Old 02-22-2019   #161
BlackXList
Registered User
 
BlackXList is offline
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 756
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightfly View Post
Ricoh isn't doing themselves any favors with the folks doing early reviews:

https://www.thephoblographer.com/201...gr-iii-in-nyc/

The photos look horrible. Not the camera's fault, but they really need to get these things in the hands of some better photographers. This is the second one I've seen in the last day with just really crappy photos.

Not exactly highlighting the IBIS or new sensor
Gampat is one of the worst photo writers around, so I'm not exactly surprised this doesn't do it justice
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #162
BlackXList
Registered User
 
BlackXList is offline
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 756
I've now read it and marvelled at how he missed focus in almost all the shots too, that takes some doing.

my current GR kit is a GR with the 21mm lens, and a GRII for the 28mm and looking at these photos, I don't need to think about upgrading yet.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #163
retinax
Registered User
 
retinax is offline
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 880
What exactly are you expecting from web sized sample photos anyway? These are bad, yes, maybe downsampling gone wrong, but one can't tell a difference between any, even the oldest APS-C sensor pics at these sizes if they're resized and sharpened OK.
But why do we all care, it's just 1/2 camera anyway...
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #164
Archiver
Registered User
 
Archiver is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,268
Hopefully Ming Thein will review the GR III and show what it can do.

I already have a GR, albeit in need of repair. Am not really sure how much better a GR III is going to be than the GR once it's repaired, although I like the sounds of many of the improvements, like 24mp sensor, stabilization, smaller body more like the GRD III which I love, etc.

I'll probably get one in another couple of years when the price is much lower, and enjoy my GR until then.
__________________
~Loving Every Image Captured Always~
Archiver on flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-22-2019   #165
bayernfan
Registered User
 
bayernfan's Avatar
 
bayernfan is offline
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 724
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackXList View Post
Gampat is one of the worst photo writers around, so I'm not exactly surprised this doesn't do it justice
his articles really are a mess. it's bewildering that he gets invited to all the new camera launches/play dates given the amateur-hour presentation of his website.
__________________
M_V instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-23-2019   #166
nzeeman
Registered User
 
nzeeman's Avatar
 
nzeeman is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: belgrade
Age: 39
Posts: 1,199
why so many bad words about that guy-its pretty decent review and covers real life use pretty ok.. he didnt try to put sugar on photos-just did them as any amateur would do which gives us much more info...
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-23-2019   #167
Ko.Fe.
Kostya Fedot
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Posts: 7,298
Quote:
Originally Posted by nzeeman View Post
why so many bad words about that guy-its pretty decent review and covers real life use pretty ok.. he didnt try to put sugar on photos-just did them as any amateur would do which gives us much more info...
I checked GRII monochrome and BW Flickr groups yesterday. Bw in review is normal bw, comparing to the crap from GRII users on Flickr. Maybe some local keyboard warriors prefers amateurs on Flickr style. I don't know. I'm scared now to check what they do with GRII on Flickr.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-23-2019   #168
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 19,888
Quote:
Originally Posted by nzeeman View Post
why so many bad words about that guy-its pretty decent review and covers real life use pretty ok.. he didnt try to put sugar on photos-just did them as any amateur would do which gives us much more info...
I`m offended when someone talks about a camera (as a supposed expert) when their photography clearly shows can`t make an interesting photo. As far as technical quality... there are not too many cameras these days that are capable of making a technically bad photograph. The GR`s image quality will be great no doubt.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-23-2019   #169
Ko.Fe.
Kostya Fedot
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Posts: 7,298
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
I`m offended when someone talks about a camera (as a supposed expert) when their photography clearly shows can`t make an interesting photo. As far as technical quality... there are not too many cameras these days that are capable of making a technically bad photograph. The GR`s image quality will be great no doubt.
This thread is amusing me with rate of comments like yours.

I can't recall any gear reviewer capable of interesting photos. Huff, Rockwell, Hamish, anyone. No interesting photos. Why?
Simple.
It is not what easy. To grab camera you don't know and do Magnum style within couple of hours or day, two.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-23-2019   #170
nzeeman
Registered User
 
nzeeman's Avatar
 
nzeeman is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: belgrade
Age: 39
Posts: 1,199
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
I`m offended when someone talks about a camera (as a supposed expert) when their photography clearly shows can`t make an interesting photo. As far as technical quality... there are not too many cameras these days that are capable of making a technically bad photograph. The GR`s image quality will be great no doubt.
lets not go ot too much, but he don't need to be talented photographer and make interesting photos to be able to review camera. review is usually made to test all the features and comment on them and to provide us with info on problems or potential problems. which he does and he does it nice and detailed... that said- gr iii looks very fine from what i see.... if i had that money i would surely consider it as an everyday camera..
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-23-2019   #171
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 19,888
Quote:
Originally Posted by nzeeman View Post
lets not go ot too much, but he don't need to be talented photographer and make interesting photos to be able to review camera. review is usually made to test all the features and comment on them and to provide us with info on problems or potential problems.
Sure, but can you truly trust someone to tell you what they think about a camera when their photography shows they are inexperienced? How do you know if it is truly the camera or if it is their shortcoming?
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-23-2019   #172
Dogman
Registered User
 
Dogman is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,479
While this particular website is many times barely literate I have to point out that the reviewer does say in the comments that he only had the camera for an hour or so. But this is the quality of information we seem to be getting today when everyone is an self proclaimed expert and anyone can have their own website.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-23-2019   #173
Out to Lunch
Registered User
 
Out to Lunch's Avatar
 
Out to Lunch is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Vietnam
Posts: 5,312
I don't get it...a $900 camera without a viewfinder. Maybe a gamble: cut cost and please the mobile phone crowd.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-23-2019   #174
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 19,888
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Wijninga View Post
I don't get it...a $900 camera without a viewfinder. Maybe a gamble: cut cost and please the mobile phone crowd.
No, it is just how the camera has always been made (in digital form anyway) and it has done well for them. No need to change on this camera.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-23-2019   #175
Out to Lunch
Registered User
 
Out to Lunch's Avatar
 
Out to Lunch is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Vietnam
Posts: 5,312
No viewfinder and you can't make calls with it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-23-2019   #176
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 9,072
The LCD is the standard viewfinder, I have no need to make phone calls with my camera. I have the Ricoh optical clip-on 28mm viewfinder as well.

Not that I'm thinking of buying another camera, but it looks like a very nice upgrade to the GR digital cameras. If I were in the market, I'd pre-order one and the matched wide lens adapter too. But I'm not in the market at present...

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-23-2019   #177
benlees
Registered User
 
benlees is offline
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Edmonton, AB
Age: 47
Posts: 1,516
The GR series is so ergonomic that it is one of the few where you don't miss an OVF. Even when I had my GR1 I would sometimes not use it. Having a 28mm lens also helps in this regard...
__________________
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-23-2019   #178
FrozenInTime
Registered User
 
FrozenInTime's Avatar
 
FrozenInTime is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Here and there
Posts: 1,755
After using the GR cameras with 28mm view, I find it very difficult to return to a 28mm on a film M.
With the GR LCD to frame, so often I hold the camera at arms length ; up , down , sideways etc. to get an interesting perspective. The eye level OVF on the rangefinder crunches down this freedom.

I’ve been trying to use a TL2 with 18mm as a GR alternative, but it does weigh considerably more, so it’s more likely to be carried in a bag rather than pocket and that minor difference in effort to deploy does lead to missed opportunities.
__________________
It's the weird colour scheme that freaks me. Every time you try to operate one of these weird black controls, which are labeled in black on a black background, a small black light lights up black to let you know you've done it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-24-2019   #179
mod2001
Old school modernist
 
mod2001 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Barcelona/Catalunya
Posts: 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by benlees View Post
The GR series is so ergonomic that it is one of the few where you don't miss an OVF.
Well, ask people who need reading glasses to see a sharp picture in the display. Glasses on/off on/off on /off... you get the idea. And optical viewfinders (if they have a diopter correction at all) are more miss than hit if you shoot mostly in short distances like me, besides, it destroys the concept as an always with me in my pocket cam. This and the at least what I saw so far still horrible magenta cast especially with skin tones are and were the reasons to sell my GRII and not to buy the GRIII, let alone the missing flash and the changed UI with a more touchscreen related handling which is obviously also not really promising reading Damiens (DPR) problems with the shutter delay via touch.

Juergen.
__________________
Nikon F3 / Nikkor 50mm/f1.2 AIS / Nikkor 28mm/f2.0 AIS / Black Contax T3
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-25-2019   #180
Doug
Moderator
 
Doug's Avatar
 
Doug is offline
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Pacific NW, USA
Posts: 13,018
GRIII just announced...

http://www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/products/gr-3/
__________________
Doug’s Gallery
RFF on Facebook
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-25-2019   #181
Dogman
Registered User
 
Dogman is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,479
The design of the GR cameras is not for everyone. I hated my GRII when I first got it. The 28mm view is not my favorite, the lack of a viewfinder was a problem, the placement of the controls seemed odd...all the things about it that I later learned to love. The great image quality was what made me keep using it and, after a short while, I found the camera fit me well.

I really am glad Ricoh is sticking to the same basic design for the new GR.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-25-2019   #182
olifaunt
Registered User
 
olifaunt is offline
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 248
Quote:
Originally Posted by mod2001 View Post
Well, ask people who need reading glasses to see a sharp picture in the display.
Viewfinders usually have diopter adjustments so most people won't have to use reading glasses - you can set the image in the display to be at infinity. It is usually a small difficult to see adjustment ring right next to the VF eyepiece. You will definitely need reading glasses to find the adjustment ring, but only once

An LCD screen, on the other had, is the main reason I don't use my GRii anymore. I just can't see the screen without reading glasses, which I never carry with me outside.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-25-2019   #183
35photo
Registered User
 
35photo is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 662
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ko.Fe. View Post
This thread is amusing me with rate of comments like yours.

I can't recall any gear reviewer capable of interesting photos. Huff, Rockwell, Hamish, anyone. No interesting photos. Why?
Simple.
It is not what easy. To grab camera you don't know and do Magnum style within couple of hours or day, two.
Which is true... The funny thing is all those folks you mentioned actually think they are "photographers" and actually they good... The joke is on them...
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-25-2019   #184
BillBingham2
Registered User
 
BillBingham2's Avatar
 
BillBingham2 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Ames, Iowa, USA
Posts: 5,903
Interesting specs and price. I wonder if the lens is a good as the pre-APC-S glass was.

B2 (;->
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-25-2019   #185
Archlich
Registered User
 
Archlich is offline
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,289
Preordered. Not really content with the battery life...
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-25-2019   #186
aizan
Registered User
 
aizan's Avatar
 
aizan is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Torrance, CA
Age: 37
Posts: 4,585
Let us know how bright the screen is. The White Magic screen in the GRV was maybe 3 stops too dim in the sun.
__________________
Ugly Cameras
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-25-2019   #187
retinax
Registered User
 
retinax is offline
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 880
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillBingham2 View Post
Interesting specs and price. I wonder if the lens is a good as the pre-APC-S glass was.

B2 (;->
Were they even better than the APS-C I and II? How so? I had an APS-C one and don't think it really gets much better, I was under the impression that the lens resolved more than the 16 mp sensor, although I never pixel peeped in corners wide open or anything like that.

I'm not sure if they really needed improvements for the higher resolution sensor, the difference in linear resolution is under 20% after all.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-25-2019   #188
Archiver
Registered User
 
Archiver is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,268
I loved the GRD III like a child when I had it, until I bought the GR a few years later. It's interesting that what I thought was superb image quality was not as great as all that, even when compared with later small sensor cams like the Panasonic LX7. These days, it is hard for me to use the GRD III without wishing it had better image quality. The GR was a major step up, delivering better IQ than the best 1 inch and m43 sensors, definitely in line with an aps-c DSLR.


The GR III image quality should be excellent. I won't buy one for a while, but I'll definitely get one. The battery life does bother me a little, though. Had that made the body a little thicker, they could have used the Ricoh GXR /Fuji X100 battery.
__________________
~Loving Every Image Captured Always~
Archiver on flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-26-2019   #189
michaelwj
----------------
 
michaelwj's Avatar
 
michaelwj is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Brisbane AUS
Posts: 2,101
Quote:
Originally Posted by 35photo View Post
Which is true... The funny thing is all those folks you mentioned actually think they are "photographers" and actually they good... The joke is on them...
I’m not sure it is. They make a living playing with cameras, so the jokes on us.
Should we judge someone’s artistic photographic ability by the photos they show in reviews? KR for example shows the same boring images review after review. It’s actually really useful as you can compare different cameras from years apart. Would you waste your A material on a review? KR has his “non-review” photos which I think would be received much better if he published them under a pseudonym. He shoots a technically competent non offensive landscape. I’ve seen worse from many “fine art” photographers.
I hate it when reviewers try to get all artsy. I just want to know how it works and what annoying “features” I should know about.
__________________
Cheers,
Michael
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-26-2019   #190
LCSmith
arbiter elegentiae
 
LCSmith's Avatar
 
LCSmith is offline
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 158
I thought this was funny:

"I found the Ricoh GR III to struggle with candid street photography at times. This struggle has nothing to do with the physical act of taking a photo–instead, the Ricoh GR III’s low profile doesn’t alarm anyone at all. The Ricoh GR III has a problem with attaining autofocus quickly in low light situations such as what Alex and I encountered in New York’s Grand Central Terminal."

The camera struggles with candid street photography?

I used to shoot with the GR I and the best "street photography feature" is the snap focus. In fact, that's a major distinguishing feature of this camera. Focus is set. All you do is press the button that releases the shutter, or gathers the pixels, or whatever digital cameras do. Who uses autofocus for quick candid snaps anyway?
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-26-2019   #191
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 19,888
Quote:
Originally Posted by LCSmith View Post
The Ricoh GR III has a problem with attaining autofocus quickly in low light situations such as what Alex and I encountered in New York’s Grand Central Terminal."
If they haven't made the low light AF act like a modern camera, they might as well have kept selling the GR II. I'm not a huge fan of snap with an APSC sensor...
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-26-2019   #192
Archlich
Registered User
 
Archlich is offline
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,289
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
If they haven't made the low light AF act like a modern camera, they might as well have kept selling the GR II. I'm not a huge fan of snap with an APSC sensor...
I believe it's improved over the (rather mediocre performing) GR and GR II, but still lags behind the competition. Which can be typical for Ricoh /Pentax: it's been stiff around these days...
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-26-2019   #193
Ko.Fe.
Kostya Fedot
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Posts: 7,298
Quote:
Originally Posted by benlees View Post
The GR series is so ergonomic that it is one of the few where you don't miss an OVF. Even when I had my GR1 I would sometimes not use it. Having a 28mm lens also helps in this regard...
Amusement parade is continuos in this thread.

But I hear you. Go Pro is the most ergonomic camera in the World.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-26-2019   #194
LCSmith
arbiter elegentiae
 
LCSmith's Avatar
 
LCSmith is offline
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
I'm not a huge fan of snap with an APSC sensor...
I am not sure I understand what you mean. The GR has an 18mm (28mm equiv) lens on a cropped sensor. When are you going to be using autofocus? Everything is already in focus. You set it and forget it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-26-2019   #195
13Promet
Registered User
 
13Promet's Avatar
 
13Promet is offline
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Milano - Italy
Age: 47
Posts: 318
Quote:
Originally Posted by LCSmith View Post
I am not sure I understand what you mean. The GR has an 18mm (28mm equiv) lens on a cropped sensor. When are you going to be using autofocus? Everything is already in focus. You set it and forget it.
Not if you're shooting at close distance (0.7 to 1.5m), which is pretty common with 28mm equiv. in street photography.
I too will only upgrade from II to III for the improved AF, which is rpetty frustrating of the current model (sometimes even with good light)while most of my cameras for street p. are manual focus, but much faster to set distance compared to the GR.
__________________
The perfect traveller does not know his destination (Lao Tsu)

www.alessandrosaponaro.com

Instagram: a.saponaro.photography
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-26-2019   #196
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 19,888
Quote:
Originally Posted by LCSmith View Post
I am not sure I understand what you mean. The GR has an 18mm (28mm equiv) lens on a cropped sensor. When are you going to be using autofocus? Everything is already in focus. You set it and forget it.
It is completely a myth to think that everything is focus at 2.8 on a 18mm on apsc. I like precise focus, not sloppy focus. Sloppy focus shows up so much
More on digital than film. I also like to be able to focus on something at 2 feet and then at 20 feet quickly, not only at 6 feet always. I’m taking from experience not hypotheticals.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-26-2019   #197
LCSmith
arbiter elegentiae
 
LCSmith's Avatar
 
LCSmith is offline
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by 13Promet View Post
Not if you're shooting at close distance (0.7 to 1.5m), which is pretty common with 28mm equiv. in street photography.
Right, which is when you would set the focus at that distance.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-26-2019   #198
LCSmith
arbiter elegentiae
 
LCSmith's Avatar
 
LCSmith is offline
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
It is completely a myth to think that everything is focus at 2.8 on a 18mm on apsc.
Obviously I was speaking in generalizations. It just seems strange to me to worry about autofocus on a 28 2.8 fixed lens camera. Of course, none of my cameras or lenses (except for my phone) has autofocus, or even batteries, so we probably have very different styles of photography. Which is fine!

Incidentally, the original "automatic focus" was on the Leica II.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-26-2019   #199
CliveC
Registered User
 
CliveC is offline
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Toronto, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 677
I don't have much to add, but I really don't like 28mm as a focal length.
Revise/update the GXR M-mount!
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-26-2019   #200
retinax
Registered User
 
retinax is offline
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 880
Quote:
Originally Posted by CliveC View Post
I don't have much to add, but I really don't like 28mm as a focal length.
Revise/update the GXR M-mount!

Ha, I really like 28mm, but a 40-50mm model in addition would be great. I suppose the lens would have to be quite slow to fit into the same package though, but I could live with that with today's sensors.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:00.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.