GaryLH
Veteran
This is main reason I have not made a final decision one way or another and have decided to sit it out for now...
Nikon and Ricoh have fired their shots and both implementation look good... But others have not answered yet.. Given Sony started this IMHO w/ the rx100 and Nikon and Ricoh answered w/ not only a pocketable but up the anti w/ one using a apsc sensor..
How is Sony going to reply or for that matter the others like Canon, Panosonic or Olympus.. Will these m43 players bring out a pocketable or be content w/ the gx1 or ep5?
But right now I am more interested in seeing if Sony is going to do a rx10.
Gary
David_Manning
Well-known
Gary--exactly. But...how long can a person expect to wait??? 
David_Manning
Well-known
On a side note, an APS-C "RX10" could very well take a bite out of the micro 4/3 market, couldn't it?
The thing that keeps me coming back to compacts is their pocketable size. In less-than-savory places, a camera that disappears into your pocket is a good thing. I'm in Buenos Aires right now (sitting at a Starbucks, actually), and I wouldn't really want to walk around with a camera hanging around my neck or off my shoulder.
Back OT, I think 28mm with a 35mm crop would suit me. I guess the 35mm is basically a digital crop/zoom? What's it look like for IQ...?
The thing that keeps me coming back to compacts is their pocketable size. In less-than-savory places, a camera that disappears into your pocket is a good thing. I'm in Buenos Aires right now (sitting at a Starbucks, actually), and I wouldn't really want to walk around with a camera hanging around my neck or off my shoulder.
Back OT, I think 28mm with a 35mm crop would suit me. I guess the 35mm is basically a digital crop/zoom? What's it look like for IQ...?
David_Manning
Well-known
FA Limited
missing in action
well he was shooting a Nikon P&S so it's not really a convincing reason to get one and ricoh would be fools not to give him GRs to play with. tbh i'm surprised there wasn't any mention (that i found) if he was using the prior GRDs
and ricoh would be fools not to give him GRs to play with. tbh i'm surprised there wasn't any mention (that i found) if he was using the prior GRDsArchiver
Veteran
Hi David. Sounds like you're looking for more justifications for GAS. Well, you've certainly come to the right place!
My Dad has a RX100 and I have the new GR. In terms of handling, feel, ergonomics and ease of use, the GR is light years ahead. It sits very well in the hand and is very grippy, unlike the soap-bar-slippery RX100.
Focus is just as fast and perhaps faster with the GR in good light, but slower and more 'hunty' in lower light. The RX100 does have the surprising benefit of face detection, which I always snubbed until I experienced it with the Oly OM-D.
Shutter sound: I have a range of cameras including the X10, X100, Ricoh GXR and many others. The GR is louder than the X10 and X100, which disappointed me. It is a definite mechanical 'click-click' and audible in quiet places, but not on the street or a busy restaurant. It is also louder than the RX100, although not too much. But lens extension sound is minimal, and focusing is practically silent.
The GR's 35mm function is a crop of the original 16mp image, down to 10mp. Image quality is still excellent, as it is identical to the centre crop of the original.
It has been suggested that Ricoh believes the sweet spot of the GR lens to be f4, which is why P mode preferentially selects it 80% of the time, regardless of lighting conditions. Even at night, I can't get P mode to select f2.8 instead of f4. I work around this by shooting in P in bright sunlight and Av at f2.8 when indoors or in anything less than bright sunlight.
I never thought that a lack of stabilization would bother me, but I've been spoiled by the EM-5. The GR seems to select lower shutter speeds in low light situations, rather than increase ISO too quickly. I have tried to work around this by setting Auto-ISO to 1/125 and ISO 6400, but it still shoots at 1/80 and ISO 3200 in moderately dull indoor conditions. Kind of odd.
