Ricoh GXR & Leica T

X

xyz3450

-
Local time
12:05 AM
Joined
Feb 27, 2013
Messages
244
Sean Reid is reviewing the Leica T. He has provided a comparison to the GXR with Leica M mount using 21mm RF lenses

http://www.reidreviews.com/

Both cameras use APCS sensors. The resolving power of the GXR does well against the Leica.....

Are you still actively using your GXR or is something else beginning to replace it?
 
I have two GXR bodies and two outfits set up in different bags - one with three autofocus lenses and the other with permanently attached M module and three lenses. Both have the (bulky) EVFs. For the life of me I can't see any reason to abandon the GXR, other than the usual GAS thing and the 'fun' of switching systems. From what I see so far, there's no way a Leica T will ever replace my GXR, though I have several film Leicas...TW
 
im amazed this thread isnt getting more buzz. i admit, even though i used a gxr for a couple years, i didnt at first make this connection. its such an obvious comparison, especially on this particular forum where most are more concerned with m lens digital backs than autofocus. but then again, the gxr has autofocus too! it also had one touch magnification plus peeking that most loved (i personally dont like peeking). so, solidly built, AF/MF, external evf, no AA filter, plus natural m mount, excellent peeking and microlens array specifically for m lenses. oh yeah, total cost of camera, m mount, evf is like $5-600. and no one wants to comment? reminds me of the old springsteen song, 'blinded by the light'. ):
 
There's a danger that saying one's perfectly happy with a GXR can be perceived as sniping. The T looks nice, but, for most, not a justifiable "upgrade". I'm very very happy with my GXRs
Pete
 
As we speak I am out the door this am to stop by the Leica store with my GXR. I started with a Sony Nex which I still use when I am very lazy and want the autofocus. But my serious camera is the GXR, it just works and I like the files and it works with any lens I can get on it. I was waiting for a FF GXR but that never happened, my loss I just love the interface on the Ricoh's.

wbill
 
The GXR M-Module does well with M-lenses in that it's essentially "transparent" to the lens signature (i.e., the "look") , within the limitation of the 1.5 crop factor. Although the focus peaking generally worked well, I found I didn't really like it. Same with the EVF. The other issue was the color rendition: I found that I could get close to what I wanted only with Raw Photo Processor (RPP) — and that often required tedious and extensive and careful adjustemt for each image that I cared about — and I still did not get the look that I like and now get with the M9. So, in the end, I stopped using it but just haven't gotten around to selling it.


GXR M-Module | Elmarit-21 ASPH | ISO 800 |RPP+ LR3
Bangkok


MITCH ALLAND/Potomac, MD
Download links for book project pdf files
Chiang Tung Days
Tristes Tropiques
Bangkok Hysteria
Paris au rythme de Basquiat and Other Poems
 
i understand and respect that we're all different. but the comparison really isnt between the gxr and m9. i would hope there was a noticeable difference m9 vs gxr in that its FF vs apsc, ccd vs sony cmos and $5000 vs $1000. kinda apples to oranges. gxr vs T is i think apples to apples. further, if one doesnt like the gxr 'look', im not sure how much theyll like the T 'look', given the apples to apples, and given that the gxr's microlens array was specifically designed to bring out M lenses original character.
 
rbelyell said:
given the apples to apples, and given that the gxr's microlens array was specifically designed to bring out M lenses original character.
Click to expand...

Kind of a shame if tailored microlenses were not used - given the lack of any native wide lenses; perhaps that will change in the future.

To be honest not much to appeal, other than style,
to current EVIL/M users.
 
rbelyell said:
i understand and respect that we're all different. but the comparison really isnt between the gxr and m9. i would hope there was a noticeable difference m9 vs gxr in that its FF vs apsc, ccd vs sony cmos and $5000 vs $1000. kinda apples to oranges. gxr vs T is i think apples to apples. further, if one doesnt like the gxr 'look', im not sure how much theyll like the T 'look', given the apples to apples, and given that the gxr's microlens array was specifically designed to bring out M lenses original character.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. On the Leica-T color rendition: I don't really know and it's too early to tell, but from the pictures in the review of Kristian Downling and Steve Huff, it could be that the color rendition of the T is better than that of the GXR M-Module (at least withough having to use RPP). I also suspect that it may not have the red-yellow issues of the M240, although that's another apples to oranges comparison.

