Ricoh GR vs. RX100 AF Speed in Low Light

[kineda]

Can owners that have both these cameras provide a comparison on the AF speed in low light at the 28mm focal range?

Also, in normal light, how does the lag compare between shots? The RX100 seems pretty snappy when shooting back to back for a compact.

Thanks!

 

[stillshunter]

I've not timed them officially, but when testing the RX100ii and the GR side-by-side a few weeks ago, the Sony was much, much snappier in low-light. Focus assist helps, but not appreciably.

But if this were a beauty pageant, lowlight focusing would be the only contest leg the RX100 would have over the GR. First prize in the personality contest, whoever was parading, would easily go to that darn charming Ricoh....for sure

 

[MikeAUS]

Have both. GR is slower. Don't like the GR much ...

 

[kineda]

I've not timed them officially, but when testing the RX100ii and the GR side-by-side a few weeks ago, the Sony was much, much snappier in low-light. Focus assist helps, but not appreciably.

Have both. GR is slower. Don't like the GR much ...

Is it slower when taking back to back shots too in normal lighting?

 

[kuvvy]

I have both and I reckon the Sony is faster focusing. Not really tested them side by side but it certainly feels like it in use. That said, its the Sony I will be selling soon. I've had a few GR series cams over the years.

Paul

 

[Andrea Taurisano]

I only have the GR but must say I am really far from impressed by its AF speed. Great in good light, but frustratingly slow as soon as light fades. And barely usable in macro. A real pity in a P&S that excels in every other aspect.

 

[jsrockit]

Let's remember that the Ricoh has never had a firmware update... the Sony wins currently in AF speed.

 

[shadowfox]

I must be the only one here who always shoot hesistant turtles or growing grass.

No AF camera is too slow for me. Whenever I can, I prefer focusing manually with my eyes and hands, actually, which is slower than any current camera's AF speed.