Reading mode: Light Dark

Ricoh GR owners. AF speed, Iso question. And rx100 comparison?

Go to last post
nico-foto

nico-foto

Well-known member
Messages
165
Reaction score
32
Location
Montevideo, UY
I have a question to Ricoh GR owners regarding AF speed and low light performance. In daylight, do you think it is fast enough for grabbing snap shots in the street? How does it perform at, say, iso 1600? And finally...has anyone here had the chance to compare AF speed and IQ to the Sony RX100?
 
Ricoh GR AF 0,25 sec, Sony RX100 0,3 sec, Fuji X20 0,20 sec. See ephotozine.com.
 
at iso 1600 it works great. The af is superb in all but the lowest light. It still works pretty good in the lowlight but you want to be careful. I only used an rx100 once but if memory serves the rx100 is snappier however I like using the GRs autofocus controls far more than the rx100 making it smoother to use it in practice
 
also any ISO and image quality to the RX100 is foolish the GR will monsters it. the GR is more aptly compared in IQ to top of the line apsc dslrs.
 
Kodachrome200 said:
Kodachrome200 wrote:

also any ISO and image quality to the RX100 is foolish the GR will monsters it. the GR is more aptly compared in IQ to top of the line apsc dslrs.
Click to expand...
Hi Kodachrome, have you had the chance to personally compare the two? I would prefer input from real life usage and not "charts" or "specs" comparisons. Thanks.
 
AF GR= 0,2, sec, AF RX100= 0,3 sec, AF Fuji X20= 0,2 sec. See on ephotozine.com
 
Kodachrome200 said:
Kodachrome200 wrote:

also any ISO and image quality to the RX100 is foolish the GR will monsters it. the GR is more aptly compared in IQ to top of the line apsc dslrs.
Click to expand...
If you mean it is a monster (magnitude) better, I would beg to differ.

Looking at the sensor sizes first:

1/1.8" 38 mm2 (like org. GR Digital)
Sony 1" 123 mm2 is 3.2x more than 1/1.8"
APS-C 370 mm2 is 3x more than 1"
35mm full frame 860 mm2 is 2.3x more than APS-C

- there is an obvious progression in terms of area here, and it does say something about light gathering quality and noise level, but not all. Still - the RX100 is not bad. Where the GR can do ISO 3200 pretty good, the RX100 does ISO 1600 pretty good. You can compare yourself in the DPR studio-scene page

Lenses also comes into play. The RX100 28-100mm Zeiss 1.8 lens is quite good, but can't compete with a HQ fixed 28 mm like on the GR - at 28mm. Obviously the fixed 28mm will not let you zoom at all.

Autofocus wise I find the RX100 to be surprisingly good, maybe even better than the GR in some situations. I have only spent some minutes with the GR, but it was good too.

You can compare a GR to a high-end APS-C SLR with a HQ 28mm fixed lens, and it will fit in your pocket, but IMO you can compare a RX100 to a medium quality APS-C SLR with a kit zoom lens, and that is also quite an achievement, considering that it too will fit your pocket.

~~~~
Magne
 
Last edited:
pepl said:
pepl wrote:

AF GR= 0,2, sec, AF RX100= 0,3 sec, AF Fuji X20= 0,2 sec. See on ephotozine.com
Click to expand...
Thanks for the info. I was interested in hearing user's real world comparisons. Most of the time the studio tests do not tell the whole story. There are so many things that can affect AF in the real world.
 
Magne Nilsen said:
Magne Nilsen wrote:
Magne Nilsen said:
RX100 28-100mm Zeiss 1.8 lens is quite good, but can't compete with a HQ fixed 28 mm like on the GR - at 28mm. Obviously the fixed 28mm will not let you zoom at all.
Click to expand...
Autofocus wise I find the RX100 to be surprisingly good, maybe even better than the GR in some situations. I have only spent some minutes with the GR, but it was good too.

You can compare a GR to a high-end APS-C SLR with a HQ 28mm fixed lens, and it will fit in your pocket, but IMO you can compare a RX100 to a medium quality APS-C SLR with a kit zoom lens, and that is also quite an achievement, considering that it too will fit your pocket.

~~~~
Magne
Click to expand...
Thanks for the feedback.

I've been using my x100 lately for casual street shooting (i.e. whenever i go out of my house i take the camera with me), mostly taking quick snapshots, from the hip pictures - you get the idea. I'm mostly using the 28mm-equivalent focal length for that. So, given the similar form factor, i'm pondering the idea of selling the RX100 and getting a GR. I would have a qualitative jump in IQ because of bigger sensor size, but i'm not so sure about operational speed, particularly AF, which the RX100 is really fast for a contrast detection compact.
 
I was showing off GR to a buddy who had RX100 in hand at the moment. I held his RX100 but handed it over to him immediately. GR has a far better grip. With a better sensor and a good grip and the snap focus feature, a skilled GR user will have little or no issue in capturing pretty decent low lighting photos.
 
nico-foto said:
nico-foto wrote:

I have a question to Ricoh GR owners regarding AF speed and low light performance. In daylight, do you think it is fast enough for grabbing snap shots in the street? How does it perform at, say, iso 1600? And finally...has anyone here had the chance to compare AF speed and IQ to the Sony RX100?

--
www.flickr.com/nicolasraddatz
www.nico-foto.com
Click to expand...
AF is quick and accurate when there is enough light; otherwise, it hunts and accuracy falters...but IMO not as bad as the EPM2 that I had for a short while.

As for noise...well...you can see color noise (not to be confused with luminance noise) with ISO as low as ISO 400 when developed with Photo Ninja...Aperture/LR does not show you that these noise exist...so it's probably a non-issue.

lens is really sharp. hard to fault it even at f2.8...it's so sharp it even causes aliasing, which shows you that it can outresolve the sensor easily.

You can see the set here. I'll be adding more to the set as I progress through my written review.

--
http://www.subtleimages.net/
http://www.istockphoto.com/dalegaspi
 
Last edited:
stonebat said:
stonebat wrote:

With a better sensor and a good grip and the snap focus feature, a skilled GR user will have little or no issue in capturing pretty decent low lighting photos.
Click to expand...
Exactly, that is what i'm thinking. Looks like a great street cam, particularly if you are used to photographing close to the action. I find the 28mm focal length very well suited for working at close distances.
 
Banana Chips™ said:
Banana Chips™ wrote:
Banana Chips™ said:
nico-foto wrote:

I have a question to Ricoh GR owners regarding AF speed and low light performance. In daylight, do you think it is fast enough for grabbing snap shots in the street? How does it perform at, say, iso 1600? And finally...has anyone here had the chance to compare AF speed and IQ to the Sony RX100?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
nico-foto said:
I have a question to Ricoh GR owners regarding AF speed and low light performance. In daylight, do you think it is fast enough for grabbing snap shots in the street? How does it perform at, say, iso 1600? And finally...has anyone here had the chance to compare AF speed and IQ to the Sony RX100?
Click to expand...
 
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