Reading mode: Light Dark

Short video on GRii vs GRiii low light AF

Go to last post
Have to agree. My mk2 is better focusing than my mk3. I can live with it though. But then I don’t do anything much faster than landscape. I can imagine street shooters etc will be disappointed.
 
I just cant believe how Ricoh can overlook the low light AF. The GR was never very good in low light and being even worse than the GR is really disappointing. I dont think i can take steps back like this.

In this video it shows 1/13 sec which is probably hand holdable with IBIS and exactly why i would want good low light AF in combination with IBIS so i can take indoor shots of cathedrals etc in low light. or long exposure on trip without having to worry about AF.

Secondly, can someone do more thorough comparisons using larger single point spot focus and multi point AF.

IF larger point focus and Multi point focus are better than GRII then that will shut down a few whiners ;)
 
maltmoose said:
I just cant believe how Ricoh can overlook the low light AF. The GR was never very good in low light and being even worse than the GR is really disappointing. I dont think i can take steps back like this.

In this video it shows 1/13 sec which is probably hand holdable with IBIS and exactly why i would want good low light AF in combination with IBIS so i can take indoor shots of cathedrals etc in low light. or long exposure on trip without having to worry about AF.

Secondly, can someone do more thorough comparisons using larger single point spot focus and multi point AF.

IF larger point focus and Multi point focus are better than GRII then that will shut down a few whiners ;)
Click to expand...
The focus getting slow happens in light that is still very hand holdable, it happens before the AF assist light would kick in. The AF assist light doesn't really speed it either.

There isn't a larger single point AF mode on the GRIII. Multi point isn't any faster.

Shawn
 
david8732 said:
Has anyone an opinion on this? Th GRiii seems really awful.

Click to expand...
Have you tried to compare with Pinch focus on GR2 ?
Not that I think it matters much, even pinch mode will usually focus if it hits the right spot.

What mode is GR3 in?

GR3 should really be able to focus there.
Would it be possible that it tries to focus on the wrong spot ? I mean, could the detection be offset from the indication on the LCD ?
 
david8732 said:
Has anyone an opinion on this? Th GRiii seems really awful.

Click to expand...
Such a big, big shame. I was so ready to buy and love this camera!

But the (low light) AF being terrible, and the reports of serious QC issues will make me skip this. I really love the (concept of) GR, but I'm not going to wait another 2-3 years for a GRIV that might possibly solve these issues. If a GRIV is ever going to happen of course...

Perhaps miracles will happen with firmware updates and QC being turned up a notch or 2.
Would love to see Ricoh step up and fix this, but I'm not holding my breath...

:-(
 
david8732 said:
Has anyone an opinion on this? Th GRiii seems really awful.

Click to expand...
Well, that is horrible... BUT if it is that bad compared to the GR II... I really think that Ricoh will fix this issue soon.
 
Shawn67 said:
maltmoose said:
I just cant believe how Ricoh can overlook the low light AF. The GR was never very good in low light and being even worse than the GR is really disappointing. I dont think i can take steps back like this.

In this video it shows 1/13 sec which is probably hand holdable with IBIS and exactly why i would want good low light AF in combination with IBIS so i can take indoor shots of cathedrals etc in low light. or long exposure on trip without having to worry about AF.

Secondly, can someone do more thorough comparisons using larger single point spot focus and multi point AF.

IF larger point focus and Multi point focus are better than GRII then that will shut down a few whiners ;)
Click to expand...
The focus getting slow happens in light that is still very hand holdable, it happens before the AF assist light would kick in. The AF assist light doesn't really speed it either.

There isn't a larger single point AF mode on the GRIII. Multi point isn't any faster.
Click to expand...
Shawn67 said:
Shawn
Click to expand...
OK thanks, so is there only spot and Multi AF on GRIII? The AF box on GRIII looks similar size to the spot AF on GR.

On GR there is pinpoint, spot, multi.
 
I understand your concerns, but read the posts on the thread Who likes their new GRIII. They are all pretty positive. I have come to distrust these Utube reviews over the years because I am never sure of their underlying motives.
 
maltmoose said:
Shawn67 said:
maltmoose said:
I just cant believe how Ricoh can overlook the low light AF. The GR was never very good in low light and being even worse than the GR is really disappointing. I dont think i can take steps back like this.

In this video it shows 1/13 sec which is probably hand holdable with IBIS and exactly why i would want good low light AF in combination with IBIS so i can take indoor shots of cathedrals etc in low light. or long exposure on trip without having to worry about AF.

Secondly, can someone do more thorough comparisons using larger single point spot focus and multi point AF.

IF larger point focus and Multi point focus are better than GRII then that will shut down a few whiners ;)
Click to expand...
The focus getting slow happens in light that is still very hand holdable, it happens before the AF assist light would kick in. The AF assist light doesn't really speed it either.

There isn't a larger single point AF mode on the GRIII. Multi point isn't any faster.

Shawn
Click to expand...
OK thanks, so is there only spot and Multi AF on GRIII? The AF box on GRIII looks similar size to the spot AF on GR.

On GR there is pinpoint, spot, multi.
Click to expand...
On the GRIII all the focusing modes are: Auto Area, Select AF, PinPoint AF, Tracking, Continuous, MF, Snap, Infinity.

As far as I can see there is no way to change the AF spot size in Select or PinPoint.

Shawn
 
This video is scary, that's for sure.
 
mgm2 said:
I understand your concerns, but read the posts on the thread Who likes their new GRIII. They are all pretty positive. I have come to distrust these Utube reviews over the years because I am never sure of their underlying motives.
Click to expand...
Based on the title of that thread, don`t you think they`d be positive? Also, the video compares ricoh vs. ricoh.
 
Last edited:
the hands on sample images I see on Flickr from new releases. If I'm blown away by those images, not necessarily all of them but enough that are superior to those from the previous model then I'll settle for some misgivings. This is subjective of course.

Pierre
 
Last edited:
Hello, I'm an author of the video. I'm a happy user and big fan of GR II. I have bought GR III because of better and faster (claimed) AF. It came last week. Shortly after I started to use it, I felt, that focusing speed and hit rate in lower light (like normally lit restaurant - ISO 1600, f/2.8, 1/30s) are much worse than with GRII, so I made this test. GR III has both "pinpoint" and "select" AF modes - same as GR II, but both of them are equally slow on GR III. I do not use auto AF as it is not predictable - I want to be sure, where the camera is going to focus. In this case, both GR II and GR III were in same mode (pinpoint). Situation in video is probably worst case scenario, but also in normal use, AF on GR III is slower and less reliable (it finds correct focus in fewer cases). It feels to me as if phase detect part of new hybrid autofocus was not used at all. This is also the case during daylight, AF sometimes hunts in a way typical for contrast detect AF (this is only my feeling, I have no way to verify this claim). I hope, that AF performance is fixable in firmware. I have also opened error report with Ricoh today describing the issue.
 
Martin Dubovsky said:
Hello, I'm an author of the video. I'm a happy user and big fan of GR II. I have bought GR III because of better and faster (claimed) AF. It came last week. Shortly after I started to use it, I felt, that focusing speed and hit rate in lower light (like normally lit restaurant - ISO 1600, f/2.8, 1/30s) are much worse than with GRII, so I made this test. GR III has both "pinpoint" and "select" AF modes - same as GR II, but both of them are equally slow on GR III. I do not use auto AF as it is not predictable - I want to be sure, where the camera is going to focus. In this case, both GR II and GR III were in same mode (pinpoint). Situation in video is probably worst case scenario, but also in normal use, AF on GR III is slower and less reliable (it finds correct focus in fewer cases). It feels to me as if phase detect part of new hybrid autofocus was not used at all. This is also the case during daylight, AF sometimes hunts in a way typical for contrast detect AF (this is only my feeling, I have no way to verify this claim). I hope, that AF performance is fixable in firmware. I have also opened error report with Ricoh today describing the issue.
Click to expand...
Thank you Martin. I`m thankful for the video because I really think it is so bad that Ricoh has to fix it to at least bring it in line with the GR II. It`s almost as if the phase detection isn`t working at all. Ricoh obviously rushed the release and I`m not sure why... I mean, it isn`t like they are working on tons of cameras and they had to have been working on it for years. I think in a year, this camera will be working ok as long as Ricoh does some firmware releases.
 
Last edited:
david8732 said:
Has anyone an opinion on this? Th GRiii seems really awful.

Click to expand...
HI,

1. The maker of the video used Pinpoint Focus which is not the best for low light. Select AF or Auto-Area will work better. I also notice FS (full snap) is on and wonder if that affected the result.

2. 1/13 sec, f2.8 ISO 3200 gives an EV of 1.67 (corrected to ISO 100)

There are very few occasions when I have actually tried to make a photo at such a low light level. In such cases manual focus by scale or Snap might be easier. Having said that I have found the low-low light AF with the GR3 to be reliable if a bit slow.

3. I ran some tests on various household subjects at EV 3.67 and found no problems with AF at all. This is quite a low light level especially for hand held work.

This low light issue with the GR3 has become a beatup, like henny-penny running around saying the sky will fall.

Someone says the AF is bad so some more people jump on board to "prove" just how bad it is or in this case is alleged to be.

Sure the AF is not as lightning fast as my Panasonics but it is perfectly adequate in light levels which will actually be used for taking photos.

Andrew
 
axlotl said:
Sure the AF is not as lightning fast as my Panasonics but it is perfectly adequate in light levels which will actually be used for taking photos.
Click to expand...
It may be adequate for you in how you take photos , others have different needs and expectations

Me I resort to snap but sometimes I wished that I didn't have to others will differ
 
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