Reading mode: Light Dark

Ricoh GRX + 50 macro

Go to last post
A

Alex WT

Member
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
Location
Milan, IT
I have purchased the GRX after GRD I&II . First of all a real beauty, second and more important the 50mm macro is almost useless due to the sloooooooow and unprecise focusing. Most of the time it does not lock and I have to manual focus. This is not acceptable even if the generated files are superb. I will wait for a firmware upgrade a while, if it will not come soon will try to resell the camera and forget about this project. I suggest not to buy it in this release. All in one I am very disappointed right now.
Things are a little bit better with the A12 module.
 
While I haven't really used the macro capability (not being a macro shooter) I too am concerned with the silence from Ricoh management on the issues others and I have identified on this and the Ricoh forum. I may have passed my 30 day return privilege point while waiting for new firmware. I debated whether to send it back or take a chance and wait to see if Ricoh lives up to their reputation of being responsive to their customers. The problem for me is that I really like the images it produces and the ergonomics of the design. I have not used any camera that was equal to it or better and that includes a long list such as the D90, G1, GF1, EP1, G7, S90, M8, etc.
--
John
Visit my web gallery at:
http://www.barjohn.com/My Photographs/index.html
Comments and critiques welcome.
 
.... I am D70 (a few Nikkors) and GX200 owner and was thinking about D90. Sounds like you prefer GXR. What were your issues with D90? Would a step (or 2) D300s or D700 made any difference?

Tom B
 
barjohn wrote:

I have not used any camera that was equal to it or better and that includes a long list such as the D90, G1, GF1, EP1, G7, S90, M8, etc.
barjohn said:
--
Click to expand...
---------------------------------

I had that experience and I certainly agree with you.

--
monoblocks
 
The D90 is an excellent camera, just too big and bulky to carry around and the wife factor, "You aren't bringing that big thing with us are you?" "People don't like you sticking that in their faces." With the GXR so quiet and discrete, no complaints. I actually like the image produced better, especially the high ISO images but even the lower ISO images show smoother gradations between colors and pixels to my eyes.

To make my earlier post clearer, I was referring to ergonomics but now that I think about it I prefer the IQ too.
--
John
Visit my web gallery at:
http://www.barjohn.com/My Photographs/index.html
Comments and critiques welcome.
 
... my focus is hiking and dslr only works for shorter, moderate dayhikes. GX200 and DP1 are current choices for tougher stuff. Just hoping a 'reasonable' (with lens) size possibility arises and next GXR module(s) may be the answer.

Thanks and regards,
Tom B
 
Below are comparison shots of the same area (though they were taken at different dates) showing a comparison of the raw files with no PP except the M8 file had the WB adjusted)

The M8 had a Leica 28mm f2.8 Asph lens taken at ISO 160, f4.5 1/500 and the GXR-A12 was at ISO 200 f4.5 1/320. One is at 50% and the other at 100% both are screen shots of comparison images in LR 3 beta I chose trees because leaf patterns are among the hardest things to reproduce with clarity and detail. I can tell you that the GXR was better as seen on my monitor (calibrated 24" iMac) than the M8.









--
John
Visit my web gallery at:
http://www.barjohn.com/My Photographs/index.html
Comments and critiques welcome.
 
... A12 is more and more interesting when total GXR package cost gets discounted (for me) by cost of a 'quality' D70 Macro. 50mm also becomes more positive given Nikkor 60 Macro is really 90mm FOV ... thus a bit narrow. Seems more to like as time passes and 'hit-n-run' critics move on.

Thanks,
Tom B
 
hello everyone
Another post of the slow autofocus . At this point ; slow compared to what ?
I have to assume that you are talking compared to a DSLR , yes ?

I ask because , while the GXR AF is slow in dark situations ( maybe because I turned off the focus aid) and in macro mode, I don't find it that slow in normal light COMPARED to other compact camera using contrast AF
I know that the GF1 is supposed to be very fast for a compact
but I am OK with the Ricoh AF in most NORMAL situations

??
Harold
--
http://www.harold-glit.com
http://www.modelmayhem.com/haroldglit
 
Yes, you are right sorry for the confusion. I was writing about the slowliness of 50mm . I will try to return the camera asap. Such a useless lens. I also wonder why there is no statement from Ricoh. They should adress this problem or the good work made with the GRDs will be completely lost. On my side will write to the importer and Ricohs HQ, but see no chances to succeed. Pls take my advice and do not throw money in the GRX. And I was really looking forward to this excellent example of lateral thinking.
 
Hello Harold, I am not talking of slow compared to a D3. I am describing a situation where the 50, low light help ON, hunts non stop till you decide to switch on manual focus. This is tragical in low light, in average/good light it takes up to 3-4 seconds to focus.

An other issue is that is almost impossible to choose the focusing point, even with spot focus on. For a proper fousing a strong contrasted area is needed. All other cameras I have used had no problems (sometimes fast, sometimes slow but they all worked fine) BTW I use a Leica D-lux 4, a Ricoh GRD II and had many other included D3 and M8. Coming from analogue Leicas. If you wish to look at some pictures (no grx though) my Flickr name is dr.Trostprugg . take care, Alex
 
barjohn said:
No comments on the M8 GXR image comparison? You can click the images several times to get larger views.
Click to expand...
Hello John

I am sorry but I have no idea how your images could be used for any kind of valid comparison

In addition to the fact that one of the series is seriously overexposed , the quality of the file is way too low to allow any kind of comparison

I don't know if it comes from the original file and/or the compression but I don't think these images allow any kind of statement based on what can be seen

Harold

--
http://www.harold-glit.com
http://www.modelmayhem.com/haroldglit
 
Alex WT said:
Hello Harold, I am not talking of slow compared to a D3. I am describing a situation where the 50, low light help ON, hunts non stop till you decide to switch on manual focus. This is tragical in low light, in average/good light it takes up to 3-4 seconds to focus.

An other issue is that is almost impossible to choose the focusing point, even with spot focus on. For a proper fousing a strong contrasted area is needed. All other cameras I have used had no problems (sometimes fast, sometimes slow but they all worked fine) BTW I use a Leica D-lux 4, a Ricoh GRD II and had many other included D3 and M8. Coming from analogue Leicas. If you wish to look at some pictures (no grx though) my Flickr name is dr.Trostprugg . take care, Alex
Click to expand...
hello Alex
are you using a VF2 EVF to focus your image ? the LCD ?
Harold
--
http://www.harold-glit.com
http://www.modelmayhem.com/haroldglit
 
Alex WT said:
I also wonder why there is no statement from Ricoh. They should adress this problem or the good work made with the GRDs will be completely lost. On my side will write to the importer and Ricohs HQ, but see no chances to succeed
Click to expand...
What statement do you expect? Ricoh knows that the AF is slow and they are looking at ways to improve this as much as possible. At the same time this is not a fault of the camera but just an unfortunate 'feature'.

Yes, the AF is extremely slow, unreliable and together with the screen freeze makes for a frustrating experiance. Yes, the AF is also slower than most compact cameras and aside from the Sigma DP series and cell phones might be the slowest AF you will find in any current digital camera. It should not happen in a camera this expensive and Ricoh should know better.

At the same time however it can deliver great pictures and works well enough even for street photography even with the stupid shallow DOF inherent to big sensors which is a big hindrance for street (or almost any) photography.

So you can blame the camera and get hung up on the problems it has or since you bought it, go out and use it, work around the problems and make the best of it or replace it with a GF1 which will absolutely destroy it when AF is concerned.

The A12 module for the GXR has a lot of problems but does also a lot right. Go out and take pictures with it.













More pictures here http://ricoh-gr-diary.blogspot.com/
and here http://www.dropbox.com/gallery/289725/1/New%20York%202010?h=87861d
 
Alex WT said:
BTW I use a Leica D-lux 4, a Ricoh GRD II and had many other included D3 and M8. Coming from analogue Leicas. If you wish to look at some pictures (no grx though) my Flickr name is dr.Trostprugg .
Click to expand...
Alex, one more thing. I agree that the AF on the GXR is rubbish and borders on useless but since you come from analogue Leicas, using MF should not be an issue for you even with the stupid focus-by-wire system.

Just see the GXR as a MF only camera with AF as a bonus and for desperate situations when you have time to wait for the camera to hunt endlessly.

--
http://ricoh-gr-diary.blogspot.com/
http://ricohgrdiary.wordpress.com/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cristiansorega
 
Hello Vladimir

I was reading your last post on this thread which made some sense until I read this :

" At the same time however it can deliver great pictures and works well enough even for street photography even with the stupid shallow DOF inherent to big sensors which is a big hindrance for street (or almost any) photography"

"stupid shallow dof ? big hindrance ?

Do you want to read that again and rephrase maybe ?. This has to be the most ridiculous thing I have read all month . so NOW street photography has to be done with a tiny sensor ??

It is amazing how improving technology can make people into making complete bigot statements on how and what for a given camera should be used

May I remind you that for decades , the 6x6 cm format was the format of choice for street photography and we were fine despite the "big hindrance" thank you

the 35mm rangefinder is still the 'weapon of choice" for which if we follow your logic the "hindrance " must be even bigger and the DOF even more stupid

I found your statement laughable especially since you can see on other forums explain that you need that shallow DOF of larger sensors AND huge max openings to make portraits
Both positions show a total ignorance of the story of photography
I am sorry , I don't want to sound too harsh.

you have made in the past some valuable contributions to the Ricoh forums but I think your questionable statement needed to be adressed
Harold
--
http://www.harold-glit.com
http://www.modelmayhem.com/haroldglit
 
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