saeba77: i really can't understand why i need this camera or the ricoh? i can buy the t10 or a6000 or a6300 or xa2 or ecc , mount a prime f2.8 and obtain the same image quality (well may be better) in a body more or less same spec
"Magic" is when Vogue photographers prefer to shoot with an X-70.
Jimmy jang Boo: Even though the Ricoh GR is arguably the better camera, one thing the Fuji has going for it is better/more appealing OOC color.
As the review says, for color social media jpegs. I bought my X-E2, 4 Fuji lenses, and GRII for large prints rendered from RAW. Color is equally awesome. Everyone has different needs. And indeed the GR excels at black and white rendering IMO.
Aroart: Think this will win the "wait till the camera is half price award"... Hey at least we know Fuji can make a touch me screen... Hope the put it in the XT2...
Not 50 percent, but with the many less than stellar reviews the price will drop to the GR II price fairly quickly. Nikon tried overpricing the A at launch, and that didn't work out so well for them.
photo perzon: The GR JPEGs are horrible in color. Reds and oranges are all messed up. Most glowing reviews say it is best for B/W. If you look at GR samples people have a grey zombie skin color. Indoors it focuses really slowly. Nikon A has great JPEGs.
I shoot the GR II and Fuji RAW all the time. Other than sharpness the files are indistinguishable in large prints, color is great in both. But B&W is indeed rendered better from the GR.
John Gellings: I use both the GR II and the X70. Both are quality cameras for actual photography.
Yes, the last thing I want from a comprehensive pro technical camera/lens review is anyone looking too close to the images!
turvyT: The review can be disappointing (for some) and the image quality test not satisfactory, and the sensor old, and the video crap, but the image gallery is very very nice, with more interesting images than many others taken by maybe sharper devices with newer sensors. I guess usability and fun of use makes you a better photographer too.
So it's true? The camera makes the photographer? Usually folks are ranting around here that a new camera won't make you a better photographer. It's a new paradigm!
You clearly need to stop shooting portraits of zombies.
ItsHotInAZ: I love that Fuji is pushing outside previous boundaries by incorporating a touchscreen and fixed 28mm lens; however, as a Ricoh GR owner I can’t justify the purchase. The handling of my Ricoh GR is second to none, and my past experience with Fuji RAW files wasn’t pleasant. I’ve yet to encounter any issues with RAW DNG files produced by Ricoh. For me, maybe not you, the handling of the Ricoh GR makes up any differences in excluding a tilting lcd and touchscreen.
I purchased my Ricoh GR around Christmas and paid $599 for a package deal that included the Ricoh GR, 32GB Class 10 SD Card, Tough case, and GV-1 Viewfinder. The Fuji optical viewfinder looks like a replica of Ricoh’s GV-1 Viewfinder but priced $100 more.
I have a GRII and a GR for almost a year. No sign of dust. I carry them in my jeans/shorts pocket. I suppose the compact size of these cameras encourage stuffing them in tight places. I carry mine in the back pouch of my cycling jersey. But all fixed lens cameras can get dust inside eventually. The problem will always be the inability to clean the sensor. It will take a year or two before we'll know how the new X-70 will handle dust. The GR has been in the field for over 3 years.
The best way to determine fine IQ differences is to actually use the cameras in various situations over time. Then the differences become clear.
I'm a Fuji fan, have an X-E2 and 4 Fuji lenses including 3 well regarded prime's. I added a GR II to the mix as a camera I felt safe taking anywhere in Europe and the US, and as my 18mm prime alternative when used with my Fuji.
The lens on the GR II is clearly at least as good as any of my Fuji prime's, edge to edge, wide open. It may be a touch sharper, but that may be because of X-Trans vs. Bayer. I love the overall look of the FUJI files but they need a bit of micro contrast added (IMO) to add texture and overcome the slightly smoothed-out look from the X-Trans. The GR has more natural crispness and bite (even RAW), so maybe this is being confused as a sharper look when it might be a Bayer issue.
If the X70's prime is the same quality as Fuji's other primes then it should be about the same as the GR.
jvt: How were the 35 & 50 crop modes? That along with the upcoming 21mm adapter have me interested.
There have been samples posted around the forums. The Fuji "magic" is called interpolation. Fuji cautions about image degradation when using the digital zoom. From the images I've seen it looks like Fuji is using a simple nearest neighbor upsampling method due to the speed needed. You would be better off upsampling the crops with better software from the RAW file, but unlike the GR, Fuji disables RAW recording when using the crop modes.
Brad Sarno: I think that naysayers to the GR simply don't yet appreciate the astounding IQ and the cult-worthy handling and real world performance and feature set linked with ergonomics and pocketability. It's for a certain type of taste, but it clearly wouldn't have risen to such a cult status if it didn't really bring so much pleasure and such astounding results.
The half press/full press shutter control for picking AF or snap focus rarely get's mentioned. It's one of the simplest pieces of technology, but is great innovation for focus control. There's so much smart thinking and evolution behind this camera. I wish my Fuji had the customization features.
cgarrard: The best serious compact on the market- it and the GR.
If you need an EVF to nail critical focus and see what your framing is while cycling or on the street, the GR is definitely not for you.
wed7: I think suspect that the only reason why this was featured now is because DPR would simply want to show to us how the new Fuji X70 will destroy this camera. I could be wrong though.
Neither camera will "destroy" the other. People will choose based on different approaches to ergonomics. Both cameras have unique advantages.
darvil77: GR cameras (I or II model) are still the best and most convenient choice for those interested in a 28mm fixed lens compact.
Leica Q wins on full-frame, more megapixels, stabilization and viewfinder, but loses (slightly) for optical quality an (hugely) for its price, since it's almost 8 times more expensive than the Ricoh. And it's also bigger and heavier.
The new Fuji x70 doesn't look like a very promising candidate, since it will sport - if I'm right in understanding - the same 16mp sensor of the X100t (which has already lost many tests against the GR) and the lens quality will be hardly as good as Ricoh's. It also lacks the hybrid viewfinder, which has so far been the major selling point (besides the external look...) of the Fuji X series.
I own the predecessor and still bought the GR II even though it's a modest upgrade. I guess people are talking about jpegs when they mention Fuji colors. The GR II has additional and better film simulations, but the B&W simulations are much better than my X-E2, and the GR color jpegs don't have the annoying waxy look at ISO 1600 and above.
The GR was designed to fit an APS-C sensor in a body thinner than the Sony RX100, so some features had to go. Something to keep in mind when comparing to cameras with EVFs. Do those camera fit in jeans pockets while keeping excellent IQ? The GR is a specialty camera, and a classic IMO.
Mostly I shoot RAW and the files are nearly identical to Fuji RAW files.
RJ Ross: And Fuji's just announced the X-E2 4.0 firmware will match all X-E2s specs. Available Feb 4th.https://www.ephotozine.com/article/fujifilm-x-e2-firmware-v4-0-announced-28718
FYI, the performance specs are listed in the release above. Pull down the X_E2 with new FW performance specs from Fuji's website--identical specs.
I'm amazed how much Fuji put in the FW upgrade for the X-E2, pretty much everything. AF speeds, performance speeds, full electronic shutter, the newest AF modes, the new Fuji UI, the EVF Live View function, etc. I thought they would hold back something.
Fuji's specs from their website state exact same performance. Both cameras:
Fast AF - 0.06 Sec.Start-up time - 0.5 Sec.Shooting interval - 0.5 Sec.Shutter time lag - 0.05
No difference - same sensor, same processor, same camera.
More like goodbye X-E3, for a while. One more X-E2 FW update and Fuji will have rangefinder and DSLR style mid-entry bodies with identical specs. Why would Fuji bother making another X-Trans clone with a different number on the front?
FYI..the Photo Acute software recommended at the end of the article above has been discontinued and is no longer supported.
Phredd: Why all the rage. It's good commentary on how good the iPhone 5s captures panoramas; not ultimate praise compared to dedicated cameras. If you'd rather take no photos than use a phone, go in peace. This wasn't written for you.
You can set the direction for panning. Just click the arrow for left or right panning. Simply turn the phone sideways to make a tall vertical pan. Very nice. It doesn't beat giga pixel images I shoot and stitch with PT GUI, but I would never take my DSLR in my back jersey pocket on all day bike rides. Great job Apple!
BeanyPic: As expected Great in Normal, Bright situations. Below average in Low light. Good try Nikon. Demonstrates that more MP's are not needed as most photographers know. Better luck next time Nikon.
So, he sees more shooting errors when the image is magnified dramatically, and thinks its an issue with the high mp sensor. I'll be taking this review with a huge grain of salt now.