GXR M-Mount and Leica M EV1 – my impressions

[Aldarin]

I’ve been using the Ricoh GXR with the M-Mount module for years, and recently had the chance to try the Leica M with the EV1. The Leica has the better viewfinder and the modern sensor, no question. But the GXR still holds its own in some important ways.

The Leica’s EVF is clean and easy to view through, but the GXR’s articulated finder is simply more practical. Being able to tilt it makes shooting from different angles much more enjoyable.

The Leica’s 60MP sensor is impressive on paper. But without IBIS, it’s hard to actually make use of all that resolution when shooting handheld. Meanwhile, the GXR’s 12MP sensor is obviously dated, but the colors it produces are still very pleasing, which can matter more than the pixel count in real use.

Where the GXR really stands out for me is manual focusing. The inverted focus peaking on the GXR is still one of the most effective implementations I’ve used. Leica’s focus assist feels more limited by comparison — especially when you look at what some modern systems (like Nikon’s) can do today.

I’m not claiming the GXR is the stronger camera overall. But when it comes to handling and manual focus operation, it still offers some practical advantages that are worth noting — even against something as current as the Leica M EV1.


Aldarin

 

[Tom Caldwell]

I’ve been using the Ricoh GXR with the M-Mount module for years, and recently had the chance to try the Leica M with the EV1. The Leica has the better viewfinder and the modern sensor, no question. But the GXR still holds its own in some important ways.

The Leica’s EVF is clean and easy to view through, but the GXR’s articulated finder is simply more practical. Being able to tilt it makes shooting from different angles much more enjoyable.

The Leica’s 60MP sensor is impressive on paper. But without IBIS, it’s hard to actually make use of all that resolution when shooting handheld. Meanwhile, the GXR’s 12MP sensor is obviously dated, but the colors it produces are still very pleasing, which can matter more than the pixel count in real use.

Where the GXR really stands out for me is manual focusing. The inverted focus peaking on the GXR is still one of the most effective implementations I’ve used. Leica’s focus assist feels more limited by comparison — especially when you look at what some modern systems (like Nikon’s) can do today.

I’m not claiming the GXR is the stronger camera overall. But when it comes to handling and manual focus operation, it still offers some practical advantages that are worth noting — even against something as current as the Leica M EV1.

Aldarin

It just goes to show how standout the GXR-M was in its day so many years ago. Designed from the ground up as a MF camera body not only was this camera capable of mounting almost every LTM and M mount lens made but it had a metal leaf shutter specifically designed for it that defaulted closed. Add firmware designed specifically to enhance the manual focus experience. Mode2 focus peaking now disappeared from the GRIV made manual focus very fast once fully understood and well practiced.

The GXR-M was single-handedly responsible for the proliferation of MF adapters of many mount systems to LM in my lived experience. When I was one of the first off he ranks owner of a GXR-M such adapters were like hens teeth as no Leica owner would have ever considered using anything but LTM or LM mount lenses. Within months of the GXR-M launch a great variety of adapters to LM were suddenly available. Not a bad tribute to a camera body/module type that somehow otherwise did not set the digital camera world on fire.

Less well known was that the 12mp aps-c sensor was a little late to the party* but was apparently made with micro-lenses to assist lens protrusions close to the sensor.

The evf was not brilliant but at leat existed. More often left at home because it did not "bag" well if packed mounted on the camera body. It would have been far nicer in a moulded shaped smooth to top plate shape that did not catch up when the camera was unpacked. I myself could have lived much better with a non-articulating version that seemed to be part of the body and was not going to be pulled over the end of its ratchet. This did not happen to me but I erred more in not having mine with me as it was not mounted.

Considering that the GXR modules fitted seamlessly to the standard GXR camera back so that the join was effectively "invisible" surely Ricoh could have made the clip on evf seem like an integral part of the camera body as well?

I did long for an updated GXR back with built in useable evf - but it was not to happen.

Compared to the new Leica M EV1 the second hand GXR-M of today must be huge good value.

* By the time the GXR-M mount module hit the streets with its modified 12mp aps-c sensor Sony was already selling NEX bodies with their 16mp aps-c sensor.

 

[Aldarin]

The GXR is a very well thought-out system. Ricoh put real work into how it handles and how the manual focus support works. That’s something I don’t really see in the Leica M EV1. These two cameras are basically the only EVF cameras that were designed from the start for manual lenses. And if that’s the goal, then the focus assist features are the key part of the camera. Leica could have done more here.

It’s also interesting that only two companies have really gone into this niche. With the huge number of manual lenses being bought and sold today, there’s clearly a market for a camera that is built around manual focus.


Aldarin

 

[Tom Caldwell]

The GXR is a very well thought-out system. Ricoh put real work into how it handles and how the manual focus support works. That’s something I don’t really see in the Leica M EV1. These two cameras are basically the only EVF cameras that were designed from the start for manual lenses. And if that’s the goal, then the focus assist features are the key part of the camera. Leica could have done more here.

It’s also interesting that only two companies have really gone into this niche. With the huge number of manual lenses being bought and sold today, there’s clearly a market for a camera that is built around manual focus.

Aldarin

I am sorry to relate that I think that the vast amount of users of photographic equipment prefer automatic focus. Hence the extreme efforts being made to make automatic focus even easier. (Subject recognition, etc)

Consider that almost all cameras treat manual focus as an accessory function and so few of them have more than the a feature box tick for such manual focus aids as focus peaking.

That Mode2 type focus peaking was not emulated by any company other than Ricoh and has in fact been dropped as a feature by the GRIV. Not that focus peaking MF was really that useful for the GR series. (But why keep Mode1 and forget the brilliant Mode2?)

In fact the rough and ready snap focus function "auto focus" compensates the GR largely for the lack of a focus ring on its lens. Snap focus after all is just a version of "zone focus" by another name.

To all intents and purposes the memory of the GXR-M is almost dead on the Ricoh forum. But I am sure that there is still odd user here that still remembers them .... and perhaps even the GRD (type).

Ricoh also made a number of interesting other modules for the GXR camera back* but was roundly criticised by the fact that its smaller sensor modules were too large and the fact that each module "wasted a sensor".

* Considering how much the fact that versions of the GRIII were made with different fixed focal length lenses it is surprising that the multiple module types of the GXR have now effectively been forgotten.

 

[Abbazz]

The GXR is a very well thought-out system. Ricoh put real work into how it handles and how the manual focus support works. That’s something I don’t really see in the Leica M EV1. These two cameras are basically the only EVF cameras that were designed from the start for manual lenses. And if that’s the goal, then the focus assist features are the key part of the camera. Leica could have done more here.

It’s also interesting that only two companies have really gone into this niche. With the huge number of manual lenses being bought and sold today, there’s clearly a market for a camera that is built around manual focus.

Aldarin

I am sorry to relate that I think that the vast amount of users of photographic equipment prefer automatic focus. Hence the extreme efforts being made to make automatic focus even easier. (Subject recognition, etc)

Consider that almost all cameras treat manual focus as an accessory function and so few of them have more than the a feature box tick for such manual focus aids as focus peaking.

That Mode2 type focus peaking was not emulated by any company other than Ricoh and has in fact been dropped as a feature by the GRIV. Not that focus peaking MF was really that useful for the GR series. (But why keep Mode1 and forget the brilliant Mode2?)

In fact the rough and ready snap focus function "auto focus" compensates the GR largely for the lack of a focus ring on its lens. Snap focus after all is just a version of "zone focus" by another name.

To all intents and purposes the memory of the GXR-M is almost dead on the Ricoh forum. But I am sure that there is still odd user here that still remembers them .... and perhaps even the GRD (type).

I'm still very fond of the GXR-M and use it regularly. With a Voigtländer Color Skopar 21mm f/4 on the camera (and a Voigtländer 12mm F/5.6 Ultra Wide Heliar -the LTM version- in one pocket as well as a 58mm F/2.0 Takumar -the Pentax Sonnar- in M42 in the other pocket) it is still a very capable compact kit.