MITCH ALLAND/Potomac, MD
Download links for book project pdf files
Chiang Tung Days
Tristes Tropiques
Bangkok Hysteria
Paris au rythme de Basquiat and Other Poems
 
Martin, I confess that my remaining GXR kit fell out of rotation in the last year, having made room for an X-E1, X-100, and a DP2M, but your thread inspired me to pack it today with the 50 2.5, and over the weekend with a couple of the modules (+ maybe 50 1.5 on the M/module), + the GR since they handle/shoot the same way. That GR/GXR haptic complementarity was, for 2 years, the basis for all my work and practice, and it still produces splendid results for me as a BW shooter/developer.

I certainly don't have the desire or the budget to Leicafy with any of their non-M digitals. The M5 (and Hexar RF) are FF enough, and I can afford to keep at bringing my BW/chrome film technique up to the levels of my digital work with APS & m43 (I really need to focus on mastering 1 or 2 emulsions for measurable, stylistic consistency--but that's another topic).

The Monochrom is the one digital M model that compels me to think of selling off a cabinet of less-utilized users/collectibles, but there need be no rush where's there's insufficient Robert-$ (photo-revenue + disposable income). In a year or two or three, FF choices in smaller cameras should beit will be clearer

Also, a foolishly optimistic bit of me hopes that Ricoh will update the GXR's modular approach to FF/mirrorless, maybe rebadged as Pentax, with a built-in EVF, and not just an M-module, but why not a K-module, an OM-module, an AR-module, a CY-module? Surely there are enough adapter manufacturers now to source different mounts to harness to the same sensor. Just a daydream, of course, but sometimes daydreams evolve into real stuff...
 
Pete B said:
There's a danger that saying one's perfectly happy with a GXR can be perceived as sniping. The T looks nice, but, for most, not a justifiable "upgrade". I'm very very happy with my GXRs
Pete
Click to expand...

I made a similar comment in the other Leica T thread.. Since I have the gxr w/
- a12 m module and 50
- a16 zoom

I would have to be in the $3000 range to get the equiv of the evf plus body plus m adapter.

Plus for gxr
- I already own it
- Given that the micro lens setup was designed for the rf lenses vs the Leica T which one reviewer has said is not..
- focus peaking and manual focus assist mag option is setup the way I like it
- no touch screen (not a real touch screen fan for cameras although I find that the Panasonic gx7 implementation works fine, need to wait and c on the Leica t. Hated the one on other cameras I have owned in the past).
Minus
- has an AA filter
- 12 vs 16mp
- evf not as good

I will just wait and c how things develop. Right now not enough there to jump in.

Gary
 
I suspect that the Ricoh/Pentax strategy will be to move the GR/GXR concept towards a line of both fixed lens (GR) and ILC (GXR) cameras. But they will be lens changes, not the lensors of the existing GXR.

In fact I predict within 2 years time we will see, all APS-C:

1) A GR with 24MP, fixed lens @ 28mm, with 2 screw-on lenses like the Fuji X100 has now 21mm and 35mm), crop mode take you to 50mm.

2) GR Zoom. Might be a rugged model with WR, image stabilization, etc.

3) A GXR system camera, 3 zooms, 5-7 primes, optional EVF.
 
gary, im 99% sure gxr has no AA filter.

mitch, i think youre right about the T color rendition. i never had any issue with gxr color, but the T does seem more sprightly.
tony
 
I can c the possibility of the GR going in the direction u are talking about. I don't think we will ever c another micro lenses dedicated setup like the a12 m module again from Ricoh. As far as a csc w/ native af lenses vs lensor design, I agree but I think they may jump n the ff bandwagon for that one and/or market it under Pentax side maybe (replacement for mirrorless Pentax that I don't think sold well). I would love to c them come out w/ a tele converter. I already have the gw3. It works fine on my dp1 Merrill as well.

Panasonic gx7, Fuji xe2, Sony nex6 and nex7 has already shown how much can be done w/ built in evf in a small package. To me Ricoh needs to have a built in evf next time.

Gary
 
rbelyell said:
gary, im 99% sure gxr has no AA filter.

mitch, i think youre right about the T color rendition. i never had any issue with gxr color, but the T does seem more sprightly.
tony
Click to expand...

U could be right.. I thought it was a weak AA. Been a while since I thought about it. In that case one less minus.

Gary
 
It is true that the M module has no AA filter. At the time it was current, its only non-AA comparator was the M9.

Glad to see there are others who see a GXR resurrection of sorts in their crystal balls. As long as they don't mess with the basic haptics/layout--i.e., taking a long-term user-handling lesson from M cameras over 60 years--Ricoh could drop the lensor approach, add an XT1 EVF hump, call it the K-1,000,000.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom