Here's the the original GRD!

Once I got my GRDII, the GRD tended to be left to one side. I had a few ADJ wheel problems and even had the screen pack up on me but, knowing that it is a great camera I had that fixed just recently.

I took the GRD to a party in the pitch dark in a park on the weekend, set her up on automatic and put the flash on and got some of the best pictures I have ever taken. Little to do, all jpeg and sharp, put through Lightroom and a few presets, et voila!
Those of you with the GRD, don't neglect her, she is a gem.....

http://www.flickr.com/photos/88974125@N00/sets/72157622519560988/

Peter
http://www.flickr.com/photos/88974125@N00/

Looks like you all had a great time, nice images.

sweet pics
thanks for sharing!

The shots posted were a revelation to me after a good two years with the GRDII. There was virtually no processing to do, no sharpening or anything with these exposures - all great. I spend ages making jpegs from RAW files and sharpening etc with the GRDII and yet the GRD quality just seems to shine.

Not many people are keen to go backwards technologically but, like when I started recently to shoot with a Rolleiflex and other large format film cameras, after years of digital clarity without much quality, I have found film so much clearer. Perhaps that is what makes the GRD - known for it's film-like quality - seem so exciting even now. I will be using it more and more from now on.

Peter

http://www.flickr.com/photos/88974125@N00/

You are not alone.

I like some of them a lot. The GRDI is a great camera. I have both GRDI & II, and for a while had also been using the I less. While the II has clear usability advantages, and some IQ advantages (e.g. dynamic range), the tonality of the I is superior. This is especially evident in B&W conversions. From what I've seen, the GRDIII doesn't seem to come close in that department either.

Regards.

I am not forgetting my GRDI despite having the GRDIII - it seems simplicity itself compared to the depth available with the 'III'. That makes it enough of a different camera to stay out of the drawer.

When I first had the GRDI I bought the extension tube, hood and wide adapter but they had little use as they inconvenienced the portable nature of the camera.

Now I have tarted my GRDI by installing adapter and hood and will use the wide adapter as well. I know that the wide does work very well with the GRDI because it is mechanically connected. The GRDI now lives in a waterproof box-case and is no longer so portable but it will get use and set up the way it is gets street cred as a mini-dslr. Enhanced when newbies see the images it captures.

Why do we always lust after miniature when the public are still impressed by the sheer size of your kit - even the GRDI is regarded as more impressive decked out with adapter tube and hood when inside the camoflage is just an 'ordinary' GRD.

Golly gosh the adapter tube and hood is no more than designer sunglasses ...

Now is it any good at finding me a young blonde?

... need to dye my hair as well, you say .... well forget it, I will just have to let the black roots grow out agian - sick of silver hair dye ...

--
Tom Caldwell

sizifo said:

From what I've seen, the GRDIII doesn't seem to come close in that department either.

Click to expand...

Um .... is that a challenge? I have not posted any GRDIII images mainly because I regard the camera as greater than I am and it might take me a little longer to fully understand its depths.

However I think I can fairly safely say that those who master the GRDIII will give us some astounding images - just give us some time.

I have a lot of time for the GRDI and will always have it and use it but the GRDIII is the 'I' come of age and is a very serious camera capable of giving great results.

The GRDI was and is great - the GRDIII is a most worthy refinement.

sizifo said:

Regards.

Click to expand...

--
Tom Caldwell

An earring and a couple tattoos in right spots will solve any hair concerns. I am hoping seriously that much of what you post is applicable to GRD II since III is out of budget and I is a broken one with no clue what the cost to fix it. It would seem Ricoh has really lost its way if CRD II is not on an upward slope from I to III.

I hope ... I hope ...
Tom B

The GRD1 IMO makes the best B&W images to date, it has an air reminicent of shooing old B&W film which from what I can tell can't be replicated with the other GRD series or any other ricoh (let alone Fuji, canon, pan, etc) I believe its something to do with blue channel noise in the outboard Amps or something because no other cam with the same sensor such as the Canon S80, Oly SP350, Kodak P880 / C875 or Samsung L85 does it ..

There isn't a lot of detail in GRD1 B&W images but the mushiness isn't Digital looking like it is in the GRD2 or the R / CX series so it prints well. GRD2 owners call it a Myth , that's their loss ! . .. some like the colour output too but personally they just look like they're from a cheap P&S unless converted to B&W ..

the GRD-II just missed full stop to me and I find the GX100 was a far better camera with the same sensor (and a 24mm zoom too) especially if you love JPG (they held off on the NR and produced beautiful colour for this ONE cam so long as you set it up right) - the GRD3 is looking like a great RAW tool from what I've seen (though I find the mushy NR laden JPGs offensive) but it still doesn't do the GRD1 B&W thing, I guess they can't put in a GRD1 B&W emulation mode ..

Just my thoughts on the matter YMMV

--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist

...could I enquire as to the nature of the GRD breakage? It may not be difficult to fix...

TMacaw said:

I am hoping seriously that much of what you post is applicable to GRD II since III is out of budget and I is a broken one with no clue what the cost to fix it. It would seem Ricoh has really lost its way if CRD II is not on an upward slope from I to III.

Click to expand...

Depends what's important to you. The GRD2 was a significant step backwards in terms of JPEG output and autofocus performance, and it trades the rear wheel for a rocker, but it was a step forwards in all other respects. If you come to it knowing you'll have to shoot raw and use AF as little as possible it's a great camera, but if those two aspects bother you then it may be different matter.

--
http://flickr.com/photos/stewartpratt/

Tom Caldwell said:

sizifo said:

From what I've seen, the GRDIII doesn't seem to come close in that department either.

Click to expand...

Um .... is that a challenge? I have not posted any GRDIII images mainly because I regard the camera as greater than I am and it might take me a little longer to fully understand its depths.

However I think I can fairly safely say that those who master the GRDIII will give us some astounding images - just give us some time.

I have a lot of time for the GRDI and will always have it and use it but the GRDIII is the 'I' come of age and is a very serious camera capable of giving great results.

The GRDI was and is great - the GRDIII is a most worthy refinement.

Click to expand...

Tom -- i have and love the original GRD. i then got a GRDII, but never felt quite the same emotional attachment to it -- it was a great tool, but tool it was...

from what little i've seen of images, the GRDIII seems to harken back to the original, with many of the refinements we asked for. whilst i love snap focus (and the ability to quickly change this now), i am mostly interested in how quick the GRDIII focuses. the II was much slower in regards to the original and i am wondering if the speed is back in the III. it seems to be so, from my limited experiment in the camera store -- but i wasn't able to test it in tricky conditions.

any comment?

thank you,
cam

wildeone said:

Tom -- i have and love the original GRD. i then got a GRDII, but never felt quite the same emotional attachment to it -- it was a great tool, but tool it was...

from what little i've seen of images, the GRDIII seems to harken back to the original, with many of the refinements we asked for. whilst i love snap focus (and the ability to quickly change this now), i am mostly interested in how quick the GRDIII focuses. the II was much slower in regards to the original and i am wondering if the speed is back in the III. it seems to be so, from my limited experiment in the camera store -- but i wasn't able to test it in tricky conditions.

any comment?

thank you,
cam

Click to expand...

GRDIII is definitely faster than GRDII and almost as fast as GRDI (bit faster in low contrast scenes and bit slower in high contrast scenes). See the speed measurements I posted here:
http://ricohforum.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=53&t=3043

--
Ricoh Film & Digital Forum
http://www.ricohforum.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/7597032@N05/

Pavel Kudrys said:

GRDIII is definitely faster than GRDII and almost as fast as GRDI (bit faster in low contrast scenes and bit slower in high contrast scenes). See the speed measurements I posted here:
http://ricohforum.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=53&t=3043

--
Ricoh Film & Digital Forum
http://www.ricohforum.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/7597032@N05/

Click to expand...

thank you, Pavel! i should have thought to look there myself (you are such a font of information and i know you know what i'm talking about)... sigh. i'm really trying not to bit on this one as i'm mostly using rangefinders.. still, this keeps on pulling at me -- damn!

Thanks for a really straightforward reply. I may still opt for one if I can find a decent 'buy', and also watching a few GRD 1 possibilities (AdamT's post reinforces the earlier ones).

Tom B

Tom Caldwell said:

sizifo said:

From what I've seen, the GRDIII doesn't seem to come close in that department either.

Click to expand...

Um .... is that a challenge? I have not posted any GRDIII images mainly because I regard the camera as greater than I am and it might take me a little longer to fully understand its depths.

Click to expand...

Definitely not meant as a challenge. I've only played with a few GRDIII DNGS downloaded from the web, and they seemed to behave more like GRDII ones than GRDI. I could easily be wrong.

That sentence does sound a little stronger than what i meant.

I have both the I and II, and the IQ of II is better in some respects/situations (DR, resolution). I use both of them about equally.

There's only something about the tonality in the grdI that is better, by quite a bit. Sort of like cam says, you get attached to the images more, in general. My impression is that this is due to the smaller pixel density. And I also think there is some NR going on in the II even for raw files that wasn't present with the one. Wouter seems to have noticed something similar with the III.

Regards,

Vid

Find a good used GRDI if someone is silly enough to want to sell theirs.

--
Tom Caldwell

sizifo said:

There's only something about the tonality in the grdI that is better, by quite a bit. Sort of like cam says, you get attached to the images more, in general. My impression is that this is due to the smaller pixel density. And I also think there is some NR going on in the II even for raw files that wasn't present with the one. Wouter seems to have noticed something similar with the III.

Click to expand...

i'm intrigued by this too subject too... the GRDII RAWs definitely have NR (even with it turned off) that the original did not. i honestly have not seen or heard anything definitive about whether this is true in the GRDIII RAWs -- though i've seen many moans about it being present in the JPEGs.

is there NR in the GRDIII RAWs? if so, shame on you, Ricoh! bring back the glory days!!!

i adore Wouter and know he has had the GX100 and GX200 but i've always thought the files looked different between the GRDs and the GXs. i wonder if his calling the JPEGs soft on the GRDIII actually has more to do with a lighter NR OFF than his GX200?

and, call me daft, but every time i pick up a new camera, processing RAW seems to take a while to get the proper flow -- even if the manufacturer is the same. i think these issues may be obsolete once some proper profiles are written... at least, i hope so. i still think Ricoh makes the best small sensor cameras out there.

it would just be glorious to have the magic back of the original with all the bells and whistles of the GRDIII... i know, i know, but can't a girl dream?

wildeone said:

Tom Caldwell said:

sizifo said:

From what I've seen, the GRDIII doesn't seem to come close in that department either.

Click to expand...

Um .... is that a challenge? I have not posted any GRDIII images mainly because I regard the camera as greater than I am and it might take me a little longer to fully understand its depths.

However I think I can fairly safely say that those who master the GRDIII will give us some astounding images - just give us some time.

I have a lot of time for the GRDI and will always have it and use it but the GRDIII is the 'I' come of age and is a very serious camera capable of giving great results.

The GRDI was and is great - the GRDIII is a most worthy refinement.

Click to expand...

Tom -- i have and love the original GRD. i then got a GRDII, but never felt quite the same emotional attachment to it -- it was a great tool, but tool it was...

from what little i've seen of images, the GRDIII seems to harken back to the original, with many of the refinements we asked for. whilst i love snap focus (and the ability to quickly change this now), i am mostly interested in how quick the GRDIII focuses. the II was much slower in regards to the original and i am wondering if the speed is back in the III. it seems to be so, from my limited experiment in the camera store -- but i wasn't able to test it in tricky conditions.

any comment?

thank you,
cam

Click to expand...

I have niot really noticed any lack of focus speed on the GRDIII to tell the truth.

There are effectively 1000 & 1 was to focus the GRDIII from variable snap focus to fixed focus to the usual spot and various multi-focus and manual focus as well not to forget that the function button can be used to toggle between auto focus and manual effectively making it a de facto focus lock - very useful and simple, also we have the variable point auto focus which can also do exposure metering if asked. I am sure to have missed something. With all the focussing tools on command just about everything a photographer could want is there - all this in a pint size package with a great deal of other in depth thoughtful camera-mavins tinkering tools make this a camera that has to be explored and learned. It is not for the casual user or the faint hearted.

However compared to the GRDI (I did not get a GRDII) the first is simplicity with good access to functions, you might learn all that there is to know about in the GRDI in a day if you are an experienced photographer, however the GRDIII is a whole new complex ball-game - is this camera deep? You bet it is. I am not up there with the stars but I am a bit of a camera tinkerer and I like to know all the subtle bits. Some weeks later I am still trying to remember all the twitches I can use with the GRDIII to wring out a bit more performance.

It is a great camera but in great thoughtful hand it can be brilliant, it gives you the tools to do better .... I am working on it ...

This is why it is hard to start posting up great GRDIII images as I am sure that I have not yet produced my very best with this camera. The interest is in the journey there - I will put up a notice when I arrive .. (smile).

--
Tom Caldwell