Previous news story    Next news story

Ricoh GR Digital IV Preview Samples

By dpreview staff on Dec 5, 2011 at 22:33 GMT

Just Posted: Ricoh GR Digital IV Preview Samples Gallery. We've been using a Ricoh GR Digital IV for some time, just long enough to get a quick gallery of samples together. As usual, our 24-image gallery contains images taken at a mixture of different camera and lens settings, in a variety of different shooting conditions. As well as 'straight from the camera' JPEGs we've also included a number of images converted from raw files, using Adobe Camera Raw (ACR) and processed 'to taste'.

Samples Gallery

There are 24 images in the samples gallery. Please do not reproduce any of these images on a website or any newsletter / magazine without prior permission (see our copyright page). We make the originals available for private users to download to their own machines for personal examination or printing (in conjunction with this review), we do so in good faith, please don't abuse it.

Unless otherwise noted images taken with no particular settings at full resolution. Because our review images are now hosted on the 'galleries' section of dpreview.com, you can enjoy all of the new galleries functionality when browsing these samples.

Ricoh GR Digital IV Samples - Posted 5th December 2011
39
I own it
8
I want it
6
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 33
Callus
By Callus (Dec 10, 2011)

I really like both the quality and colours of these samples. Impressed!

0 upvotes
LarryLatchkey
By LarryLatchkey (Dec 8, 2011)

Pleeeeease DPR, i think it's time for a proper review!

your critical review of the first model helped me decide. i bought it despite the awful destructive colour noise, cause i fell in love with it ;)

it was fine skipping GRd II. But then hardly a sound on GRd III. Now, please, this is a contender for all those 1,7" zoomies!!

0 upvotes
LarryLatchkey
By LarryLatchkey (Dec 7, 2011)

I think it's quite impressive for 1.7"!
I didn't expect them to get more out of the same sensor... and some of these you could even go down with the sensitivity. the perfect low-light street photography compact.

ISO400! the texture in the wooded horizon! (looks better than base iso in my GRd I)
Compared to the S95 to me even the JPEGs look better, less processed. I wonder how it'll compare to S100, which squeezes mor MPix into the same size sensor.

I never understand these comments about its alledgedly booring design. Everyone who sees my old GRd tell me how cool it looks.
And compared to its competitors it's not that terribly overprized anymore as what the first one used to be.

1 upvote
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Dec 7, 2011)

If it's anything like the GRD I-III it should be very good; just not good enough. Problem is, if you have the money for one of these and understand the benefits of a prime lens, you're probably well aware of the limitations of the sensor. Unless an X10 is too large, I can't see going with a GRD IV.

0 upvotes
bobbarber
By bobbarber (Dec 6, 2011)

I really really want to like this camera, but the price...

Oh well, maybe Fujifilm and Ricoh can charge more for their compacts because they know what they've got.

0 upvotes
JackM
By JackM (Dec 6, 2011)

Wonderful photos. Too bad the camera does not do at least 720p video. Therefore I cannot buy it, because I have young kids. S100 for me I guess. :-(

0 upvotes
D1N0
By D1N0 (Dec 6, 2011)

Noise reduction is too heavy, makes it lose detail. Give me noise or a choice instead of smear. For the rest it looks fine, except that the camera doesn't look anywhere near cool.

0 upvotes
iaredatsun
By iaredatsun (Dec 6, 2011)

You can turn the JPG NR off – I think the reviewers left it on in the photo I looked at.

0 upvotes
LarryLatchkey
By LarryLatchkey (Dec 8, 2011)

everyone's commenting on NR. tbh, i don't see much unusual NR in these... i don't get it. compare this to a canon or panasonic, and even though those might not be the worst, you will see what's real noise reduction!

Comment edited 19 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
LarryLatchkey
By LarryLatchkey (Dec 8, 2011)

ok,.. sorry, looking again i see what you mean. yet it's not unusual.

0 upvotes
gl2k
By gl2k (Dec 6, 2011)

In Europe the NEX-5 with kit lens is cheaper than the Ricoh.
So ... who buys the Ricoh P&S ?
omg ... are customers really that stupid ?

0 upvotes
DaveCS
By DaveCS (Dec 6, 2011)

Well, gl2k, not everyone thinks price is the only deciding factor when buying a camera. The Ricoh has incredible ergonomics. I can operate the camera (turning on, focus, shoot, change ISO, change WB etc.) with one hand. I'm not sure you can do that with any other P&S camera on the market today.

4 upvotes
HeezDeadJim
By HeezDeadJim (Dec 7, 2011)

Plus the Ricoh can fit on your pants pocket a bit easier than the "stock" lens on the Nex. You could probably still fit a Nex in your pocket, but it would look kind of rude and norty...

0 upvotes
LarryLatchkey
By LarryLatchkey (Dec 8, 2011)

plus, nex is ugly, gr is beautiful :)

0 upvotes
Mauro.B
By Mauro.B (Dec 6, 2011)

IQ, in both raw and jpeg, is very "plastic" either on macro (portrait) or micro (foliage) details. For the 2x price, I would have expected an advancement over a Canon S95, or at least the same IQ, given same-ish aperture at 28mm equiv. Stellar ergonomics and lcd are a good addition but cannot justify "per se" an expensive package if there is an unsufficient IQ delivery.

Earlier this year I tested the III as a PJ backup camera. Snap focus and "single handed" ergonomics where the deal maker, sensor weaknesses the breaker. Lens was surprisingly good, but behind LX5 (even if the latter has little scope in fast PJ usage).

Since it looks like the IV has little or no advancement over III sensor wise, I will try it first hand to see if autofocus is really faster (III was snail-paced) and if I can live with snap focus buried in menus.

Otherwise, the III is fantastic value as a BW documentary photography tool.

1 upvote
LarryLatchkey
By LarryLatchkey (Dec 8, 2011)

imo these 1.7" sensor cameras have become so similar in quality that if you don't put then at 100% next to each other on a computer screen, the difference won't hurt you.

f 1.9 and focus on nose tip ;)
in the raw portrait there's better – quite impressive – texture. (skin, wool threads of that scarf). I think jpeg NR up to iso400 is only visible when pixel peeping, if you're planning large prints, why don't you use RAW?

i also think it's much better than the GRd III, from what i see (e.g. here: http://www.d-pixx.de/index.php/online-content/praxisbilder/?g2_itemId=28241 )!

0 upvotes
iaredatsun
By iaredatsun (Dec 6, 2011)

I had a look at the portrait of the woman in JPG mode. Appears to me, looking at the foliage in that shot, that dpreview left the default NR switched on. On that count alone, I wouldn't personally take these as a clear indicator of IQ possible from the GRD4.

There are plenty of GRD4 shots around (flickr, the Ricoh forum) from people who have turned off the factory setting NR. I would recommend people find and look at those, too.

0 upvotes
richjack5
By richjack5 (Dec 6, 2011)

I have a GRD III and have had the GRD IV for a couple of weeks now. ISO 3200 with the IV is comparable to 1600 on the III. Neither is fantastic but shoot DNG and use PS to reduce noise and the results are acceptable if you’re not a pixel peeper. Focussing is faster. The screen is gorgeous. I can keep it in my jeans pocket – try that with a DSLR or even the Fuji X100. If you want low light, low noise then take your DSLR. If you want portability and the ability to take street shots without attracting attention then the IV is ideal.

0 upvotes
James Bligh
By James Bligh (Dec 6, 2011)

You may say color is natural but I find color is not punchy. The colors GRDIII produce were a bit faded. It seems that GRDIV is same in this respect.

0 upvotes
iaredatsun
By iaredatsun (Dec 6, 2011)

James, firstly, we have no idea what image settings were used. Also many people don't want their photos punched up. Punching up photos can easily be achieved afterwards in Photoshop. Personally, I'd rather have a natural look as a base to start from so a camera's user can choose punchy or not rather than the camera making the choice for them.

0 upvotes
D200_4me
By D200_4me (Dec 5, 2011)

Suggestion: Make it so the galleries don't force the entire page to reload when changing to a different image. Makes the browsing slower and very annoying :-(

3 upvotes
Simon Joinson
By Simon Joinson (Dec 5, 2011)

you can always use the slideshow - no reloads.

0 upvotes
Tom Bird
By Tom Bird (Dec 6, 2011)

as always: we don't serve the customer, the customer has to serve us.

0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Dec 6, 2011)

@Tom - don't be rude. This site is much more user-friendly now than it was even a couple of years ago.

As for the original post, we're aware that the current way of viewing samples galleries isn't ideal, and it's one of the things that we're working on improving.

10 upvotes
D200_4me
By D200_4me (Dec 6, 2011)

Thanks, Simon/Barney. A way to change images without loading the whole page again would be awesome :-) Sounds like you're already working on it.

0 upvotes
dpfan32
By dpfan32 (Dec 25, 2011)

Suggestion: get rid of this flash. No way ti see the slideshow on my iPhone/iPad. Please go with the time :)

0 upvotes
dpfan32
By dpfan32 (Dec 25, 2011)

Suggestion: get rid of this flash. No way ti see the slideshow on my iPhone/iPad. Please go with the time :)

0 upvotes
grafli
By grafli (Dec 5, 2011)

wonderful lens, but not so good sensor.
there is some noise at ISO 80 like a new DSLR has it at ISO 800
And ISO 3200 is not as good as a Canon S95, my opinion.

0 upvotes
Samuel Dilworth
By Samuel Dilworth (Dec 5, 2011)

Not coincidentally, a typical DSLR has a sensor about 10x larger than the GR Digital IV. Therefore you should expect the SLR to deliver the same noise at an ISO sensitivity 10x higher.

The GRD IV uses the same Sony CCD sensor as the Canon S95.

2 upvotes
Simon97
By Simon97 (Dec 5, 2011)

Having had the S95, I think this camera is better. Instead of smearing the noise away along with detail, they let some noise show and retain the shadow detail. Canon: take a hint. A bit of luminance noise is not so bad.

2 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Dec 5, 2011)

The GRD III has no noise at ISO 64 to speak of. Much prefer the the GRD III to virtually any other compact. It is made for photographers with a excellent UI. Haven't used the IV.

0 upvotes
Pangloss
By Pangloss (Dec 5, 2011)

The in-camera JPEG engine seems to do a wonderful job "cleaning up" the noise without any noticeable loss of detail.
And the high-quality lens really helps the camera achieve excellent results, despite the small, aging 1/1.7" CCD sensor.

0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Dec 5, 2011)

The lens really is lovely...

2 upvotes
Total comments: 33