Reading mode: Light Dark

Still not satisfied

Go to last post
M

marceloh

Well-known member
Messages
115
Reaction score
0
Location
BR
Hi people...

I don't know if somebody else feels the same... I am still wainting for a little better compact camera to leave my dslr.

Like in the GX100 vs. G9 thread, I think that is still better using my xt with a prime ou fast zoom lens if I want minor size (comparing to G9), ou a minimus IQ (comparing to GX).

GX and GR are perfect conceptions that fit my needs, but I am almost sure that the results will be desapointing to me in some situations. Like you can see in my very very simple site, I do b&w, use film and digital, and do want a little sized camera with the same quality I can get with my old cameras or my dslr.

I think the same I've read other day in this forum... digital noise is not the same that film grain, and the answer that Ricoh's noise is good to pretend film grain is a misconception...

But I am sure that we ll have a good choice very very soon... technology is fast, and maybe this year something relevant ll apear.

Thank you.

--
Marcelo
http://www.marcelosestren.com
 
I know what you're saying Marcelo. I am always torn between my DSLR and my Ricoh GRD....the latter being much more convenient & quiet.

But, I think different P&S's have different characteristics - the GRD has a nicer noise pattern than the GRD II IMHO. When I first got the GRD II, I thought I would sell my GRD; but, I am actually likely going to return my GRD II. The files just appear a bit more 'digital' to me. The RAW writing speed is much improved; but, I still hold to my premise that the basic RAW data out of the GRD is more film-grain like than that of the GRD II. Maybe it's just an unfortunate result of cramming 2 milllion more pixels into the GRD II.

I know there are folks who will say that you can fix the files, because with the GRD II's fast writing, there's no need to shoot anything but RAW. But, whether one shoots RAW or lets the camera process a jpg, it is still the quality of the RAW data to begin with that I feel matters the most.

Take care.

Mark T.
 
I have an Olympus E-1 and a clutch of lenses, a Sony R1, a Fuji s9500 that I mainly use for Infrared photography and of course my GRD1, all these cameras are used when the situation demands it but my GRD1 is my constant companion, I feel naked if it is not in its pouch on my belt, I never use flash and it is often used in low light and unless on the (very)rare occasion I want colour it is permanently set to black and white, as will be testified by many users on this forum its B/W output is the very best, you can put it on colour and convert in PS etc but it is just not the same as the native B/W.

You may not be interested in B/W as I am but the camera is a gem, I have no experience withn the GRD11 so I can't comment.

Also just having a 28mm wide angle lens suits me down to the ground, a legacy from my films days when a 28 prime was my walk about lens.

Three cheers for Ricoh,

Hip Hip Hooray x3

Barrie
 
I'm afraid that as long as camera manufacturers continue to have their testicles firmly clamped in the vice of their pixel-hungry sales & marketing departments, we will never see a quality compact digital camera. Look at the plethora of really good quality film compact cameras with excellent, fast lenses (yashica t4, contax t series, etc) which can, given the right film, produce grainless high-iso images. There are no digital equivalents in this category. Sure, the build quality is there, and the lenses are often very good... but it all falls apart at the sensor, which suffers year after year from further pixel-cramming. We are repeatedly told that one should learn to compromise and accept noise as our friend, but to my mind this is simply giving the camera companies a break that they don't deserve.
 
I agree that there is no perfect compact camera at this point in time but
think of all the special moments you are not capturing by waiting for the

"perfect compact".... Personally I'd rather be able to shoot those photos I see today ...than hope to in the future.
 
I had a look at your site and really like your pictures, at the same time I think you should not discount the GRD I as it will be perfect for this kind of images.

I believe it can deliver what you look for and you won't be disatisfied with the results. Obviously you're the only one who can really answer this but you should have a look at the GRD I, especially at the low price you can get it now.

If you shoot b&w only then you don't even need to worry about RAW as the jpg processing in the GRD is great for b&w images.

--
http://picasaweb.google.com/Cristian.Sorega
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cristiansorega
 
I forgot to mention also Marcelo - your images are fantastic....just beautiful.

And, I agree with my GRD-peers comments above - the GRD's native B&W output is great. Here are two ISO 1600 shots w/o pp, followed by an ISO 64 color shot pp to B&W - all from the GRD:







This last image is hanging on my wall as an 11x14" print on Hahnemuhle fine art pearl paper - it looks as good as any traditional print I've seen (no bragging intended....; - ) ).

Take care.

Mark T.
 
Mark Turney said:
...
...the GRD
has a nicer noise pattern than the GRD II IMHO. When I first got the
GRD II, I thought I would sell my GRD; but, I am actually likely
going to return my GRD II. The files just appear a bit more 'digital'
to me.
Click to expand...
Mark, that was my initial reaction but the more I work with the GRD2 files, the more I like it. I like it a lot at ISO 400 and and now am beginning to like it at ISO 200 as well. At ISO 800 and 1600, I have no doubt that it is better than the GRD, particularly in that I can get a higher proportion of usable files from it than from the GRD at these speeds. You can see picture at these speeds on page 2 my flickr site at the url under my signature. I certainly don't at all agree with the OP's views.

GRD2 ISO400 (40% crop)



—Mitch/Huahin
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/
 
marceloh said:
But I am sure that we ll have a good choice very very soon...
technology is fast, and maybe this year something relevant ll apear.
Click to expand...
Of all the things I've read, maybe this Kodak idea will be the one to swarm all through cameras first, because it seems so easy to do...

http://www.sci-tech-today.com/news/Kodak-Develops-New-Image-Sensor/story.xhtml?story_id=121000E43MZQ

Basically it appears they've realised that luminance matters most, so that extra no filter pixel will improve luminance information.

That will help a little but of course as mentioned the bloody marketing departments will think it's an opportunity to cram even more pixels in and the quality game goes backwards once more.

Of course all this would be no bother at all if only they would ditch the Bayer RGGB filters and deliver a true B/W camera like Kodak used to have years back. It's mentioned here at....

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/kodak-760m.shtml and that was an expensive one back in maybe 2002, but imagine what a true B/W GRD2 would be like.

Even I would buy one.

Regards............. Guy
 
I know exactly what you mean Marcello. The grain from a film can not be compared with the noise in a digital cam. I saw your work and this I call B&W in the pure way.

You will never have the same results with a Ricoh, simple as that. Even days of PP will not bring you at 50% of what I saw.

I think in approx 2 years we will see other CCD systems, not based on capturing light and measuring a voltage as this is quite a stupid system in fact to do.

The day will come that they will use chemical/electronic CCD systems, than we will be able to start talking about digital cams.
Now, every digital cam is in fact no more than lots of air and advertising.
 
Thank you all for your comments.

I just want to clear something misunderstood. I would like to leave my dslr, but there is no model that attacts me.

I keep going with my dslr and a prime lens or a fast zoom, because I am almost sure that I ll be disapointed with these Ricohs cams results, even more considering their prices (and lots of taxes doubling the cost, here in my country). Besides, I use my old cams with bw film, and have a little Olympus XA for discret photographs. My Xt with an EF 35/2.0 is not so big equipment, and give me good results.

Of course I do my work anyway, wainting for a new relevant model... a cam little better than GRs ou GX, with de LX2 price would be great.

Maybe the Sigma... if that really exists.

--
Marcelo
http://www.marcelosestren.com
http://www.brfoto.com.br
 
Lucridders said:
I know exactly what you mean Marcello. The grain from a film can not
be compared with the noise in a digital cam. I saw your work and this
I call B&W in the pure way.
You will never have the same results with a Ricoh, simple as that.
Even days of PP will not bring you at 50% of what I saw.
I think in approx 2 years we will see other CCD systems, not based on
capturing light and measuring a voltage as this is quite a stupid
system in fact to do.
The day will come that they will use chemical/electronic CCD systems,
than we will be able to start talking about digital cams.
Now, every digital cam is in fact no more than lots of air and
advertising.
Click to expand...
Marcelo, please don't be turned off by reading the above. Lucridders is well-known as an anti-Ricoh troll. If you look at some of his previous postings, you will see that he has spewed such pearls of wisdon as: 'real art is done with canvas and brush', or some such nonsense.

In the end, these cameras are tools. I would back up something that Pavel (of ricohforum.com) alluded to: Be more leary of overly clean images, because that's usually a sign of the camera manufacturer using heavy-handed noise reduction, and thus detroying detail.

Take care.

Mark T.
 
Despite fast technology digital photography will not replace analog photography. It is in my opinion a different form of photography in the same way as 35mm and 120mm. The same for small sensor cameras and dslr's.

It is too expensive to build high quality small sensor cameras. It is a niche market. Just like the former Leica Minilux series, Konica Hexar, Nikon 28 and 35Ti, Contax T and Ricoh GR series (analog). The only serious competitors in the high quality compact cameras are Ricoh, Leica/Panasonic and Canon nowadays as dslr's become increasingly popular. Others departed.

If you are in doubt, do not change. Your work is outstanding. If you still want to use film and you want a good compact camera search for the analog cameras I named above. They are very well build and have excellent fixed lenses.
--
Wouter
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wouter28mm/
 
Mark,

I understand the pros and cons of Ricohs cameras. If I have no digital cam, I certainly would buy one, propably a GR, that costs the same of an entry dslr like xti.

But not worth for me, selling my equipment, expending more money, and buy a Ricoh that has that weakness we already know.

Let's waint for 2008 new models.

thanks

--
Marcelo
http://www.marcelosestren.com
http://www.brfoto.com.br
 
marceloh said:
I have the chance to buy a second hand one:
Click to expand...
I do not know how much this would be in € or US $ but if it's under US 450$ and good condition than get it.

I think you won't be disapointed as long as you do not look for absulutely noisefree images at 100% on screen. You should judge it by printing the images.

If you look at my galleries you can see in the People section some b&w images that are straight out of the camera at different ISOs.

You can always wait till 2009 and longer but there never will be a perfect camera and there are always compromises to make and even with dSLRs.

--
http://picasaweb.google.com/Cristian.Sorega
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cristiansorega
 
But you might be waiting a while!

Their compact does look interesting..so long as its not priced at a daft level.
--



Clint is on holiday! Soon to return! ;-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top