Ricoh GR...Yes or No

[David_Manning]

What's the verdict? Should I sell my RX100 and get the GR? It sure is tempting.

In my mind...it'll be like carrying my X-Pro 1 and 18mm in my pants pocket. Very tempting indeed. :bang:

 

[kbg32]

If you like 28mm as your only focal length, sure.

 

[burancap]

Ricoh has a VERY loyal following! I genuinely liked them when I tried them, but ended up keeping my RX100.

 

[ruby.monkey]

Keep the RX100 and add a GRD-4 with GV-2 finder to your stable.

 

[GaryLH]

Pretty much in your same boat about 5 weeks ago. For now Ricoh is on the back burner.. For following reasons.....
- rx100 is over a stop better and has good iso up to 800
- Ricoh good iso up to 3200 (maybe even 6400) and better dynamic range
-- in low light faster Ricoh looks better on paper but it has problems in terms of af and no stabilization
-- rx100 af works pretty well in most lighting conditions
- zoom range vs fixed 28
- I already own the rx100
- will sony introduce a rx10 which is as compact as the Ricoh or Nikon?

Anyway, I decided to wait it out since I have the rx100.. C what else may come down the road by December.

The rx100 as the first of the pocketable p&s w/ a really good iq. The bar has been raised w/ the Coolpix A and the Ricoh grd.

Good luck w/ your decision.
Gary

 

[Aristophanes]

Pretty much in your same boat about 5 weeks ago. For now Ricoh is on the back burner.. For following reasons.....
- rx100 is over a stop better and has good iso up to 800

No.

1.5-3 stops faster for the GR. Low-light it's a GR blowout against the RX100 even when the latter is not zoomed out.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/(appareil1)/874|0/(brand)/Ricoh/(appareil2)/812|0/(brand2)/Sony

You simply cannot compare the low-light capabilities of APS-C sensor size vs. 1". The RX100 is slightly more compact and versatile with the zoom.Both being CDAF focus types the larger sensor will also trump AF speed in lower light even with assist.

So the 800 ISO on the RX100 is going to have significantly more dB noise than the GR.

 

[GaryLH]

No.

1.5-3 stops faster for the GR. Low-light it's a GR blowout against the RX100 even when the latter is not zoomed out.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/(appareil1)/874|0/(brand)/Ricoh/(appareil2)/812|0/(brand2)/Sony

You simply cannot compare the low-light capabilities of APS-C sensor size vs. 1". The RX100 is slightly more compact and versatile with the zoom.Both being CDAF focus types the larger sensor will also trump AF speed in lower light even with assist.

So the 800 ISO on the RX100 is going to have significantly more dB noise than the GR.

I am not talking about iso performance here. I am talking about lens aperture at 28 fov. The rx100 @28fov is f1.8 vs the Ricoh @f2.8.

I would not have talked about the Ricoh having better high iso and dynamic range later on if I was talking about iso alone in that context.

Gary

 

[Dunn]

I have the Ricoh GR and my girlfriend has the RX100.
I like her RX100 more than I thought I would and it's a great little camera, but I prefer the GR. But I'm coming from using the GR1v so I might be biased. It handles great and the photos are wonderful.
My only problems with the GR is the autofocus is slow in low light, in normal light it is very fast, and trying to use it in P mode it almost always selects f4. I don't know why. For example, the sun was just starting to go down the other day, I set the iso to 400 and then tried to take a shot. It selected f4 and at least 1/1000 for the shutter. There was plenty of light for it to select f8 and still shoot at 1/250 or more. It only selected a smaller aperture when I pointed it towards the sky. It also selects f4 in really low light too. Kind of an annoyance but no biggie.

 

[MikeAUS]

I have the Ricoh GR and my girlfriend has the RX100.

Dunn,
What about the shutter noise of the GR? Is it near silent like RX100 and Coolpix A. I still don't have the answer to this one, some saying it's 'loud' others saying it's 'quiet'. So how is it compared to RX100? Thanks!

 

[Dunn]

Dunn,
What about the shutter noise of the GR? Is it near silent like RX100 and Coolpix A. I still don't have the answer to this one, some saying it's 'loud' others saying it's 'quiet'. So how is it compared to RX100? Thanks!

I think the Ricoh is pretty quiet. I'll do a side by side comparison though and get back to you about which is quieter. But I would never call the Ricoh loud.

