The 40mm GRIII

Tom Caldwell · Dec 12, 2016

As a concept this could be taken two ways. We presume that a 40mm collapsing lens of acceptable speed can be fitted into the present GR body.

If it is made in parallel to the 28mm version I only wonder that users will pick and choose between the two versions and neither will sell well enough to be worth making. Of course some GR owners will want to have one of each. Ths assumes that Ricoh has some exciting new features to sell it.

On the other hand if the "GR idea" has run out of steam and there are no new fields to conquer beyond perhaps a new sensor then why not just make a 40mm version alone?

This would mean that all those GR users could keep and use their GR/GRII bodies for a further extended period of time in parallel to their new GRIII-40. Nothing wrong with the current models and I am sure that they will last - probably as long as my +10 year old original GRD. The financial "hit" of buying two GR cameras will therefore be reduced.

Ricoh would have to take a chance on the "40" being popular but they could do sensor cropping into short telephoto to add to the versatility. Taking away choice would probably mean more "40" sales than if there were a choice of two focal lengths.

They could alternate models with a GRIII-28 a year of so down the track.

Harold66 · Dec 13, 2016

Tom Caldwell said:
As a concept this could be taken two ways. We presume that a 40mm collapsing lens of acceptable speed can be fitted into the present GR body.

If it is made in parallel to the 28mm version I only wonder that users will pick and choose between the two versions and neither will sell well enough to be worth making.

I am convinced that Ricoh would benefit from making both. First of all, as for any manufacturer there are two kind of buyers . The ones who buy a camera when it is brand new , always want the latest stuff and usually change their cameras at least once a year. Then there are people who keep their stuff for longer time. they may upgrade their equipment when an UPGRADED model (meaning same brand and model line up) but they are more faithful to the brand

Everyone knows that Ricoh cameras are a niche product. Often when you have a smaller market, you also gather a serious brand following and have buyers who have more buyers loyalty. I am sure that, outside the first group mentioned in the above paragraph , a very large majority of current GR 28 buyers would buy a GR 40mm with a 24MP sensor ( and a 50mp crop)

Even if, say only 80% of Current GR 28 owners buy the 28mm version because the other 20% prefer to have JUST the 40mm version , that also means that many would own both and that more than 20% will own the 40mm version. Not to mention the number of new buyers who would come to the GR because of the standard focal length

I also think that numbers for the second version would be CONSIDERABLY higher if they provide a high quality 2x converter to give direct access to 80mm and 100 mm FOV ( 100 with the crop)

Finally there are some cost savings involved for Ricoh because lots of parts would be the same

Tom Caldwell said:
Of course some GR owners will want to have one of each. Ths assumes that Ricoh has some exciting new features to sell it.

On the other hand if the "GR idea" has run out of steam and there are no new fields to conquer beyond perhaps a new sensor then why not just make a 40mm version alone?

I think for two reasons . First of all the 28mm FOV is part of the Ricoh legacy. secondly because for lots of photogs having those two options which are so small and easy to carry in large pockets or small pouch or bags mean that lots of photogs could rely on just Ricoh cameras for some trips . I think it would also increase the sale of Ricoh accessories

Tom Caldwell said:
This would mean that all those GR users could keep and use their GR/GRII bodies for a further extended period of time in parallel to their new GRIII-40. Nothing wrong with the current models and I am sure that they will last - probably as long as my +10 year old original GRD. The financial "hit" of buying two GR cameras will therefore be reduced.

Ricoh would have to take a chance on the "40" being popular but they could do sensor cropping into short telephoto to add to the versatility. Taking away choice would probably mean more "40" sales than if there were a choice of two focal lengths.

They could alternate models with a GRIII-28 a year of so down the track.

Tom Caldwell · Dec 13, 2016

Harold66 said:
Tom Caldwell said:

As a concept this could be taken two ways. We presume that a 40mm collapsing lens of acceptable speed can be fitted into the present GR body.

If it is made in parallel to the 28mm version I only wonder that users will pick and choose between the two versions and neither will sell well enough to be worth making.

Click to expand...

I am convinced that Ricoh would benefit from making both. First of all, as for any manufacturer there are two kind of buyers . The ones who buy a camera when it is brand new , always want the latest stuff and usually change their cameras at least once a year. Then there are people who keep their stuff for longer time. they may upgrade their equipment when an UPGRADED model (meaning same brand and model line up) but they are more faithful to the brand

Everyone knows that Ricoh cameras are a niche product. Often when you have a smaller market, you also gather a serious brand following and have buyers who have more buyers loyalty. I am sure that, outside the first group mentioned in the above paragraph , a very large majority of current GR 28 buyers would buy a GR 40mm with a 24MP sensor ( and a 50mp crop)

Even if, say only 80% of Current GR 28 owners buy the 28mm version because the other 20% prefer to have JUST the 40mm version , that also means that many would own both and that more than 20% will own the 40mm version. Not to mention the number of new buyers who would come to the GR because of the standard focal length

I also think that numbers for the second version would be CONSIDERABLY higher if they provide a high quality 2x converter to give direct access to 80mm and 100 mm FOV ( 100 with the crop)

Finally there are some cost savings involved for Ricoh because lots of parts would be the same

Harold66 said:

Of course some GR owners will want to have one of each. Ths assumes that Ricoh has some exciting new features to sell it.

On the other hand if the "GR idea" has run out of steam and there are no new fields to conquer beyond perhaps a new sensor then why not just make a 40mm version alone?

Click to expand...

I think for two reasons . First of all the 28mm FOV is part of the Ricoh legacy. secondly because for lots of photogs having those two options which are so small and easy to carry in large pockets or small pouch or bags mean that lots of photogs could rely on just Ricoh cameras for some trips . I think it would also increase the sale of Ricoh accessories

Harold66 said:

This would mean that all those GR users could keep and use their GR/GRII bodies for a further extended period of time in parallel to their new GRIII-40. Nothing wrong with the current models and I am sure that they will last - probably as long as my +10 year old original GRD. The financial "hit" of buying two GR cameras will therefore be reduced.

Ricoh would have to take a chance on the "40" being popular but they could do sensor cropping into short telephoto to add to the versatility. Taking away choice would probably mean more "40" sales than if there were a choice of two focal lengths.

They could alternate models with a GRIII-28 a year of so down the track.

--

Click to expand...

Ricoh has limited resources in terms of putting products out of there so yes I think the best would be , outside the first year to alternate the two versions unpdate on the new recycle cycle. Like we could have one year for the 28mm , following for the 40mm , one year later 28mm and so on

Let s hope someone at Ricoh is listening

Unfortunately they tried all this with the GXR and apparently were burned in the process. The result was to buy Pentax assets and ask their newly acquired management for advice. The rest is history.

I think that the 40mm GR is a possibility but I am unlikely to buy one. Why might I when I have a suite of M4/3 lenses now that will fit on any M4/3 body from the newly released E-M1ii to the tiny GM5 and on every M4/3 body in the future.

Presently I can cover from 4.5mm f2.8 Sigma EF Fish-eye to Canon EF 400mm f2.8 on any M4/3 body via adapter and, should I wish, have access to unknown but at least 80+ made for M4/3 mount lenses and can adapt countless legacy MF lenses - including LTM and LM mount versions.

So the GR is timeless, but it lost IBIS and truly close focus after the GRDIV and now we get questions on how well the 4/3 sensor might perform compared to the aps-c sensor in low light when the GRD models were all time classics that used a "tiny" sensor.

Therefore the GR 28mm is in a niche that it well deserves but unless some real rabbit comes out of the hat it is a niche that it will fulfill well just as it is for many years to come.

I used to carry my original GRD everywhere with me in a belt pouch - even to work. It became an emergency copy machine (among other things). But the GR is now just that little bit too big (in a warm climate at least) and I don't carry a belt pouch any more. Nor is is close enough focus to be a useful copy machine - but of course in a more stand-off manner it can copy documents just as easily.

Harold66 said:
H

Harold66 · Dec 14, 2016

Tom Caldwell said:
Tom Caldwell said:

Tom Caldwell said:

This would mean that all those GR users could keep and use their GR/GRII bodies for a further extended period of time in parallel to their new GRIII-40. Nothing wrong with the current models and I am sure that they will last - probably as long as my +10 year old original GRD. The financial "hit" of buying two GR cameras will therefore be reduced.

ng

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Unfortunately they tried all this with the GXR and apparently were burned in the process.

Hi Tom

I am sorry but I do not see the logic trying to link the failure of the GXR system with the idea of having two versions of the GR . Apples and oranges. Irrelevant

The GXR was supposed to be a full system and , while being small , is not a pocket camera and having camera with interchangeable lenses of modules is quite different with having two very compacts camera with two lens choices

Tom Caldwell said:
The result was to buy Pentax assets and ask their newly acquired management for advice. The rest is history.

I think that the 40mm GR is a possibility but I am unlikely to buy one. Why might I when I have a suite of M4/3 lenses now that will fit on any M4/3 body from the newly released E-M1ii to the tiny GM5 and on every M4/3 body in the future.

Again apples and oranges. The idea for a GRN ( as in Normal focal length) is not to become the one and only camera system of the buyers

Tom Caldwell said:
a niche that it will fulfill well just as it is for many years to come.

I used to carry my original GRD everywhere with me in a belt pouch - even to work. It became an emergency copy machine (among other things). But the GR is now just that little bit too big (in a warm climate at least) and I don't carry a belt pouch any more.

Looks to me you are trying to get it both ways . You are comparing the GXR with a lens with the GR in terms of size ( and it is not close) and yet at the same time argues that the GR is too big compared to the GRD
You may have good reasons not to be interested in a second GR option but I doubt that they would apply to many current GR users

Harold

rondom · Dec 14, 2016

Tom Caldwell said:
So the GR is timeless, but it lost IBIS and truly close focus after the GRDIV and now we get questions on how well the 4/3 sensor might perform compared to the aps-c sensor in low light when the GRD models were all time classics that used a "tiny" sensor.

--
Tom Caldwell

Well the macro adapter is a very good lens but you may ask how practical it is to carry it around and pay an extra 100 dollars for it. I also miss my grd3. I think the true DNA of Ricoh is still more suitable for a smaller sensor camera. Even the very much revered firmware and menu system is primarily designed for a small sensor street camera, and I think doesn't work as well when they "upgraded" to apsc. When I look through my pictures with the Ricoh that I owned until now (grd3 GR GR II) the small sensor grd3 produced much more interesting results photographically. For dynamic and spontaneous shooting which is also open to pleasant accidents nothing comes close to it. There are lots of fantasy threads in this forum asking full frame, 40, or a 28 with 1.7 etc etc but no one is asking for a 1" sensor. I think that would be rebirth of GR as a great street tool.

Tom Caldwell · Dec 16, 2016

rondom said:
Tom Caldwell said:

So the GR is timeless, but it lost IBIS and truly close focus after the GRDIV and now we get questions on how well the 4/3 sensor might perform compared to the aps-c sensor in low light when the GRD models were all time classics that used a "tiny" sensor.

Click to expand...

Tom Caldwell · Dec 16, 2016

Harold66 said:
Tom Caldwell said:

Harold66 said:

Harold66 said:

This would mean that all those GR users could keep and use their GR/GRII bodies for a further extended period of time in parallel to their new GRIII-40. Nothing wrong with the current models and I am sure that they will last - probably as long as my +10 year old original GRD. The financial "hit" of buying two GR cameras will therefore be reduced.

ng

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Unfortunately they tried all this with the GXR and apparently were burned in the process.

Click to expand...

Hi Tom

I am sorry but I do not see the logic trying to link the failure of the GXR system with the idea of having two versions of the GR . Apples and oranges. Irrelevant

The GXR was supposed to be a full system and , while being small , is not a pocket camera and having camera with interchangeable lenses of modules is quite different with having two very compacts camera with two lens choices

I am afraid you missed my point Harold. You have taken the conventional aproach and decided that the GXR modules were in fact "odd" types of "lenses" and therefore the GXR was a systems camera. When in reality only the Mount Module was a systems camera. The rest of the modules could easily be used permanently with their own private back attached - ergo you have a number of cameras depending on which lens is in use. No need to ever dismount a module and if one module was 28mm with its back and another 40mm with its back then you have your wish for - 28mm and 40mm cameras. I often have wondered what might have happened if there had been no module release catch and that modules could only be attached and detached at factory. This would have meant that Ricoh would have released a bunch of cameras exactly the same each with its own particular lens type. And not a murmur from detractors that the whole contraption would have to be thrown away when the lens was upgraded

That the GXR might be too large for you as cameras is a different issue entirely. I have suggested that it might be possible to fit GXR mount rails on a camera body much the same size as the GR. Immediately you get backward compatibilty with existing modules and add a 40mm module and you have your ideal camera.

Harold66 said:
Harold66 said:

The result was to buy Pentax assets and ask their newly acquired management for advice. The rest is history.

I think that the 40mm GR is a possibility but I am unlikely to buy one. Why might I when I have a suite of M4/3 lenses now that will fit on any M4/3 body from the newly released E-M1ii to the tiny GM5 and on every M4/3 body in the future.

Click to expand...

Again apples and oranges. The idea for a GRN ( as in Normal focal length) is not to become the one and only camera system of the buyers

Harold66 said:

a niche that it will fulfill well just as it is for many years to come.

I used to carry my original GRD everywhere with me in a belt pouch - even to work. It became an emergency copy machine (among other things). But the GR is now just that little bit too big (in a warm climate at least) and I don't carry a belt pouch any more.

Click to expand...

Looks to me you are trying to get it both ways . You are comparing the GXR with a lens with the GR in terms of size ( and it is not close) and yet at the same time argues that the GR is too big compared to the GRD

Not really - in my opinion the GRD was the ideal size for a carry everywhere on the belt camera which would get used. By the time the GR had arrived it was bordering on systems camera size. Therefore it need to either go the module way like the GXR or adopt a lens mount system like conventional cameras. But Ricoh has no aps-c capable short flange focal length lens system to offer - so it really has nowhere to go - except to either get smaller and use the M4/3 mount or make your 40mm special as you would like. But in any case once the lens stops being a collapsing one then it is no longer a GR. Furthermore I think that the GR cannot afford to grow any larger in future as it is already past its optimum size.

More like between a rock and a hard place maybe.

Harold66 said:
You may have good reasons not to be interested in a second GR option but I doubt that they would apply to many current GR users

Quite right my present GR is about as far as I can go unless someting truly revolutionary comes as the GRIII. The GR40 might be what you particularly might like and maybe lots of others as well. But it i not something that I really need and if I did need 47mm I can always crop sensor on mine already.

I am in the happy situation where I have no real longing for a better camera to be released. I hope it lasts for a good while yet. Took a while to get to this sublime state

Harold66 said:
Harold

rondom · Dec 16, 2016

Tom Caldwell said:
Not that my present fascination with Panasonic GM series cameras is a solution in this vein. I don't see them as "pocket" cameras - just very small systems cameras.

that's a good definition and distinction. Actually with 21, macro and gh-3 and all the hoods, and the back caps and the front caps and what not, the GR also transforms to a small system camera. But it is "optional" and unlike the GM, it functions without all that. So there is room for versatility in GR while keeping the current concept.

In case Ricoh introduces a 40 GR all these accessories should still function and bring versatility to the system. In other words: you get a GR40: Your wide angle attachment brings it to 28 mm etc. etc. Depending on your preferred shooting needs you pick a "body" and expand it with the add on's.

Harold66 · Dec 16, 2016

Tom Caldwell said:
rondom said:

Tom Caldwell said:

So the GR is timeless, but it lost IBIS and truly close focus after the GRDIV and now we get questions on how well the 4/3 sensor might perform compared to the aps-c sensor in low light when the GRD models were all time classics that used a "tiny" sensor.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Harold66 · Dec 16, 2016

rondom said:
rondom said:

In case Ricoh introduces a 40 GR all these accessories should still function and bring versatility to the system. In other words: you get a GR40: Your wide angle attachment brings it to 28 mm etc. etc. Depending on your preferred shooting needs you pick a "body" and expand it with the add on's.

Click to expand...

I think if Ricoh was to introduce a GR40 it would make little sense to add a wide angle converter for a 28mm which would be as big as a GR28 and this could impact on the sales of the GR 28. The GR40 should be develop to go along with the GR28 and not cross it with such an adapter. the GR40 should have a 2x adapter to make it a small tele on the go for portraits and not have too many adapters

this way would be logical a GR28 for wide and ultra wide photo ( with gw3)

a GR 40 for normal and small tele ( with 2x adapter)

Thus with two small cameras and two small adapter lenses one would cover the very useful 21-80mm focal length range ( up to 100mm with the crop factor and the 2x converter)

Harold

rondom · Dec 16, 2016

Harold66 said:
rondom said:

Harold66 said:

In case Ricoh introduces a 40 GR all these accessories should still function and bring versatility to the system. In other words: you get a GR40: Your wide angle attachment brings it to 28 mm etc. etc. Depending on your preferred shooting needs you pick a "body" and expand it with the add on's.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I think if Ricoh was to introduce a GR40 it would make little sense to add a wide angle converter for a 28mm which would be as big as a GR28 and this could impact on the sales of the GR 28. The GR40 should be develop to go along with the GR28 and not cross it with such an adapter. the GR40 should have a 2x adapter to make it a small tele on the go for portraits and not have too many adapters

this way would be logical a GR28 for wide and ultra wide photo ( with gw3)

a GR 40 for normal and small tele ( with 2x adapter)

Thus with two small cameras and two small adapter lenses one would cover the very useful 21-80mm focal length range ( up to 100mm with the crop factor and the 2x converter)

The beauty of converter lenses (when they are good- and they rarely are as good as Ricohs) is that they simply give you a factor of multiplication vs a specific focal length.

My suggestion was to have the very * same* conversion adapters available for both GR28 and GR40.

Depending on your choice of camera they would help you cover different focal lengths. The fact there will be some overlap hardly matters. That wouldn't have any impact on sales of any particular model because you will still need to decide what your main camera is. if you are a dedicated 28 guy, you don't want to shoot with a GR40 with a conversion lens on a regular basis.

And more importantly, if you really need to cover a wide range, you will still need to buy both of the GRs.

Also remember: no matter how good they are, the conversion lenses will never be as good as the lens attached to the body. Besides, If they ever make a GR40 with a different conversion mount, I would guess it would still be possible to attach the current 21 to it rather easily.

but more importantly:

1. there will probably never be a GR 40.

I believe that GR is continued by Ricoh just to honor the legacy and the history of the film camera. If they ever offer another model, I would say GR 21 is more likely as it is something that they have done before. And probably japanese would go nuts over it. I would prefer a 40 as well but I don't assume my wishes are universally endorsed and I don't have any reference to prove it. I just know that you love 40 and you want GR40 and that's enough to dominate the discussion in a forum attended by three (3) people

2. there will probably never be a tele converter for GR system because they think cropping is fine with all the extra megapixels.

Therefore I don't see the point of a heated debate over hot air. Mine was just an idea on expandability and versatility within a "system" with ****limited**** offerings. I would think it would make sense to offer flexible products if they cannot afford to enter into the market with a large catalog of products.

and unlike you, I may be wrong of course

Harold66 · Dec 16, 2016

rondom said:
Harold66 said:

rondom said:

rondom said:

In case Ricoh introduces a 40 GR all these accessories should still function and bring versatility to the system. In other words: you get a GR40: Your wide angle attachment brings it to 28 mm etc. etc. Depending on your preferred shooting needs you pick a "body" and expand it with the add on's.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I think if Ricoh was to introduce a GR40 it would make little sense to add a wide angle converter for a 28mm which would be as big as a GR28 and this could impact on the sales of the GR 28. The GR40 should be develop to go along with the GR28 and not cross it with such an adapter. the GR40 should have a 2x adapter to make it a small tele on the go for portraits and not have too many adapters

this way would be logical a GR28 for wide and ultra wide photo ( with gw3)

a GR 40 for normal and small tele ( with 2x adapter)

Thus with two small cameras and two small adapter lenses one would cover the very useful 21-80mm focal length range ( up to 100mm with the crop factor and the 2x converter)

Click to expand...

Hi Rondom

rondom said:
The beauty of converter lenses (when they are good- and they rarely are as good as Ricohs) is that they simply give you a factor of multiplication vs a specific focal length.

My suggestion was to have the very * same* conversion adapters available for both GR28 and GR40.

I am not 100% sure but I think it is not feasible to get a converter that could function both as a wider angle and a narrower

rondom said:
Depending on your choice of camera they would help you cover different focal lengths. The fact there will be some overlap hardly matters. That wouldn't have any impact on sales of any particular model because you will still need to decide what your main camera is.

rondom said:
if you are a dedicated 28 guy, you don't want to shoot with a GR40 with a conversion lens on a regular basis.

this is true

rondom said:
And more importantly, if you really need to cover a wide range, you will still need to buy both of the GRs.

Indeed but because the cameras are small and if they do not do anything foolish like change the battery it is very easy to carry two small cameras

rondom said:
Also remember: no matter how good they are, the conversion lenses will never be as good as the lens attached to the body.

Indeed

rondom said:
Besides, If they ever make a GR40 with a different conversion mount, I would guess it would still be possible to attach the current 21 to it rather easily.

That I do not know

rondom said:
but more importantly:

1. there will probably never be a GR 40.

You may be right but I HOPE you are wrong on this one

rondom said:
I believe that GR is continued by Ricoh just to honor the legacy and the history of the film camera. If they ever offer another model, I would say GR 21 is more likely as it is something that they have done before. And probably japanese would go nuts over it. I would prefer a 40 as well but I don't assume my wishes are universally endorsed and I don't have any reference to prove it.

Me neither but one thing that I KNOW for a fact, if you look at the history of "made for streets cameras" 40mm is one of the two most common focal lengths and waayyy more popular than 21mm. Plus now between the iphone and theta the ultra wide segment is already covered

rondom said:
I just know that you love 40

waouh how did you know

? ( just kidding)

rondom said:
and you want GR40 and that's enough to dominate the discussion in a forum attended by three (3) people

that s a little bit harsh but ok. If I judge by these forums ( and granted they are a very little sample of Ricoh GR users ) I think there is an interest for a 40mm FOV

rondom said:
2. there will probably never be a tele converter for GR system because they think cropping is fine with all the extra megapixels.

I do not know what they are thinking and nobody does here

rondom said:
and unlike you, I may be wrong of course

Ah going back to being a little prejudicial . For the record , I am always willing to admit when I am wrong . let s bury the hatchet , shall we ?

H

rondom · Dec 16, 2016

Harold66 said:
rondom said:

and unlike you, I may be wrong of course

Click to expand...

