Why bother for a m4/3 when you can get a GXR ?

[Aex]

Hello Thom

This one is easy . a large wide angle ( 24 to 28mm) lens and a portrait lens ( like between 40 to 45) with at least a 2.0 aperture

I mean these are usually two basic lenses for landscape and portrait , which are two of the most common subjects for entry and intermediate camera users
Harold

--
http://www.harold-glit.com
http://www.modelmayhem.com/haroldglit

Interesting. Does that makes me a non-entry non-intermediate camera user or an uncommon entry camera user? Cuz my fav is close up/macro.

--
=============================
My flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/testdasi/

 

[Harold66]

Interesting. Does that makes me a non-entry non-intermediate camera user or an uncommon entry camera user? Cuz my fav is close up/macro.

--
=

Let's not twist my words. I am just saying that every brand has such lenses on its catalog and Neither olympus or Panasonic do at the present time
( and yes , there is a 2.8/14mm Panasonic coming some time in 2010)
Harold
--
http://www.harold-glit.com
http://www.modelmayhem.com/haroldglit

 

[kevinparis]

past 100 years was probably an overstatement... but i happily use lenses from nikon, Olympus OM, Pentax Contax, Leica R, Leica M and Zeiss M

and for me they work .. some better than others... wides not as good as standard to long...

GXR offers one lens at the moment and no actual promise for the future

K
--
if you really must see my photos then try
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kevinparis2007/

 

[Harold66]

The GXR is really no different than a fixed lens point and shoot. Providing you're OK buying a new camera each time you want a different lens it's OK, but as a system it ensures that the investment you make in lenses will never keep pace with sensor advances.

To my mind the GXR is not a camera system, it is a series of cameras with a shared card holder and battery compartment. It's hard to think of something less relevant to what I want from photographic equipment.

Hello Kevin
I have heard that point several times and it never made sense

If you are of the kind of the person who always need to get the latest sensor ( I am not and most photographers are not ) , what's the difference between changing camera versus changing lens
it's like the glass half empty and half full
Harold
--
http://www.harold-glit.com
http://www.modelmayhem.com/haroldglit

 

[Teski]

That really is the point. Last 100 years? No...Last 20 - 30 years of lenses...Many, if not most. m4/3 is impressive in it's potential.

The GXR is revolutionary for sure...Usable in my world? Not that I see at this point.

--
Thanks,

Teski
http://www.tedescophotography.com

 

[Teski]

You choose to answer the one you say is easy, but don't address the other points?

--
Thanks,

Teski
http://www.tedescophotography.com

 

[Harold66]

you are not getting my point
it's not about the m4/3 system being "bad"
it's about it not developing towards its full potential
I can understand why it chosed to address first the entry user

I am just surprised and disappointed that instead of having Olympus pursue other target in this standard, they would rather to play catch-up with panasonic on their existing products
Harold
--
http://www.harold-glit.com
http://www.modelmayhem.com/haroldglit

 

[jiayaw]

the ricoh system gives you aps-c sensor with the prime lens, but what about the zoom? it is a sad point and shoot sensor... which you can get already with an LX3 or a canon S90, therefor theoretically, the image quality from the zoom lens is not gonna be as great. As for the Ricoh having more modules, they only have two right now, and those 2 does not cover everything while m4/3 covers from small number of primes, to wide zoom, ultra wide zoom, ultra zoom, and soon with panasonic's offering a 70-300 telephoto... and plus, with an adapter, also 4/3 lenses can be used if ultiamte image quality is required and you don't mind the lens size.... to me... this is a plus over the GXR system. Not to mention your lenses woudl probably hold value longer than the modules from the Ricoh system
--



http://jiayaw.smugmug.com
Yoko Dam

 

[Anfy]

who are you talking about ? not me I hope
Harold

If I say no will you give the password for the "private galleries" of your beautiful site?

Seriously, Harold, I think that it is absolutely senseless to start a thread saying more or less "I don't care about system X because system Y is better", in particular today where a micro 4/3 or a Ricoh GX3, or for what it matters, a Canon G10 or G11 or Panasonic LX3 (not to count any single entry dSlr kit) are capable of producing in right hands (as yours!) stunning pictures.
Some of the best pictures I ever did were shot via an "old" Sony R1.

But I remember well the true ancient times when things were much more uncomplicated, in the bag there was a Nikon FM with a 28mm, any 50mm, some low-cost Nikon-E tele zoom, a 100 ASA (color) and 125 ASA (b/w) film, and life was beautiful. Maybe I am becoming old already!

BTW I can still use almost any Nikon lens with any micro 4/3 camera - but that is incidental.

Ciao!!!

... is to see such a good photographer acting like a fanboy.

Ciao!

--
Me a silly guy

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1041&message=32483228

--
http://www.harold-glit.com
http://www.modelmayhem.com/haroldglit

--
Me a silly guy

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1041&message=32483228

 

[kevinparis]

harold

agree that olympus may not have been as bold as we would all wish... but we do live in financially awkward times... and perhaps Olympus are playing a long game - establishing the standard, developing the market that offer the best return.

truth is that probably a large percentage of these or indeed any other cameras are sold not to people like us.

The GXR wil appeal to many people... but as it stands a the moment it is all potential... The 50mm seems a fine lens... but not enough for me to buy into a very restricted system with no clear road map

you are not getting my point
it's not about the m4/3 system being "bad"
it's about it not developing towards its full potential
I can understand why it chosed to address first the entry user

I am just surprised and disappointed that instead of having Olympus pursue other target in this standard, they would rather to play catch-up with panasonic on their existing products
Harold
--
http://www.harold-glit.com
http://www.modelmayhem.com/haroldglit

--
if you really must see my photos then try
http://www.flickr.com/photos/kevinparis2007/

 

[don m]

--
Birds: http://www.pbase.com/dmichael/birds
Flowers: http://www.pbase.com/dmichael/flowers

 

[Harold66]

Thom Hogan wrote:
y

More modular system

What does that modularity buy you versus lose you? It buys you sensor flexibility at the expense of lens flexibility. At a very high expense.

Thom
One of the thing I meant about modularity is about how one view the subject

When you are talking about a reflex , lots of it is said when you look through the prism finder

with m4/3 cameras , this is not an option so one has to look at how one compose and focus on its subjects
There are 3 ways to frame the subject
Using the back LCD ( my least favorite one)
Using a EVF ( built in or not)
Using an external OVF

so now let's look at simple facts
The GXR offers from the start the 3 options .

1/ It comes with a great EVF for which there is NO equivalent at either Oly or Pana until next year when the EP2 becomes available

2/ The LCD of the Ricoh is significantly better than all of the pansonic models and waaayyy better than the one from the Olympuses ( including the coming EP2)

3/ the positioning of the hotshoe on the GXR associated with the step zoom makes it easy to find and use Ricoh and third party viewfinders .

the Olympus has only one single lens to use a OVF and the G1 and Gh1 cannot really use the IVF because of the hotshoe positioning

For me , composing is one of the most significant criteria when to choose a camera
so when you look at the composing options with any of the m4/3 models

and you add the lack of single focal lenghts , it makes it a rather disappointing offer
despite the huge potential

I am confident that in a year from now , Ricoh will have more single focal length options that both Brands of the 4/3 have after more than a year on the market

I am fully aware that these limitations may not be problematic for a lot of people here and that's good. I am not trying to have anyone switch over

I am just saying that there is going to be more interesting options for coat pocket cameras outside the m4/3 arena
Harold
--
http://www.harold-glit.com
http://www.modelmayhem.com/haroldglit

 

[Harold66]

who are you talking about ? not me I hope
Harold

If I say no will you give the password for the "private galleries" of your beautiful site?

This is a good one , it made me laugh. At least , I can tell you have a good senseof humor even if you don't see my point

Seriously, Harold, I think that it is absolutely senseless to start a thread saying more or less "I don't care about system X because system Y is better",

This was hardly my point

I was just merely hinting at the fact that Ricoh is introducing from the start a camera with a lens that seems really up to the par based on some samples ( I am willing to bet that final test will confirm that) when Olympus has only brought in a 6 monthes period one single focal length which is getting very " average " reviews to say the least and seeing Olympus not planning to bring more for almost another year

I am not sure why this would make me a "fanboy" but if it is what you want to call me, fine.

Some of the best pictures I ever did were shot via an "old" Sony R1.

I loved this camera. I would love to see a Sony R2

Harold

--
http://www.harold-glit.com
http://www.modelmayhem.com/haroldglit

--
Me a silly guy

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1041&message=32483228

--
http://www.harold-glit.com
http://www.modelmayhem.com/haroldglit

 

[Anfy]

... being a portrait shooter I too feel the lacking of a true lens of this kind in the micro 4/3 lineup.

After considering: a 2,0x teleconverter for the Panasonic 20mm f/1.7, the Olympus m.Zuiko 14-42mm f/3.5-5.6, a Nikon 45mm f/2.8 Pancake, a CV 40mm f/1.4 Nokton, a CV 40mm f/2 Ultron or the 58mm f/1.4 Nokton, some other 35-50mms CV, a Contax Zeiss G 45mm f/2 Planar, unfortunately not being able to afford (even in my dreams) a Leica, I went for some old Pentax Auto 110 lenses, all "fixed aperture" at f/2,8 to date, which at least should be of good optical quality and possess the big big advantage of being very tiny.

But an Olympus/Panasonic or even Samyang 40-50mm f/1.4 with native micro 4/3 mount would be THE lens.

Ciao!!!

who are you talking about ? not me I hope
Harold

If I say no will you give the password for the "private galleries" of your beautiful site?

This is a good one , it made me laugh. At least , I can tell you have a good senseof humor even if you don't see my point

Seriously, Harold, I think that it is absolutely senseless to start a thread saying more or less "I don't care about system X because system Y is better",

This was hardly my point

I was just merely hinting at the fact that Ricoh is introducing from the start a camera with a lens that seems really up to the par based on some samples ( I am willing to bet that final test will confirm that) when Olympus has only brought in a 6 monthes period one single focal length which is getting very " average " reviews to say the least and seeing Olympus not planning to bring more for almost another year

I am not sure why this would make me a "fanboy" but if it is what you want to call me, fine.

Some of the best pictures I ever did were shot via an "old" Sony R1.

I loved this camera. I would love to see a Sony R2

Harold

--
http://www.harold-glit.com
http://www.modelmayhem.com/haroldglit

--
Me a silly guy

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1041&message=32483228

--
http://www.harold-glit.com
http://www.modelmayhem.com/haroldglit

--
Me a silly guy

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1041&message=32483228

 

[nick_webster]

Oh, you must mean the one you have to buy separately, adding a ( probably large ) cost to the already expensive system

Why would you need an external finder on the G1 or GH1 - they both have an excellent EVF built in ? If you don't want to use that then they have a swivelling LCD which will composition a lot easier than the fixed one on the Ricoh

Since you have started several threads in both the Oly SLR and Micro 4/3s fora about the lack of single focal lengths in each system I'm really curious how you find the Ricoh offering - which has 1 lens with a decent sized sensor - so wonderful. I'll be prepared to bet you a large sum of money that this time next year the 4/3s system will still have more single focal length lenses than the Ricoh.

If you don't want people to switch or make their own minds up why did you start a thread asking why bother with micro 4/3s ?

Why didn't you answer my first post - will the Ricoh system fit any of my MF lenses ?

Not sure why you start these threads as you have made up your mind already and ignore any posts that show that other people have different wants and needs.

Not sure if I've ever said so in my various replies to you but your work is stunning. Stick to taking great pictures instead of starting threads about how nobody is making the camera you want. I'm sure that the Ricoh system will disappoint you in a couple of months time and then you'll have to find another "perfect" camera

Nick

 

[Thom Hogan]

This one is easy . a large wide angle ( 24 to 28mm) lens and a portrait lens ( like between 40 to 45) with at least a 2.0 aperture

Neither of which are available on a GXR ;~). And I wouldn't put "portrait" at 40-45mm equivalent, so you're either mixing your focal length references or confused.

I mean these are usually two basic lenses for landscape and portrait , which are two of the most common subjects for entry and intermediate camera users

Actually, entry and intermediate camera users tend to use longer "wide" and "telephoto" lenses. They tend to stand too far from their subjects, thus they tend to pick 36mm and 100mm as their choices.

--
Thom Hogan
author, Complete Guides to Nikon bodies (21 and counting)
http://www.bythom.com

 

[Thom Hogan]

Let's not twist my words. I am just saying that every brand has such lenses on its catalog and Neither olympus or Panasonic do at the present time

Nor does Ricoh.

--
Thom Hogan
author, Complete Guides to Nikon bodies (21 and counting)
http://www.bythom.com

 

[Thom Hogan]

with m4/3 cameras , this is not an option so one has to look at how one compose and focus on its subjects
There are 3 ways to frame the subject
Using the back LCD ( my least favorite one)
Using a EVF ( built in or not)
Using an external OVF

so now let's look at simple facts
The GXR offers from the start the 3 options .

Funny. I've got all three options on my m4/3 cameras. That's because it's a system, not a single maker's proprietary set of items.

1/ It comes with a great EVF for which there is NO equivalent at either Oly or Pana until next year when the EP2 becomes available

2/ The LCD of the Ricoh is significantly better than all of the pansonic models and waaayyy better than the one from the Olympuses ( including the coming EP2)

3/ the positioning of the hotshoe on the GXR associated with the step zoom makes it easy to find and use Ricoh and third party viewfinders.

Great. So I have this beautiful view of what? A small sensor 24-72mm zoom, and a 50mm. Neither are what I want. One can argue all day about what the modularity gives you, but all the missing (and expensive) lensors are what keep that modularity from being meaningful to me in any way.

the Olympus has only one single lens to use a OVF and the G1 and Gh1 cannot really use the IVF because of the hotshoe positioning

The G1 and GH1 don't need an OVF, they have a perfectly fine EVF.

For me , composing is one of the most significant criteria

You might look at all the things that I've written about composing over the years. I'll argue over 95% viewfinders. Now, have you seen me say that I'm unable to compose with my m4/3 bodies? Nope. I'd love to have a 922k dot LCD, sure, but I'm not finding it problematic to frame well with E-P1, GF1, or GH1.

when to choose a camera
so when you look at the composing options with any of the m4/3 models

and you add the lack of single focal lenghts , it makes it a rather disappointing offer
despite the huge potential

Here's what I don't understand. You fault m4/3 for all the things that it doesn't have, then you fail to fault the Ricoh GXR for all the things it doesn't have. You're not being logical in your arguments.

I am confident that in a year from now , Ricoh will have more single focal length options that both Brands of the 4/3 have after more than a year on the market

Great. How much would you like to bet? Real money now. Put your wallet where you mouth is. I will. Will you? By the way, Ricoh will need four additional lensors just to make your bet pay off with the currently announced m4/3 lenses (or is it five now, I can't keep track).

I am just saying that there is going to be more interesting options for coat pocket cameras outside the m4/3 arena

No doubt there will be many large sensor compacts introduced in the coming year. In the meantime, I'll keep shooting with my m4/3 cameras. What are you shooting with?

--
Thom Hogan
author, Complete Guides to Nikon bodies (21 and counting)
http://www.bythom.com

 

[Dr Hal]

I had a Ricoh GX100. It was a joy to operate from the standpoint of the menus and the ergonomics of the camera. The IQ was lacking. Before I buy another Ricoh they will have to show the better IQ. MyGF1 has excellent IQ.

 

[Thom Hogan]

I was just merely hinting at the fact that Ricoh is introducing from the start a camera with a lens that seems really up to the par based on some samples ( I am willing to bet that final test will confirm that) when Olympus has only brought in a 6 monthes period one single focal length which is getting very " average " reviews to say the least

It's statements like that which drive me crazy. Basically you're willing to believe the marketing hype from Ricoh over random reviews on the Internet. Moreover, you're doubly willing to just ignore the fact that there are better prime choices available for m4/3 today. Not just one or two, but many.

But the thing that really gets me about your constant mooning over the Ricoh and panning of m4/3 is that you're not actually using either of them. You're basing all your wandering and non-responsive posts on, well, belief in the unknown. Meanwhile, some of us are actually using cameras in the field and capturing some very nice photos (sorry you missed mine on my site, but images are ephemeral on my front page for a reason).

--
Thom Hogan
author, Complete Guides to Nikon bodies (21 and counting)
http://www.bythom.com