 

[Aristophanes]

I am not talking about iso performance here. I am talking about lens aperture at 28 fov. The rx100 @28fov is f1.8 vs the Ricoh @f2.8.

And the GR APS sensor still substantially outperforms the 1" sensor in stops.

The GR in low-light is 3 stops faster than the RX100, both wide open, both at 28mm.

A stop is a stop.

So if the RX100 wide open f/1.8 at 28mm needs 1/60 second, the GR at f/2.8 will be at 1/250 sec.

In order for the RX100 to get that same 1/250 sec. it will need to crank the ISO 2 stops, but it will be about 5.5x noisier in the shadows. Lots of pink speckles. It gets much worse for the RX100 above ISO 800.

Also the GR DOF is shallower than the RX100 at measured aperture. At 28mm the RX100's DOF on a 10 ft. subject shot at f/1.8 is 1.52 ft. The GR at f/2.8 is 1.31 ft. The laws of physics say it cannot get any better on the RX100. The GR f/2.8 will always have a shallower DOF and brighter image than the RX100.

All this will apply on the GR at the crop 35mm as well, and at the 21mm with adapter.

The RX100 is smaller, cheaper, and has a zoom. But at no FL can its f/1.8 lens make up for that 3x larger sensor in the GR. It's within 20% at ISO 100 at f/1.8, but that's as close as it gets. From there on the GR pulls away. The RX100 zoomed out or stopped down more and more resembles a P&S while the GR never loses its APS-C (DSLR or Fuji X) equivalency. That's the design choice of a large sensor, fixed lens.

And the Sony RX1 full frame has a similar advantage over the GR. It's a full stop on the lens alone plus about 1.3 stops on the sensor, pulling away above ISO 1600 substantially. Of course you have to add $2,000 to get there over the GR whereas the gap between the GR and RX100 is $150 MSRP.

They each have their own niche. I've used the RX100 and really like it. If I had to get a travel size P&S it would be my choice, especially for outdoor available light shooting.

 

[GaryLH]

If u read my initial post in context I never said that that RX 100 outperformed the Ricoh. What I was trying to say that at end of the day, it is close enough for me for now given the info I outlined. It is my assessment of the reason I have held off on a grd. Nothing more nothing less. Enough said.

Gary

 

[aizan]

switch from the rx100 to the gr if the following conditions apply:

1) you don't zoom in often with the rx100. look at your stats to verify.
2) you're unsatisfied with the low light performance of the rx100.
3) you're unsatisfied with the dynamic range and overall file robustness of the rx100.
4) you're unsatisfied with the rx100's user interface.

and whatever else you can think up.

 

[kuvvy]

To the OP, Dave, you think you have a problem. I have the RX100, the GRDIV and the now the GR. The GR is best for image quality. The RX100 with its zoom is handy when doing the touristy thing though on a daily basis I use mainly 28mm. Although the GRDIV hasn't the image quality of the GR it's still a fine camera and I still enjoy it. I really should sell the Sony and GRDIV and stick with the GR but I'm struggling to part with either of them. Gonna have to make a decision soon.
I don't suppose any of this has been of use to you but good luck with your choice.

Paul

 

[Matus]

I would not go for the GR, but that is purely because of the focal length. I have the GRDIII and even after more than 2 years I find the lens too wide quite often. The body design of the GR being nearly identical to GRD series - I believe the camera must be great user for those liking the focal length.

 

[maggieo]

I'm confused- the new GR with the APS sensor is supposed to have a 35mm FOV, right? The older GR-Ds are the ones with the 28mm FOV.

 

[erikhaugsby]

I'm confused- the new GR with the APS sensor is supposed to have a 35mm FOV, right? The older GR-Ds are the ones with the 28mm FOV.

The GR has an 18.3mm lens with an APS-C sensor equivocating to a 28mm lens in 135 terms. It's also got a 35mm crop setting but that's entirely software-based and thus sheds pixels, but allows the 35mm focal length to be viewed through the display.

 

[maggieo]

Ah, OK! Thanks!

 

[erikhaugsby]

Ah, OK! Thanks!

No problem!

 

[David_Manning]

I'm traveling right now with only my RX100. While I was street shooting, I was easily talking myself into the new GR. It's sexy, pretty fast, and seems to be able to deliver the goods.

But--away from the streets, the RX100's zoom sure is useful for basic (or better) travel shots.

I wish a little birdie could drop into this thread and confirm an APS-C sensor RX (RX10, maybe) was in the works. THAT would be my dream travel partner.