600

Ricoh GR III review

Image Quality

Out-of-camera JPEG | ISO 100 | 1/125 sec | F5
Photo by Barney Britton

Broadly speaking, the Ricoh GR III offers at least comparable pixel-level image quality to the best 24MP APS-C cameras in its class. This isn't damning with faint praise - the 16MP sensor in the GR / II was really showing its age, but the GR III's sensor on the other hand is very competitive. Ricoh's 'Std' color profile still isn't great, but a range of 'image control' picture modes offer considerable versatility for JPEG shooters.

Key takeaways

  • Modern 24MP sensor offers excellent JPEG and Raw image quality
  • Noise reduction is applied to Raw files, but dynamic range is very competitive
  • JPEG shooters will appreciate suite of 'image control' color modes
  • Redesigned lens offers excellent sharpness across the frame

Studio scene

Against other 24MP APS-C cameras, we can see that the GR III easily holds its own, with excellent detail capture across the scene, often resulting in moiré patterning. It holds up very well against the Fujifilm XF10 in the center of the frame, and the increased resolution of the new 24MP sensor versus the 16MP sensors of the older X70 and GR II is noticeable. And though this scene is primarily designed to evaluate image quality based on a camera's sensor - which is why we use standard lenses for each interchangeable lens system - it can be useful to get a broad idea of uniformity for fixed-lens cameras as well. You can see evidence of variation at points outside the center of the scene.

It's worth noting that shooting our studio scene on a 28mm equivalent lens is a real 'stress test', in the sense that wide-angle lenses generally aren't well-suited for shooting flat targets at close distances. Despite this, the GR III's lens looks great.

On to noise performance: just as with detail capture against other 24MP interchangeable lens cameras, the GR III holds its own as the ISO value climbs. At least part of this is due to noise reduction applied to the Raw at all ISO values 200 and up. As that ISO value climbs even higher, we begin to clearly see evidence of this noise reduction on the GR III's Raw files (it's that sort of 'cross-hatching' pattern). Whether this Raw noise reduction matters to you is really, well, up to you, though it can trip up third-party noise reduction software. All cameras here start to fall apart by the time you hit ISO 25600.

Let's transition to the JPEGs. In terms of sharpening, the GR III looks a bit softer than the Sony and Fujifilm while still showing hints of moiré patterning from the Raw capture. The haloing visible around these gray boxes on our ColorChecker indicates somewhat high-radius sharpening, when the camera is at its default values. In terms of JPEG color in its 'Standard' picture profile, well, we have reservations. The red patch in particular is muted and skewed more magenta than we'd like, and the yellow patch is dull and slightly greenish. The orange patch is likewise desaturated. In fact, our color wheel shows all colors from red-orange to yellow are muted with fairly unpleasant hue shifts.

Of course, the Ricoh GR III comes with a variety of different JPEG scene modes, of which we'll have a look at the real-world impact below.

JPEG Color modes

The GR III offers nine 'Image Control' color modes (shown below), plus 'HDR' and two user-customizable settings. Between them, they provide the JPEG shooter with an impressive amount of 'one click' control over the look of their images.

Of the five color modes, I find that 'Positive Film' works well for shooting sunny scenes (especially with a bit of positive exposure compensation) while four 'monotone' modes offer a lot of versatility in black and white, from the tonally rich 'soft' to the aggressively contrasty 'Hi'.

Raw dynamic range

As with most other cameras that have modern 24MP APS-C sensors, our ISO invariance test shows that the GR III performs very well. There isn't much of a difference between shooting a scene at the base ISO of 100 and pulling the shadows up by 5-ish stops, versus shooting at ISO 3200. For advanced users, working this way can help keep the brightest highlights you want to preserve from clipping to white and being unrecoverable.

Now on to exposure latitude, in which we use the camera's base ISO and try brightening increasingly dark exposures to see how much noise is being added in the deep shadows. Here, you can see that the GR III performs similarly in terms of noise to the Sony a6400, which also has a 24MP APS-C sensor. The color shift between the two cameras is due to the nature of these pushes in Adobe Camera Raw, and is not relevant for this test.

78
I own it
293
I want it
21
I had it
Discuss in the forums
View Comments (600)

Comments

All (600)
Most popular (15)
Editors' picks (0)
DPR staff (12)
Oldest first
jonikon

No internal flash means no deal for me, so I will be keeping my Coolpix A. One of the great things about a camera like this is the ability to use fill flash in sunny conditions because all shutter speeds are flash synced. If the GR IV has a built in flash I will buy it, if I should live that long anyway.

3 days ago
iLandPhotos

Can someone please explain how the % rating relates to a gold vs silver award?

5 days ago
TN Args
TN Args

As that link explains, they are not meant to be related at all.

18 hours ago
justmeMN

Hmm. I suppose a Canon M100 with 22mm lens would be a potential alternative to this camera.

https://www.dpreview.com/products/canon/slrs/canon_eosm100

6 days ago
tonyz1

I have this combo - bought it for my significant other but I use it quite a bit. Great if you're shooting on automatic but the manual controls are very poor. It is very compact and portable though. Raw quality is also excellent for what it is.

6 days ago*
keeponkeepingon

"controls are very poor".

The M100 is really not that bad for one of the most compact APS-C MILC. The touch screen is great which often more than makes up for the lack of a second control dial. You have a control wheel for shooting TV/Av and when shooting manual it's a single tap of the screen to switch between adjusting shutter speed and adjusting aperture.

Don't get me wrong there is lots of room for improvement with ergonomics even on the small body but controlling is not as bad as I thought it would be.

4 days ago
egk4260

If Thom Hogan numbers on actual sales dollars are accepted it appears Ricoh is about the only camera company to generate more year on year sales revenue in past quarter. Now, they may have been sinking far faster than the rest, but it must be encouraging that the intended audience may be actually purchasing the camera. Ricoh appreciates the vocal supporters, hears the detractors, but needs the buyers if they are to continue.

1 week ago
Leandros S

The funny thing about the Hogan numbers is that they've been interpreted as evidence that this camera is making a huge impact on the company's bottom line. It would have to be one hell of a seller for that to be true, because the camera had barely arrived on the market when the quarter closed (that Hogan cited figures for and based his observation on). And it's true that it's been top dog of DPR for quite a few days now, but I wonder if other factors aren't playing a role, like the Theta, the KP, lens sales (D FA* 50, maybe), or that Ricoh has perhaps been benefitting more than other brands from new international trade deals.

6 days ago
justmeMN

I wonder where Thom got those sales numbers. I didn't think that Ricoh included those in their quarterly financial documents.

6 days ago
cn_a75

My phone doing exactly the same.

1 week ago
ffking

Factually incorrect - but if your phone takes images you're happy with, the good news is that you don't have to buy this, or any other, camera

1 week ago
Leandros S

Or read this website, I suppose... In fact, if you did, you might realise that your phone is not doing exactly the same. And that would seem to be counter-productive.

6 days ago
bladerunner6

Thanks for an insightful review. This is definitely a camera that is aimed at a limited range of users but as said for street photography or people looking for pocketable camera with great image quality this can be a great choice.

1 week ago
Walker Truly

This is a PERFECT camera! It would be even PERFECTER if Ricoh had made every design decision completely different. Especially if they could simultaneously just keep everything the same too.
So, in conclusion: this is a perfect camera that could be vastly improved my making it a different camera.

1 week ago
Walker Truly

Your Welcome!!

1 week ago
DougDolde

Another "expert" who knows better

1 week ago*
1 week ago
hemiguy
hemiguy

Good news, they did!

1 week ago
ZeBebito
ZeBebito

@Walker you really made me laugh, love your post lol

1 week ago
onlyfreeman
onlyfreeman

So you want Schrödinger's camera?

1 week ago
FoxShutter
FoxShutter

At this point this new released camera is quite bad . I agree with you and with this TS :
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/62480050
Ricoh must be kidding to shamelessly ask a $1000 USD (with taxes ) for that . They should have included a small pocket flash and a spare battery at least.
The only ppl who perhaps buy it are those who really loyal yo the brand (but the brand isn’t ), not really smart consumers and some Rich folks to try it out and toss after 150 shots .
It’s not backordered ,actually as some stated , many units were recalled and returned and that’s what created it at some retailers. Here in Ontario no backorders.

1 week ago
Ryan Villanueva
Ryan Villanueva

Great review. I love the form factor of this camera. So simple, so direct to the point. This for me is the perfect travel camera.

1 week ago
caravan

Thanks for the review, this is a wonderful camera.

1 week ago
NeilFowler

Does anybody else wish that Ricoh had included a touch screen on the III? I think it would be very useful for shooting subtly.

1 week ago
luck002

GRIII does have touch screen.

1 week ago
PentaxNick

Er, they did.

1 week ago
NeilFowler

Sorry, I meant a tilting screen.

1 week ago
Alex Sarbu

The GR III touchscreen interface works quite well, it's very responsive and complementing the dials-and-buttons interface nicely.
I like for example how I can override the AF - if, say, it's automatically selecting the AF areas and I want it to focus on something specific. Very fast; just a touch, no need to change any setting.

1 week ago
beavertown
beavertown

No EVF is a con for this kind of zoom range? Seriously? There were many camera reviews done by early days of dpreview back then and there were a lot fewer cons as the cameras were so good, now for some reason, they have to put as many cons to equal the pros.

1 week ago
SpeedyNeo
SpeedyNeo

Thanks for pointing that out, I didn't get it either!

1 week ago
Barney Britton
Barney Britton

No EVF option is the con. There are plenty of cameras that don't have a built-in EVF but do feature contacts for an external viewfinder unit.

6 days ago
SpeedyNeo
SpeedyNeo

Honestly viewfinders are like phone keyboards. People used to care about them until most of them realised they don't them.

5 days ago
Barney Britton
Barney Britton

I care about them! Especially in sunny conditions. I'm sure I'm not alone.

4 days ago
Tom Caldwell

The GRD itself was great for the compact camera for enthusiasts of its day - the GR lost a lot of its compactness benefit in the interests of larger sensor. The sensor size increase was a benefit but my GR was too large for this person to carry everywhere. So my compromise has been the no-longer-sold GM5 which is not really pocketable in my book but has the advantage of being a systems camera and can dip into the stock of wonderful M4/3 lenses against being restricted to one lens copes with all needs.

Furthermore the GM5 came with a quite useful built in evf and a little clip on flash in the box.

I am a long term Ricoh fan and appreciate that the GRIII is a pinnacle of its type with “fixed collapsing prime lens” - but the reality for me at least is a tiny systems camera with built in evf and 100+ lenses I can choose from. But of course the GM5 is no more - but I can continue to manage as it still is a much more versatile camera than any GRD/GM can ever be.

1 week ago
Rolf Brenner

I love and have the GM5 too but it is a very different beast next Monday I will have both beasts :)

1 week ago
Kariyam

Tom Hogan says the Nikon 1 cameras are collectables, so I am buying them for cheap and hoarding them up (Only the V1 and J5). The J5 with 18mm normal lens have excellent image quality. May be it is the poor man's equivalent of HCB's Leica for street photography. However, the protruding 18mm with the J5 cannot be compared to GR 3

1 week ago
Kariyam

I upgraded from the Nikon 1 V1 to the J5. Happy with the 28 and 50mm equivalent.

1 week ago
Alex Sarbu

There's an issue with the studio scene widget - it shows cross-hatching and artifacts on the ISO 100 RAW sample, that are not there (yes, I downloaded the ACR-generated JPEG).
But not always. If - for example - I click on the "even higher" link just below the widget, then select again ISO 100, the image looks fine.

1 week ago
FoxShutter
FoxShutter

I don’t know why some Ricoh users here are trying to defend this stripped down camera. The web is full of negative reviews criticizing the horrible battery life and the lack of flash. Even paid by Ricoh utube bloggers mention it in some , more hidden , way.
I’ve never seen so many negative reviews when the GRII was released and it is ,actually, a better camera overall in real use.
Ricoh perhaps aware of what’s happening and could partially rectify the issues as once Sony did with their alpha 7r and 7s : they started to include a second battery for free . Fuji , PanaLeica and Canon (M1-M2) we’re shipping their cameras with small pocketable flash units .

1 week ago
FoxShutter
FoxShutter

Canon EOS M1 with the free SMALL flash supplied :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EOS_M

1 week ago
Alex Sarbu

Oh, that image of the EOS-M with the SMALL flash supplied and a zoom...
Did you just decide on your own that nobody should ever use a pocketable camera? <rolling eyes> It's not like we were asking for your permission...

1 week ago*
FoxShutter
FoxShutter

@AlexSarbu
It’s not that I asked for your opinion or to comment under my comments , especially such a nonsense as you just wrote.

1 week ago
Alex Sarbu

Right... I'll post more "nonsense", then:
https://camerasize.com/compact/#819,351.348,ha,t
Those are the GR III (obviously) and the EOS M with the same lens as in that Wiki article - but without a flash.

1 week ago
TN Args
TN Args

LOL, thanks Alex, what a ridiculous comparison!

@Fox, show me a camera as small with as big a sensor and long battery life. Oops there isn't one! So it's difficult to criticise Ricoh here, if no-one does it better.

And I laugh at people whining about battery life. I have cameras with poor battery life and I have spare batteries and changing them in 10 secs with no tools is the least problem in all of photography. It's just whining!

With the GRIII it is even worse than whining, because you are getting something back for it: incredible size and large sensor. You can even avoid battery changes by connecting USB-C to a power bank in your pocket and shoot all day.

Don't like it? Get a bigger camera, or one with a 2-sizes-smaller sensor like a the obsolete Nikon 1. Knock yourselves out.

17 hours ago*
luck002

While I feel like the GR III's ergonomic and battery life are behind the GR II, I really love the IBIS and the new in-camera raw development settings. The price is quite "ouch"-ey though. I think it should be around $700.

1 week ago
Alex Sarbu

Just buy it at a discount, Black Friday, whatever. If a GR is what you want, of course.
The price is the only characteristic you can actually negotiate to some extent.

1 week ago
luck002

@Alex I already bought it for around $999 here. The price hurts so much. Ricoh's price in my country is quite constant. I bought my GR II for around $700 2 years ago and the price was still the same a month ago (it is $550 now after GRIII's release).

1 week ago
Alex Sarbu

$999, wow, that is a lot; more than the full price where I live (including the VAT).
I actually bought mine at a discount; being a regular customer helps. ;-)

1 week ago
Fazal Majid
Fazal Majid

The fact it's sold out suggests the price is below what the market will bear.

1 week ago
luck002

@Alex You are so lucky. XD

@Fazal I think so too. Despite many people hate the GR III here, I think the unit itself just being sold well. I even need to wait for 2 weeks to get my purchase bonuses (blue ring cap + additional battery) because they are out of stock. Yikes!!

1 week ago
Fazal Majid
Fazal Majid

@luck002: to be sure, there is an early adopter tax. I've wanted a GR for a long while, but hesitated because of the dust issues on the GRII. I don't regret buying my GRIII one bit, and it even replaced my RX1RII as EDC despite my preferring 35mm as a FL, simply because the smaller size makes it more carry-friendly.

1 week ago
LucaPCP

I am getting out of my GRIII the same quality I used to get from my Fuji 645 rangefinder in the film days! Seriously, the resolution of this camera is nothing short of amazing. The price is not too high; it's an incredible instrument. It doesn't look like much, but think of it -- it's like 80 lines/mm on film days and with a lens capable of delivering it! It's sharper than most aps-c or mft lenses.

1 week ago
Fazal Majid
Fazal Majid

@LucaPCP: I dunno. I took some photos of the Golden Gate Bridge last weekend with my GRIII, as my father was with my Nikon Z7, and I had taken photos from the other side with my old Fuji G617. On the GRIII, the suspension cables anchoring the road bed to the catenaries look like a single cable. On the Z7, they look like two cables each. Only the G617 slides (Velvia 100) show the real 4 cables.

1 week ago
Vasilis D.
Vasilis D.

Wondering what would it take RICOH to make this "tool" waterproof (even up to 5m). In extreme travelling conditions i.e. continuous rain, stormy weather/snow, waterfalls, hiking, mountains, desert etc. (Iceland trip for example) an APS-C camera with Olympus's waterproofing grade would be an amazing deal.

1 week ago*
Alex Sarbu

Waterproofing it would be, I'd guess, very difficult - due to the retractable lens (but not only). Waterproofing would put lots of restrictions on the camera body, and I'm afraid it would result on something other than a GR.

Weatherproofing, I hope they'll manage this on the next model. I might even upgrade because of it.

1 week ago
Don Sata
Don Sata

A few milimiters thicker which is a lot for a camera this small, increased price, non retractable lens sticking out all the time.

