I considered GR's from the beginning. (film days) I sold the originals. They quickly got a reputation for being delicate, compared to the Olympus Stylus family. (I went for a Yashica T4, at the time) Over the years, I didn't see much that durability had improved, so I never bought one. In the digital days, folks had to REALLY be in it for the compactness and large sensor, to spend that kind of money.
As recently as the GR II, it was just not compelling enough at the $1k price point without IBIS and with the lower resolution. It's not that I need 24 MP, it's just that I need that for to make it versatile when cropped, if I have only a wide prime lens! The body also seemed a bit long, due to the wimpy built-in flash.
The addition of IBIS and 50% more resolution, along with making it more compact by eliminating the flash finally made it worth paying the price. (and let's be honest, they're quite expensive for their feature set) Oh, and the (already great) lens was improved, too.
With the additional resolution, I can just shoot all the time now at 24 MP and crop down to 50 mm eq. with no problems. When I DO need the full 28 mm angle of view, I just reduce the JPG to 1800p or so on the long edge for sharing.
I LOVE IBIS, since I got my Olympus E-M10.3. It really is a game-changer when shooting in available ambient light. Even more so on a wide angle lens, as it is not typically considered an "action lens".
Best how? IMO the GRIII only has one advantage, noise at high ISO. Nothing more.
IBIS is a huge advantage in its own right. (not just for noise reduction) It can make the difference between shooting wide open at max ISO and still having camera shake motion blur and not.
I have owned the old Ricoh GR digital line, Ricoh GR, Ricoh GRII and the Ricoh GRIII, I think the GRII is superior to the GRIII. It has 4:3 ratio,
Crop to 4:3; what's the problem?
I don't care, but it can't be much! What I want is good jpgs, so I don't need to screw around editing raws.
way better ergonomics, better button layout, flash and so on.
I don't know about the II, but I like the layout fine on the III; no complaints. It sounds like it is your preference because you've gotten used to it, and now you don't want to change. Also, the wheel that some people find flakey has a D-pad too, so what's the problem?
I sold my GRIII after about a month an bought a second GRII. Sales numbers means nothing when deciding how good something is.
Here, you're 100% wrong. Sales numbers mean EVERYTHING to Ricoh, and so it should mean something to you, since they won't keep making them if they don't sell! When they sell more, it is their feedback that they did a good job and made the right decisions. There might be 100 people who feel like you do, but if there are 800 people who feel the III is more compelling, guess who they're going to listen to?
Ricoh finally succeeded in creating a hype around the GRIII, that’s why it sells.
Nope, you're not giving people enough credit. It sells because it is finally compelling enough to a wider market of potential buyers. I've been a digital photographer for a long time, but the GRs just weren't compelling enough to justify the price until the III. They either had to be cheaper or have features that more people want.
It’s finding a way to new Ricoh GR shooters. But most old Ricoh GR users seem to like the GRII more.
I think you're right about finding new GR shooters, but old GR users are a much smaller pool than all the potential new customers. (as evidenced by the 800% increase in sales in Europe!)
Hope it's true.
works for you. You know what works for you but you shouldn’t try to second guess why it does not work for some of us
