Reading mode: Light Dark

Fuji X10 v GRD IV first shots opinion

Go to last post
G

grapo2001

Active member
Messages
50
Reaction score
5
I have been deciding whether to go for the X10 or GRDIV. Im after a decent compact camera so I don't have to carry my Nikon D90 about everywhere. I was waiting until I saw the first user shots of these two cameras and I have to say the X10 has disappointed me. Every shot I see has just been a bit... underwhelming. The GRDIV shots I have seen have looks much more impressive.

Is it a case of the X10 having more mass market appeal and the users not being that technically gifted in comparison to GRD users (niche appeal, better photographer?)? Or is the GRD ACTUALLY the camera that boasts better IQ?
 
I suspect it will be more the former than the latter, because - all things being equal - there is no substitute for sensor area. However, all things are arely equal; and, a lesser sensor in more capable hands is more likely to produce an outstanding image than even the best sensor in the wrong hands.

If you like the aesthetic or the philosophy that the GRD-4 imparts better in use, by all means, get the Ricoh. Just don't confuse preferences for absolute truths.

FWIW, despite it having a bigger sensor and a greater mass market appeal, I also find the X10 to be more pedestrian than the GRD-4.

mjh
--

'One must always take photos with the greatest respect for the subject and for oneself.' Henri Cartier-Bresson
 
Thanks for your reply. However, surely sensor size isn't the be all and end all of image quality. Hasn't marrying a sensor to a fixed focal lens and honing its coordination going to be of some use in the equation? The X10 sensor isnt THAT much bigger than the GRDIV. I try and avoid high ISO shots if possible, because even on dslr sized sensors it is normally obvious you are straining the capabilities of the camera, so at ISO 100 - 400 would the X10's 'big' sensor make much of a difference over the GRDIV's?
 
Michael J Hoffman said:
I suspect it will be more the former than the latter, because - all things being equal - there is no substitute for sensor area. However, all things are arely equal; and, a lesser sensor in more capable hands is more likely to produce an outstanding image than even the best sensor in the wrong hands.

If you like the aesthetic or the philosophy that the GRD-4 imparts better in use, by all means, get the Ricoh. Just don't confuse preferences for absolute truths.

FWIW, despite it having a bigger sensor and a greater mass market appeal, I also find the X10 to be more pedestrian than the GRD-4.

mjh
Click to expand...
Elegantly put Michael. I love the word "pedestrian" - I wish I had thought of that first - it does sum up all the cameras that are put up against the GRD as possible alternatives.

Thinking myself I find it hard to remember any other compact camera that dares to be a fast prime wide and nothing else. Maybe the GRD is in a class of it's own and for good or bad simply refuses to be categorised as an alternative to anything else?

Without wanting to be considered a "fan boy" I might suggest that whatever other style of camera is anyone's preference there must always be room for a GRD in the camera kit bag somewhere.

The GRDIV is just the latest refinement of an unique camera series. That it does need to be compared is to not understand it's unique properties which extend to more than just a fixed wide prime lens.

"Never could play golf despite the fanciest set of clubs" Tom Caldwell
Michael J Hoffman said:
--

'One must always take photos with the greatest respect for the subject and for oneself.' Henri Cartier-Bresson
Click to expand...
--
Tom Caldwell
 
grapo2001 said:
Thanks for your reply. However, surely sensor size isn't the be all and end all of image quality.
Click to expand...
Yes
grapo2001 said:
Hasn't marrying a sensor to a fixed focal lens and honing its coordination going to be of some use in the equation?
Click to expand...
Yes very much so
grapo2001 said:
The X10 sensor isnt THAT much bigger than the GRDIV.
Click to expand...
Yes
grapo2001 said:
I try and avoid high ISO shots if possible, because even on dslr sized sensors it is normally obvious you are straining the capabilities of the camera,
Click to expand...
High ISO shots can have a charm of their own, the fact that this is made possible suggests that it can be used. Most of the strain is in the eyes of the beholder, at higher ISO the camera is working fine and not under the least amount of strain.
grapo2001 said:
so at ISO 100 - 400 would the X10's 'big' sensor make much of a difference over the GRDIV's?
Click to expand...
No idea, that is up to the user more so than an opinion.

Any worries about sensor size can be easily accommodated by buying a FF sensor camera body which is much more sensible than worrying about micro-millimetres of sensor size.

--
Tom Caldwell
 
I am sorry to say that but if you are deciding on these two cameras by judging on Low res images taken in unknown conditions and posted on the web , welll... it is a rather silly and dangerous way to make its choice

the GRD IV uses a sensor that is smaller and that is "dated " already since Sony does not put into more research in this sensor size

I am just starting to test my Fuji X10 and I am pretty certain that the IQ should be at least equal if not better than The GRdIV at current iso range

That being said , the two cameras are very different and I think that there are THREE main factors that should dictate your choice but I do not think the IQ is going to be THAT MUCH different for it to be the deciding choice

Harold
--
http://www.harold-glit.com
http://www.modelmayhem.com/haroldglit
 
I am not sure it is one or the other, but maybe they are complimentary. The GRD is great and it has a wonderful fixed lens, the X10 has a zoom, for me that is the difference. The GRD is also much smaller and easier to carry, but with a shoulder/neck strap the X10 is as easy as taking my GXR around and I would not have to change lenses (and I would not have an APS-C sensor). Many choices today.
 
Harold66 said:
Michael J Hoffman said:
FWIW, despite it having a bigger sensor and a greater mass market appeal, I also find the X10 to be more pedestrian than the GRD-4.
Click to expand...
I have NO idea what this means and I am quite sure that I am not the only one . Care to explain it ?
Click to expand...
Not really, no.

Then Harold wrote in response to a different thread:
Harold66 said:
"but it is not my job to ask you to explain what you wrote"
Click to expand...
Methinks, Harold, that you are playing the semantics game, and I do not wish to follow suit. You don't have to like, agree with or understand my opinions; its all good. I am simply not interested in biting on the troll-bait for whatever axe you feel is yours to grind here this evening.

Take care!

mjh
 
How do you propose I make an informed decision about which camera to get Harold? I read reviews, I look at users photos (the very 'dangerous' thing you warned me against'). None of the shops around me stock the GRDIV so I would have to buy it from the web.

Also, I can see peoples point about the two cameras complimenting each other, but I cannot afford to spend money on both. They are both expensive compact cameras to start with!
 
Michael J Hoffman said:
FWIW, despite it having a bigger sensor and a greater mass market appeal, I also find the X10 to be more pedestrian than the GRD-4.
Click to expand...
The EXR feature means in either SN or DR mode the X10 is only a 6MP sensor because it combines adjacent pairs of picxels, in effect halving the resolution in order to increase either dynamic range or sensitivity.

Only in HR hi-res mode, ie 'normal', does it match other sensors pixel-for-pixel, but.. from the DPR preview:
Michael J Hoffman said:
Michael J Hoffman said:
The EXR pattern isn't quite as good at capturing resolution as a Bayer sensor with the same pixel count though - the downside of clumping together pairs of similar colors is that the gaps between one pair and the next is much greater than the spacing between similarly-colored photosites in a Bayer sensor.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
In my opinion if anyone is thinking about an X10, the primary reason would be for the EXR sensor which makes it different/better/worse than other cameras. Everything else is secondary because if the EXR isn't what you want/need, the rest doesn't matter.
 
Harold66 said:
I am sorry to say that but if you are deciding on these two cameras by judging on Low res images taken in unknown conditions and posted on the web , welll... it is a rather silly and dangerous way to make its choice

the GRD IV uses a sensor that is smaller and that is "dated " already since Sony does not put into more research in this sensor size

I am just starting to test my Fuji X10 and I am pretty certain that the IQ should be at least equal if not better than The GRdIV at current iso range

That being said , the two cameras are very different and I think that there are THREE main factors that should dictate your choice but I do not think the IQ is going to be THAT MUCH different for it to be the deciding choice

Harold
Click to expand...
Oh! So you bought an X10 Harold?

Look forward to an extended run down on how you have found it.
Harold66 said:
--
http://www.harold-glit.com
http://www.modelmayhem.com/haroldglit
Click to expand...
--
Tom Caldwell
 
grapo2001 said:
How do you propose I make an informed decision about which camera to get Harold? I read reviews, I look at users photos (the very 'dangerous' thing you warned me against'). None of the shops around me stock the GRDIV so I would have to buy it from the web.

Also, I can see peoples point about the two cameras complimenting each other, but I cannot afford to spend money on both. They are both expensive compact cameras to start with!
Click to expand...
I think you can compare images on the web to judge a camera, especially when you can cpmpare to your own pics on your own screen. Just looking at Geoffrey's photo of the hen on the other thread here tells me the GRD IV is among the best in its class:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1013&thread=39780224
Harold66 said:
I am just starting to test my Fuji X10 and I am pretty certain that the IQ should be at least equal if not better than The GRdIV at current iso range
Click to expand...
Technically this is probably unlikely as per the quote I pulled from the DPR preview above, the spacing between the similar photosites on the Fuji sensor are greater than on normal sensors and therefore physically can't produce a superior IQ, in terms of detail and resolution at any rate.

The X10 also lacks a size advantage to make up for this larger spacing, ie 2/3" sounds a lot bigger than 1/1.7" but in reality my basic arithmetic tells me it's 1/1.5" so still in the same size-class 1/1.5" to 1/1.8" enthusiast sensor category.
 
anthony mazzeri said:
grapo2001 said:
How do you propose I make an informed decision about which camera to get Harold? I read reviews, I look at users photos (the very 'dangerous' thing you warned me against'). None of the shops around me stock the GRDIV so I would have to buy it from the web.

Also, I can see peoples point about the two cameras complimenting each other, but I cannot afford to spend money on both. They are both expensive compact cameras to start with!
Click to expand...
I think you can compare images on the web to judge a camera, especially when you can cpmpare to your own pics on your own screen. Just looking at Geoffrey's photo of the hen on the other thread here tells me the GRD IV is among the best in its class:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1013&thread=39780224
Harold66 said:
I am just starting to test my Fuji X10 and I am pretty certain that the IQ should be at least equal if not better than The GRdIV at current iso range
Click to expand...
Technically this is probably unlikely as per the quote I pulled from the DPR preview above, the spacing between the similar photosites on the Fuji sensor are greater than on normal sensors and therefore physically can't produce a superior IQ, in terms of detail and resolution at any rate.

The X10 also lacks a size advantage to make up for this larger spacing, ie 2/3" sounds a lot bigger than 1/1.7" but in reality my basic arithmetic tells me it's 1/1.5" so still in the same size-class 1/1.5" to 1/1.8" enthusiast sensor category.
Click to expand...
Very useful information abut the X10, thanks...... I have been following it on Fuji Talk and many non fuji from the past enthusiast that have purchased on are having a lot of trouble understanding the camera.
 
Michael J Hoffman said:
Methinks, Harold, that you are playing the semantics game, and I do not wish to follow suit. You don't have to like, agree with or understand my opinions; its all good. I am simply not interested in biting on the troll-bait for whatever axe you feel is yours to grind here this evening.
Click to expand...
Hello mjh

your answer is almost funny... in a sad way. Now I am a troll because I wrote because I did not understand what you meant and I asked you to explain...go figure

i have never exchanged with you and you went to another reply of mine to judge me
waouh, not very opne minded is it ?
but in any case michae , it does not matter
There was no bait.

Tom seemed to have understood what you meant and not me . we will leave it at that

Harold
--
http://www.harold-glit.com
http://www.modelmayhem.com/haroldglit
 
Tom Caldwell said:
Oh! So you bought an X10 Harold?

Look forward to an extended run down on how you have found it.
Click to expand...
Hello Tom
Yes I did

as you know it usually takes me a while to choose a camera but I always found that 2/3" format to be interesting and in a market of small expert cameras are now ALAS being introduced more and more with the 3;2 ratio ONLY ( which you all know I hate with a passion) ( sony Nex , Nikon 1,..) I thought that a camera with a native 4;3 ratio , an optical viewfinder and a bright lens would be a nice replacement for my GX 100 which is not getting more use

I will try to focus on all the details which I have not seen yet covered in other reviews
stay tuned :)

Harold

--
http://www.harold-glit.com
http://www.modelmayhem.com/haroldglit
 
grapo2001 said:
How do you propose I make an informed decision about which camera to get Harold? I read reviews, I look at users photos (the very 'dangerous' thing you warned me against'). None of the shops around me stock the GRDIV so I would have to buy it from the web.

Also, I can see peoples point about the two cameras complimenting each other, but I cannot afford to spend money on both. They are both expensive compact cameras to start with!
Click to expand...
hello Grapo 2001

There is no doubt that buying a camera without being able to handle it is always a little more uneasy

My point though was not that you could not do that. My point was when making your choice you should give more weight to some VERY big considerations other than IQ since IQ is not going to be fundamentally different

IMHO the questions to ask yourself are for instance:

1/ How often and how big do you print
2/Are you comfortable using the LCD most of the time or do you prefer an OVF ?
3/How often do you need or use manual focus or snap focus ?
4/ How much do you like only using the 28Mm FOV ?

5/How do you like zooms on a camera ?
6/how often do you shoot RAW ?

7/ how often do you use the PSAM or auto modes versus manual and custom users modes ?
8/do you post or print most of your images in color or B&W ?

you clearly stated that you would not get both cameras and I just wanted to tell you that in my mind the IQ would be in the same ballpark and that you should choose based on the other factors

both cameras would allow to print like 11"X14" at least for well exposed shots taken say up to 400 or 800 iso

Hope that this could help in your choice . this is all I can ask for

Harold

--
http://www.harold-glit.com
http://www.modelmayhem.com/haroldglit
 
Michael J Hoffman said:
I suspect it will be more the former than the latter, because - all things being equal - there is no substitute for sensor area. However, all things are arely equal; and, a lesser sensor in more capable hands is more likely to produce an outstanding image than even the best sensor in the wrong hands.

If you like the aesthetic or the philosophy that the GRD-4 imparts better in use, by all means, get the Ricoh. Just don't confuse preferences for absolute truths.

FWIW, despite it having a bigger sensor and a greater mass market appeal, I also find the X10 to be more pedestrian than the GRD-4.

mjh
--

'One must always take photos with the greatest respect for the subject and for oneself.' Henri Cartier-Bresson
Click to expand...
Pixel size matters not sensor size alone, and since the X10's sensor is about 20% bigger on the one hand but also includes about 20% more pixels on the other hand it's a draw.
 
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