Ah going back to being a little prejudicial . For the record , I am always willing to admit when I am wrong . let s bury the hatchet , shall we ?

please, didn't you see the smiley there? I hate them but I believe one better uses them in order to avoid misunderstanding. Apparently not enough

it was a joke.

I know you tend to have strong opinions!

This place urgently needs a new Ricoh offering or we will lose half of the attendees and I don't think the forum can survive with 1-1/2 people.

rondom · Dec 16, 2016

Harold66 said:
rondom said:

Harold66 said:

rondom said:

Harold66 said:

In case Ricoh introduces a 40 GR all these accessories should still function and bring versatility to the system. In other words: you get a GR40: Your wide angle attachment brings it to 28 mm etc. etc. Depending on your preferred shooting needs you pick a "body" and expand it with the add on's.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I think if Ricoh was to introduce a GR40 it would make little sense to add a wide angle converter for a 28mm which would be as big as a GR28 and this could impact on the sales of the GR 28. The GR40 should be develop to go along with the GR28 and not cross it with such an adapter. the GR40 should have a 2x adapter to make it a small tele on the go for portraits and not have too many adapters

this way would be logical a GR28 for wide and ultra wide photo ( with gw3)

a GR 40 for normal and small tele ( with 2x adapter)

Thus with two small cameras and two small adapter lenses one would cover the very useful 21-80mm focal length range ( up to 100mm with the crop factor and the 2x converter)

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Hi Rondom

Harold66 said:

The beauty of converter lenses (when they are good- and they rarely are as good as Ricohs) is that they simply give you a factor of multiplication vs a specific focal length.

My suggestion was to have the very * same* conversion adapters available for both GR28 and GR40.

Click to expand...

I am not 100% sure but I think it is not feasible to get a converter that could function both as a wider angle and a narrower

can only find out after some experiments. In case of tele: the fuji 1.4x designed for 35 mm equiv x100 works perfectly with GR 28 equiv. I think the sensor format (and the size of the image circle) is the critical thing here, not the actual focal length.

Harold66 said:
Harold66 said:

Depending on your choice of camera they would help you cover different focal lengths. The fact there will be some overlap hardly matters. That wouldn't have any impact on sales of any particular model because you will still need to decide what your main camera is.

if you are a dedicated 28 guy, you don't want to shoot with a GR40 with a conversion lens on a regular basis.

Click to expand...

this is true

Harold66 said:

And more importantly, if you really need to cover a wide range, you will still need to buy both of the GRs.

Click to expand...

Indeed but because the cameras are small and if they do not do anything foolish like change the battery it is very easy to carry two small cameras

you and your love of 10 year old batteries

Harold66 said:
Harold66 said:

Also remember: no matter how good they are, the conversion lenses will never be as good as the lens attached to the body.

Click to expand...

Indeed

Harold66 said:

Besides, If they ever make a GR40 with a different conversion mount, I would guess it would still be possible to attach the current 21 to it rather easily.

Click to expand...

That I do not know

Oh I can't wait

Harold66 said:
Harold66 said:

but more importantly:

1. there will probably never be a GR 40.

Click to expand...

You may be right but I HOPE you are wrong on this one

Harold66 said:

I believe that GR is continued by Ricoh just to honor the legacy and the history of the film camera. If they ever offer another model, I would say GR 21 is more likely as it is something that they have done before. And probably japanese would go nuts over it. I would prefer a 40 as well but I don't assume my wishes are universally endorsed and I don't have any reference to prove it.

Click to expand...

Me neither but one thing that I KNOW for a fact, if you look at the history of "made for streets cameras" 40mm is one of the two most common focal lengths and waayyy more popular than 21mm. Plus now between the iphone and theta the ultra wide segment is already covered

actually 35 is way more popular than 40. but I like 40 a lot.

Harold66 said:
Harold66 said:

2. there will probably never be a tele converter for GR system because they think cropping is fine with all the extra megapixels.

Click to expand...

I do not know what they are thinking and nobody does here

they dropped the thing with grd3. that's what? almost 8 years ago. 3 cycles of cameras since then and nothing was offered. why should they do it now?

Harold66 · Dec 16, 2016

rondom said:
Harold66 said:

rondom said:

and unlike you, I may be wrong of course

Click to expand...

Ah going back to being a little prejudicial . For the record , I am always willing to admit when I am wrong . let s bury the hatchet , shall we ?

Click to expand...

please, didn't you see the smiley there? I hate them but I believe one better uses them in order to avoid misunderstanding. Apparently not enough it was a joke.

i did see the smiley but since we had been able to communicate normally as of late i fid not get the joke I guess

rondom said:
I know you tend to have strong opinions!

indeed I do. But I am hardly the only one on these forums, no I am ?

rondom said:
This place urgently needs a new Ricoh offering or we will lose half of the attendees and I don't think the forum can survive with 1-1/2 people.

Agreed. Even the thread I make every year about ricoh users showing off their bedt 2016 picture is not getting much love

And my GR II is still one of the few dust free cameras I have ( the other ones are my sigma dpm

H

Harold66 · Dec 16, 2016

rondom said:
Harold66 said:

rondom said:

Harold66 said:

rondom said:

rondom said:

In case Ricoh introduces a 40 GR all these accessories should still function and bring versatility to the system. In other words: you get a GR40: Your wide angle attachment brings it to 28 mm etc. etc. Depending on your preferred shooting needs you pick a "body" and expand it with the add on's.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I think if Ricoh was to introduce a GR40 it would make little sense to add a wide angle converter for a 28mm which would be as big as a GR28 and this could impact on the sales of the GR 28. The GR40 should be develop to go along with the GR28 and not cross it with such an adapter. the GR40 should have a 2x adapter to make it a small tele on the go for portraits and not have too many adapters

this way would be logical a GR28 for wide and ultra wide photo ( with gw3)

a GR 40 for normal and small tele ( with 2x adapter)

Thus with two small cameras and two small adapter lenses one would cover the very useful 21-80mm focal length range ( up to 100mm with the crop factor and the 2x converter)

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Hi Rondom

rondom said:

The beauty of converter lenses (when they are good- and they rarely are as good as Ricohs) is that they simply give you a factor of multiplication vs a specific focal length.

My suggestion was to have the very * same* conversion adapters available for both GR28 and GR40.

Click to expand...

I am not 100% sure but I think it is not feasible to get a converter that could function both as a wider angle and a narrower

Click to expand...

can only find out after some experiments. In case of tele: the fuji 1.4x designed for 35 mm equiv x100 works perfectly with GR 28 equiv. I think the sensor format (and the size of the image circle) is the critical thing here, not the actual focal length.

rondom said:

rondom said:

Depending on your choice of camera they would help you cover different focal lengths. The fact there will be some overlap hardly matters. That wouldn't have any impact on sales of any particular model because you will still need to decide what your main camera is.

if you are a dedicated 28 guy, you don't want to shoot with a GR40 with a conversion lens on a regular basis.

Click to expand...

this is true

rondom said:

And more importantly, if you really need to cover a wide range, you will still need to buy both of the GRs.

Click to expand...

Indeed but because the cameras are small and if they do not do anything foolish like change the battery it is very easy to carry two small cameras

Click to expand...

you and your love of 10 year old batteries

Well as a traveling photographer I think the size of BOTH the battery and the charger is a great advantage and frankly logical if one is to argue about the size of the camera itself

This frantic and alas common request to criticize compact cameras which do not allow the same autonomy as much bigger cameras ( like 35mm cameras) is for me the number one clue that often reviewers are not users ( or not traveling far from home at the very least)

rondom said:
rondom said:

rondom said:

Also remember: no matter how good they are, the conversion lenses will never be as good as the lens attached to the body.

Click to expand...

Indeed

rondom said:

Besides, If they ever make a GR40 with a different conversion mount, I would guess it would still be possible to attach the current 21 to it rather easily.

Click to expand...

That I do not know

Click to expand...

Oh I can't wait

rondom said:

rondom said:

but more importantly:

1. there will probably never be a GR 40.

Click to expand...

You may be right but I HOPE you are wrong on this one

rondom said:

I believe that GR is continued by Ricoh just to honor the legacy and the history of the film camera. If they ever offer another model, I would say GR 21 is more likely as it is something that they have done before. And probably japanese would go nuts over it. I would prefer a 40 as well but I don't assume my wishes are universally endorsed and I don't have any reference to prove it.

Click to expand...

Me neither but one thing that I KNOW for a fact, if you look at the history of "made for streets cameras" 40mm is one of the two most common focal lengths and waayyy more popular than 21mm. Plus now between the iphone and theta the ultra wide segment is already covered

Click to expand...

actually 35 is way more popular than 40. but I like 40 a lot.

I do not know about way more , but yes more popular. This is why I wrote "two most common focal length" But if we are talking about a GR Normal to come along the 28mm version a 40mm makes more sense than a 35m version

rondom said:
rondom said:

rondom said:

2. there will probably never be a tele converter for GR system because they think cropping is fine with all the extra megapixels.

Click to expand...

I do not know what they are thinking and nobody does here

Click to expand...

they dropped the thing with grd3. that's what? almost 8 years ago. 3 cycles of cameras since then and nothing was offered. why should they do it now?

Not sure it is very relevant. On a camera with a tiny sensor , a converter is limited in what it can achieve . On a APS sensor and a recent one, one can achieve professional results so I think one should not try to draw too many conclusions from 8 years date on a very different camera in terms of IQ. Eight years in the digital is like an eternity

Harold

morepix · Dec 16, 2016

Instead of substituting a new lens for the present incredibly good lens, I would use an APS C sensor with 24 mp (like the Fuji X-T2, but not X-Trans). Then I'd get the added focal length by facilitating an easy continuous in-camera crop from 28 to 40 or 50 mm EFL -- i.e., digital zoom. I figure that one would still have about 12 mp usable sensor area at 50 mm EFL.

I'll leave it to the Ricoh engineers to come up with the ergonomically best way for the user to manage the crop/zoom.

Harold66 · Dec 16, 2016

morepix said:
Instead of substituting a new lens for the present incredibly good lens, I would use an APS C sensor with 24 mp (like the Fuji X-T2, but not X-Trans). Then I'd get the added focal length by facilitating an easy continuous in-camera crop from 28 to 40 or 50 mm EFL -- i.e., digital zoom.

That s fine who only post on social media or only print like 8x10 but only an emergency solution for others at the 47 mm crop

morepix said:
I figure that one would still have about 12 mp usable sensor area at 50 mm EFL.

I do not think so . The 47mm crop on the current 16 mp GR gives like a 5.7 mp file. So on the 24mp sensor you would get (24/16) X 5.7 which is just about 8.5 MP not 12 Mp

morepix said:
I'll leave it to the Ricoh engineers to come up with the ergonomically best way for the user to manage the crop/zoom.

A crop zoom, yuck !

rondom · Dec 16, 2016

Harold66 said:
morepix said:

Instead of substituting a new lens for the present incredibly good lens, I would use an APS C sensor with 24 mp (like the Fuji X-T2, but not X-Trans). Then I'd get the added focal length by facilitating an easy continuous in-camera crop from 28 to 40 or 50 mm EFL -- i.e., digital zoom.

Click to expand...

That s fine who only post on social media or only print like 8x10 but only an emergency solution for others at the 47 mm crop

Harold66 said:

I'll leave it to the Ricoh engineers to come up with the ergonomically best way for the user to manage the crop/zoom.

Click to expand...

A crop zoom, yuck !

So how come the same idea is "fine" above and later becomes "yuck". Morepix apparently wants a digital zoom. I don't see how that hurts prime shooters. It could be a firmware feature which can be activated by anyone who wishes. And one of the existing dials can serve as a zoom if assigned. You end up getting varying file sizes, from 8 to 24 mp for eg. I sure wouldn't use it at all as I get distracted by zooms and I really don't like to compose it that way. But if all is nested somewhere in the firmware as an option I wouldn't lose my love for GR.

rondom · Dec 17, 2016

rondom said:
Harold66 said:

morepix said:

Instead of substituting a new lens for the present incredibly good lens, I would use an APS C sensor with 24 mp (like the Fuji X-T2, but not X-Trans). Then I'd get the added focal length by facilitating an easy continuous in-camera crop from 28 to 40 or 50 mm EFL -- i.e., digital zoom.

Click to expand...

That s fine who only post on social media or only print like 8x10 but only an emergency solution for others at the 47 mm crop

rondom said:

I'll leave it to the Ricoh engineers to come up with the ergonomically best way for the user to manage the crop/zoom.

Click to expand...

A crop zoom, yuck !

Click to expand...

So how come the same idea is "fine" above and later becomes "yuck". Morepix apparently wants a digital zoom. I don't see how that hurts prime shooters. It could be a firmware feature which can be activated by anyone who wishes. And one of the existing dials can serve as a zoom if assigned. You end up getting varying file sizes, from 8 to 24 mp for eg. I sure wouldn't use it at all as I get distracted by zooms and I really don't like to compose it that way. But if all is nested somewhere in the firmware as an option I wouldn't lose my love for GR.

Actually a step crop would be much better. 35-40-50 etc. That's what Leica did when they did a "zoom" lens. Tri-Elmar sort of

You jump from one prime to another.

Again, I'm not a fan of crops and I rather do it with glass, resolution compromise is just a compromise on quality. But I can see it as a firmware enhancement for anyone who is willing to use it.

p.s. We will probably reach a level of resolution where anything beyond will be theoretical even in pixelpeeper standards. (Obviously glass technology will need to match it). At that point cropping will be just as valid as "full frame" . All pictures will be downsampled before being recorded. didn't they already to that with Nokia smartphones? Of course bokeh guys will still be unhappy

The 40mm GRIII

Community Leader

Forum Pro

Community Leader

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Community Leader

Community Leader

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts