Ricohs...

aureliaaurita

aureliaaurita

Well-known
Local time
10:14 AM
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
330
Does anyone know anything about them?

I have had the Ricoh GR digital for quite some time now and love it to bits but have decided that, for day to day use, I need an optical zoom. Particularly for my horses and show jumping events.

I have been considering moving up to an slr but really don't think I'd use it enough to qualify spending so much money, simply because it wouldn't fit in my handbag. That and I'd like to wait until I can afford to invest in the system that I really want to, rather than being limited to one or two bodies with a kit lens.

Has anyone owned or used any of the other ricohs?

Particularly the GX100 or GX200.... are they as good as the ricoh gr d?

is there a massive difference between the gx100 and 200? or won't I notice.

Having the extra £100 I'd have to spend to get the GX200 still in my pocket would be nice and I can't spot any massive difference between their specifications aside from the number of mega pixels, which I'm not overly fussed about as the 6mp I get with the GR Digital seems perfectly sufficient to me.
 
I too am very happy with my GR-D I. I've been looking for any small camera (e.g. LX3, GX200) but want a lens that is of the same quality (e.g. lack of distortion, sharpness) as I have the my GR-D. I've come up dry, nothing. It appears that lots of folks do corrections in their RAW filters (software) rather than making better lenses. While Ricoh has adapter lenses to give the GR-D a 40mm and 21mm everything I've read says they each have issues, besides being rather large.

I'm hoping that Ricoh will come out with a GR-DT with a lens between 50 and 75mm in the same package. I'd be very happy if they came out with one so I would not have to learn a different set of menus (read IMHO a real pain in the A55).

Remember, YMMV.

B2 (;->
 
BillBingham2 said:
I too am very happy with my GR-D I. I've been looking for any small camera (e.g. LX3, GX200) but want a lens that is of the same quality (e.g. lack of distortion, sharpness) as I have the my GR-D. I've come up dry, nothing. It appears that lots of folks do corrections in their RAW filters (software) rather than making better lenses. While Ricoh has adapter lenses to give the GR-D a 40mm and 21mm everything I've read says they each have issues, besides being rather large.

I'm hoping that Ricoh will come out with a GR-DT with a lens between 50 and 75mm in the same package. I'd be very happy if they came out with one so I would not have to learn a different set of menus (read IMHO a real pain in the A55).

Remember, YMMV.

B2 (;->
Click to expand...

YMMV?

I am lost...

It seems we are a little set in our ways! I love that little camera, it just needs to get a bit closer :bang:
 
72m just isn't long enough for horse stuff, so I'd say the GX100/200 aren't suitable for that, really: we use a 70-200/2.8 (our only zoom!) on a D200 for that and it's just about long enough even with the crop factor making it effectively a 105-300. Depending on where you live (and you seem to be pricing in sterling ... ), a slower lens might be an option, but in Ireland we need the wide aperture to keep the shutter speed up.

I don't know what to suggest: maybe get a P&S with a long zoom as a stop-gap until you can afford the kit you want? My wife's R7 is moderately effective at that and the user interface is ok. Shutter lag is one of the big issues here.
 
Last edited:
Today I was in the shop checking out a Canon G10 and the Panasonic LX3, and went home with my trusty GRD still firmly in my bag, its not in any danger of being replaced anytime soon, though that LX3 sure it nice....
 
My GR-D is my friend - it's the camera that always travels with me whether I pack RFs, DSLR, 6x6 or 4x5, but wide angles and fast moving horses are hard and dangerous to mix!
 
I also have a GR-D with me all the time -- in a Luigi case attached to my belt.

I've wondered about the GX100/200 as well but instead bought a 2nd GR-D as a spare...
 
do any of you subscribe to reid reviews?? he has extensive tests of the gx100 and 200, the gr digital and other similar small-sensor cameras with zoom. the ca. $40 annual subscription is low compared to the expense of a wrong purchase, i think. here's a link: http://www.reidreviews.com/reidreviews/

good luck

rick
 
Ymmv

Ymmv

aliceelizabeth said:
YMMV?

I am lost...
Click to expand...

I'm speaking of the cameras other than the GR-D. There is no question in my mind that the GR-D ROCKS:cool:. I have never held, tested, or played with either the LX-3 or GX-100/200. That's what my Your Milage May Vary (YMMV), you might find it's perfect for you.

B2 (;->
 
Colman said:
72m just isn't long enough for horse stuff, so I'd say the GX100/200 aren't suitable for that, really: we use a 70-200/2.8 (our only zoom!) on a D200 for that and it's just about long enough even with the crop factor making it effectively a 105-300. Depending on where you live (and you seem to be pricing in sterling ... ), a slower lens might be an option, but in Ireland we need the wide aperture to keep the shutter speed up.

I don't know what to suggest: maybe get a P&S with a long zoom as a stop-gap until you can afford the kit you want? My wife's R7 is moderately effective at that and the user interface is ok. Shutter lag is one of the big issues here.
Click to expand...


I'll go and have a play with them all I think. I don't mean fast paced horse stuff-though I occasionally attempt a bit of show jumping photography, mainly sedate schooling (trotting round in circles) and portraits...so ought to be okay with something like that.

Whereabouts in ireland are you?
 
We're in Dublin.

Portraits will be fine, but once you're outside the arena at all you need something longer: I had great fun trying to take pictures of an arena full of foals earlier in the year with the GR-D!
 
I often shoot with a GX100, and I thnk it's a super little camera. The biggest gripe I have is that the shot to shot time is too slow in raw mode (6 seconds plus), although if you habitually shoot jpegs you'll probably have no problems. The new GX200 offers a raw buffer that speeds things up, and will shoot raw in square format (which I also miss on the GX100). Apart from those genuinely useful changes the GX200 offers a bit more resolution and potentially worse or no better low light performance. I'm not ready to spring the upgrade cost as I still like my 100.

Another thought is that I would have imagined that you'd want a longer lens for horses - perhaps a panasonic FZ-xx would suit. We've also got an old FZ20, which is 5Mp and 35 to 420 equivalent (35mm terms). Something like that might work - though I don't use at all these days.

Mike
 
aliceelizabeth, I've never used the GR-D or GX's and never shot horsey pix either really but maybe an interim option is to get, as others have said, a digicam with that longer zoom. I have a Canon G7 and it is pretty good and goes upto 210mm. No Raw but then again I've never shot Raw either. I bought a Panasonic LX3 a couple of weeks back and I'm enjoying it so far, probably because I prefer wider lenses than longer. That's the reason my G7 is going up for sale shortly.
If you go the SLR route after all, perhaps the smaller Olympus models with their smaller lenses may suit you.
 
a side question: can anyone point me to a URL with a gallery of GR-D pictures? you folks made me curious :) (must...suppress...gas...attack...)

thanks,

warren
 
I have had the GX100 and now own the GX200. The GX200 is considerably faster in RAW, the LCD screen is larger, and Ricoh added flash compensation. The RAW files are slighty softer than the GRD1 and GRD2 RAW files, but they take up sharpening really well in PP.

A great feature of the GX100 and GX200 is the step zoom. That gives you the impression that you work with a 24, 28, 35, 50, and 72mm prime lenses.

Here are two horse pictures. The first one was made with the GX100 and the second with the GX200.

2424373035_43ed386588.jpg

Ricoh GX100, f4.9, 1/570 sec, ISO 200, -1.3 EV

2982794083_925fae2782_o.jpg

Ricoh GX200, f3.7, 1/40 sec, ISO 64, -0.7 EV
 
I have both the Ricoh GRDs and the GX100 and while the lens and dynamic range of the GRDs is higher, the GX100 is very good and since it uses the same controls and interface it is easy to swap between them. The extra zoom comes in handy and if you need more you could always get the telephoto adapter which gets you to 135mm and still keeps the camera smaller than a bridge camera or dSLR. Right now I would rather spend the extra money for the GX200 since the improvements (RAW buffer, leveler, 2nd FN button, etc.) are really usefull and worth the extra money IMO.

As an alternative for a longer zoom the Ricoh R10 might be usefull, it has a slower lens and no RAW or manual controls but is small and offers a zoom from 28mm to 200mm.

Or maybe look at the Panasonic G1.

Warren, If you go to my blog in the signature you can see some of my pictures with the GRD and also have my galleries and other people's blogs linked from there.
 
thank you

thank you

everybody, it has all been taken on board, and those horse photographs are mightly impressive. I particularly like the second.

one more question, can I use the electronic viewfinder the gx200 uses on my grd?

I'm fairly settled on another ricoh as they seem to suit and be that tiny little bit hardier than a lot of other digicams, which is quite important with me! :eek:

Shall go and play and report back forthwith.
 
Hi,
I now own bot hte GX100 and LX3. If you go for the Ricoh get the GX200 unless tou dan't care about the speed of writing raw files.
I like the LX3 better than the GX100. Better built and better high iso performance.
Cheers,
Michiel FOkkema
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom