Reading mode: Light Dark

R6/R7 - lost me

Go to last post
T

Tom Caldwell

Community Leader
Forum Moderator
Messages
51,477
Solutions
20
Reaction score
21,804
Location
New South Wales, AU
I have a R4 - think it is great

However the R6/R7 has no pull and I think that even if the worst happens and I wear out my R4 I will not be in the market for the R6/7/8/9 (or whatever)

Why?

They are great cameras for what they are and no doubt will give their users a great deal of feedback and pleasure.

My problem is basically "a different battery size" and secondly the slight divergence away from the "G" series concept towards the point and shoot market.

I would not dare to call the R6/7 a "point and shoot" but merely point out that there is a subtle bend in the trajectory in that direction.

I find the R4 a very superior camera and I can forgive the pressed aluminium case as it is well-made and it does allow you to mix in with the other tourists and not to be seen as a serious photographer (when you are) but at least I only need to carry one set of spare batteries and one charger when I am off with my GR-D GX100 and R4. The cameras tend to complement one another but the R6/7 seems to be a do it all camera and not a companion to the others.

I have interpreted the re-positioning of the R6/7 as being made to allow room for a 7x zoom version of the G series - I hope that I am right - the criteria would be a similar sized body and retaining the same battery as the rest of the G series - maybe then the R4 could be retired. I am not in a hurry - the R4 is much loved and well used - but I cannot see myself ever buying a R6/7 or their successors.

With the R4 worn out and no GZ1000 zoom in sight then I will panic.

--
Tom Caldwell
 
I am of the same basic opinion. What might entice me to spend money is a enhanced GX-xxx that gives a lens range of 24-160 using the switched lens system of the R series. I thought the GX-100 may have been designed that way in the first place, but I'm still waiting.

Brian
 
I agree with my Aussie colleagues, but if my R4 went south and I couldn't get another one, then what would I replace it with as an go everywhere everyday compact? I use both the 28mm and the 7x zoom a lot so. . . . A 'standard' 36mm 3x at the same size from another company has little appeal (but I still use my F-11 at night).
--
Rube
http://www.flickr.com/photos/71881102@N00/
 
Hi Tom,

very much treasure your posts!

I have the GRD, also a Olympus C7000 (5x zoom) and a Panasonic FZ15 (12x zoom).

So I don't really need another zoom camera, but the Panasonic is too large to carry around with me all the time and I have a love/hate relationship with the Olympus. It has a little bit of everything but nothing that really stands out (image quality can be amazing, but there is always corner softness and barrel distortion. 5x zoom is great but no image stabilization).

I carry around the GRD with me as much as I can and I do miss the zoom sometimes.

Here is my question/statement: I really love great image quality, the GRD has it, and my other cameras have it too (if I work them the right way).

Somehow I am infatuated with the R4 or R5 (people don't seem to like this one), they are small and have the range I need from a carry-with-me-always camera.

Can you get real quality pictures from the R4 or is there a compromise that comes from having such a versatile lens. Will I be happy with outdoor pictures (I am planning for the R4 to be my hiking camera) from the R4 compared to the pictures I get from my GRD?

In Germny (where I will be traveling to for Christmas, I live in Seatte) the R4 can now be had for 159 Euros and the R5 is selling for 154 Euros.

Is there a big difference between th e28mm GRD shots and those from the R4?

Thanks Tom and have a good one,

D.
 
Francis Mariani said:
What is it about the R6/R7 that doesn't impress you. I did a
side-by-side comparison and the only thing that I can see that's
favourable to the R4 is the aperture range: R4: F3.3 - F4.8 / R7:
F3.3 – F5.2. Is this what bugs you, or is the lens, or is there
something else, not measurable?
Click to expand...
Can't speak for others, but for me I think its the fact that the early Rs broke new ground with their speed, zoom range, small size, and image quality. It means that they are just as useful as a pocket camera today as when the R3 was introduced. All that has happened is that there have been minor enhancments done to subsequent models which are not sufficient to make an existing R owner upgrade.

If you do not already own an R model then there would be nothing wrong with buying an R6/R7 I think.

Brian
 
I dont understand. If you love the R4, the R6/7 is overall imo a much better camera. It does not offer 'too much' other features if you already own an R4, but it is of better quality with more tweaks/advantages/updates/thinner/bigger screen/assist light etc...

To be honest, you need to get over the 'battery' issue. Its changed. Its thinner, and it wont fit a GRD/GX100. No company will continue to use a bigger battery over a thin one if it basically does the same job/performance. If a new gr comes out with the r6 type battery, then what would you say? All a new battery means is that you have to carry one more charger. It also means if your charger/battery for your THREE cameras break or get lost, your up creek without a paddle and you would not be able to use any, unless your carrying 3 batteries and 3 chargers?

The G series and the R series are two different types of cameras.
 
Hi,

Not to begrudge Tom's right to his opinion, but I'm also a bit bemused that battery compatibility could be a significant reason to prefer the R4 over the R6/R7. For myself I think the thinner R6 battery (and hence thinner R6 camera) is a small but definite plus for the R6. I concede that the need to carry an extra charger could be an issue, but how many of us carry two cameras around anyway? And even if we do, who carries the chargers themselves around? I leave the chargers at home and carry a couple of spare batteries for long outings - they're cheap as chips (

A better argument is the R6 didn't really do the image quality of the R series any favors moving from 6MP to 7MP on such a small sensor, but (as Guy points out in another thread) that's the way everyone is going these days, and Ricoh has to keep up to sell cameras - and the R series is definitely aimed at the "more is better" point and shoot buyers (as I was till I learned better!). Even so I think the other improvements in the R6 over the R4 would outweigh this for most people.

But given how cheap a new R4 is here in Oz, it's hard to resist the temptation to buy one just to see if maybe Tom is right after all - but then if it turned out he was there'd be that damned battery incompatibility to worry about :-)

Ross.
 
In Germany you can buy the
R4 for €160,
R5 for €170,
R6 for €210,
R7 for €280 (once available)
(all online)

As an ex R4 owner I seriously consider buying the R7 (provided its better than the R4/R6) if not I need to make a call on R6 or R4... and if I decide for another R4 I need to hurry before stocks are depleted.

But then the Gx100 really appeals to me with the 24mm (and the possible 19mm adaptor and the $1000 underwater housing from Sea and Sea, and...)
But €400+ is a bit too much for me at the moment.

I think I'll go with technology though and hopefully the R7 is good investment for the P&S and maybe at a later stage I'll add a G series.

So please someone with early R7 impressions.....
 
sunskisurf said:
Hi Tom,

very much treasure your posts!
Click to expand...
Thanks for your kind words of encouragement - sometimes I think I prattle on too much.
sunskisurf said:
I have the GRD, also a Olympus C7000 (5x zoom) and a Panasonic FZ15
(12x zoom).
Click to expand...
I bought the GR-D after much hand-wringing because I had not long before bought an LX1. I was quite aware that the GR-D had won awards and I wondered why a small fixed focal length camera could command such a price. I would certainly not have gone hunting one but a shop near where I live was brave enough to acquire one for sale and after a back to back shoot out with my LX1 in the shop I was hooked.

I really liked the LX1 and never stopped liking it but for some reason it rarely got used after that - why I can't really say as the LX1 is an excellent camera - I guess the GR-D was just more personally rewarding to use - I call it the "photographic experience" (PE). The PE of the GR-D is just so compelling that you just want to keep on using it - this is something more than just the imaging itself.

On the basis of the GR-D and my newly-refound interest in Ricoh I saw the R4 advertised at a small discount right after the R5 was released. I saw it initially as a cheap knock-about camera and was really surprised at how well it actually performed.

Not quite as intuitive as the GR-D in use but the image stabilisation works well and the zoom is very useful as it adds versatility to the range over where the GR-D excels. If you only shoot jpg you will find that the slightly smaller sensor and lower pixel count does show up from time to time but Guy will tell you that 6mp is more than enough for acceptable quality images and in some cases like more extreme light conditions the lower mp is actually an advantage. The GR-D has slow-RAW of course which helps if you have patience.