Ricoh also made a number of interesting other modules for the GXR camera back* but was roundly criticised by the fact that its smaller sensor modules were too large and the fact that each module "wasted a sensor".

I love the P10 module. Small sensor but very capable of delivering surprisingly good results:

Cheers!

Abbazz

 

[Tom Caldwell]

Is alive and kicking

 

[Aldarin]

I still use it regularly, and compared to the Leica I briefly tried, it’s much handier.

Mode 2 is great, but you have to get used to it. I think the Pentax K-3 Mark III has it too. I can see why they removed Mode 2 from the Ricoh GR — that camera doesn’t really need it.

It would be nice if Ricoh brought back something like the GXR. The system is well designed and wouldn’t need much change. But that probably won’t happen

Aldarin

 

[Abbazz]

I still use it regularly, and compared to the Leica I briefly tried, it’s much handier.

Mode 2 is great, but you have to get used to it. I think the Pentax K-3 Mark III has it too. I can see why they removed Mode 2 from the Ricoh GR — that camera doesn’t really need it.

I prefer using the magnified view mode with the additional EVF.

It would be nice if Ricoh brought back something like the GXR. The system is well designed and wouldn’t need much change. But that probably won’t happen

Great picture with beautiful colors, what lens did you use?



Cheers!

Abbazz

 

[Aldarin]

I think it was the Voigtländer Nokton 35/1.4. But could also be my Minolta 135/3,5. I don't remember anymore.

Aldarin

 

[Tom Caldwell]

They could have kept the modules and just made a new ubiquitous back with a good evf built in and a PK mount module. A M4/3 module would also have added another wide range of lenses for use.

The file recording on the GXR was/is far too slow and a faster recording speed would have been useful.

What did we get? The K-01 and the Pentax Q .... consigned to museums and other dustbins of history.

 

[Abbazz]

They could have kept the modules and just made a new ubiquitous back with a good evf built in and a PK mount module. A M4/3 module would also have added another wide range of lenses for use.

Dear Tom,

I agree about keeping the modules (we don't need more megapixels) and adding a new back with a good buit-in EVF. As for the PK and M4/3 modules, I doubt they would have been so useful. It's quite easy to use a Pentax K to Leica M adapter in order to mount Pentax lenses on the GXR-M. As for the M4/3 lenses, Ricoh is not a member of the M4/3 alliance and doesn't seem to have any interest in joining the group. And the Panasonic GM5 does the job beautifully in an even smaller form factor.., ;-)

On the other hand, a Q module with an 1/1.7" sensor and a Pentax Q mount would have been very useful in my view. A Pentax Q with an EVF is really something I would have bought immediately!

The file recording on the GXR was/is far too slow and a faster recording speed would have been useful.

Or at least an improved buffer.

What did we get? The K-01 and the Pentax Q .... consigned to museums and other dustbins of history.

The K-01 was a magistral failure but I don't agree about the Pentax Q. It's a great system built around a small sensor.

Cheers!

Abbazz

 

[Sarah F]

I still use my GXR but I was thinking, only last week actually, that I should upgrade.

Sadly, apart from going the Leica M route, there is nothing out there that would match the compact size and cool features of the GXR.
Thankfully I own two, so I should be good to go for a while...

 

[Tom Caldwell]

I still use my GXR but I was thinking, only last week actually, that I should upgrade.

Sadly, apart from going the Leica M route, there is nothing out there that would match the compact size and cool features of the GXR.
Thankfully I own two, so I should be good to go for a while...

I have a few GXR bodies and all the modules - bought to make sure that I had plenty of this historic camera type. But sadly, perhaps, I found the tiny GM5 which also had a usable built in evf as well. Then the GX7 was a logical extension being much the same size as the GXR.

Today I still use my collection of GM5 camera bodies which are kept fresh by reliably keeping on working despite also never having been updated. Why must all those that find charm in some exclusive style cameras be bound to be left holding something left of the shelf (so as to speak).

These days the best alternative to the GXR seems to be the simple, "get it done", very affordable Panasonic G100D with a very capable IBIS-less 20mp 4/3 sensor and a magnificent evf built in. Adapting lenses? Sure ..... which ones do you need?