Lumix LX100 vs Ricoh GrII for low light?

MalcolmD99

Leading Member
Messages
577
Solutions
3
Reaction score
37
Hi, I am looking to replace my Ricoh GRii and am looking for a camera with as good or better low light performance that will also have a zoom lense and not be too much bigger than the GR. I believe the LX100 fits the bill but I wanted to see what other people say. The Iso is almost the same on both cameras however the LX has a wider aperture while the GR has a prime lense. It is said the iso on the LX expands by 100.

The GR dose have a larger sensor and I am concerned about the LX because it has a crop sensor. How can I know when the lx is using the full sensor?

Anyone feel they are sure which camera has better low light capabilities?

Any other camera suggestions?

I see the Sony rx100 v has a Iso that expands to iso 2500. Dose that make it a contender?

Many thanks....
 
Hi Malcolm...

I am a little late in viewing this post but hope you find my comments helpful.

I am a massive fan of the Ricoh GR and owned one for several years. I loved everything about the camera, other than the 28mm focal length was a little to wide for me.

Last year I got the chance to purchase a used Sony RX1 with the add on electronic viewfinder.

In my opinion there is nothing out there that offers the fantastic image quality of the RX1. Combined with a relatively small body and the full frame sensor the results are simply stunning.

Plus of course being a full frame sensor you have the option to really crop the shot if desired without loss of detail - hence a zoom without being a zoom - if that makes sense.

I also have a Sony a6300 and coupled with one of the sigam 19mm, 30mm and 60mm prime f2.8 lenses makes a great kit.

However for me at least the RX1 beats them all.

I recently photographed a wedding using my RX1 and Pentax K-3ii.

The results were great but the quality of the RX1 sensor was plain to see, especially for the low light, evening reception shots.
 
I am looking at the Sony 16-50mm f/3.5-5.6 OSS Alpha E-mount Retractable Zoom Lens. It is very small. I noticed there are places selling it new for as little as $150. THis is about $100 less the the price for this lens on B&H. Do you think these super low prices indicate this is not a great lens?
i bought a used 16-50 and i thought it was quite bad compared to my Lx100. it’s pretty slow and i didn’t like the color rendition. i had a sigma 19mm f2.8 which was also cheap but was really good for the price.
I agree. I never use the kit zoom with my a5100, but regularly use both the sony 20 and the Sigma 30 (which is a 45mme). Both very sharp and to be recommended. The sigmas are very inexpensive as well.
 
I mean do they work as well as Sony e mount lenses for autofocus and other integration issues?

Thanks...
Yes. The cheaper 19-30-60 all work great, as does the more expensive and larger f1.4 lens. I have the 30 for sony, and the 19-30-60 for m4/3s. They are not super fast to operate (start up time, for example) but are a nice set of inexpensive primes.

I prefer the Ricohs for 28mme of course!
 
I mean do they work as well as Sony e mount lenses for autofocus and other integration issues?

Thanks...
Yes. The cheaper 19-30-60 all work great, as does the more expensive and larger f1.4 lens. I have the 30 for sony, and the 19-30-60 for m4/3s. They are not super fast to operate (start up time, for example) but are a nice set of inexpensive primes.

I prefer the Ricohs for 28mme of course!
 
So the Sigmas lenses are great but you still prefer the Ricoh 28mm lense. What lens would I have to buy to match the Ricoh in terms of quality? Now I am actually looking at full frame lenses for Sony, but I see there are not any good quality pancake lenses available made by Sony. Are familiar with full frame lenses for Sony?
 
So the Sigmas lenses are great but you still prefer the Ricoh 28mm lense. What lens would I have to buy to match the Ricoh in terms of quality? Now I am actually looking at full frame lenses for Sony, but I see there are not any good quality pancake lenses available made by Sony. Are familiar with full frame lenses for Sony?
You can buy the Ricoh GR lens made for Leica M mount and use it with an adapter
 
So the Sigmas lenses are great but you still prefer the Ricoh 28mm lense. What lens would I have to buy to match the Ricoh in terms of quality? Now I am actually looking at full frame lenses for Sony, but I see there are not any good quality pancake lenses available made by Sony. Are familiar with full frame lenses for Sony?
I don't shoot sony full frame, so I really wouldn't know. Panasonic makes a terrific 30mme pancake for m4/3s but that is another story.

 
So the Sigmas lenses are great but you still prefer the Ricoh 28mm lense. What lens would I have to buy to match the Ricoh in terms of quality? Now I am actually looking at full frame lenses for Sony, but I see there are not any good quality pancake lenses available made by Sony. Are familiar with full frame lenses for Sony?
I don't shoot sony full frame, so I really wouldn't know. Panasonic makes a terrific 30mme pancake for m4/3s but that is another story.

https://www.dpreview.com/products/panasonic/lenses/panasonic_15_1p7
 
So the Sigmas lenses are great but you still prefer the Ricoh 28mm lense. What lens would I have to buy to match the Ricoh in terms of quality? Now I am actually looking at full frame lenses for Sony, but I see there are not any good quality pancake lenses available made by Sony. Are familiar with full frame lenses for Sony?
In the tele range I own a few Sony lenses and they're great - light weight, sharp, etc. all the things you'd expect. (these do not work with the A7 - the on board computer just can't focus them).

In the normal to wide range I own a number of manual focus lens - a few of them M-Mount.

I can't say enough good things about the Voigtlander lenses.

The 35mm f/1.4 is tiny. It vignettes but produces good colors. If you want a compact setup, this is as compact as you're gonna get. (edit: the MC version, not the SC version)

The 35mm f/1.2 is larger, but omg the photos, especially in low light. The shallow depth of field is something you're not used to seeing from a 35mm field of view. Really nice.

These are manual focus lenses, but being M-Mount they have the little tab on the bottom of the lens that you use to focus - once you get used to it, it's really fast - you begin to develop a feel for where the tab should be for what focal length & the A7 has good manual focus aids (focus peaking). (edit: the 1.2 doesn't have the tab, just the 1.4)

I own the original A7R - which are incredibly cheap now - and the A7R2. The A7R has a good screen and I have no problem with manual focus even with the 35 1.2.

The A7 is naturally larger than the Ricoh, but it's lighter than a Leica, physically smaller than the Fiji XPro-1/2 (though not as light). The later A7 series gain IBIS but the body gets ever so slightly bigger and it's just a touch less comfortable in the hand.

I'm very happy with the A7 in aperture priority mode with these lenses up to ISO 6400 for B&W (haven't pushed it further than that - haven't had to).

The B&W JPGs are gorgeous, especially with the 35mm f/1.2 wide open.
 
Last edited:
Thanks, i look forward to checking out these lense rcomendations, you are saying the a7iii will not work with all e mount full frame lenses? Or only the a7?
The A7 is an older generation than the lenses & it doesn't autofocus with at least the ones I have. (85 f/1.8, 100 f/2.8 STF)

I'd read this criticism elsewhere but bought the lenses anyway, knowing that if it was really bad, I'd just have to upgrade- and it was worse than bad, it just didn't work until it decided to, which was random. I suspect the onboard computer & contrast-only AF aren't enough to drive the lenses, or maybe it doesn't put out enough wattage to drive the motor or something - all I know is the A7 doesn't autofocus with my AF Sony lenses. (it'll probably be fine with older generation AF lenses)

The A7Rii which I also have autofocuses with them a treat - the onboard PDAF and I guess more powerful computer makes it quick to focus & the face detect works nicely.

The A7 is old enough now that I don't even see it for sale at the major sites, and the A7ii is well under a grand, so you can just go straight for that. Just do your research before you commit to a body re: which lenses you want.

That said I'm still very happy with the files out of the A7 with my manual focus lenses. The AA filter means it's not as sharp as it could be but that's a minor quibble. The manual focus aids (focus peaking + magnification) make it easy to manual focus.

I'd also like to point out that I'm happy with my Fuji X-Pro2. The colors out of it are great, and they have some nice pancake lenses. The 27mm f/2.8 (41mm equiv) is compact - not their fastest AF lens but decent enough. The 23mm f/2 (35mm equiv) is much faster to focus - but not as compact. They also have an 18mm f/2 (27mm equiv) that's reasonably compact - I have no experience with it.

A lot of people prefer the colors out of the X-Pro1 (vs the X-Pro2), but it's AF performance is less than stellar. I don't know anyone who prefers the colors out of Sony vs. Fuji, but I'm sure someone will pipe in on that front.

My main complaint against the Fuji is that - the dials are nice but they have some issues. The aperture ring gets knocked too easily and suddenly I find I'm no longer in Aperture Priority but at f/16, and the ISO/shutter speed dial is nice, but they'd be better in 1/3 stop increments. But I love having the controls right there without menu diving.

Between the two - I'd buy into Sony if my goal was to use vintage wide-angle or wide-aperture lenses. I'd buy in to Fuji if my goal was to get a light-weight system with a lot of nice primes. Both are at the point where their bodies are coming down in price so you're buying for the glass & color science. I'm happy to shoot both, depending on what I want out of the photos - but you might not have money to burn like I do.

I'm not super familiar with Sony's lens lineup (despite having shot with them for longer - I mostly use it for vintage lenses), but my sense of it is that Fuji has more of the primes you'd expect them to have & Sony has more primes that take better advantage of the full frame sensor (like a wide aperture portrait lens).

Between the two, coming from Ricoh, I'd recommend the Fuji - it has more of the lenses you'd expect. Even though the X-Pro2 (one of the larger Fuji bodies) is larger than the Sony A7, it's lighter & the lenses are great.

Again - unless your goal is to adapt a lot of vintage lenses and want the full frame for that purpose, I'd go with Fuji. I find the Sony only comes out for specialty reasons now that I have the Fuji.

Mostly my camera collection breaks down like this.

X-Pro2 - my go-to camera.

Sony A7 - I use with vintage and manual focus lenses for when I want a shallow depth of field at 35mm and 50mm.

X-Pro1 - My every-day camera, with the 27mm f/2.8 pancake (even if it's a slow focusing package - both the body and lens are slow to focus).

Sony A7Rii - specialty for when I want the look of the 85mm f/1.8 or 100mm f/2.8 OSS and the 42 megapixels of detail.

Ricoh GRDiii - every day carry along with the X-Pro1.

Ricoh GR - mostly stays home.
 
Last edited:
So the Sigmas lenses are great but you still prefer the Ricoh 28mm lense. What lens would I have to buy to match the Ricoh in terms of quality? Now I am actually looking at full frame lenses for Sony, but I see there are not any good quality pancake lenses available made by Sony. Are familiar with full frame lenses for Sony?
In the tele range I own a few Sony lenses and they're great - light weight, sharp, etc. all the things you'd expect. (these do not work with the A7 - the on board computer just can't focus them).

In the normal to wide range I own a number of manual focus lens - a few of them M-Mount.

I can't say enough good things about the Voigtlander lenses.

The 35mm f/1.4 is tiny. It vignettes but produces good colors. If you want a compact setup, this is as compact as you're gonna get. (edit: the MC version, not the SC version)

The 35mm f/1.2 is larger, but omg the photos, especially in low light. The shallow depth of field is something you're not used to seeing from a 35mm field of view. Really nice.

These are manual focus lenses, but being M-Mount they have the little tab on the bottom of the lens that you use to focus - once you get used to it, it's really fast - you begin to develop a feel for where the tab should be for what focal length & the A7 has good manual focus aids (focus peaking). (edit: the 1.2 doesn't have the tab, just the 1.4)

I own the original A7R - which are incredibly cheap now - and the A7R2. The A7R has a good screen and I have no problem with manual focus even with the 35 1.2.

The A7 is naturally larger than the Ricoh, but it's lighter than a Leica, physically smaller than the Fiji XPro-1/2 (though not as light). The later A7 series gain IBIS but the body gets ever so slightly bigger and it's just a touch less comfortable in the hand.

I'm very happy with the A7 in aperture priority mode with these lenses up to ISO 6400 for B&W (haven't pushed it further than that - haven't had to).

The B&W JPGs are gorgeous, especially with the 35mm f/1.2 wide open.
Manual focus should never be a dealbreaker IMO, assuming there is a focus tab. I have a Minolta CLE with manual focus (with tab) Rokkor lens and once you get used to it, it is so easy to focus. You can pretty much adjust the tab before the camera even gets to your eye; arguably it is better than autofocus in many cases because you have absolute control of the plane of focus for fast shots, and with a little practice you don't even need to check focus; it is like Ricoh snap focus on steroids because you can choose any distance in an instant depending on subject. It is ergonomically such a good design. I thought it would be a big adaptation but very few of my shots are out of focus even though I am a relative beginner.
 
Last edited:
So the Sigmas lenses are great but you still prefer the Ricoh 28mm lense. What lens would I have to buy to match the Ricoh in terms of quality? Now I am actually looking at full frame lenses for Sony, but I see there are not any good quality pancake lenses available made by Sony. Are familiar with full frame lenses for Sony?
In the tele range I own a few Sony lenses and they're great - light weight, sharp, etc. all the things you'd expect. (these do not work with the A7 - the on board computer just can't focus them).

In the normal to wide range I own a number of manual focus lens - a few of them M-Mount.

I can't say enough good things about the Voigtlander lenses.

The 35mm f/1.4 is tiny. It vignettes but produces good colors. If you want a compact setup, this is as compact as you're gonna get. (edit: the MC version, not the SC version)

The 35mm f/1.2 is larger, but omg the photos, especially in low light. The shallow depth of field is something you're not used to seeing from a 35mm field of view. Really nice.

These are manual focus lenses, but being M-Mount they have the little tab on the bottom of the lens that you use to focus - once you get used to it, it's really fast - you begin to develop a feel for where the tab should be for what focal length & the A7 has good manual focus aids (focus peaking). (edit: the 1.2 doesn't have the tab, just the 1.4)

I own the original A7R - which are incredibly cheap now - and the A7R2. The A7R has a good screen and I have no problem with manual focus even with the 35 1.2.

The A7 is naturally larger than the Ricoh, but it's lighter than a Leica, physically smaller than the Fiji XPro-1/2 (though not as light). The later A7 series gain IBIS but the body gets ever so slightly bigger and it's just a touch less comfortable in the hand.

I'm very happy with the A7 in aperture priority mode with these lenses up to ISO 6400 for B&W (haven't pushed it further than that - haven't had to).

The B&W JPGs are gorgeous, especially with the 35mm f/1.2 wide open.
Manual focus should never be a dealbreaker IMO, assuming there is a focus tab. I have a Minolta CLE with manual focus (with tab) Rokkor lens and once you get used to it, it is so easy to focus. You can pretty much adjust the tab before the camera even gets to your eye; arguably it is better than autofocus in many cases because you have absolute control of the plane of focus for fast shots, and with a little practice you don't even need to check focus; it is like Ricoh snap focus on steroids because you can choose any distance in an instant depending on subject. It is ergonomically such a good design. I thought it would be a big adaptation but very few of my shots are out of focus even though I am a relative beginner.
Agree with two caveats.

The camera needs to be good enough - the screen has to be good enough and/or the manual focus aids need to be good enough.

At small apertures, the ability to pre/zone focus with the tab is great. Without the tab, for shallow depth of field the ability to select what you're focusing on - face on left vs. face on right) is great, but you need to be able to do it on the fly.

For critical focusing though, I'd still prefer manual focus. For - say - an 85mm f/1.2 lens or equivalanet and you want to make sure the eye is in focus - AF is good enough now that I'd 100% trust the camera over my own eyes for that.
 
Did you try doing firmware updates on your a7 and the new lenses? According to another post they should work together if you have the right firmware.
I did.

Word of warning: Only update your Sony firmware from a Windows PC and not a Mac. The update process failed on a Mac, but luckily I had a Windows PC lying around so I could complete the update.

I don't know why Sony makes the update process via USB cable and not via a BIN file on the card, but c'est la vie.

I just checked and there is no "lens database" to update, so I have the latest firmware - 3.20, Release Date 7/26/2016 - same as on Sony's website.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top