Ricoh GR Hands-on Preview

April 2013 | By Richard Butler

Preview based on a production Ricoh GR running firmware v1.1

With the launch of the Nikon Coolpix A we marvelled at how, in the space of a year, the idea of a large sensor compact with a fixed, prime lens, has gone from being an obscure niche (as it was when Sigma launched the original DP1) to a burgeoning and competitive area of the market. Now, with the Ricoh GR, Pentax Ricoh has added to this trend by introducing an APS-C compact with a fixed 28mm equivalent F2.8 lens.

The Nikon is an obvious reference point for this camera, since they share the same field-of-view, the same maximum aperture and, quite plausibly, the same sensor. But it's important to give credit to Ricoh as the only manufacturer to have a continued history of building compact cameras with prime lenses. The GR is not just the immediate successor to a line of enthusiast compacts with bright, fixed-focal-length lenses, it's the continuation of a range that dates back into the film era.

Ricoh GR key specifications

16.2MP APS-C CMOS sensor with no low-pass filter
18.5mm (28mm equivalent) F2.8 lens
ISO 100-25,600
3.0" 1.2m dot LCD
Up to 4fps continuous shooting
1080p movies at 24, 25 or 30fps
12-bit Raw in DNG format
10MP 35mm equivalent crop mode
Built-in 2-stop ND filter

However, while much of the Ricoh's core specification looks similar to the Coolpix A, there is at least one significant difference - the price. Whereas Nikon decided it could ask $1,100 for the Coolpix A, Pentax Ricoh has been much more aggressive - asking just $800 for the GR.

Interestingly for a camera with such deep Ricoh roots - the GR is the first camera to show signs of the company's purchase of Pentax. The camera gains the Pentax TAv (Time and Aperture priority) mode, allowing the photographer to specify both shutter speed and aperture, with the camera selecting the appropriate ISO. Having this option as a dedicated mode, rather than letting AutoISO operate in Manual exposure mode as some recent cameras have, has the benefit that it's been properly thought out, so you still have access to exposure compensation. It also avoids the logical inconsistency of having the camera make decisions for you in a supposedly manual mode.

Beyond this, the GR uses an interface that's consistent with previous Ricoh models - and that's something we're delighted to see. We've often referred to the Ricoh interface (as used in the GRD and GXR models) as arguably the best enthusiast-focused interface on a compact camera, so we're delighted to see it retained.

Existing Ricoh users will be pleased to hear that the GR is still capable of interval shooting and has retained the much-loved Snap Focus and Full Press Snap focus modes that push focus to a pre-determined distance to make it easy to get grab shots.

The GR also perpetuates something of a history shared by Ricoh and Pentax - the ability to shoot Raw files conforming to Adobe's DNG open standard.

28mm equivalent GR lens

The Ricoh uses a 28mm equivalent F2.8 lens - an apparent step down from the F1.9 lens offered on the GRD IV but, as a result of the much larger sensor, actually effectively two stops more capable in terms of depth-of-field control and light-gathering capability.

The design features seven elements (two of which are aspheric) in five groups and there's a 9-blade diaphragm nestling inside. As with many cameras with a shutter in the lens, the maximum shutter speed is limited by the selected aperture.

Aperture	Maximum available shutter speed
F2.8 - F3.2	1/2000th sec
F3.5 - F4	1/2500th sec
F4.5 - F5	1/3200th sec
<F5.6	1/4000th sec

The front of the GR's lens, when set to close-focus. The outer tube of the lens doesn't change length on focusing - instead the lens assembly can be seen shunting back and forth within it. As you may be able to see from this image, the lens itself is remarkably small - the front element is only around 12mm across.

The lens itself is set within an extending tube, whose length doesn't change as you focus. Instead you can see the front element of the lens shunt back and forth within the tube. Internal-focus lenses are usually fastest to focus, since you have less mass to accelerate and decelerate each time you focus, but although the Ricoh doesn't take this approach its speed is perfectly acceptable.

Movie shooting

The Ricoh GR can capture 1080p movies at 24, 25 or 30 frames per second and save them in the MOV format with H.264 compression. It doesn't include a socket for an external mic, limiting audio quality by having to rely on built-in stereo microphones.

There's no exposure control when shooting movies (not even exposure compensation), so videographers shouldn't get too excited by the idea of the GR. You can apply many of the camera's film-related 'Effects' processing modes to the footage, but that's about it, in terms of control.

Optional accessories

A series of accessories is being launched alongside the GR, including an adapter (that allows use of 49mm filters) and lens hood combination (GH-3) and a wide-angle lens (the GW-3, that mounts on that adapter). Optical viewfinders, both for the camera's native 28mm equivalent coverage and the wide-angle adapter's 21mm equivalent field-of-view will be available, as will a dedicated flash.

There's no accessory port on the back so, unlike the GXR module, you can't fit an electronic viewfinder.

A lens hood and adapter are available. The adapter then allows the use of other accessories, such as the 21mm equivalent wide-angle adapter.

If you're new to digital photography you may wish to read the Digital Photography Glossary before diving into this article (it may help you understand some of the terms used).

Conclusion / Recommendation / Ratings are based on the opinion of the reviewer, you should read the ENTIRE review before coming to your own conclusions.

Images which can be viewed at a larger size have a small magnifying glass icon in the bottom right corner of the image, clicking on the image will display a larger (typically VGA) image in a new window.

To navigate the review simply use the next / previous page buttons, to jump to a particular section either pick the section from the drop down or select it from the navigation bar at the top.

DPReview calibrate their monitors using Color Vision OptiCal at the (fairly well accepted) PC normal gamma 2.2, this means that on our monitors we can make out the difference between all of the (computer generated) grayscale blocks below. We recommend to make the most of this review you should be able to see the difference (at least) between X,Y and Z and ideally A,B and C.

Comments

Total comments: 267

We use the TaV mode quite a bit on our Pentax. Good feature to include.

0 upvotes

Amazing flash synch speed !

0 upvotes

Anyone think that Pentax might release a weather sealed version?

1 upvote

that would be my ultimate take anywhere camera. The question is if they can do it at a price that makes sense.

1 upvote

@Richard Butler,

Could someone test if a softening filter eliminates moire? It could be a general test with something like the D7100 or K-5 IIS, not aimed at the Nikon A or Ricoh GR (do they even have filter threads?).

I'm convinced there is little moire in most real life situations, but would like to know if carrying a filter in my pocket would help the rest of the time. I don't have an aa-less camera or I'd check myself.

Comment edited 18 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

I guess that's a no...

0 upvotes

Jeepers bob, it was only 4 hours ago, give the world a chance to help you. :-)

0 upvotes

If the moire bothers you stop down to f8. After f8 the diffraction from the lens will start to cancel out the gains due to the lack of AA filter and moire will basically disappear. Im on the fence given the amount of moire present here, but these are worst case examples too. There are a lot of k-5 IIs users now and none of them are complaining about moire. Most are praising the camera for its resolution which a gain of 30% is a figure that is being tossed around. That's interesting.

I think the ricoh looks like it has the better lens too as well as much better ergonomics. For $800, I'd rather buy another lens, but for some this is a dream camera. With an ovf it would work well for street.

0 upvotes

I'm not really bothered by the moire with this camera. I just thought that it would be an interesting test, given that so many cameras are coming out now without AA filters.

My thoughts are, if you can use a softening filter as your own AA filter, then really there is nothing to lose by dropping the AA filter. You just pull out the softening filter once in a while, as you would say a graduated filter, when you recognize that conditions call for it.

I use filters on cameras like this, whether they have threads or not. I just hold the filter up in front of the camera and it works fine. That's why God gave me two hands. I'm sure I'm not the only one that does it that way, either.

After I posted the request, I realized that it isn't necessarily the kind of thing that dpreview does...Dpreview looks at the machine itself, and not accessories. So maybe that was my bad.

Comment edited 25 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

DPReview: it is a bit odd that you have two sets of comments on the Ricoh GR, one on the page announcing the Preview article, and another on the preview article itself. Could they not both show the same comment thread?
(Also, I don't understand why you use 'New first'... but hey!)

Thx

3 upvotes

I greatly applaud DPR for adding an optional test scene that grants a more technical display of performance. Well done!

2 upvotes

Once we've developed a better way of presenting it, this will replace the existing test scene.

0 upvotes

History repeating itself?

Once upon a time, Nikon introduced two premium compact cameras, the 35Ti and 28Ti. Both had very sharp, fixed focal length lenses and both were expensive. The 28Ti retailed in the US for close to $800.

Out of nowhere, Ricoh (who had been making junky cameras for places like Sears) introduced their GR1, which was functionally identical to the 28Ti, yet priced at $350. Nikon fans declared the GR1 was no good because the price was too low, but it was so good, it became a cult camera. And that was the end of the 28Ti.

3 upvotes

The 28ti is as much a cult camera as the GR1 is. I have no idea of respective sales figures, but 28ti (and 35ti) appealed to many with its "analogue" user interface (kinda steam punk dials). I still have my GR1 and it still works except dead LCD, but I would have loved one of those Nikons as well. The GR1 was the ideal trouser pocket camera. The 28 or 35 it were great when you wanted less fiddly command and control and a more traditional user experience.

Harder to see unique selling points to the A though, except manual focus through lens ring, which is way better for me than the GR way. Also, am not sure that the Snap feature of the GR will be as effective on a high res large sensor as it was with the GRDs, due to much thinner DoF. People will realise that CoC conventions do not match pixel peepers sharpness expectations.

1 upvote

In manual mode, how do you change shutter speed & aperture? Obviously the front wheel changes one, but do you then need to press a button to change the other?

1 upvote

The front dial changes one parameter, the rear ADJ jog lever controls the other.

You can, of course, switch which does which.

2 upvotes

To DPReview: the Ricoh sample is very strange. Look at the deck of cards in the upper right corner: it is much softer than the one in the lower left corner. And it's also softer than the top right corner crop.
Compared to the Nikon, the lower-left deck is sharper and the upper-right one is softer. While the upper-right corner is sharper.
Could it be that the lens (of the Ricoh) has a manufacturing defect or something? Because elsewhere the Ricoh image looks pretty sharp, but it seems there's a problem in that particular point...

1 upvote

"The camera gains the Pentax TAv (Time and Aperture priority) mode, allowing the photographer to specify both shutter speed and aperture, with the camera selecting the appropriate ISO."

Lovely!

3 upvotes

I just don't know. Where is the market for these cameras? How is the market for these stronger than the market for phones equipped with legitimate cameras? I'm still not convinced that these are better than the Sony NEX + new pancake lens.

1 upvote

Oh, I'll take a phone with this sensor and controls, no doubt

4 upvotes

Phones = hugely inferior image quality.
NEX + pancake = not pocketable or nearly as portable.

2 upvotes

this has excellent glass too. this is much, much more compact than a nex with any lens. as soon as you need something other than a pancake the nex becomes unbalanced and awkward. just my opinion of course. this isn't much bigger than a GRD IV! That's amazing!

0 upvotes

@ winkalman. ... Yes, see the dial behavior section on this thread

0 upvotes

Does this have snap focus like the previous GRs? Being able to set a fixed focus distance could make this a street shooter's dream!

0 upvotes

Yes.

1 upvote

To R. Butler: We would all appreciate if real world picture samples were taken simultaneously with the GR and Coolpix A with the same parameters at the same place just a few seconds apart; ie same picture + same parameters.

James

2 upvotes

It's certainly my plan to do so. However, while we've had the camera for a few days, we only had shootable firmware for about 10 hours before the announcement, so had to balance real-world and studio time with the need to finish writing the preview.

3 upvotes

To R. Butler: For greater clarity...identical pictures taken with the GR and Coolpix A with identical parameters, taken side by side within seconds...iso, aperture etc...

Many thanks in advance.

James

Comment edited 1 minute after posting

1 upvote

That's certainly the plan.

3 upvotes

these samples are the brother to useless, maybe the reviewer could pop down to a street, say, with people, and, say, do a street shoot with this? maybe? as that seems to be a target audience. I would recommend iso800, f/5.6-f/8 under mid day light, and maybe f/2.8 and iso 1600 under evening light or in a dark train station

0 upvotes

With respect, we got final firmware around 10 hours before the announcement, so only had time to shoot a limited gallery.

I tried to make clear that this was only the beginnings of a gallery and that low-light samples would be added soon (after we've had an evening where I'm not in the office writing about the camera, for instance).

Comment edited 44 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

Thanks R Butler. We look forward to seeing more samples when you get the time! And at least some of us appreciate how limited your time has been with the camera so far.

0 upvotes

The writing at DPR is improving (kudos to you for taking great writing seriously!) with the new ringers you've brought on board, but "the GR can shoot at 1/4000th of a second at F5.6 and smaller, 1/3200 below F4.5, 1/2500 up to F3.5 and 1/2000 above that" made my head spin. Huh? I can't figure out what's "above" and what's "below" here.

0 upvotes

Sorry, I added that at 11:30 last night. It would work better as a table (to be provided shortly).

0 upvotes

Really hope DPreview will have sigma DP merrills images to compare.

0 upvotes

Comparing something like this or the Coolpix A with the DP Merrill is the clearest case of apples and oranges I can imagine given the similar focal length. The Sigma will have the best image quality of the class and it won't even be close. But that's only for shooting in good light at base ISO when you're in absolutely NO hurry to get the shot. The Ricoh and Nikon will not have nearly as good IQ at base ISO, but they can both shoot quickly and do back to back to back shots and can also shoot very effectively at high ISO. They're just for totally different kinds of photography and have very clear tradeoffs. If you're a daytime landscape shooter or architectural shooter, you'd almost certainly want the Merrill. If you're a street shooter or someone who really enjoys low light photography (without using a tripod), you'd probably steer completely clear of the Merrill and go with the Ricoh or Nikon.

The Merrill is a different category of camera...

4 upvotes

The 21mm option definitely sets this apart. Throwing this combo in a bag with a DSLR and portrait lens would make a killer travel kit.

0 upvotes

what's a vision of loveliness perfect minimalist stylish design fantastic finish I love that kind of matt black. going back a few years I love my g x 100 and I have been waiting for a worthy successor. Looking forward to hearing the full review

2 upvotes

Nice to see very similar features available for different budgets. Good on Pentax-Ricoh for squeezing in good value

Notwithstanding the corner falloff which I don't care about, based upon THESE images, I would personally pay the extra $200 or more for the Nikon. The detail and color in the frame other than the corners is that much better to me.

FYI dpreview, all of the test scene shots are at f5.0, at least in the large versions I opened.

0 upvotes

The first pair (the Raw conversions) are at F2.8, as stated. The second pair (the JPEGs) are at F5.0 and I've updated the text to reflect this.

0 upvotes

I liked the specs and the body design, except for the fixed screen.
But @ 800 usd, I don't see why would I choose this over a NEX-6.
It is the same price, has arguably the same sensor, an awesome VF, a tilting screen that makes a lot of difference to me AND I can put any lens I want in front of it. Even one that is retractable and is a zoom.
Maybe when the price is right, some months from here...

1 upvote

The selling points of the Ricoh and Nikon are a faster lens and pocketability. If those points aren't important to you, then, yes, the NEX is a better option.

1 upvote

austin design

I think another selling point of the Ricoh is the user interface. The Ricoh user interface was kind of legendary among some people in previous (small-sensor) models. They allude to that a little bit in this preview. Many people bought previous GRD models almost entirely because of the user interface, and features like snap focus. I don't know if the Ricoh user interface is the same in this model.

1 upvote

Same reason people choose Panasonic's LX7 over the NEX6...size. Everyone has their own definition of "what I want in a P&S"...

UI is a lot better on the Ricoh too from what I hear...I've tried Sony's NEX UIs in the past (friend's NEX5) and found it horrible to get it to do what I want. This GR has front/rear dials which should make things a lot more intuitiive...

0 upvotes

> The selling points of the Ricoh and Nikon are a faster lens ...

Faster than what? The comparable lenses for a NEX would be either the Sony 16mm or 20mm f/2.8 pancake or Sigma 19mm f/2.8 primes.

0 upvotes

Well, the lens is not exactly fast and it does not have VF nor tilting screen, and costs the same as NEX6.
I believe Sony or Panasonic/Olympus produce better options for my style of shooting

0 upvotes

The Nikon A is too expensive, and not sharp in the corners. The GR seems to have solved both of those problems, awaiting further review.

The images look very nice.

4 upvotes

In these test shots, the Nikon shows greater detail clarity in almost all points OTHER than the extreme corners. So I guess you have to ask yourself: what's the most important part of your composition -- the 95% at the heart of it, or the outlying 5%?

3 upvotes

I would say the 5% at the edge. Here's my reasoning.

1) I don't need the extra resolution in the middle. It will be hard to see in a print. Both the Nikon A and Ricoh GR images will likely be downsized anyway, when sent to the printer at normal print sizes.

2) The corner flaws are obvious. I WILL be able to see them in a print, without cropping.

3) With a wide angle lens, you want the corners. If you have to crop the Nikon A to get it sharp edge to edge, then it's not 28mm anymore. I have captured dozens of wide-angle photos over the years that were not sharp in the corners, and some of them I framed specifically because I wanted something in the corner. That truly sucks, my friend. My days of spending $$$ on wide angle lenses that are not sharp to the corners are OVER.

Your analogy is flawed. It's like saying, "95% of my car works, just not the air conditioning." But the air conditioning may be the only thing you care about, depending on where you live and what you do.

4 upvotes

Just took a close look at the two images.

I am now 100% certain that any difference in detail in the center of the image between the Nikon A and Ricoh GR will be unnoticeable in a print. There is practically no difference at all, pixel-peeping.

In fact, the Ricoh looks SHARPER in many places in the center of the frame; however, the Nikon A seems to have smoother tones and fewer sharpening artifacts in some places. It may be that the default sharpening of the Ricoh is too high for my taste.

It is impossible for me to say that one camera is better than the other in the center of the frame. Where did you draw your conclusion from, Austin?

Comment edited 8 minutes after posting

1 upvote

> I would say the 5% at the edge. Here's my reasoning.

You need to account for the following in your reasoning: DPR's test is for a medium/close distance at f/2.8. If your favorite subject is brick walls in the shade at 3 paces then GR will be superior. Of the shots you composed w/something in the corner, how many were f/2.8 and how many had both the corner and the subject at medium/short distance?

0 upvotes

Erik,

That's a fair point. We really don't know how these cameras will perform in real life.

To answer your question, I own an Olympus 11-22mm which is a decent lens edge to edge, although it does have some problems wide open. I used to own an Olympus C-7070 with a wide-angle converter, 19mm equivalent, that I shot quite often at f2.8. The image quality was not good at the edge of the frame, although I did get a nice wide angle. From staring at a lot of the shots taken with that wide-angle converter, I just don't want anything to do anymore with wide-angle lenses that are soft in the corner.

From the test shots, the GR seems at least the equal of the Nikon in the center of the frame. Some people are saying the Nikon looks sharper, but I don't see it. The GR image looks a little oversharpened, and the Nikon has smoother tones in a few spots, but we are talking extreme pixel-peeping to notice any difference.

Personally, I'd be hard-pressed to justify $300 more for the Nikon.

0 upvotes

Agree that the corners in the preview are not good with the A. This surprises me. I have been using the A for 2 weeks now, and find the IQ amazing across the frame. Really amazing. Including corners. Perhaps a fluke in this preview? Or a question of field curvature? Things might look different at other distances? Dunno. Just surprised. GR looks really great (as well).

For the rest, agree there is not a 300 USD advantage to the Nikon, unless one places high value in an exclusively NEF workflow or in interoperability with Nikon accessories (flash, wifi, GPS, etc).

At first sight, the A does have an operational advantage on the GR by managing manual focus from the lens ring rather than whatever lever/dial on the back. I like that a lot. For the rest, the GR is mighty convincing.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting

0 upvotes

There are other advantages to the 'A' - I'll be looking into them as we expand both towards a head-to-head review.

1 upvote

Could the Nikon just have a lens problem with the particular camera? The top left seems corner seems to below par compared to the rest of the corners, with the Nikon bottom right looking better to me than Ricoh. Could the Nikon lens be decentered?

1 upvote

I'm wondering if Sony is going to release RX10 with APS-C sensor and fixed lens later this year.

0 upvotes

I wonder if it will be better than rx100

0 upvotes

Better, but not by much. See Sony Alpha rumors site.

0 upvotes

Looks like Ricoh dropped the IV's 'Hybrid AF' focus system, which according to Ricoh gives "Improved AF speed (up to 2x faster) combining external AF sensors with conventional contrast AF".

How will this GR's AF perform with Contrast Detect (sensor) only?

Comment edited 25 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

It's pretty fast. Not the 'essentially instant' performance of the latest Micro Four Thirds cameras and lenses, but not at all bad.

0 upvotes

We have a new (kid)king on the block!!! I really buy this one!

0 upvotes

Little tendency to underexpose perhaps?
I like it that way, less blown highlights...

Looks like it's way better than the the Nikon A and for a lot less money...

2 upvotes

The white balance on the test images looks very different...

0 upvotes

We didn't have time to perfectly white balance both cameras at the time. I've now re-processed both shots in their respective cameras to get white balance consistent on both.

0 upvotes

@Gatanoll: I do not think the issue is to gain "more resolution". It is more about maximising micro contrast and sharpness perception. Many of us prefer having that sharpness edge, even if that leads to more risks of moire. Is probably a pixel peeper thing.

As more and more pictures never get printed, even great pictures, pixel peeping has become part and parcel of the way we look at contemporary photography. I know it has become so for me, and I feel frustrated when I am not allowed a 100% zoom on any picture I am looking at.

By taking AA out, we get substantially more impactful results out of the box, at pixel level. It is probably "wrong", and we probably should all focus more on the aspects that make a good image truly great, but, hey, many of us enjoy that diving into the small details...

1 upvote

It's a digital image, sampling has simple rules, a low pass filter is a must have if you want a correct image, everything else is simply "wrong" (as you said) eventually pleasing to watch, but wrong (moire is there to warn us) adding fancy filters (sharpness etc ..) is easy, removing the wrong ones is mostly impossible and an hardware (missing) filter is the worst to recover.

BTW I like this camera, but a missing AA filter is a strong NO NO.

0 upvotes

Guys, I'm curious.

Wouldn't it be possible to soften the image via a lens filter, to avoid moire when necessary?

Gatanoll, you're going to have to point out some flaws in the sample images to convince me of your moire fears. I didn't pixel-peep all of the sample images, but they look very nice at first glance. I would gladly take images like that at the risk of losing one or two a day.

I scan film, and I went through a period of using glass holders with Newton rings. They were far more intrusive than moire, and most of the time they were not objectionable in prints, or even noticeable unless pointed out.

As far as "wrong" goes, all photography is "wrong" then, even with an AA filter, because no system accurately depicts reality.

0 upvotes

What would be great would be if Ricoh made a tele converter for this, like the tc1 for the GRD2, which gave an effective 40mm. When Ricoh did not make something similar for the GRD3 and 4 helped make my decision to stick with the grd2.

I know you get a bit of softening in the corners, but that is something I can live with... and can be used creatively!

0 upvotes

Viewfinder, viewfinder; where the heck are you, viewfinder?

0 upvotes

No AA filter is really bad.
Do you want to give us more resolution? Use a 24MP with AA instead of a 16MP without one.

0 upvotes

This would have been a fantastic camera with a longer lens. Put a 35 on it for a 50mm and the IQ would have been stunniing. Want wide - just stitch.

0 upvotes

50mm has much too narrow a FOV for street photography, and the GRD is pretty much the prototype for this type of shooting. Shoot in any city or landscape/scenics with a 50mm and you'll be wishing for something wider.

7 upvotes

I'd jump on this too, if it had a 35mm lens. It seems to be Ricoh's tradition to go to 28 for the GR - Maybe they'll revise to a 35 model in the lineup later on...

0 upvotes

Didn't HCB use 50mm, or am I mistaken?

0 upvotes

I agree! 80% of everything I shoot sits between 35 and 50mmEq focal lengths, even when using a zoom. For street it would be more like 95%

0 upvotes

Cropping is your friend

0 upvotes

Hi Guys, thanks for the comprehensive preview.

I have been a gr fan for some time as my go everywhere camera. My others are leica m's.

I have a question on fps. On my other ricohs I have a burst similar to the specs of the new gr, 4fps, but the camera then locks for about 4-5 secs as it writes and prosseses. When it is on single frame (my preffered choice) I can only do approx a frame a sec or so. With the new camera can one take a fairly steady 1-2 fps for a few frames before the camera locks/ the buffer is hit?

Thanks,

0 upvotes

Back in the day I had a GR1 film camera and loved it. In fact, I still have it. This looks very similar.

But it is just another me-too in an increasingly crowded field.

Too bad- whoever is first with an eyelevel finder in a small size wins.

And I don't buy the common wisdom here- that it would have to be so much larger to accommodate said finder. Just a few years ago eye level finders were more common in such point and shoots.

The Canon SD1200- a much smaller camera, had a tiny zooming eyelevel optical finder. Even simpler if you don't have to zoom.

The aforesaid GR1 had an optical finder- plus an entire film transport mechanism, plus electronics, plus collapsing lens.

I dispute there is a technical obstacle. I aver that the vendors have rather a price point obstacle.

First one to take the dip in the small form factor wins.

Comment edited 43 seconds after posting

1 upvote

Viewfinder limits the size of the back LCD. Either make the LCD smaller or make the camera taller. Personally, for a P & S, I prefer no viewfinder at all.

0 upvotes

So, Richard, the question everyone is dying to know the answer to - or at least half a dozen of us: how do you change snap focus distance? Is it the quick and easy way like the GRD3 and GXR where you hold down one button and turn the front dial? Or is it the horrible way they switched to with the GRD4 where you have to change it in the menus? This is actually pretty critical for those of us who use snap focus a lot. The GRD4 was a total fail in this regard while the previous models were great.

0 upvotes

If this is so important to you, why not use full-press snap mode or assign snap mode to one of the Fn buttons?

Comment edited 15 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

The question isn't how to GET TO snap focus, but how to change the snap distance. On the GRD3 and GXR, you held down one rear button and turned the front dial and it would scroll through the snap distances. On the GRD4, you actually had to go into the menus to change the snap distance. The only workaround was using the "MY" custom settings on the mode dial for different distances. HUGE difference if you use snap focus a lot. I use it almost exclusively, just occasionally using auto-focus...

0 upvotes

Not so. The missing top-level snap distance setting was addressed by Ricoh more than a year ago by this firmware update: http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/02/23/Ricoh-GRD-IV-firmware
Ricoh is known to listen to and act on customer feedback.

0 upvotes

I suppose making the snap distance one of the adjustments accessible via the "ADJ" rocker switch would be better than nothing. I still don't know why they changed from the GRD3 and GXR method, which couldn't have been quicker or easier.

0 upvotes

It makes me sad that the GR uses the 12-bit ADC exmor rather than the 14-bit one. Other than that it looks like a too-good-to-be-true camera. Very sharp lens! Love the new test scene, btw.

0 upvotes

Is it 35mm thick including the lens protrusion/grip? If so, it'd be the same dimensions as the GR1 film compact, which would make it the first TRULY pants-pocketable APS-C compact!

0 upvotes

TRULY pants? That's not a good thing for a pocketable camera to be in the UK LOL!

:-)

Comment edited 25 seconds after posting

0 upvotes

No manual controls in video?
Sad, pass on. Otherwise perfect.

0 upvotes

Oh yeah, a mono mike.

0 upvotes

It has stereo mike.

1 upvote

This is a photographer's tool. If you want a camera that thinks its a camcorder buy a GH-3, 7D, 5dmk3, etc and be happy. Without optical stabilization this camera would be a poor choice for video anyways.

1 upvote

The images quality comparison with the A on page 5 is impressive.
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/ricoh-gr/5
Image corner quality at f2.8 on the A is just wrong, when the GR looks clean and sharp.
And the GR cost cheaper than the A ?
Seriously, who wants to buy a Nikon a after seeing that ?

8 upvotes

Did you actually open the two files on separate tabs and look, for example, at the playing cards on the upper right or the center resolution?

4 upvotes

Marike6,

There are obvious, huge flaws in the Nikon A in the corners, which was (ahem...) pointed out to you repeatedly on the Nikon A thread. The flaws are disturbing in the context of a wide lens, because people buy a wide angle of view precisely to capture out to the edges of the frame.

Why would anybody in their right mind ignore those flaws, as you seem to be doing, in order to direct their attention to some cherry-picked part of the image where the Nikon A performs slightly better?

It's like saying, "Sure, my car doesn't start, and yours runs well, but have you seen how awesome my air conditioning is?"

I mean, people are going to focus on the big stuff and ignore the little stuff, know what I mean?

Have a nice day.

5 upvotes

Good to see Ricoh fighting back. Good to see direct competition.

6 upvotes

Does Ricoh GR support USB charging? I love this feature on Sony RX100.

0 upvotes

Yes, it does.

1 upvote

Why do you only compare this camera to the Nikon? Isn't for example the DP1 merrill a better quality camera in terms of IQ? And it's also priced at 800$.

0 upvotes

Because we don't have a DP1 Merrill (though have requested one).

4 upvotes

Don't you buy the cameras you review? I thought this s critical to avoid vendor-selected samples to be tested...

1 upvote

yeah, well - might be nice to mention it at least. Also the X100 with the wideangle converter might be an option.

0 upvotes

The DP1 AF is very slow. And the high ISO of the DP1 is bad.

0 upvotes

How close does the lens focus? I haven't seen that mentioned anywhere.
(The GRDs are quite useful for certain kinds of macro work, but retaining that with much larger sensor would not be easy.)

0 upvotes

Its like 30cm or something. Macro is much harder on a larger sensor. If that's something that's really important the mx-1 will focus down to the front element practically.

0 upvotes

Richard,
Is there a protective shutter that closes over the lens when power is off? or a lens cap? I don't see any in the pics and am just wondering..

CZR

0 upvotes

It has a protective shutter cover.

0 upvotes

not sure if it's the angle or just me. I see so much distortion with the buildings in the sample images, which they don't stand straight up or tilted so much. but the resolution is nice and clear.

0 upvotes

It's due to the camera angle. The camera's pointing upwards slightly so the verticals converge.

0 upvotes

Why, oh why didn't they make it possible so that the Adj. dial can be used as an APERTURE dial? I find it so much more ergonomic than a "index finger" dial.

Of course an aperture ring beats both. Can the ring I see around the lens be repurposed?

0 upvotes

It's not a ring around the lens - it's a removable cover for the bayonet (to which an optional adapter can be mounted).

0 upvotes

Oh too bad. Thanks for the clarification.

0 upvotes

Nice looking camera. For the same price I'd probably go for the Canon G1X with swivel screen and more versatile lens.

0 upvotes

and you would end up with a slower, softer lens, a smaller sensor with worse noise performance and an AA filter to blur the remaining fine detail away. less resolution too. but hey if that makes you happy.

1 upvote

Does everyone else read the review with Richard's accent?

3 upvotes

what s his accent? Irish?

0 upvotes

Richard doesn't have an accent, he speaks the proper Queen's English. I'm from New York if you want to talk accents (he types as he sips his caw-fee).

2 upvotes

minimum shutter speed 1/300 sec ? There must be mistake.

0 upvotes

300 sec - it should be fixed now.

0 upvotes

Total comments: 267