical viewfinders (if they have a diopter correction at all) are more miss than hit if you shoot mostly in short distances like me, besides, it destroys the concept as an always with me in my pocket cam. This and the at least what I saw so far still horrible magenta cast especially with skin tones are and were the reasons to sell my GRII and not to buy the GRIII, let alone the missing flash and the changed UI with a more touchscreen related handling which is obviously also not really promising reading Damiens (DPR) problems with the shutter delay via touch.

Juergen.
 
The design of the GR cameras is not for everyone. I hated my GRII when I first got it. The 28mm view is not my favorite, the lack of a viewfinder was a problem, the placement of the controls seemed odd...all the things about it that I later learned to love. The great image quality was what made me keep using it and, after a short while, I found the camera fit me well.

I really am glad Ricoh is sticking to the same basic design for the new GR.
 
mod2001 said:
Well, ask people who need reading glasses to see a sharp picture in the display.
Click to expand...

Viewfinders usually have diopter adjustments so most people won't have to use reading glasses - you can set the image in the display to be at infinity. It is usually a small difficult to see adjustment ring right next to the VF eyepiece. You will definitely need reading glasses to find the adjustment ring, but only once ;)

An LCD screen, on the other had, is the main reason I don't use my GRii anymore. I just can't see the screen without reading glasses, which I never carry with me outside.
 
Ko.Fe. said:
This thread is amusing me with rate of comments like yours. :D

I can't recall any gear reviewer capable of interesting photos. Huff, Rockwell, Hamish, anyone. No interesting photos. Why?
Simple.
It is not what easy. To grab camera you don't know and do Magnum style within couple of hours or day, two.
Click to expand...

Which is true... The funny thing is all those folks you mentioned actually think they are "photographers" and actually they good... The joke is on them...
 
Let us know how bright the screen is. The White Magic screen in the GRV was maybe 3 stops too dim in the sun.
 
BillBingham2 said:
Interesting specs and price. I wonder if the lens is a good as the pre-APC-S glass was.

B2 (;->
Click to expand...

Were they even better than the APS-C I and II? How so? I had an APS-C one and don't think it really gets much better, I was under the impression that the lens resolved more than the 16 mp sensor, although I never pixel peeped in corners wide open or anything like that.

I'm not sure if they really needed improvements for the higher resolution sensor, the difference in linear resolution is under 20% after all.
 
I loved the GRD III like a child when I had it, until I bought the GR a few years later. It's interesting that what I thought was superb image quality was not as great as all that, even when compared with later small sensor cams like the Panasonic LX7. These days, it is hard for me to use the GRD III without wishing it had better image quality. The GR was a major step up, delivering better IQ than the best 1 inch and m43 sensors, definitely in line with an aps-c DSLR.


The GR III image quality should be excellent. I won't buy one for a while, but I'll definitely get one. The battery life does bother me a little, though. Had that made the body a little thicker, they could have used the Ricoh GXR /Fuji X100 battery.
 
35photo said:
Which is true... The funny thing is all those folks you mentioned actually think they are "photographers" and actually they good... The joke is on them...
Click to expand...

I’m not sure it is. They make a living playing with cameras, so the jokes on us.
Should we judge someone’s artistic photographic ability by the photos they show in reviews? KR for example shows the same boring images review after review. It’s actually really useful as you can compare different cameras from years apart. Would you waste your A material on a review? KR has his “non-review” photos which I think would be received much better if he published them under a pseudonym. He shoots a technically competent non offensive landscape. I’ve seen worse from many “fine art” photographers.
I hate it when reviewers try to get all artsy. I just want to know how it works and what annoying “features” I should know about.
 
I thought this was funny:

"I found the Ricoh GR III to struggle with candid street photography at times. This struggle has nothing to do with the physical act of taking a photo–instead, the Ricoh GR III’s low profile doesn’t alarm anyone at all. The Ricoh GR III has a problem with attaining autofocus quickly in low light situations such as what Alex and I encountered in New York’s Grand Central Terminal."

The camera struggles with candid street photography?

I used to shoot with the GR I and the best "street photography feature" is the snap focus. In fact, that's a major distinguishing feature of this camera. Focus is set. All you do is press the button that releases the shutter, or gathers the pixels, or whatever digital cameras do. Who uses autofocus for quick candid snaps anyway?
 
LCSmith said:
The Ricoh GR III has a problem with attaining autofocus quickly in low light situations such as what Alex and I encountered in New York’s Grand Central Terminal."
Click to expand...

If they haven't made the low light AF act like a modern camera, they might as well have kept selling the GR II. I'm not a huge fan of snap with an APSC sensor...
 
jsrockit said:
If they haven't made the low light AF act like a modern camera, they might as well have kept selling the GR II. I'm not a huge fan of snap with an APSC sensor...
Click to expand...

I believe it's improved over the (rather mediocre performing) GR and GR II, but still lags behind the competition. Which can be typical for Ricoh /Pentax: it's been stiff around these days...
 
benlees said:
The GR series is so ergonomic that it is one of the few where you don't miss an OVF. Even when I had my GR1 I would sometimes not use it. Having a 28mm lens also helps in this regard...
Click to expand...

Amusement parade is continuos in this thread. :)

But I hear you. Go Pro is the most ergonomic camera in the World. :D
 
jsrockit said:
I'm not a huge fan of snap with an APSC sensor...
Click to expand...

I am not sure I understand what you mean. The GR has an 18mm (28mm equiv) lens on a cropped sensor. When are you going to be using autofocus? Everything is already in focus. You set it and forget it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom