Ricoh GXR & Leica T

conyon said:
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?
Click to expand...

The T sensor is of the same family as the Sony NEX 5n/6 sensor, and the one in the Leica X2 and X Vario. It was always pretty closely matched to the Ricoh GXR sensor, so no surprise there.

I still have my GXR, but the M9 pretty much replaced it for M-mount lenses.

I wasn't happy with cropped formats for the R-mount lenses so a Sony A7 has taken over that duty now.

G
 
would 16 really have made that much of a difference? imo, the very point of this comparison, gxr to T, is that in IQ and feature set youre really not improving, at least not noticeably.
 
rbelyell said:
would 16 really have made that much of a difference? imo, the very point of this comparison, gxr to T, is that in IQ and feature set youre really not improving, at least not noticeably.
Click to expand...

I doubt that 16 vs 12 Mpixels makes all that much of a difference. If Leica has done the T sensor correctly, and customized profiles for their lenses, that will make more of a difference than the additional pixel resolution. It remains to be seen how the T image quality compares to the GXR (and no, I refuse to pay Sean Reid for the stupid way I have to twist my eyes and use my system to read his reviews, so I'm not interested in his opinion).

G
 
really good point godfrey, i totally agree. btw, i have no idea who sean reid is. my comments based on my experience, as inept a talent as i may be. i think the clarion calls for a gxr redux are often without substantive basis. a different sensor, say ccd, yeah. a different focusing method, something retro akin to the fuji xt, yeah. but 4 more megapixels? dont get it.
 
4 mp is really not enough just by itself.. I will stay w/ my gxr. But on the otherhand, Leica brought us the monochrom... If they did a T or Fuji ever made a monochrome, I would be all over it. Right now my monochrome of choice is the Merrill cameras..

Gary
 
yeah, that monochrome is pretty sweet. i personally just cant take $5000+ cameras seriously. could just as easily be the hubble for its relevance.
 
Well I played with the T today in the Leica store, swapped lenses back and forth. I was impressed with the 23mm f2.0 lens, however I noticed two things with the camera now I have to say this was not the final firmware. There is a slight freeze of the image when you press the shutter release and after you take a picture and you display it on the lcd it will not flip when you hold the camera vertically. They told me that this is supposed to work and it should be corrected with the final firmware. Also there is some setting in the camera they were told to turn off to stop the image freeze when you fire the shutter, it made it better but it was still their.

I was quite impressed with the EVF, camera seemed easy to focus with just the magnified image there was no peaking like on the GXR. The camera felt very good in the hand had a nice solid feel.

wbill
 
agfa100 said:
...
I was quite impressed with the EVF, camera seemed easy to focus with just the magnified image there was no peaking like on the GXR. The camera felt very good in the hand had a nice solid feel.
Click to expand...

I've found that I use focus peaking very little with either GXR, E-M1 or A7. A fast way into magnification at about 7x is my best critical focusing tool. All three of these do it well.

G
 
Only problem I have with the GXR-M was the viewfinder blackout when taking a picture. I've recently bought an M9 (again) and need to make time to compare the two. The EOS-M comes to mind when I see the T - awesome touchscreen and mounts M lenses with adapter (alas, no viewfinder).
 
I'm still learning my GXR (bought from RFF member here). Similarly, I find magnification best too for critical focusing. Focus peaking helps get me part of the way there in some contexts....

Alas, I do not have a full frame digital to use my RF lenses. To date, I have enjoyed using the GXR; it is well designed. For me, I find the image quality very good.... -- martin

Godfrey said:
I've found that I use focus peaking very little with either GXR, E-M1 or A7. A fast way into magnification at about 7x is my best critical focusing tool. All three of these do it well.

G
Click to expand...
 
martin youre really not going to get better IQ with M lenses, unless you invest in a digi M. if you like the experience the gxr will serve you very well.
 
Not only did I feel rather relieved when read of Sean Reid's test results, but I picked up the GXR-M again and did some shooting with it. I've used it as a secondary camera when shooting with the M9, and I also use it when I don't want the weight and expense of the M9 around my neck. To know that the image quality seems better than the T with M-mount lenses is a great relief.

I have the M-module as well as the 50 and 28. I've used every M lens I have, including ultra wides like the CV 12/5.6 and 15/4.5, without a hitch. My only niggle about the camera is the prolonged blackout after taking a shot, and the relatively long shot-to-shot time. The EVF could always be better, but it is functional. High ISO could be better, but that's what f1.2 glass is for. I have two GXR bodies and I may even pick up a third while they are still around.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom