View Full Version : Ricoh GR1 Digital
Nikon Bob
10-31-2005, 19:02
Ran across this while looking for other things http://www.letsgodigital.org/html/review/ricoh/gr/digital_camera_EN1.html . Would anyone consider it a contender for their digital P&S needs? Sure like the size of it.
Bob
simonankor
10-31-2005, 22:35
Not so keen on the small chip though... now if we could combine that and the new Sony p&s that has an APS-C chip... and maybe give it more resolution...
THEN you'd be onto something!
Prices are going to be pretty high, I think, somewhere around 550 Euros
I am trying to get a new digital Compact, and my choice is at the moment restricted between the Panasonic DMC-LX1 and the Ricoh GR-D, raw is a must for me.
it's definitely a contender. it's the only pocketable p&s with a 28mm lens and raw, afaik.
I was in the process of buying a DSLR when I saw the GR-digital first mentioned. If it had had a decent APS-size sensor, I would have seriously considered it instead. But this is not anywhere near! I also don't care about the resolution of 8MP, because anything over 5MP on a small sensor means more noise and more agressive noise reduction. No way am I going to part with my money for this..
the gr actually has little to no in-camera noise reduction.
You can't beat basic physical principles (nor the wavelength of visible light); an 8MP sensor that's about 4.7 times as small diagonally as a 35mm frame has such small photo sites, that it will exhibit noise. If it's not processed in-camera it needs to be done as a post-processing step..
bmattock
11-01-2005, 02:18
External viewfinder? Lack of internal optical viewfinder is a killer for me. On most digicams, chimping over the LCD is fine, no problem. But the original GR-1 was valued because it was a great pocket camera and you could 'stealth' it. Can't stealth a huge honking LCD, and the external viewfinder is just gonna fall off, get snagged in a pocket, etc.
Not sure what market they built this for, but it seems to be neither fish nor fowl, and therefore, I don't have any interest in it.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
simonankor
11-01-2005, 02:26
Bill, I think they built it for the cult-following GR market... you know, people who love the GR film cameras so much they'll pay anything for a digital version.
Personally, I hope the GR1 fans recognise that, and the whole project flops. Overpriced cashing-in-on-a-cult-following camera annoy me! ;)
bmattock
11-01-2005, 03:12
Bill, I think they built it for the cult-following GR market... you know, people who love the GR film cameras so much they'll pay anything for a digital version.
Personally, I hope the GR1 fans recognise that, and the whole project flops. Overpriced cashing-in-on-a-cult-following camera annoy me! ;)
I agree, that's what they wanted to do - position this camera as a worthy successor to the cult-status film GR cameras.
It lacks many of the specific qualities that made the GR series film cameras special.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
Nikon Bob
11-01-2005, 03:25
Seems like a few people have looked at it and like everything else it is not perfect. I would be careful with deriding it as a camera the is only for the cult- following GR market , you could apply that to a lot of what Leica has put out.
Bob
The analog GR1 viewfinder was none too great, IMHO. Nothing like an M's or the Hexar AF's. But, Great ergonomics and build quality and the lens, wow! I'd enjoy trying out the digital version. OT: Anyone have an Olympus C-8080? That looks interesting.
Cheers
If you want a pocket digicam with a wide angle lens and raw support there are only two to fit the bill: the GR-D and the LX1.
Having raw is important because allows you to control the amount of noise reduction and sharpening applied, so on a 1/1.8" (or 1/1.65" for the LX1) it does not really matter if they crammed too many pixels.
The LX1 has a nice zoom, but looks like the GR-D might have a sharper lens (this from preliminary reports, no full tests have been made public yet AFAIK) and a conversion lens to get tit to 21mm equiv, also the GR-1 has the external finder option, while the with the LX1 you can only chimp at the screen when composing.
Again from some user tests it seem that the noise on the GR-D sensor is less than the one on the LX1, while the LX1 has optical stabilization.
So at the moment for me is wait and see if more information comes along to help me decide.
If you are not in the market for a pocket digicam, or you don't require raw, then you might be better off saving your money.
bmattock
11-01-2005, 05:20
If you want a pocket digicam with a wide angle lens and raw support there are only two to fit the bill: the GR-D and the LX1.
Having raw is important because allows you to control the amount of noise reduction and sharpening applied, so on a 1/1.8" (or 1/1.65" for the LX1) it does not really matter if they crammed too many pixels.
The LX1 has a nice zoom, but looks like the GR-D might have a sharper lens (this from preliminary reports, no full tests have been made public yet AFAIK) and a conversion lens to get tit to 21mm equiv, also the GR-1 has the external finder option, while the with the LX1 you can only chimp at the screen when composing.
Again from some user tests it seem that the noise on the GR-D sensor is less than the one on the LX1, while the LX1 has optical stabilization.
So at the moment for me is wait and see if more information comes along to help me decide.
If you are not in the market for a pocket digicam, or you don't require raw, then you might be better off saving your money.
I am going to wait. I *do* want a camera that is the digitla equivalent of the Ricoh GR series film cameras, but I don't feel that it exists just yet.
My requirements, assuming I want to spend $800 on a non-SLR digicam, are these:
1) Slim, small, shirt-pocket size.
2) Fast, wide, sharp, lens.
3) Larger than 1/1.8" sensor. APS/C or bigger, please.
4) Optical viewfinder for shooting. LCD optional.
5) Manual controls by knobs, not menus.
6) ISO to 3200 with no more noise than current DSLRs, such as Pentax.
7) Fast startup.
8) Fast shot-to-shot.
9) Option of manual focus by knob, not by menu.
Things I don't want or need in a GR-like digicam:
1) LCD.
2) Zoom lens.
3) More than 6 megapixels.
Now, I fully realize that the trend in consumer digicams is away from my specs and towards the opposite, and I know that the camera makers create new models for the masses, not for the tiny niches.
I am kind of disappointed because the Ricoh GR Digital was supposed to be the 'inheritor' of the GR film camera mantel of fame, and it has SOME of the attributes that the film camera did, but not all of them, and not enough to satisfy me.
You can see they were trying - they put in a built-in ND filter to lower the outside light so they could use a wider aperture / slower shutter speed for more creative control when needed, but the 1 1/8 CCD does not allow for much in the way of selective-focus effects, despite the wide f2.4 aperture. The external viewfinder was an obvious attempt to put back what they lost room for when they put in a big honkin' LCD on the back - but no one who appreciated how the GR fit into a shirt pocket and was ready to use in a split-second is going to like fumbling with an optional external viewfinder that they don't even include with the camera, for crying out loud.
The GR was a cult camera for a lot of reasons, and for many, it was the fact that it was a pro-quality stealth camera par excellance. This ain't, and that disappoints me. You can't 'stealth' while chimping over an LCD - not possible.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
Reviews on the Ricoch image quality are not encouraging. Seems like this digicam is trying to ride on the coattails of its superior film ancestor.
Panoramix
11-01-2005, 06:17
The GR-D goes a long way towards my ideal digital camera, but I am also going to wait for one with built-in optical viewfinder and above all, good high-ISO performance. Nice test shots in the brochure that you can download on:
http://www.ricoh.com/r_dc/support/brochure/
But... All taken at ISO64, even the night shots! Nice touch though, that all photos were made in Paris, street photography heaven ;-)
All this waiting game is not for me, I think Ill get something by X-Mas or early next year atathe latest, and then swap it if a big sensor pocket cam comes around.
Also I have nothing against chimping, it is something that TLR and WLF users have been doing for a long time.
justins7
11-01-2005, 06:53
What a damned disappointment! How long are we going to wait for what is obviously a HUGE hole in the market? I would be happy with a fixed-lens, zone-focusing digital camera even without a rangefinder. Just give me a larger chip, a fast lens (why is it so wide on the Ricoh?), aperatures and focusing on the lens mount. IS THAT SO HARD?
Wouldn't you be happy with a digital Olympus RC or XA?
All they have to do is take one of these cameras, gut it, and put in a chip. I don't even care about an LCD screen at this point. Just give me a manual stealth camera! It's SO frustrating! :bang:
What a damned disappointment! How long are we going to wait for what is obviously a HUGE hole in the market? I would be happy with a fixed-lens, zone-focusing digital camera even without a rangefinder. Just give me a larger chip, a fast lens (why is it so wide on the Ricoh?), aperatures and focusing on the lens mount. IS THAT SO HARD?
Wouldn't you be happy with a digital Olympus RC or XA?
All they have to do is take one of these cameras, gut it, and put in a chip. I don't even care about an LCD screen at this point. Just give me a manual stealth camera! It's SO frustrating! :bang:
When Ricoh started thinking of the GR-D they considered putting a big sensor in, but then decided that the only way to have a small camera was to have a small sensor; if you look at the market even cameras with a 2/3" sensor are quite big, and the only compact camera with an APS size sensor (Sony DSC-R1) is as big and heavy as a DSLR.
In the RD-1, to put an APS sensor inside a Bessa R2, they had to make it taller.
So it seems to me that big sensors and small cameras can't really go together, who knows, maybe in 3-4 years time things will be different.
the lc1 doesn't really count because its 28mm only works in 16:9 mode.
if you want a stealthy p&s, there is the minolta tc1. it's even better than the original gr1, imho.
the lc1 doesn't really count because its 28mm only works in 16:9 mode.
Still I fail to see why 28mm on a 16:9 form factor does not count as a wide angle, so given the form factor what would you count as a wide angle on a 16:9, and what about the the x-pan?
If you don't consider the diagonal a good way to determine how wide is a lens, which method do you propose?
if you want a stealthy p&s, there is the minolta tc1. it's even better than the original gr1, imho.
I do agree, I have one and even if I am not sure about the "Better that the original gr1 thing", it is a mighty fine camera, but if you are looking for a digital compact the TC-1 just does not fit the bill.
at 3:2 and 4:3, the widest is 35mm. that's why i don't think it counts.
and all you gotta do with the tc1 is scan it! digital isn't good for stealthy, robert frank-style coat pocket shooting anyway. not enough latitude.
bmattock
11-01-2005, 11:43
at 3:2 and 4:3, the widest is 35mm. that's why i don't think it counts.
and all you gotta do with the tc1 is scan it! digital isn't good for stealthy, robert frank-style coat pocket shooting anyway. not enough latitude.
But I thought digital was better than film in every way?
LOL!
As a person who loves film and digital, I am often attacked by both sides when I point out flaws in the ointment. In the case of digital - I love it, and I'd like to have a REAL digital version of a stealthy point-n-shoot like the film-based GR series. All anyone can point out to me are a series of compromises. When we exhaust that list by rejecting all of them on one failing or another, the person who adores digital usually finally throws their hands up and says "Well, no one would want that anyway."
In other words, when digital is as good as or better than film, yahoo. When digital fails to even come close to what film can do, well, let's pretend that's not important anyway - it is a rediculous thing to want - no one would want that, etc.
So I continue to wait. I am sure that at some point, something more like the film-based GR cameras will appear, and I'll be happy and buy one. But I'm not going to pretend in the meantime that this steaming pile of horse hockey is anything like the incredible GR film-based camera series. 'Cause it ain't. And my requirements may be outlandish - but they are my requirements, and that's all that matters to me. The film GR can do it, why can't the digital version?
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
simonankor
11-01-2005, 11:47
Seems like a few people have looked at it and like everything else it is not perfect. I would be careful with deriding it as a camera the is only for the cult- following GR market , you could apply that to a lot of what Leica has put out.
Bob
This is true, but I don't own or even aspire to own a Leica :p so I can deride all I like! :D
at 3:2 and 4:3, the widest is 35mm. that's why i don't think it counts.
and all you gotta do with the tc1 is scan it! digital isn't good for stealthy, robert frank-style coat pocket shooting anyway. not enough latitude.
Actually the 35mm equivalent focal lenght at 4:3 is 34mm and at 3:2 is about 31mm, it is due to the fact that the sensor itself has a form factor of 16:9, and for other form factors pixels are simply chopped off at the sides.
So using form factors other than 16:9 is a bit silly, like having an x-pan and adding a mask that lets you use only the central part of the negative.
Of course if you don't like the panoramic format then look elsewhere, but saying that the 28mm don't count because the sensor does not have the 4:3 form factor is like saying that on a Leica the 28mm don't count because if you crop the 3:2 to 4:3 the equivalent focal lenght becomes 30mm.
ok, if you aren't looking for a panoramic camera, and want a 28mm lens, the lx1 isn't for you. but if you do want a panoramic camera, it's just the thing.
Nikon Bob
11-01-2005, 13:14
This is true, but I don't own or even aspire to own a Leica :p so I can deride all I like! :D
I do one one and there is alot of the BS surrounding them but they do have some very good points too. I guess that is the trouble with a cult anything.http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/images/icons/icon7.gif
Smile
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.