Apr 18, 2013 at 11:14 am #1301889
Oh boy, oh boy!
RicohApr 18, 2013 at 11:29 am #1978077
"The first thing that strikes you about the Ricoh GR when you handle it is how light it is. It weighs 20% less than the Nikon Coolpix A and yet manages to still feel decidedly solid. Impressively it's very similar in size to the company's GR Digital models, despite having a sensor almost nine times larger"
Did i mention… Oh boy!Apr 18, 2013 at 11:45 am #1978084
Adam RothermichBPL Member
@aroth87Locale: Missouri Ozarks
If only I were comfortable with the 28mm focal length. After lugging my D300 + Tamron 17-50/2.8 these APS-C fixed lens cameras look really appealing. After checking the used price on the X100 I'm seriously leaning that way. I'm more comfortable with a 35mm lens (50mm would be ideal) and the direct aperture and shutter speed controls are more to my liking too. If I were more of a wide-angle guy I'd be all over the new Ricoh though! Especially at almost half the weight of the X100.
AdamApr 20, 2013 at 8:02 pm #1978871
@sgiachettiLocale: Boulder, CO
Continually impressed with these smaller designs. This one weighs barely more than my rx100, with an ap-c sensor. I'd definitely be interested in this sort of thing if only it came with a 35mm lens. Hope sony comes out with an RX10….although I gotta say, the RX100 leaves very little to be desired as a general adventure cam.Apr 21, 2013 at 6:27 am #1978946
@ken_bennettLocale: southeastern usa
That's pretty slick. Right now my smallest "real" camera is a GF1 with the 14mm pancake lens, which is 28mm-equivalent. I've carried it backpacking several times, and the focal length is fine for me — but then I like shooting wide angle most of the time. The Ricoh looks like it might fit the bill for an everyday carry camera, too.Apr 26, 2013 at 5:00 am #1980677
I agree, that it definitely comes down to personal shooting preferences when going fixed focal length.
Personally, i still look back at a trip 7 years ago, when i borrowed my dad's:
28mm fixed, analog, optical wievfinder, and only 160g…one word…FUN!
Since i got my first Digital Camera (a Canon 350D DSLR), i've been waiting and waiting for a digital camera equally fun to use as the Leica Mini, and with high image quality.
I've never really been satisfied with any of my Digita Cameras i've owned that had/has a smaller sensor than APS-C.
If i were to get this camera, i'd definitely get a Viewfinder to mount on top, for me, a good optical viewfinder is the basis for having FUN when shooting.
If 35mm were my prefered focal lenght, i'd be drooling all over the FujiFilm X100S – that built-in viewfinder is great! – But i think it's a little on the heavy side for what it is.
A Ricoh GR with the viewfinder from the X100S would be badass!
But i think i could be happy with the GR ;-)Apr 26, 2013 at 3:00 pm #1980844
Franco DarioliBPL Member
Some camera trivia..
That Leica Mini was made by a division of Panasonic.
It was also sold as the Panasonic C625AF and Minolta Freedom Escort.
Minolta probably made the lens for them all.Jun 10, 2013 at 8:53 pm #1995478
convince yourself that you need to buy this camera, read this review:
;-)Jun 14, 2013 at 1:36 am #1996516
I'll be picking one up in the coming month or so. Will let you guys know what I think.Jun 14, 2013 at 2:21 am #1996518
Kevin, looking forward to your thoughts. Are you getting an external viewfinder?Jun 14, 2013 at 10:28 pm #1996824
Yeah, I hate shooting on LCDs—not to mention the power drain, especially considering the battery life of these cameras (my main camera right now is the X-Pro1). Not sure exactly what I'll be getting, but there will definitely be a chunk of glass on top.Jun 15, 2013 at 5:19 am #1996854
Agree. I had a much better battery life when i turned the LCD off on my DSLR on a 5 day hike. It lasted the whole trip – no problem – and battery life to spare. On top of that – more fun to shoot that way. Less digital-fidling, more presence. Win-win.Aug 19, 2013 at 3:54 pm #2016665
Finally ordered, should be here this week. Will have a few days to gather some initial impressions and then it'll be coming along for two and half weeks in the High Sierra.Aug 19, 2013 at 11:16 pm #2016802
Looking forward to it, have a great trip!Aug 24, 2013 at 5:10 pm #2018291
This thing is great. Image quality is outstanding, the screen is gorgeous, the ergonomics are the best I've ever used (honestly—I can use it one handed easily). Can't wait to give it a go on my trip. I have a wall charger but I see the USB charging as a big plus for folks like us; I'll be able to bring along a 6000mAh Mophie (about half a pound) and charge directly, without an outlet. The batteries are 1250mAh so just the Mophie alone will be good for almost five charges. Add in 3 full charged batteries at the start and that's 8 charges (hopefully around 2400 photos) for about 10oz of battery (camera is about 7.75 oz w/out battery).Aug 28, 2013 at 10:06 am #2019469
Still drooling…hopefully you'll post some pictures from the trip :-)Aug 29, 2013 at 11:09 am #2019835
I have another thread going on trying to find an ultralight camera that can do time lapse shots of the Milky Way and stars moving across the sky.
Does the Ricoh GR fit the bill? It appears to have built in time lapse and a good sized sensor.
Do they make a fisheye for this?Aug 29, 2013 at 12:11 pm #2019854
Greg MihalikBPL Member
"That Leica Mini was made by a division of Panasonic.
"It was also sold as the Panasonic C625AF and Minolta Freedom Escort."
What is today's equivalent? (fixed 28mm, optical viewfinder, good quality)Aug 29, 2013 at 12:19 pm #2019857
Greg MihalikBPL Member
" I soon found out that a charger is NOT included but instead a USB cable with outlet is and you must charge the battery while it is in the camera,"
"Battery Life on the low side at around 300-340 shots"
So… add a USB charging system to the gear list.Sep 8, 2013 at 5:39 pm #2023089
Ted EBPL Member
@mtn_nutLocale: Morrison, CO
Im kinda torn. My RX100 broke on a recent trip, and my first thought is that i would replace it with a RX100 M2, but after looking around and reading the steve huff review and looking at the DXOmark comparison, i think i might go with a GR. i've shot some great photos with a fixed lens when i was a kid, and most of my photos i've taken with the RX100 have been at the 28mm focal length. It seems like the dimensions are similar (4.6(W) ×2.4(H) ×1.4 (D) for the GR vs. 4''×2-9/32''× 1-1/2'' for the sony) and its a little lighter (8.6oz. vs 9.9 oz.), and the better sensor and lens seems to make it worth it.
what do you think. is the GR a better camera for backpacking than the RX100?Nov 15, 2013 at 9:56 pm #2045076
@diablo-vLocale: Orlando FL
My new GR arrived about an hour ago.
I studied and studied weight vs image quality vs cost options and without exaggerating probably about 100 or more hours calculating what to buy and reading reviews/specs/samples.
The GR won.
The top runner up was the new Fuji X-E2 with its APS-C sensor and awesome ($900+) wide angle lens, but that setup would have run me over $2000 and been much heavier. And a lack of support from ACD Systems (My preferred RAW software)for the Fuji sensor helped with the decision.
Enter the Ricoh GR.
Sub 8oz, less than $800, and less than $1200 with the optional 21mm wide angle adapter and spare batteries. Not needing to tote a wall charger is a big plus also.
It is hard to believe that such a smallish looking lens can produce such image quality but it somehow does. If you count the 35 MM crop factor shooting mode ( which produces 10 MP images)there are three possible focal lengths: 28MM native, 35 MM "crop factor mode", and 21 MM Super Wide angle with the optional converter lens.
With this camera I am out of luck trying to do telephoto wildlife shots, but my intended use is mainly for wide panoramas/scenery for 90 percent of my shooting, so this camera won out. It should produce large detailed prints perhaps a tiny notch below the Fuji X-Pro1 or X-e2 in detail/quality.
Without having used it yet the two cons are: USB mini-"B" connector for charging-not sure if I can use a generic (lighter) one .. yet, would prefer Micro-USB.
It costs more for the optional optical viewfinder, (but not as much as for some other cameras).
When my 21mm converter lens and the hood/filter adapter arrive from Japan I will post the weights of everything.
Edit: new firmware just added a 47 MM crop factor as well.Nov 17, 2013 at 9:14 pm #2045705
I've been eyeing this camera for a while.
Can you comment on its low light capabilities?
Specifically the night sky? How grainy does it get at high ISO? Any chance I could get a milky way shot with it?
Also, I think it has built in timelapse. Any comments on that would be awesome as well.
-ChrisNov 18, 2013 at 7:18 pm #2046020
@diablo-vLocale: Orlando FL
I have been perusing reviews even after buying it, mainly to see how some of the pro photographers are using camera settings.
One recurring theme is the very low noise of the sensor in RAW shooting.
I think it will work just fine for star / milky way shots with a decent tripod.
It has a setting where you can select your own aperture and shutter speed manually, and the camera will apply the correct ISO, so that if nothing else, you can use the setting to preview which ISO you can get away with as it will display the ISO setting on screen along with the other two.
In other words, it has a number of settings to fine tune this (or any other) style of shooting.
There is a built in intervalometer also.
Keep in mind there is no "in camera" HDR but then again all the other cameras that do this can only do it with Jpegs.
If I recall the noise is low up to 1200 ISO in RAW (above F9).
I hope this is helpful.Nov 26, 2013 at 5:35 pm #2048390
Sorry I just now saw this.
Thanks Daniel. Very helpful. If you get a chance to post some sample shots I'm sure we'd all love to see them!Dec 5, 2013 at 5:06 pm #2051271
Doug SmithBPL Member
@jedi5150Locale: Central CA
I agree, please put up some photos.
I really went back and forth a ton between the Ricoh GR and the Sigma DP2 Merrill. For an all around camera it sounds like the GR is the winner, hands down. When BH Photo had their $200 off special two days ago on the DP2M, I finally pulled the trigger. It will primarily be my backpacking landscape camera, so the low ISO only and crappy video won't hinder me too much.
The primary reason I went with the DP2M, though, is the 45mm equivalent focal length. 28 is just too wide for my style. If Ricoh made the GR in a 45-50mm equivalent instead of 28, I would have jumped on it immediately.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.