The real secret of all Ricoh cameras is the easy accessability of the EV control. Before Ricoh I knew about this valuable tool as every camera has it - the difference with Ricoh is that it is up there in your face begging to be used whereas with other cameras it is hidden and at best needs a few button presses and some loss of concentration to get right. My favourite is assigning the EV to the zoom rocker on the GR-D - instant EV correction - it is a wonderful function.
sunskisurf said:
I carry around the GRD with me as much as I can and I do miss the
zoom sometimes.

Can you get real quality pictures from the R4 or is there a
compromise that comes from having such a versatile lens. Will I be
happy with outdoor pictures (I am planning for the R4 to be my hiking
camera) from the R4 compared to the pictures I get from my GRD?
Click to expand...
I don't think that the R4 pictures are noticeably any worse than the GR-D unless you were real picky - the GR-D lens is a bit better and the sensor is larger than that on the R4 but a good shot from either is very acceptable. In my book the cameras complement each other and it is easy enough to have an R4 not far away when you are carrying the GR-D and vice-versa. The batteries are interchangeable and that is a good space saving if you are travelling light. A GR-D and an R4 with charger and a couple of spare batteries has to be easier than any dslr or even prosumer digital in my book.
sunskisurf said:
In Germny (where I will be traveling to for Christmas, I live in
Seatte) the R4 can now be had for 159 Euros and the R5 is selling for
154 Euros.
Click to expand...
Currently being sold out of chain of a chain store (Target) in Australia for AUD$269 - don't know what that is in Euros but we have a 10% GST here.
sunskisurf said:
Is there a big difference between the 28mm GRD shots and those from
the R4?
Click to expand...
Pixel peeping would show a difference but I don't bother with this and this rough and ready type would say that most would not readily tell the difference.
sunskisurf said:
Thanks Tom and have a good one,

D.
Click to expand...
--
Tom Caldwell
 
If you did not already own any other Ricoh camera and only intended ever owning one versatile small camera then the R6/7 would be a great camera to have. A few small steps forward - smaller and possibly better "weighted" - and a few steps sideways (reduced focussing alternatives).

My little say was from someone who has a R4 a GR-D and a GX100 and uses them all as they complement each other in many ways. The battery-size commonality is a big factor and as the R4 is the technical older type and of nominal less robust construction then I might wonder what I might do if I had to replace it.

My thoughts were that the R6/7 has lost me because I would need new batteries and a charger (would come with the camera) but I already have more battery types and chargers than I can possibly cope with and there is no way that I want yet another set.

My response would be to "make do" with the other two cameras (not a crying shame) and hope that Ricoh will have enough sense to bring out a 7x optical zoom version of the G series in a body similar to the GR-D/GX100 with the same battery used at some later date.

That would be the only thing that would tempt me over the line whilst my R4 is still firing up. There is no way that I see any need to trade up to a R6/7 but this is no disrespect to those cameras - it is just a comment on that the direction that the recent R series has taken has diverged from my personal preferences.

The ability to waltz into my local Target store and pick up the respected R4 for AUD$269 also makes the currently available R6 look very overpriced.

If you were to buy an R6/7 first and then be tempted to try either a GR-D or GX100 later you will then face the same battery size problem in reverse - of course if you are a "one-camera-at-a-time" person then all this doesn't matter.

--
Tom Caldwell
 
rossh said:
Hi,

Not to begrudge Tom's right to his opinion, but I'm also a bit
bemused that battery compatibility could be a significant reason to
prefer the R4 over the R6/R7.
Click to expand...
Fair enough - I am not saying that there is anything wrong with the R6/7 just pointing out that the R4 is "good enough" that I am not adding to my battery and charger problems by going to the R6/7 - I also have Canon cameras and Canon is smart enough to make sure that most of their larger mainstream cameras are compatible with the BP-511 battery - so I steer my course so that all my Canon gear has the same battery/charger set up. As each unit comes with its own charger I have chargers to spare - one can be set up permanently on my desk and another can be in my travelling bag of chargers and that leaves several spare in a drawer if any one breaks down or gets lost.

Even the new Canon backup drive/reader uses the BP-511.

Panasonic had a burst where most of their cameras used a limited range of batteries and it was good to find your spare battery stock could be recycled into the next camera and that spare chargers proliferated - then suddenly things went awry and each new camera seemed to have a new battery size and charger. Sure took the shine off Panasonic for me However it was good to find that the LX1/2 has the same battery type and charger as the Ricoh R1-R5 and the GR-D and GX100.

I don't really think it is absolutely necessary for so many proprietary battery types ot be around - notable is the fact that most manafacturers have their equivalent of the Canon BP-511 but the rotten sods have all got different contacts and will not cross fit each other's cameras. This for one ensures that camera batteries will not be in "every" shop and relatively cheap like the AA and AAA.

I realise that it is a small issue if one has only a few cameras and a practical non-issue for those who only have one at a time - but I am an addict and my Scots heritage abhors waste (smile).
rossh said:
For myself I think the thinner R6
battery (and hence thinner R6 camera) is a small but definite plus
for the R6.
Click to expand...
Yes it is and if I did not already have three Ricoh cameras using a common battery it would be a big plus for me.
rossh said:
I concede that the need to carry an extra charger could
be an issue, but how many of us carry two cameras around anyway?
Click to expand...
I do
rossh said:
And even if we do, who carries the chargers themselves around?
Click to expand...
I do
rossh said:
I leave the chargers at home and carry a couple of spare batteries for long
outings - they're cheap as chips (
batteries are small enough that the biggest worry is remembering
which pocket you put them in when you need them.
Click to expand...
I have been to Malaysia for an extended trip recently and been about Australia enough to tax even a good stock of pre-charged batteries.
rossh said:
Even so I think the other
improvements in the R6 over the R4 would outweigh this for most
people.
Click to expand...
I would agree with this but for the rest of my Ricoh fleet tugging me in the other direction.
rossh said:
But given how cheap a new R4 is here in Oz, it's hard to resist the
temptation to buy one just to see if maybe Tom is right after all -
but then if it turned out he was there'd be that damned battery
incompatibility to worry about :-)
Click to expand...
If you already have an R6 I would see no need to buy an R4 as it is not the superior image quality I am on about. The R6/7 is just not a big enough jump in "necessity" for me to warrant what to me is going off in a tangent into a separate camera "system" when I can use the R4/GR-D/GX100 in a similar manner to the way one would buy a dslr and several lenses. I see the cameras as a set and should be used as a set ("can be used" are a better words signifying "optionally").

The dslr body is the functional unit and by definition uses the same battery as there is only one body (naturally) and the lenses are there to extend its functionality.

Using the same anaolgy we have several lenses permanently attached to compact bodies that also can be used to extend functionality. Try telling someone who has a dslr that he needs different batteries every time he changes a lens and therefore has to carry batteries stocks of each size and multiple chargers when he goes on a mission. Even the most dedicated dslr user replete with heavy kit would soon point out the lack of wisdom in this idea.
rossh said:
Ross.
Click to expand...
What interests me is the GZ1000 7x optical zoom camera in a G series body shell - similar size will do and it must have the same battery as the other G series cameras.

... and I promise to carry them all when I go away (smile) - after all it is still less bulk and weight than a Canon 5D with battery pack and even one decent lens.

--
Tom Caldwell
 
I am sure that you will be very happy with the R7 unless you do buy a GX100 and decide to team it up with a longer zoom - then you fall into the same dilemma:

Is the GX100/R7 combination that much better than the GX100/R4 combination to be worth duplicating spare batteries and another charger?

To many it might be but I have a GR-D as well and the R6/7 replacing the R4 doesn't make sense to me - I will be happy to soldier on with the R4 until either it dies or Ricoh make a GZ1000. After all I am perfectly happy with the R4. However I am not saying that the R6/7 is not a fine camera and it may well be much more superior to the R4 in capability but it is heading in a direction that means that it has ne real attraction for me personally. I would hate to seem to be arguing that the the R4 was the pinnacle of its class and that every step since was retrograde - plainly that is not so.