Apart from these quirks, I find the GR an immensely enjoyable camera. It is very fast to operate, out of the pocket, shooting and back in the pocket before anyone notices. The image quality is somewhere between the GXR M-mount module and the Leica M9, and the LCD screen is super. Just make sure you put a protector on the screen, as it appears to be coated and collects dust and fingerprints like blazes.
If you've got any more questions, just fire away. GAS Enablers Inc. is here to help.
My Dad has a RX100 and I have the new GR. In terms of handling, feel, ergonomics and ease of use, the GR is light years ahead. It sits very well in the hand and is very grippy, unlike the soap-bar-slippery RX100.
Focus is just as fast and perhaps faster with the GR in good light, but slower and more 'hunty' in lower light. The RX100 does have the surprising benefit of face detection, which I always snubbed until I experienced it with the Oly OM-D.
Shutter sound: I have a range of cameras including the X10, X100, Ricoh GXR and many others. The GR is louder than the X10 and X100, which disappointed me. It is a definite mechanical 'click-click' and audible in quiet places, but not on the street or a busy restaurant. It is also louder than the RX100, although not too much. But lens extension sound is minimal, and focusing is practically silent.
The GR's 35mm function is a crop of the original 16mp image, down to 10mp. Image quality is still excellent, as it is identical to the centre crop of the original.
It has been suggested that Ricoh believes the sweet spot of the GR lens to be f4, which is why P mode preferentially selects it 80% of the time, regardless of lighting conditions. Even at night, I can't get P mode to select f2.8 instead of f4. I work around this by shooting in P in bright sunlight and Av at f2.8 when indoors or in anything less than bright sunlight.
I never thought that a lack of stabilization would bother me, but I've been spoiled by the EM-5. The GR seems to select lower shutter speeds in low light situations, rather than increase ISO too quickly. I have tried to work around this by setting Auto-ISO to 1/125 and ISO 6400, but it still shoots at 1/80 and ISO 3200 in moderately dull indoor conditions. Kind of odd.
Apart from these quirks, I find the GR an immensely enjoyable camera. It is very fast to operate, out of the pocket, shooting and back in the pocket before anyone notices. The image quality is somewhere between the GXR M-mount module and the Leica M9, and the LCD screen is super. Just make sure you put a protector on the screen, as it appears to be coated and collects dust and fingerprints like blazes.
If you've got any more questions, just fire away. GAS Enablers Inc. is here to help.
aleksanderpolo
Established
If there is an RX10 in the making, I am sure it would be somewhere between RX1 and RX100, obviously. That means good to exceptional image quality, horrible to ok ergonomics. Which is exactly why I have no interest in it.
The only thing that I see can shake up the GR/A/x100s market is if RX10 is a 35/2 fixed lens that is the same size as the GR/A (i.e. half the size of x100s). But then I am sure it will come with a shiny, slippery body and a non-existing grip.
The GR is amazing in hand, by the way, so what's stopping you from getting one?
The only thing that I see can shake up the GR/A/x100s market is if RX10 is a 35/2 fixed lens that is the same size as the GR/A (i.e. half the size of x100s). But then I am sure it will come with a shiny, slippery body and a non-existing grip.
The GR is amazing in hand, by the way, so what's stopping you from getting one?
Harry Caul
Well-known
The first company to make a fixed 45-50mm equiv. APS-C compact gets my money. I'd prefer f2 but would still buy it a f2.8 if it would be as pocketable as the GR. For nearly a century this was the go-to kit... I'm baffled as to why manufacturers seem to have abandoned this configuration???
Aristophanes
Well-known
Was not 35-45 equivalent more common for this type of camera?
Cropping is so common now in the high megapixel era, and lens correction, that, wider is more functional.
No way f/2 on APS-C could be pocketable compared to the GR. It would be closer to the RX-1 or the Fuji X100.
FA Limited
missing in action
what pocketable ~50mm f2 cameras are you referring to?
FrozenInTime
Well-known
+1
Love the GR series for travel and grab shots; a 50mm compliment would be the perfect combo.
It is 100 years of the Barnack Ur Leica - I had hoped the 'mini-M' would be true to the orignal 0-series/Standard etc. ; but I guess that's not progress in the eyes of Leica.
I couple of weeks ago I traveled for work to Korea, with a lot of work related carry on items, so took my GRD IV and a 0-series.
BTW. The Sigma DP2 Merrill would fit the bill - if it was not so damn slow and useless at high ISO.
Harry Caul
Well-known
I wasn't. I said f2.8 if as pocketable as the GR -- which many would even say is pushing the definition.
Harry Caul
Well-known
I would agree that 40-45 was historically the most common fixed lens FOV range. But I would still guess that 50 was more common than 35.
And again, I never said f2 and pocketable. I said f2 and compact or f2.8 and as pocketable as the GR.
FA Limited
missing in action
your wording is confusing ... it implies that fixed 50mm f2 cameras have been go to kits for one hundred years. which is ridiculous to say. but besides that, if you want 50mm, why does it have to be fixed, there are 50mm options for every mirrorless system that are worth considering that are not overly large.
Well, it'll be a little more noisier at high ISOs, but the GR's lens smokes the 18mm fuji.
I'm very happy with the GR. It truly fits in my front pants pocket, has decent high ISO, a great lens, great ergonomics, and fast AF in most situations.
Harry Caul
Well-known
Sure my wording could be more clear regarding aperture... but lets not blow this out of proportion. We are in the advanced fixed-lens compact section in a thread about a new fixed lens camera and I responded to a post speculating about what new fixed lens compacts other manufacturers might release. This has nothing to do with mirrorless interchangeable lens cameras. That is like asking people why they should bother with the GR at all when they could just get a EP5/GX1 + 14mm. If you can't see that they meet different needs then I'm not sure we'll ever see eye-to-eye...
I was talking about the ~40mm to 50mm FOV (not necessarily aperture) compact fixed lens camera being a extremely prominent part of the history of the medium -- more so I might argue than a 28mm or 35mm fixed lens cameras. Yet, flash forward to today and all we have are 28mm and 35mm fixed lens cameras. I'm just asking for some new options from manufacturers who want to carve out a niche in this apparently growing market.
Sigma DP2 Merrill
Harry Caul
Well-known
I am VERY intrigued by this camera... I shoot medium format more than 135 and I'm amazed by the detail and colors this thing produces. But I'm more of an available light/candid people shooter and I'm afraid that the ISO limitations might be limiting for my always-with-me camera.
Right now I carry my OMD + 25mm on a sling strap over my shoulder, but I don't bring it with me as often as I would like. Even with the 20mm it is still a bit large. I don't think the DP2m will cut down on size much and the increased detail at the expensive of high ISO is probably not the best trade off for my shooting style unfortunately.
Still, I'm seriously considering picking up a DP2m as a possible second camera...
cwalton
Established
I had been using the RX100 as my only camera for a couple of weeks when I pre-ordered the GR with the intention of 'testing it out' and knowing full well I could not justify having both cameras.
It took about ten minutes from opening the GR to know that the RX100 would be sold. The RX100 is a fantastic compact camera but to me it always felt like a compact. The GR feels like a fully functional camera that just so happens to fit in my pocket. That, for me, is the difference.
Disclaimer: I have always been a primes guy and, although the zoom on the RX100 was initially a welcome change, I soon realised that I could not live with a zoom on my only digital camera.
It took about ten minutes from opening the GR to know that the RX100 would be sold. The RX100 is a fantastic compact camera but to me it always felt like a compact. The GR feels like a fully functional camera that just so happens to fit in my pocket. That, for me, is the difference.
Disclaimer: I have always been a primes guy and, although the zoom on the RX100 was initially a welcome change, I soon realised that I could not live with a zoom on my only digital camera.
dleyva2
Established
Yes. Get one and shoot it and shoot it.