Interesting..CX3 vs samsung EX1 review...

a little while ago we saw the CX3 review and i even started this thread:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1013&message=35589644&changemode=1

and among the discussions over the subject some might even argue if dpreview should (or not) noticed if the camera was faulty..but when it comes to the EX1 review, a quote:

"As shown in the studio comparison shot, the camera we based our review on occasionally shows a loss of image sharpness down the left-hand side. The effect is only really visible with this essentially flat target that is shot at a relatively close focus distance. The performance shown in this review is fractionally better than that of a second unit Samsung sent us to check the results against (which instead showed a soft right-hand side)."
so they saw and even wrote in the review that the EX1 was a bad copy...
--

Think about photography books and classes before any kind of gear....without knowledge, no camera is useful....

Carlos Roncatti Bomfim

carlos roncatti said:

a little while ago we saw the CX3 review and i even started this thread:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1013&message=35589644&changemode=1

and among the discussions over the subject some might even argue if dpreview should (or not) noticed if the camera was faulty..but when it comes to the EX1 review, a quote:

"As shown in the studio comparison shot, the camera we based our review on occasionally shows a loss of image sharpness down the left-hand side. The effect is only really visible with this essentially flat target that is shot at a relatively close focus distance. The performance shown in this review is fractionally better than that of a second unit Samsung sent us to check the results against (which instead showed a soft right-hand side)."
so they saw and even wrote in the review that the EX1 was a bad copy...
--

Think about photography books and classes before any kind of gear....without knowledge, no camera is useful....

Carlos Roncatti Bomfim

Click to expand...

Interesting they could pick it up for them but not for Ricoh. Any bad blood flowing between Ricoh and DPReview? I would think that they would not be unprofessional as their reputation is at stake.

carlos roncatti said:

a little while ago we saw the CX3 review and i even started this thread:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1013&message=35589644&changemode=1

and among the discussions over the subject some might even argue if dpreview should (or not) noticed if the camera was faulty..but when it comes to the EX1 review, a quote:

"As shown in the studio comparison shot, the camera we based our review on occasionally shows a loss of image sharpness down the left-hand side. The effect is only really visible with this essentially flat target that is shot at a relatively close focus distance. The performance shown in this review is fractionally better than that of a second unit Samsung sent us to check the results against (which instead showed a soft right-hand side)."
so they saw and even wrote in the review that the EX1 was a bad copy...

Click to expand...

I noticed these EX1 comments and had seen your earlier thread about the CX3. At that time, I checked my CX1 using a test target (something I almost never do) and noticed that my CX1 was soft on the right edge, at least at the range, focal lengths, and apertures I used in my test. I've decided to ignore the problem because I don't see any obvious impact in normal shooting.

Other small-sensor cameras DPReview has tested have had similar problems. I recall the Nikon P50 was found to be soft on one edge and they didn't test a second copy. Others reported the same problem with their copies.

I'm about to conclude that the lens image circle in the focal plane, optical tolerances, or the production process are marginal for small sensor cameras. I'm sure the optical systems are machine-assembled and are rarely tested for precise alignment. It's probably necessary to keep costs low. I actually expected Ricoh cameras wouldn't exhibit such problems, though, since they have a slightly higher price point than much of the competition.

Given that some DSLRs have supposedly had back-focus or front-focus problems, I'm not sure camera quality control isn't suffering in general for the sake of profit.

--
Darrell

Ricoh does suffer lens assembly quality control problems.

Back a few months I bought a CX2 and it was very soft down one side, so took it back to the shop and got another one. This time near perfect, totally different performance.

That's the advantage of a bricks and mortar shop, you can bang on the counter and get satisfaction. But no banging needed as they were quite good about it all, just the paperwork needed on their side of the counter was the time consuming bit.

Regards............ Guy

Darrell Spreen said:

Other small-sensor cameras DPReview has tested have had similar problems. I recall the Nikon P50 was found to be soft on one edge and they didn't test a second copy. Others reported the same problem with their copies.

Click to expand...

The CX3 vs CX1 sample clearly shows how bad the CX3 was...still they didnt quote any kind of problem...its just obvious when we see it so it would be obvious for them too...thats what really bothers me...

Member said:

I'm about to conclude that the lens image circle in the focal plane, optical tolerances, or the production process are marginal for small sensor cameras. I'm sure the optical systems are machine-assembled and are rarely tested for precise alignment. It's probably necessary to keep costs low. I actually expected Ricoh cameras wouldn't exhibit such problems, though, since they have a slightly higher price point than much of the competition.

Click to expand...

You are probably Right Darrell. But i do think this happens more to some camera lines than others. I do think that GX and GRD series have some different control over the production, since it is uncommon to heard about lens problems with these cameras. I have also a curiosity if the problem with corner softness persists with the 3:2 option, since i heard over the fuji forum that the F200 has corner softness but only at 4:3.....

Member said:

Given that some DSLRs have supposedly had back-focus or front-focus problems, I'm not sure camera quality control isn't suffering in general for the sake of profit.

Click to expand...

Yes, specially with fast prime lenses...

Member said:

--
Darrell

Click to expand...

--

Think about photography books and classes before any kind of gear....without knowledge, no camera is useful....

Carlos Roncatti Bomfim

Guy Parsons said:

Ricoh does suffer lens assembly quality control problems.

Back a few months I bought a CX2 and it was very soft down one side, so took it back to the shop and got another one. This time near perfect, totally different performance.

That's the advantage of a bricks and mortar shop, you can bang on the counter and get satisfaction. But no banging needed as they were quite good about it all, just the paperwork needed on their side of the counter was the time consuming bit.

Click to expand...

THats the good part of being in a country that Ricoh products are easily found...once i (long time ago) asked a Japan ebay vendor if he could check a lens (for softness) before sending the lens...he agreed..but one other didnt after i asked him to check the lens on a compact camera....

Guy Parsons said:

Regards............ Guy

Click to expand...

Regards
--

Think about photography books and classes before any kind of gear....without knowledge, no camera is useful....

Carlos Roncatti Bomfim

Like i said to Darrell, just comparing the CX1 vs CX3 sample it was pretty clear that the CX3 was a bad copy...but you have to wonder how can they not even suggest it....
Hope things are fine with you both...

Joel Stern said:

Interesting they could pick it up for them but not for Ricoh. Any bad blood flowing between Ricoh and DPReview? I would think that they would not be unprofessional as their reputation is at stake.

Click to expand...

--

Think about photography books and classes before any kind of gear....without knowledge, no camera is useful....

Carlos Roncatti Bomfim

Carlos, you are absolutely right. Things are fine, very hot with no ocean breeze is making my girl cranky.

I hope you are well.

Joel

carlos roncatti said:

a little while ago we saw the CX3 review and i even started this thread:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1013&message=35589644&changemode=1

and among the discussions over the subject some might even argue if dpreview should (or not) noticed if the camera was faulty..but when it comes to the EX1 review, a quote:

"As shown in the studio comparison shot, the camera we based our review on occasionally shows a loss of image sharpness down the left-hand side. The effect is only really visible with this essentially flat target that is shot at a relatively close focus distance. The performance shown in this review is fractionally better than that of a second unit Samsung sent us to check the results against (which instead showed a soft right-hand side)."
so they saw and even wrote in the review that the EX1 was a bad copy...

Click to expand...

You would also notice that they compared the EX1 to the LX3 in the article as if the LX3 had invented that class of camera - not a mention of the Ricoh GX - even if just that Ricoh had vacated the field and moved to the S10 module of the GXR. Wheras the S10 might be soothing more bulky than the EX1 it was acknowledged that the EX1 was slightly larger than the LX3. I would guess that the still not sighted invisible GXR would be a classier act than the other two cameras but it could not be by as much as the price differential would indicate. On nominal specifications the S10 module does fit in the class but when price is considered then it is (possibly) best left out of the equation. However one might have thought that the GXR S10 might have been mentioned in passing as being a similar capability camera to the others whose price ruled it out of contention.

Now that I actually own an EX1 my response to the dpreview test is that the EX1 is "damned with faint praise" much as we have felt that Ricoh camera reviews have not fully appreciated the Ricoh qualities. See the CX3 test as has been mentioned.

I could not say that in the comparison the EX1 was less than honestly reported but the general feeling was that the now aging LX3 made a pretty good show against the EX1 which may have won but only by a whisker.

To my mind all this shows just how much digital cameras have lifted their game exponentially. Any of these cameras will make the early digital cameras and even releases as recent as the Olympus SP-800UZ (announced February this year) look like sick puppies indeed.

In my mind the GRD, GX, LX and now the EX are very professional presentations of the compact camera idea. All the EVIL type cameras the m4/3, GXR and NX series are quality offerings.

What the EX1 has done is to take the price fight right into the territory of the point and shoot compacts. My short flirtation with the SP-800UZ was a wake up call by showing that it was possible to buy an expensive plastic bodied camera with no serious control by the user. It was significantly more expensive than the EX1 but built like it was a disposable camera - it's one main standout was it's super testosterone lens. But with no way that a user could use their brain to drive it. But it was branded "Olympus" the more shame on such a respected brand to lend their name to it.

One might wonder what happened: Ricoh canned the GX300 and shifted camera size parameters. Panasonic canned the proposed LX4 for a firmware upgrade and a very long gestation for the proposed LX5. Samsung hit the market hard with the very nice and affordable EX1. What gives? We might ask. Did the others get wind of Samsung's entry at a very early stage and change their corporate direction? Or has Samsung come in strongly to try and capture market share before the LX5 hits the shops?

In any case I would suggest that the LX5 might be one doozy of camera and that with Samsung setting a base market price with the EX1 there might be some good buying opportunities in the coming months. Not going to help the S10 much if the LX5 comes out super compact with a flip LCD raw and PASM control. If they extend the range of the lens as well and price it competitively to the CX then it is likely to be all over Red Rover for the CX and P10 as well.

carlos roncatti said:

--

Think about photography books and classes before any kind of gear....without knowledge, no camera is useful....

Carlos Roncatti Bomfim

Click to expand...

--
Tom Caldwell
I am always trying ...

Tom Caldwell said:

You would also notice that they compared the EX1 to the LX3 in the article as if the LX3 had invented that class of camera - not a mention of the Ricoh GX - even if just that Ricoh had vacated the field and moved to the S10 module of the GXR. Wheras the S10 might be soothing more bulky than the EX1 it was acknowledged that the EX1 was slightly larger than the LX3. I would guess that the still not sighted invisible GXR would be a classier act than the other two cameras but it could not be by as much as the price differential would indicate. On nominal specifications the S10 module does fit in the class but when price is considered then it is (possibly) best left out of the equation. However one might have thought that the GXR S10 might have been mentioned in passing as being a similar capability camera to the others whose price ruled it out of contention.

Click to expand...

Yes Tom they actually NEVER ever mentioned the GX200 and like you said the S10 is a little more bulky than the EX1 and the price difference ( 150 usd...OK only in US...smile) may be a problem for some or most....

Tom Caldwell said:

Now that I actually own an EX1 my response to the dpreview test is that the EX1 is "damned with faint praise" much as we have felt that Ricoh camera reviews have not fully appreciated the Ricoh qualities. See the CX3 test as has been mentioned.

Click to expand...

I know that the EX1 is a good or excellent camera...but the main point is like you said here about our fellings about Ricoh cameras....

Tom Caldwell said:

I could not say that in the comparison the EX1 was less than honestly reported but the general feeling was that the now aging LX3 made a pretty good show against the EX1 which may have won but only by a whisker.

Click to expand...

I agree but i think that actually the LX3 won by a whisker...

Tom Caldwell said:

To my mind all this shows just how much digital cameras have lifted their game exponentially. Any of these cameras will make the early digital cameras and even releases as recent as the Olympus SP-800UZ (announced February this year) look like sick puppies indeed.

Click to expand...

Agreed

Tom Caldwell said:

In my mind the GRD, GX, LX and now the EX are very professional presentations of the compact camera idea. All the EVIL type cameras the m4/3, GXR and NX series are quality offerings.

Click to expand...

Once again agreed

Tom Caldwell said:

What the EX1 has done is to take the price fight right into the territory of the point and shoot compacts. My short flirtation with the SP-800UZ was a wake up call by showing that it was possible to buy an expensive plastic bodied camera with no serious control by the user. It was significantly more expensive than the EX1 but built like it was a disposable camera - it's one main standout was it's super testosterone lens. But with no way that a user could use their brain to drive it. But it was branded "Olympus" the more shame on such a respected brand to lend their name to it.

Click to expand...

Tom if im not mistaken (450usd) was the price for the LX3 at the beggining and now the S90 is about 330 usd

Tom Caldwell said:

One might wonder what happened: Ricoh canned the GX300 and shifted camera size parameters. Panasonic canned the proposed LX4 for a firmware upgrade and a very long gestation for the proposed LX5. Samsung hit the market hard with the very nice and affordable EX1. What gives? We might ask. Did the others get wind of Samsung's entry at a very early stage and change their corporate direction? Or has Samsung come in strongly to try and capture market share before the LX5 hits the shops?

Click to expand...

The late option, but the LX5 will probably be even better....i just dont like panasonic s colors...

Tom Caldwell said:

In any case I would suggest that the LX5 might be one doozy of camera and that with Samsung setting a base market price with the EX1 there might be some good buying opportunities in the coming months. Not going to help the S10 much if the LX5 comes out super compact with a flip LCD raw and PASM control. If they extend the range of the lens as well and price it competitively to the CX then it is likely to be all over Red Rover for the CX and P10 as well.

Click to expand...

Still, once you buy an S10, you can change modules, so its a different option.....

Tom Caldwell said:

Tom Caldwell said:

--

Think about photography books and classes before any kind of gear....without knowledge, no camera is useful....

Carlos Roncatti Bomfim

Click to expand...

--
Tom Caldwell
I am always trying ...

Click to expand...

--

Think about photography books and classes before any kind of gear....without knowledge, no camera is useful....

Carlos Roncatti Bomfim