Sometimes it is small things and in my case the battery size spoils my "set" of interchangeable complemetary cameras.

... and "golly gosh" I am also saving money by being happy with what I already have (smile).

--
Tom Caldwell
 
At the danger of going all OT now.. just wanted to share my encounters since I broke my R4. (Btw - I was entirely happy with the cam and nearly cried when it broke....)
  • the Pics I got from the wedding where the camer broke are almost all wide angle shots ( a handful of tele close-ups which weren't that great to begin with)
  • at my wedding a few weeks later I really missed my cam - cause anyone would have made better shots with the R4 with its settings - than the poor quality I got back from all the aunts/uncles and friends with their fancy digicams that bump ISO to 800/1600 to keep the shutter speed up or avoding to use the flash - mainly cause they have no idea how to set their fancy cams and if they had all kept their old SLRs, the fixed ISO film would have produce much much better pics.
  • I took my old Nikon F80 on my honeymoon (only with 35 -80 lense) and I didn't miss any longer lens, but could have used a 28 or 24 for most of the shots.
Those experiences made me think whether a GX100 might be better suited. But I still need some convincing that the price differnce is justified (the gx100 is worth the money) keeping in mind I might buy the R7 (or R8/R9) after all if I need a long zoom lens.
 
Tom,

I guess the question that I as a one-cam-at-a-time Ricoh supporter would ask.

If you carry an R4 and GX100 (lets ignore the GRD) at the same time - what situation make you use the GX100 over the R4? Other then for 24mm shots?

Daz
 
DazUlrich said:
In Germany you can buy the
R4 for €160,
R5 for €170,
R6 for €210,
R7 for €280 (once available)
(all online)
Click to expand...
Thanks for that price list, here's the Australian current prices, the R4 for this week only at the moment at Target stores and the rest online from http://www.camerafarm.com.au , there may be cheaper elsewhere but they work OK for me so far.

R4 = Oz$269 (Target store special)
R5 = Oz$377
R6 = Oz$497 (will go down a bit when R7 available)
R7 = Oz$477 (jumped up from an earlier advertised Oz$457)

That Oz currency translates today to ...

R4 = Oz$269 = €165 = US$230
R5 = Oz$377 = €231 = US$323
R6 = Oz$497 = €305 = US$426
R7 = Oz$477 = €293 = US$409

So as usual in Australia, though much closer to Japan and China it has higher prices. Sigh!

Regards............. Guy
 
Sorry to hear that you didn't get photographic value on your big day. Sadly even thought the most basic small digital camera has quite sophisticated adjustments available the "Box Brownie" syndrome still persists and most people just leave their camera on auto-pilot.

Also sadly most just want a quick cheap print of the fairly average image captured - usually with red-eye or out of focus and badly framed.

The cheap prints are waved around and gushed over and then thrown in a drawer to wait the final clean out and destruction by those who were not there and do not value them. 20 years later just a few survive the distance and suddenly become cherished momentoes of friends long lost or relations now gone forever.

So nothing has changed - the Box Brownie has become the Point and Shoot and those that press the shutters are thinking exactly the same way.

The trouble is that those who spend a bit of time and money on photography are thought a bit strange if not exactly mad. Because photography is practised by everyone with a camera and cameras are ubiquitous then the product is undervalued. It is accepted that you might have acquired more skill and spent more money but as this is a product of your madness the cost of one of your prints should not be more than $1 more than that from that charged by the photo-print bar at their local variety store.

Someone once said to me that the tip truck business was the hardest business to be in because anyone who could raise he deposit on a hire purchaase contract could be a tip truck operator. Not an exact analogy but it does highlight the difficulties of being rewarded for taking good images.

This applies to both money and respect.

btw either the GR-D or the GX100 are better cameras than the R4 or R6 and are well worth the extra money - I do not see my R4 as a potential replacement for either but the other cameras don't have the R4/6 zoom capabilities.

--
Tom Caldwell
 
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