1 week ago
mikphoto
mikphoto

I am waiting with the purchase because I like to learn from long time users reports. Both, my GR and GR II developed the Closed Shutter Problem which made the cameras use- and worthless before the shutter counts reached 50K frames. I hope that Ricohs Engineers quietly adressed and fixed the internal lens module parts from "dying at a young age".

My wishes for the GR IV:
- Bring back the build-in flash
- Address the cameras Achilles' heel by developing a non-rectractable 28mm pancacke lens module (ex. fuji x100 series). It could enable the camera body to become weather sealed and noticably reduce the still reported dust issue.

1 week ago*
Tom Caldwell

Forget the aps-c sensor - just fit a M4/3 mount and 20mp 4/3 sensor and get access to the whole range of M4/3 lens stock. Keep the GRIII as it is obviously a great camera. Call the new (extra) camera the GRX and make it a systems camera.

There is a great big gaping hole in the market since Panasonic stopped making the GM series bodies.

GRX with Panasonic 42.5/1.2 Nocticron? With their 15/1.7 lens? Or even their very nice 35-100/f2.8? Compact wide zoom? 7-14/4.0?

1 week ago
luck002

@Robert

Agree with you. Though I had sold my m43 gears when I had my GRII, I could still say Lumix GM1 (with franiec grip) + 20mm or oly 17mm is the best travel camera I ever had.

1 week ago
luck002

Ouch it should @tom not @robert. Sorry. :(

1 week ago
LucaPCP

I have both GRii and GRiii and the iii is amazing. The ibis and 24mp are great, and the colors in the jpegs are much better.
I also have an MFT camera, and the only lenses that come close to it in resolution (but do not improve on it) are the PanaLeica lenses; certainly not the Oly 17mm, which is quite poor, and also not the 20mm pancake. The Leica Summilux 15/1.7 is close, but the GRiii is still better resolution-wise. And a camera with 15/1.7 does not fit in your pocket.

So sure, when I go with an official large camera, I often choose my Pen-F for the ability to also use long lenses. But for a pocketable camera, or one that you can slip in your travel / work bag, the GRiii is fantastic.

1 week ago
Harold66
Harold66

LucaPcp.
I use the GRII professionally and once I customized the vibrant filter , my jpegs were very good
as for micro 4/3 lensMaybe you got a lemon because the 20mm is a very good lens. Most reviews says it is sharper than the 15mm
oh and the Pen-F is not a great choice for fitting long lenses unless you are talking about the smaller F4.5 to 5.6 zooms

1 week ago
NeilFowler

Thanks for a great review. The battery life is the only real niggle for me.

Quite pricey but worth it for the fights in this comments section alone.

1 week ago
PentaxNick

I was worried about battery life but luckily I also have the Olympus TG-4 with a spare which is compatible. As it turns out I’ve never had to change it while out taking photographs. I always turn it off between shots, and I’m not a machine gun shooter (doesn’t suit this type of camera anyway. I can’t say I’ve been restricted by battery life at all, less so than the Fuji X100F/T.

1 week ago*
Daft Punk

It's a great camera. I love mine.

It is liberating to have something genuinely pocketable with a big sensor.

28mm was always my fave focal length anyway. IBIS genuinely works and the touch screen is nice.

Positive Film is a lovely film sim - gives great JPEGS.

USB-C charging is a welcome addition.

1 week ago
SpeedyNeo
SpeedyNeo

Is it ok to say that this camera is actually sexy?

1 week ago
Arun H

I clicked buy the moment they told me I can raise the shadows by 5 stops. Everything else is irrelevant.

1 week ago
gordon94024

No mention of portraits. How is the 28mm lens for portraits?

1 week ago
MrHollywood
MrHollywood

Not very good. Classic portrait focal length is typically 85 to 200mm. 28mm is not very flattering.

1 week ago
ogl
ogl

It can....

1 week ago
Olifaunt

See a lot of fashion photography that uses wide lenses. Different kind of portraiture.

1 week ago*
MrHollywood
MrHollywood

Fashion photography is NOT portrait. For fashion work you're shooting the OUTFIT and designs, not portraits, but even for that work I've never seen a soul working with a 28mm prime. No one says you can't shoot portraits with 28mm or even 20mm, but if you plan to do a lot of it, a fixed 28mm camera isn't a very good tool.

1 week ago
Tom Caldwell

Fine if you can get up close and personal :)

1 week ago
MrHollywood
MrHollywood

Most shooters will fall back on 85mm, but the 105 and 135mm lenses have gained a lot of popularity. 200mm is also excellent and very flattering. 28mm is pretty bad for faces, fine for group or full body. If you really want to shoot people, a GR is not a very versatile pick.

1 week ago
kkoba

Even if you get up close, the perspective of a wide angle lens is not very flattering. You know those pictures of puppies taken with fisheye lenses? Kind of like that, but not as extreme.

1 week ago
MrHollywood
MrHollywood

Exactly. As much as I enjoyed my GR, it was just a poor camera for too many subjects. Essentially I found it much like a camera phone with much better quality, but stuck with an often useless perspective.

1 week ago
Olifaunt

People take good portraits all the time with cellphones, which tend to be 28mm. So if you can live with cellphone portraits, then yes, it's fine. MrHollywood, many of the better arts magazines will run environmental portraits of, say, celebrities that are obviously taken with wide angle lenses. The type of high school or family portraits taken by mall photographers with totally blurred-away backgrounds are literally scraping the bottom of the barrel nowadays as far as portraiture is concerned.

1 week ago
Olifaunt

By the way MrHollywood, I tend to agree with you that 28mm is too wide for myself. I use my GR2 less because I have a 40mm camera that is better suited to my vision. But that is not because I take portraits (which I don't).

1 week ago*
MrHollywood
MrHollywood

Virtually nobody shoots portraits at 28mm. Yes, they are occasions where it's done. But not one wedding shooter, event shooter or anyone who seeks to create intimate candids reaches for a 28mm prime. I don't know why anyone would argue this. Go into ANY amateur or pro forum and ask "what's the best portrait lenses?"
No one will suggest a 28mm. There may be instances where the 28mm will work. I've seen some wonderful portraits at 24mm, but that doesn't make the WA focal length something recommended.
I've also seen some great scenic stuff shot at 135mm, but if someone asks for the best ALL AROUND lens for scenic, the suggestions will be for 14-24 99% of the time.
I got rid of my GR because it was a failure when it came to being versatile. A fixed lens camera has its charms, but it has specific weaknesses that cannot be overcome. 28mm is like driving forever in 2nd gear. You can do a lot, but then there's a lot you can't do.

1 week ago
ffking

"I got rid of my GR because it was a failure when it came to being versatile." - slightly surprised you didn't realise that at the time of purchase...?

1 week ago
MrHollywood
MrHollywood

You're correct. But I wanted to give it a chance. And I did enjoy using it. I just think there are better options for street and travel.

1 week ago
Alex Sarbu

I find it humorous when experienced people get surprised, only after using the camera for a while, that an 18.3mm prime behaves like an 18.3mm and not a superzoom.
Then start a bashing campaign to make people know 18.3mm is 18.3mm.

1 week ago
Rolf Brenner

ordered! Ask why!

1 week ago
ronago

Its design? It's a beautiful little thing

1 week ago
Rolf Brenner

1/4000 flash synchro!

1 week ago
ronniemac

Because it's there.

1 week ago
FoxShutter
FoxShutter

Heck! Even Sony RX100 series have a pop up flash , and they are even smaller. And it doesn’t matter the sensor size in this regard. Smartphones got it ...
The only reason Ricoh stripped it off is because the already lacklustre CIPA rating of 150 shots per charge (less in practice ) would be a 100 shots with a flash . By ditching it out they were able to get it rated at 150 shots at least.
This camera reminds me of “optimizations” at work places .

1 week ago
mgm2

Wow, I'm glad you understand the thinking behind Ricoh's design.

1 week ago
Leandros S

"They are even smaller" - yeah, because the sensor is smaller. Not quite the biggest trick in the magician's box.

1 week ago
brett nz
brett nz

There again - someone who is commenting on a camera that is specifically designed for the street shooter without understanding what the requirements are.

1 week ago
johnami
johnami

You are joking, aren't you? The size comment I mean.

1 week ago
MikeB2000

Seriously high-price for a camera with fixed 28mm equivalent lens. In this market full of less expensive cameras with zoom lenses, I don't see the attraction. What am I missing?

1 week ago
Daft Punk

Seriously ?

A very sharp lens that is fast as well.

A large and excellent performing sensor. Much larger than normal for such a sized camera.

All in a package that fits in your back pocket.

I mean, again, seriously ??

And it is not even that expensive - where else is there a 24mp APSC sensor camera with a 2.8 lens and IBIS you can you get for $800? Let alone one with great optical quality you can fit in your back pocket.

1 week ago*
T3

It's a very specific camera for a very specific type of user.

1 week ago
mgm2

If you truly don't understand you obviously won't buy the camera as it wasn't meant for you.

1 week ago
AbrasiveReducer

The fixed focal length lens is the key. No wiggling, wobbling, extending, retracting, unevenly soft corners from one camera to the next. No variable quality at different focal lengths.

1 week ago
Alex Sarbu

Oh, the startup time... quite fast for the GR III, 2 seconds or more for the various small sensor "alternatives".

1 week ago
Walker Truly

Snap focus, 1/4000sec flash sync, one hand control, highly customizable, quiet, light, small.
These and other factors are each the One True “key” to this camera’s appeal to some.

1 week ago
Tom Caldwell

Glad you asked Mike. Why do compact cameras fail? Just as soon as they are built down to meet the popular market price.

I have had 3 out of 4 GRD models and the GR itself - at which point it became too large for my personal requirements. It was a question of whether once size became borderline the versatility of a similar size systems camera body became more interesting.

However the GRD/GR has remained interesting because it was and is an enthusiasts camera better built and has enviable firmware support. Funnily enough the firmware and enthusiast support in use does not review very well.

Those that have simply wanted a cheap easily portable compact camera have long since opted for the “automatic dumbness” of the mobile phone.

Point’n’press. The GRIII is much more than that. It is a pity that it cannot offer a built in evf and a mount system that can handle a wide variety of lenses.

1 week ago*
Fazal Majid
Fazal Majid

The fact it's sold out suggests it's not overpriced.

1 week ago
Alex Sarbu

If it had "a mount system that can handle a wide variety of lenses" I wouldn't have bought mine. Because it would no longer be pocketable, and as a non-pocketable camera I already have an ILC kit.
This is a GR; not a me too ILC. Get over it.

1 week ago*
glarry

Minimum shutter speed 30 sec
Maximum shutter speed 1/4000 sec Is this correct? I would use a castling...

1 week ago*
kkoba

What is a castling? I only know that as a chess term.

1 week ago
Sannaborjeson
Sannaborjeson

To summarize: this camera is awesome and I would buy one with no hesitation only to support Ricoh in what they do.

1 week ago
riveredger

Did you buy one?

1 week ago
johnami
johnami

I prefer 'have you bought one?'

1 week ago
DarnGoodPhotos

I prefer, "Have you purchased one?" or "Did you buy it?".

1 week ago
Patrick Dodds

"would" is definitely all wrong in your sentence.

6 days ago
tbcass
tbcass

It will be interesting to see how well this camera sells. It seems to me, and I could be wrong, that the market for a camera with limited capabilities but offers great IQ in a pocketable size has limited appeal. I say this because the IQ of the 1" pocketable zooms from Sony and Canon have IQ that is nearly indistinguishable from APS-C cameras below ISO 800.

1 week ago
Daft Punk

The camera is back ordered everywhere.

I am trying to buy one for my son and cannot find one anywhere.

So there is a data point for you.

1 week ago
tbcass
tbcass

Not really. The initial orders are probably from existing owners of the previous models wanting to upgrade. The back orders most likely reflect the fact Ricoh doesn't expect to sell many. They are probably limiting production so as not to be stuck with excess inventory. It's such a niche product sales will always be limited.

1 week ago*
Daft Punk

I confess to being utterly baffled by your position.

A small, small camera with excellent IQ and a very sharp lens. So small it is genuinely pocketable and can be taken anywhere. It is as easy to pocket as a phone.

What is there NOT to like????

1 week ago
Alex Sarbu

Is there any ultracompact APS-C fixed lens camera that sells better?

1 week ago
tbcass
tbcass

What is there not to like? No zoom, mediocre AF, no flash, mediocre video, no EVF, OVF costs extra. For the people that want this camera these things may not matter but I believe that these limitations will turn off most potential buyers. Since this camera appeals to you, you don't understand that most people want more and are willing to sacrifice a small amount of IQ to get a 1" sensor camera that is far more versatile. I don't understand what the appeal is because small size is a lower priority for me than APS IQ so I'll take the 1" sensor zoom.

1 week ago*
tbcass
tbcass

Alex Sarbu

Maybe not but it's such a small market to begin with that it wouldn't take much to be #1. :-)

1 week ago
Darkerlight

@tbcass Yes, it is not a mass market product but that doesn't mean it makes no profit. I want to buy it because I really liked the GR for travelling but now I use a RX1r II so the overlap is too big. If you ever travel like me you will reduce all the size and weight of your stuff. And for video I now use a Osmo Pocket. Is it great? No, but for some short impressions it is good enough.

1 week ago
surelythisnameisfree

may have limited appeal to you but it is outselling every other camera in Japan

1 week ago
Daft Punk

tbcass wants the GR to have a zoom lens, a flash and an EVF.

If it had those things I it would not fit in my pocket. Which is the whole point of the camera.

If it had an EVF or an OVF the VF would be a tiny tunnel. I don't want that.

If it had a flash the flash would be on body and essentially rubbish - better to have a tiny little flash and shoot off camera.

If it had a zoom lens it would be too bulky and the lens too slow. I dont want that either.

If you want those things there is nothing to see here - move on and buy a Sony RX ( a camera I also own by the way.. ) .

Tbcass complaining about the GR is like complaining that coffee has coffee in it.

1 week ago*
tbcass
tbcass

Daft Punk

I don't want anything and I'm not complaining about anything. My points were to point out why the camera has a very limited market, nothing more, nothing less. Nothing I said is a criticism of the camera but are reasons why it's not a big seller. If you go back and read my first post in this subthread you should understand that.

1 week ago*
Daft Punk

Fair point, but you were holding the GR3 up in comparison to 1" cams from Sony , for example.

This makes no sense. I have a Sony RX something and I see no comparison. None at all.

Ricoh are ( I am certain ) well aware that their new camera does not have a zoom lens, or a flash. They have probably noticed this and factored it into their expectations in terms of sales. I cannot see a Ricoh exec somehow shocked that their camera is not suitable for someone who wants a built in flash. Just like I am not expecting someone to compare my Sigma SD-H with a cheese sandwich. Or compare my X-T3 with a prawn salad.

Ricoh know what their market is. It clearly is not you. I get that. It's me. And a few thousand other people like me. For us, it really hits the spot.

1 week ago
Alex Sarbu

The entire GR line - started in 1996 - is based around this concept, of a compact camera with a 28mm-ish lens.

1 week ago
tbcass
tbcass

Darkerlight

Of course it makes a profit or they wouldn't sell it.

1 week ago
tbcass
tbcass

Daft Punk

I never said the 1" sensor cameras and the GR3 were the same.

1 week ago
Alex Sarbu

Oh? "I say this because the IQ of the 1" pocketable zooms from Sony and Canon have IQ that is nearly indistinguishable from APS-C cameras below ISO 800."
It looks like you're blaming the GR for not being a Sony RX 100.

1 week ago
Daft Punk

So why are you here? if they aren't the same? Why mention different cameras that do different things?

I am tempted to go on the Oly EM1X review comments to talk about my washing machine. It would be the same thing

1 week ago
mxx
mxx

"My points were to point out why the camera has a very limited market, "

And why is that fact so important for you and many others to point out? The fact that you probably use a camera that sells better, does not make you a better person than the Ricoh shooter.

1 week ago
SpeedyNeo
SpeedyNeo

tbcass
Man, he lack of zoom is not a disadvantage of this camera, it's rather a feature.

How many very expensive prime lenses still exist and being sold for MILC on both FF and APSC platforms? (Hint: a lot)

A prime lens appeals to many types of photographers. They don't want zoom. A fixed prime lens makes perfect sense on a camera that's made mainly to be used for street photography.

This is a perfectly accepted compromise.

1 week ago
tbcass
tbcass

Alex Sarbu
When I said "I say this because the IQ of the 1" pocketable zooms from Sony and Canon have IQ that is nearly indistinguishable from APS-C cameras below ISO 800" I meant it. I defy you to tell the difference in IQ between 1" sensor camera IQ and this Ricoh below ISO 800. I say this as an owner of a 42mp FF camera. The difference between my FF and APS-C cameras at iso 800 and below is greater than the Ricoh and a 1" sensor camera IMO.

SpeedyNeo

That is true but it does not address the issue that this camera has a limited market which after all was my point in the first place.

1 week ago*
Alex Sarbu

tbcass: it's irrelevant if you mean it or not - what matters is if it's true. ;-)
Sooo... who are you to decide I should only shoot below ISO 800? Actually, who are you do decide anything for us?

1 week ago
Daft Punk

Why do people come on a forum to argue over a camera they are not interested in ? Why do they think people care why they are not interested?

It is bizarre.

If i went on the Canon 5D forum saying that i do not see the point in a DSLR people would rightly question why i was there.

If i went on a forum about 80’s prog rock to talk about electronic trance music people would rightly say “wrong thread”.

So why do people feel the need to talk about a camera with a fixed lens as a key feature and argue it should have a zoom ???

Why ? Life is short. Dont they have better things to do ??

1 week ago
Fazal Majid
Fazal Majid

People who compare the 1" cameras' IQ to the GRIII are delusional. I have the original RX100, the RX100M4 and the GRIII, and there is no comparison. The GRIII is heads and shoulders above the mushy RX100 series.

Now if you want a zoom lens and EVF, that's your prerogative, but this is what you end up with:
https://camerasize.com/compare/#723,819

not to mention zooms this size are just mediocre compared to even an ordinary lens, let alone the GR's outstanding prime. The only thing that compares is the Sony RX1 series, the Leica Q series or the Sigma DP1M.

1 week ago
tbcass
tbcass

My last post. I find it curious that people defend this or any camera from even the slightest hint of criticism. The emotional attachment of some people to an inanimate object can sometimes be surprising. I would hate to see the response to someone actually trolling and saying the camera sucks.

1 week ago
tbcass
tbcass

I found this post in the Sony Forum from someone who "upgraded" to a Sony RX100vi;

"I upgraded from the Ricoh GRII because 28mm is no place to live 100% of the time."

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/62680116

1 week ago*
Daft Punk

If it is the only camera I agree. If not, then it is nonsense.

1 week ago
Alex Sarbu

And this is one further post after your "last" <rolling eyes>

1 week ago
Daft Punk

I have no attachment to an inanimate object.

tbcass is making no sense. If he cared so little, why does he go to such extraordinary lengths to question and disparage other people's choices ?

1 week ago
Alex Sarbu

tbcass is a Sony user promoting a Sony camera and bashing a non-Sony one. It can't be more obvious.

1 week ago
tbcass
tbcass

I did not bash the camera one bit.

1 week ago
tbcass
tbcass

Alex Sarbu
And to prove this isn't a Sony Fan thing I feel the same way about the Sony RX1R with it's 42mp FF sensor and 35mm f 1.8 fixed Zeiss lens.. Too limiting to be a big seller.

1 week ago
Daft Punk

So what ?

Struggling to see the point of your posts. It’s self evident the Ricoh has a limited appeal to a specific market so I think most of us really struggling to understand why you are so invested in making these pointless statements.

1 week ago*
tbcass
tbcass

Daft Punk

I fail to see the point of your posts.

1 week ago
Daft Punk

So you are commenting about a thing you are not interested in, nor have any intention of purchasing; an item that is of no appeal to you, does not meet your requirements in any way. I ( and others ) in contrast, either are interested in the item or already own it. I can see why I ( and those interested in the camera ) would comment, but what precisely is the point of you being here?

I am not interested in needlepoint. Shall I go on a needlepoint forum and tell everyone why I am not interested, using hundreds of words and being argumentative? Would that be a sensible, sane thing to do ? This is precisely what you are doing. Frankly, it's weird.

1 week ago
scottenyc

I wanted to love this camera. But, it seems that my preference for shooting at night or in available light interiors is a deal killer. Miss after miss with this one. It often hunted forever and then fired at minimum focus. Maybe it's too much to ask for a better low light focusing system that fits in your pocket, but I'm asking anyway. I don't need the extra pixels, but I do need the shot to be in focus without destroying the moment with that horrible green light. Day exterior folks, trying to hide their camera, should love the Ricoh, but night stalkers will need to keep looking.

1 week ago
ffking

Can't you use the snap focus ? Or even manual? though I've not used it, so Idon't know how feasible this is

1 week ago*
Robert Garcia NYC

Did you have the updated firmware?

1 week ago
Daft Punk

Use snap focus. Its hyperfocal focus made easy.

AF is pretty irrelevant most of the time anyway for a lens like this.

1 week ago
kkoba

Even after the firmware update?

1 week ago
mxx
mxx

"I wanted to love this camera."

Luckily you don't have to.

1 week ago
dissonate

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tv4wSsvGOb0

assuming you tried firmware 1.10, in your experience with the camera is the above youtube misrepresenting the improvement over 1.00 or the overall performance in low light?

1 week ago
Mac McCreery
Mac McCreery

When will folk stop judging cameras by what they lack? Handling, ease of use and image quality should be enough surely?

1 week ago
paleodawg
paleodawg

Cameras are judged by their price vs what they offer...

1 week ago
mxx
mxx

"Cameras are judged by their price vs what they offer..."

Sure, tell that to Leica users.

1 week ago
paleodawg
paleodawg

Leica offers their users the Leica badge...

1 week ago
SpeedyNeo
SpeedyNeo

paleodawg
"Versus what they offer" that includes quality of specs before their quantity, isn't it?

1 week ago
porrosno

a camera of the best,

1 week ago
SignumX
SignumX

I'm perplexed over why anyone in their right mind would be interested in this camera. The same kind of perplexity can however be seen at the Canon stand. Power of marketing and brand loyalty cannot be overlooked. Fanboys galore 😎

1 week ago
ffking

Ricoh? - Marketing!!?? :D

1 week ago*
vscd
vscd

It's not like Canon. Canon with no 4k = HATE. Ricoh with no 4k = OK, we don#t need it.

1 week ago
Revenant

Just because some people are interested in a product that doesn't make sense to you, that doesn't necessarily make them fanboys. They might have different preferences and requirements than you, and therefore see something of value that you're overlooking or don't care about.

1 week ago
goodgeorge

Simple answer Mr. SignumX: As an upgrade to my aging Nikon Coolpix A.

1 week ago
turvyT

@SignumX: you're right. this camera is for unassuming people who don't follow marketing strategies, most probably well informed and really interested in photography. Not for fanboys who criticize without ever having used what they criticize.

1 week ago
Managarm

You’re perplexed why anyone is interested in a camera with APS-C sensor, a great lens and control layout that you can just slip in the pockets of your pants or shirt? Now I’m perplexed too …

1 week ago
Daft Punk

I am genuinely perplexed that a person can be on a photography site and not see the benefit of a sharp fast lens and a large sensor in a tiny, tiny package that slips in a jeans pocket. It is perplexing that Signumx is so perplexed and he / she simply does not see this.

1 week ago
johnami
johnami

I'm perplexed why people take photos with telephones...ohh yea..convenience and boy, aren't those phones expensive......The Ricoh is convenient because it is small and quite solid, something I find isn't the case with the Sony 100s. It also has a huge sensor compared to phones or the Sony. I personally find that all cameras with retracting lenses eat dust. Let's see how well the shaking sensor in the Ricoh deals with the issue.

1 week ago
Daft Punk

I am not a raging fan boy type - let me make that clear.

But this is a bloody marvellous camera. Fantastic IQ and easy to use. Smaller than a small thing and well made.

AF complaints are largely irrelevent. With snap focus if you cannot get sharp pictures taken in a hurry with this camera then give up photography now , hand over your cameras and use a smartphone.

Lack of flash ? Does not matter. Get a little cheap pocket unit and a little remote cube on the hotshoe.

The price ? Getoutahere - for the IQ alone this camera is a billy bargain. Size is not correlated with value.

1 week ago
FantasticMrFox
FantasticMrFox

Everything you deem not important or irrelevant may be pretty important or relevant to others.

1 week ago
Daft Punk

The best GR3 review - from a GR2 user. Everyone on this thread should watch this.

https://youtu.be/xmV5FfSaEcw

1 week ago
pastukaste
pastukaste

Too bad mine broke down after a couple of weeks refund given but wasted my time

1 week ago
ffking

@Daft Punk - thanks for the link - I'd forgotton about that guy, but he really knows his way around the camera and what it's for

1 week ago
mxx
mxx

"Too bad mine broke down"

Unfortunately the unbreakable camera has yet to be invented.

1 week ago
cali92rs

The price and AF are not too bad...but it would be real nice had they kept the pop-up flash from the GR2. It has a leaf shutter and high sync speed which makes it great for back-lit subjects or to get rid of the racoon eyes, or to add nice catch light in the eyes.

1 week ago
mxx
mxx

A small flash in another pocket is probably the answer.

1 week ago
cali92rs

Or a pop up flash such as what is included in the GR2 and the GR would have been an even more convenient answer ;)

1 week ago*
mxx
mxx

I actually totally agree with you, but there would probably have some sort of penalty like size or loss of other features.

1 week ago
Daft Punk

Off camera flash always gives better results. Have the camera in one hand and a tiny flash in the other. Easy.

1 week ago
Harold66
Harold66

Daftpunk the problem of this video , like most reviews on this new model, is not what they are saying but rather what they are leaving out
Most of the virtues that they praised on this model are already present on the previous model
yes the GRIII has slighty better resolution but for many long-time GR users they know (or will find out once the newness of it disappears)that the GRII is a better tool... and significantlly cheaper too

1 week ago
Ryan Villanueva
Ryan Villanueva

This is the perfect light stills travel camera for me. Although I did wish the 1080 video was decent, its IBIS is pretty good. Come on Fuji, bring out the X80!

1 week ago*
ogl
ogl

The night photo from review - ISO800 f2.8 at 1/10 is rather sharp for me

1 week ago
xeppelin

dpreview:
Canon EOS M50 = 79%
because of ... poor 4k video, "limited native lens selection", not very good battery reach, despite everything else excellent and low price (550 with 15-45, about 700 with EF-M 22/2)

Ricoh GR III = 81%
despite poor video, no lens selection at all, dismal battery reach and high price (899).

review ratings are a (bad) joke, really.

real explanation: barney likes GR III, does not like Canon / EOS M system. that's all.

1 week ago
ogl
ogl

Because you compare different class of cameras...Apples with oranges.

1 week ago
Franz Weber
Franz Weber

If a camera reviewer likes camera A more than camera B than he has not only the right to say it, I expect him to do so.

1 week ago
Daft Punk

Which is fair enough. Barney is allowed an opinion.

I dislike the Canon EOS M too. Nasty little thing IMO.

1 week ago
xeppelin

I don't see it as a "a different camera class". Both are compact, digital cameras with APS-C sensor.

Main difference: Canon M50 is somewhat less compact, jacket pocket vs. shirt pocket. But it is a much better camera in all relevant aspects - namely EVF, AF, IQ, UI, performance ... and much more versatile, thanks to interchangeable lenses and system accesories.

M50 should definitely score significantly higher (as a stills camera) than Ricoh GR III in any "serious" review.

If I would reviwe cameras according to my personal preferences, cameras with bolted-on single-focal length lens would get max. "49%" rating, if everything else were "perfect" ... IQ, AF, EVF, performance, UI/handling, price ... which is defintiely not the case for the GR III.

1 week ago
Dericali

You can't see the difference between a fixed lens camera and an interchangeable lens camera?

Think of the difference between a knife and a fork. You're not going to down rate a fork because it's bad at cutting... or a knife because it's doesn't have any prongs.

You review a camera based on its intended uses. That what they've done here.

The Ricoh is clearly not intended to be used for video, so let's stop talking about that.

Saying that the M50 is 'more versatile thanks to interchangeable lenses" is nonsensical given that the core design of the GRIII is as a fixed lens camera.

1 week ago
larkhon

"no lens selection at all"

must be the dumbest comment I read today... I don't know what you're complaining about, the M50 is selling very well, probably outsells the GR III 100 to 1, they're just different products.

1 week ago
Revenant

You can't downgrade a product for not being what it isn't supposed to be. If you want to use different lenses on your camera, you shouldn't be looking at a fixed-lens camera in the first place. It's a completely different product category.

1 week ago
Alex Sarbu

I'm sorry, xeppelin, but your M50 fails completely at being a medium format camera. DPR clearly has a strong pro-Canon bias, otherwise they wouldn't give it 79% - obviously, it deserved at most 22.9% because that's precisely how much of a medium format camera it is.

1 week ago
larkhon

@Alex Sarbu: I almost thought you were serious before I understood your post ;)

@xeppelin: so you basically think any phone is crap because it has a fixed focal lens?

1 week ago
Daft Punk

Why are we comparing this Ricoh camera to a Canon M50?

One fits in my jeans pocket, one does not. This is as binary a difference as black vs white.

In other news, xeppelin compares a Toyota Corolla to an Amtrak GE diesel train, on the basis that both of them have wheels.

1 week ago*
xeppelin

nope. Both cameras have APS-C sensors.

But, alright, I should not compare Ricoh GR III to significantly better cameras like EOS M50 (with EVF).

So just compare EOS M 1st gen in terms of size ... even if EF-M 22/2.0 is added, there is not much of a difference. Yes, APS-C cameras with lens mount can also be built really compact. Unfortunately Ricoh/Pentax don't offer one.

https://www.apotelyt.com/compare-camera/canon-m-vs-ricoh-gr-iii

1 week ago
xeppelin

or for a more current model, Canon M100 vs. Ricoh GR III
https://www.apotelyt.com/compare-camera/canon-m100-vs-ricoh-gr-iii

1 week ago
Alex Sarbu

EOS M? It's about the same size as the GR... if you don't put a lens on.
But then, the image quality will be truly abysmal.

1 week ago
xeppelin

Take the current EOS M100 and add the excellent and small pancake EF-M 22/2.0. Only a bit less compact than the Ricoh. But much better all around. At around a half the money (including lens).

1 week ago
Alex Sarbu

"A bit less compact" means too big, it doubles the camera's thickness:
https://camerasize.com/compact/#819,719.349,ha,t

The EF-M 22mm... is not as good as the GR III's lens. Stop pushing your worse choices on us.

1 week ago*
Daft Punk

The EOS100 is not “better” in any way for me.

There is no lens option to compete with the Ricoh.

I would never consider the Canon even if they paid me because with a lens on it will not go in my pocket and even the 22mm is too long.

1 week ago
xeppelin

for me its exactly other way round. Would not switch my old EOS M 1st gen (!) vs. a Ricoh GR or any other camera with bolted-on fixed focal length. :-)

And I am not "pushing" anything on you. I do exactly what everbody else here does: expressing my opinion.

1 week ago
Alex Sarbu

Are you going to post such things on every review, article, forum etc. for a camera you won't switch to?

1 week ago
Daft Punk

I refuse to switch my Fuji X-T3 for a Canon 5DIV. I am just waiting for the opportunity for a thread on the Canon to come up so I can post a lot telling everybody.

I also refuse to switch my Sony RX100IV for a Canon C100 video camera. Just wait for that opportunity to come up so I can tell everyone about that !

I also would never switch a cheese sandwich for a packet of washing detergent. They both came from the same shop, so they could be compared. But I would not switch. YMMV.

1 week ago
kkoba

Different types of products are judged with different standards. A family sedan would be marked down for having limited rear leg room, while a sports car may get a pass for having no rear seats at all.

1 week ago
Dericali

@xeppelin You need to think about the Ricoh GRIII as fitting within the class of cameras that can be carried in a shirt pocket, as in the picture in the review.

It's a pretty short list.

1 week ago
xeppelin

saw the image. And know the size of it. While it may tightly fit, it is still too bulky to be carried in a regular shirt pocket for any length of time. At least I'd not want to do so. But then, I don't feel comfortable carrying even small smartphones in a shirt pocket. You folks may have "wider chests" and/or "deeper shirt pockets", lol.

In reality, GR III is also a "jacket pocket camera" just like a Canon EOS M100 with EF-M 22/2.0 lens or an EOS M50 (yes, slightly larger jacket pocket needed for that one due to EVF bump).

So for me, they are in the same "super-compact APS-C camera" class, and that's why i directly compare them. With Ricoh GR III I'd be stuck with only 1 focal length. Whereas a package only slightly bigger will give me a better camera [EVF, AF, performance, handling, UI] and a much more versatile one. For significantly less money.

1 week ago
Dericali

The M50 with the lens is literally double the width of the Ricoh. Would you compare the M50 with a camera that is double its width with a lens and says it's basically the same size? Given your spiel here I doubt you've used the Ricoh in a practical fashion. Those that have can attest to the usefulness of such a small sized camera.

So... what you also need to understand is that some people like fixed lens cameras. The fixed lens is a strength not a weakness.

If you think it's a weakness then don't buy the camera.

1 week ago
Daft Punk

You really do not get why i and others like this camera.

I would never buy the EOS M. Never. Simply because it is does not fit in a pocket. If i have to put it in a coat or a bag then i may as well carry a much better camera than the EOS.

It is a binary situation. There are no measures of “ its only a bit bigger”. A “bit bigger” in the case of the EOS is a deal breaker.

It either fits in my jeans pocket ( Ricoh ) or it does not.

1 week ago
xeppelin

yep, I'll definitely never buy a camera with a fixed single focal length lens.
Except in smartphone, which I have on me (almost) all the time.

To me cameras with only one focal length when I could as well have one with a lens mount and interchangeable lenses are "total fail". And I have a hard time to udnerstanding, why anyone would chose a less universal, less capable and more expensive photographic tool when better options are available.

Also under ecological/sustainability viewpoint I prefer modular digital products. Lenses generally serve me much longer than camera bodies which become technically obsolete every few years. Would hate having to dispose of a nice lens along with camera body when I swap it for a technically more advanced and better successor. To me it is a bit similar to buying those "one-way film cameras" [film pack with lens].

1 week ago
xeppelin

@daft punk: our usage scenarios are really different.

i never wear technical gear (phones, cameras) in my left jeans pocket. Way too uncomfortable. And it does not go well along with my keys i carry there. Right side is my [sometimes] used handkerchief, also not a good place to put cameras in. ;-)

In back jeans pockets I wear my wallet on 1 side. Other side - even if camera would fit - I'll never put it, because for sure I'd accidentally sit on it and break it.

so in my real life, any small camera is a "jacket pocket"-camera. EOS M6 or M50 size/weight is the max limit for me.

Other than in jacket pocket I often carry my EOS M plus lens in a small Lowepro Dashpoint pouch attached to left shoulder strap of a backpack. Hands-free, comfortable, somewhat protected and quicker to draw than from a shirt or jeans pocket. :-)

1 week ago*
Daft Punk

Precisely. You end up with a back back. If I have a back pack I may as well carry my X-T3 with a prime or even EOS R and a 35mm. Both absolutely kill an EOS M and they are no more inconvenient.

In contrast, the Ricoh is with me ALL the time. Every time. Any where. Everywhere. Because it slips in a pocket.

1 week ago
xeppelin

you definitely don't need a backpack for any EOS M. I need backpack wwhen hiking or on some city trips. Then camera goes on shoulder strap of backpack.

But normally my M is in my pocket. Just not a shirt or jeans pocket. lol.

1 week ago
Alex Sarbu

I've got the GR III partly to have a wide angle when my K-1 has the 150-450 on it (without carrying another DSLR), and partly to have it with me when I go out *without a camera bag*.
L.E. Or a big pockets jacket in full summer.

1 week ago*
Daft Punk

This is turning into a clothes / fashion site. :)

1 week ago
xeppelin

"always-with-me camera" with fixed lens, one focal length only ... about 28mm eq. = my cameraphone.

if i take along a "real camera" it's got to be more versatile. But still as compact as possible. :-)

1 week ago
Alex Sarbu

You, you, you. Who cares about you?
*I* would rather have the GR III than any of the inferior alternatives presented here.
And for those occasions a GR III won't do, the inferior alternatives won't do either - and I'll get my SLR kit.

1 week ago
xeppelin

yes, me. *I* don't care a bit about *you* either.

And the GR III is inferior to any *real camera*. No EVF, bolted-on single focal length lens, subpar AF (for a 2019 camera), poor battery life, sub par jpgs ooc. Not much smaller than decent real cameras. But really expensive.

Really a very enticing product.

1 week ago*
Alex Sarbu

Haters gonna hate.

1 week ago
xeppelin

lol.out of arguments.

no hate in my postings. Only realistic appraisal of an inferior product.

1 week ago
Daft Punk

You say the Ricoh is an “inferior product” while admitting to prefer an EOS M ?

A camera that is not pocketable even with the smallest lens ( which is too long anyway ) and has a sensor and IQ that cannot get close to the Ricoh.

The Canon is inferior by definition because it will not fit in a pocket. I would therefore always leave it at home. Why is that so hard to understand?

If you are not interested in a pocket camera - why are you here ??

1 week ago
Dericali

arguing about the strengths of the Canon EOS M50 is an odd hill to want to die on.

amateur hour

1 week ago
JacquesBalthazar
JacquesBalthazar

Ricoh completely owns the large sensor “shirt pocket camera” segment (1” sensor is not same IQ).

It seems so obvious to me that this combination of IQ, features and size is the perfect antidote against the smartphone monopoly: sure, it is an additional device, but just as pocketable, and so much better/easier/faster to use than that a laggy phone. Smartphone for selfies and stellar pocket camera for all the rest.

This is a crucial time for the photography industry, with mass-market dedicated cameras at risk of vanishing completely. So, yes, it is a pity that this iteration of the legendary GR line is underwhelming on key usability aspects. Ricoh had plenty of time for refinement and optimisation of the concept. They missed the target and there is no alternative.

Nikon almost got there with the excellent Coolpix A back in 2013, then dropped the ball. There is still a window of opportunity for someone to crack that nut, and bring out the Minox 35 or Olympus XA of the digital age!

1 week ago*
Daft Punk

There is a line where opinion meets facts.

The fact is that the Ricoh GRiii is backordered all over the world.
This rather makes your opinion a bit shaky. By all means hold it as you are entitled, but the evidence says you are probably wrong.

1 week ago
JacquesBalthazar
JacquesBalthazar

@Daft Punk - I'd be delighted if Ricoh is as successful as your info sounds. That would in fact validate my main points: there is a big market opportunity for the concept and Ricoh completely owns the segment as there is no alternative. My personal opinion is that they could have done much better on key usability aspects, and that there still is an opportunity right now for others to step in with an alternative take on that concept.

1 week ago*
Daft Punk

In a world where camera sales are collapsing, maybe being king of a small niche with lower volumes and to charge a decent price is the wise thing to do.

1 week ago
lightandaprayer

I still have an Olympus XA. It doesn't have a built-in flash either. If I remember correctly there were two accessory flashes that attach to the side of the XA; I have the more powerful model. It's a wonderful design not having a top-heavy flash perched on the camera. The Ricoh cries out for a similar option.

1 week ago
Richie S

Now if Olympus could get a 43 sensor in an XA body.........

1 week ago
Jersey Shore

Ah well. I guess I'll hold onto my original GR for a couple more years. It still works fine. The GRIII's poor battery life and shiny screen kind of kill for me. I was looking forward to this camera. And, given that it took Ricoh so long to bring it out, I can't understand why some of its flaws are so glaring. It seems like Ricoh hasn't really been working on the GRIII for very long at all. It seems much more like it got the green light a year or so ago and it was rushed into production.

1 week ago
ffking

I think you have to see the features you don't like as decisions you disagree with rather than flaws - no camera is perfect for everybody, let alone perfecr per se, but all design decisions are trade-offs.

1 week ago
Zvonimir Tosic
Zvonimir Tosic

ffking, some cameras are made very quickly and sent to the market. The amount of thought that went into the previous GRII, surpasses all possible tinkering about the GRIII. GRIII is not designed well, and no amount of self-assertion and autohypnosis can help make it better. It is the worst GR release ever.

1 week ago
ffking

Zvonimir Tosic- that's your opinion - it's not the opinion of the writers of this review who spent time with the camera and tested it. It also seems extremely unlikely your opinion represents the truth of the matter. What is likely is that you are either trolling or that you simply disagree with the design choices made by Ricoh. You have that right, and for you it might be true but it does not make it true for everybody.

1 week ago
Daft Punk

Completely disagree.

1 week ago
Zvonimir Tosic
Zvonimir Tosic

Compare this poor Ricoh's attempt with Pentax cameras; it is like night and day difference! Pentax team would NEVER allow this to ship! Pentax team also designed MX-1 compact, and the Pentax Q, both were superbly designed and had ZERO hardware issues. MX-1 is so good, that today it catches a higher price than at its introduction – unheard of in the camera business!

1 week ago
kadardr
kadardr

:) :)

1 week ago
kkoba

Oh sure, they rushed through development, they just threw in IBIS and a new lens and didn't do much else. Uh huh.

1 week ago
DarnGoodPhotos

"MX-1 is so good, that today it catches a higher price than at its introduction – unheard of in the camera business!"

I can find countless MX-1s on eBay, selling for a lot less than the $499 MSRP.

Many people would say that Pentax never should have allowed the K-01 to ship with it's polarizing, avant-garde design (which I happen to like).

1 week ago*
ogl
ogl

GRIII is good camera....But...
I think the weaknesses of GRIII are some kind of marketing trick. They will make some tweaks in GRIV...The bad news - GRIV will be not early than 2021.:)))

1 week ago
photomedium

This goose is cooked dude. Will there even be a GRIV? Who knows what's going to happen in two years in this camera market and what's going to be relevant or marketable.

1 week ago
FoxShutter
FoxShutter

I used to love the GRII as much as I dislike this stripped down and poorly thought new GRiii.
Nobody who shoots street or even landscapes needs more than 16mp , and don’t tell me that you crop . If you need more than that for cropping than perhaps you need a zoom lens or just you are in the wrong business/hobby,The only reason Ricoh put a new 24mp ,perhaps Sony, sensor is because .There is no 16mp sensors being made (by Sony?)anymore.
Tbc

1 week ago
FoxShutter
FoxShutter

Stabilization ? No need for 28/35/50mm . The only reason it’s there is to try and rectify the serious dust issues GRii has by shaking the dust off.
No built in flash ! It’s the major flaw. If you don’t need it than perhaps you are in the wrong field again. Or buy a huge Pentax flashes.

Poor battery life! The point of such a small camera is not to fiddle with additional cords, power banks, spare batteries etc .

Poor low light focus. Worse buttons layout in exchange for a touch screen - always slower. Poorer built quality. Some other , more minor flaws.
Tbh, I consider this camera as a huge failure.

1 week ago
ffking

"The only reason Ricoh put a new 24mp ,perhaps Sony, sensor is because .There is no 16mp sensors being made (by Sony?)anymore. " - if true, seems ike a reasonable reason to me :)

1 week ago
larkhon

ok, again the same comment we see from you on every article about GR III. I guess the same answer is only fitting. Just because you don't value the new features like IBIS doesn't mean that they're not useful to someone else.

Even if they could still get a 16mp sensor, how would asking $900 for a 16mp camera look from a marketing point of view? I'm sorry but touchscreen is almost a must for a new consumer camera. How would you gain back smartphone users if you don't offer the minimum they expect from the cheapest phone?

"If you don’t need it than perhaps you are in the wrong field again. "

Or maybe consider that this camera is not only a street camera but can be used for landscape/travel as well. There is no other camera or system that gets such a sharp lens in such a small camera. So yes, I'd get IBIS over flash anytime, but that's just me. Question is, how many customers are they losing because of it? maybe they can afford losing a few to gain more new customers...

1 week ago
FoxShutter
FoxShutter

@larkhon
I don’t know why are you following my comments ,actually. One new review or article - a new comment. What’s the problem ? Is there a limit that I am not aware of?
You are a bad lawyer , btw . Your argument that this is a good travel camera especially. Travel camera without a pop up flash with 150 shots/charge. Exactly!

1 week ago
Zvonimir Tosic
Zvonimir Tosic

A very good *dedicated* camera should be built around solid engineering premises and real photographer's demands. That is, it should be built like someone's life and constancy of results depend on it:

1. a very good sensor
2. a very good lens performance throughout the frame
3. excellent battery life
4. excellent AF
5. excellent sturdiness and dependency
6. runs cool (no heating issues)

Only when these are all addressed, add some extra features. With GRIII, Ricoh failed in 4.5 out of 6 (because even the 'good' lens in GRIII is vignetting heavily). Let me ask any engineer: who on earth needs a *dedicated* $900 camera that has less battery life than a $300 smartphone with a similar FoV lens, is vignetting like a $50 pinhole camera, and is heating like a hotpod? Previous GR ticked more boxes than this release.

1 week ago*
ffking

I'm slightly curious as to why you place a higher priority on battery life than the sensor or lens quality

1 week ago
Zvonimir Tosic
Zvonimir Tosic

Because it is a dedicated device, with one basic purpose, therefore the power consumption should not be compromised but optimised, and deliver more performance than some generic device.

1 week ago
ffking

Doesn't answer the question - it's a dedicated PHOTOGRAPHIC device.

1 week ago
Zvonimir Tosic
Zvonimir Tosic

GRIII is not dedicated to photography: photography is about critical moments, and this camera fails in critical performance required for critical moments to be consistently captured. It is rushed out design, fails to deliver consistent and optimal performance of a dedicated product. Say, if cameras were cars, Ricoh has delivered a push-bike and persuades us that GRIII is a car, with two wheels, but is stabilised, and runs on alternative fuel too.

1 week ago*
ffking

Your opinion - almost certanly factually inaccurate regarding rushing out- others disagree

1 week ago
Don Sata
Don Sata

So you really don't get it, don't you?

1 week ago
khunpapa
khunpapa

" Are you searching for the best image quality in the smallest package? "

Now the best IMAGE QUALITY is not belonged to FF anymore, isn't it?

For IQ _per- package, I don't think the Sony RX-1 is worse than this GR-3.

But if you're biased toward package than IQ, I think HW P30Pro is also better than the GR.

Consistency becomes rarer and rarer in [digital photography] review?

1 week ago
Jefftan

i agree
p30 pro absolute IQ with RAW is of course way behind
but u get 3 FL 16/27/125mm
much better jpeg and no RAW needed (not detail but balance between light and dark area)
this is good trade off

if limit to camera i would rather have RX100 VI that give me the focal length

1 week ago
cosinaphile

as good as the p30 is calling it the better of this new GR is like calling Egyptian cotton the same as polyester ... the versatile plastic fiber can be a soft and plush couch throw... or a rigid tray to hold your chips and guacamole

one creates image files and one fakes image files one is the real article ...a camera and one is an electronic Swiss army knife

a smartphone lets you game ... but calling it a gaming machine is absurd

a smartphone lets you watch video .... but put it on your living room wall instead of a proper television and you will be committed

a smartphone allows you to create a pleasing image .... but call it a real camera and ......... well ......you get the point

1 week ago*
larkhon

I think the difference in IQ is way bigger than the difference in size.

1 week ago
khunpapa
khunpapa

@cosinaphile, your long reasons can be summarized by just one 4-letters word.

B I A S.

1 week ago
khunpapa
khunpapa

Long reply.

Bias toward to big camera is better [more important] than small camera.
Bias toward to Fool Flame is better [ibid] than 4/3.
Bias toward to Image Quality is better [] than Form Factor.
Bias toward to Form Factor is better [] than Image Quality.

Fool Flame canera > 4/3 camera
interchangable lens camera > compact camera

Now
ANY camera is better than PHONE camera.

ROTFLMAO.

Double rotflmao when hearing the word "REAL" camera.

With such extreme bias, you can't not open your mind. No need to further 'explain'.

1 week ago
larkhon

Bias is everywhere, guys. It's the same thing as debating about FF being the only way for serious photography. You buy something, based on knowledge, excitement for technology and/or whatever. Someone tells you that something new and/or something cheaper can do the same, how do you react?

Yet, one cannot dismiss an argument simply because of bias. We're not talking about best photophone against just any camera. The Ricoh GR holds its own against most cameras/lenses I have used, if the GR III is anything near this optical excellence, it is not unreasonable to think the best photophone is not enough to challenge it.

1 week ago
cosinaphile

you keep calling smartphone real cameras .. and that is your bias

base iso from the 1930s

no working aperture

tiny lentil sized elements [plastic ,of course] in front of sensors so pathetic they must fuse to give a decent file

no sd cards ... in high end

usually have trapaziods or bulletholes in screen [ try that on a real camera lol]

no creative control

no shutter button

why not accept that cellphones due to incredible advances in computational photography produce pleasing images at ,... maybe iso 40

and stop pretending your bigwheel is the family car ....lol

1 week ago*
Jefftan

i think no bias but how one view whether convenience or IQ is more important

many don't need the best IQ but view a waterproof device with 3 FL 16/27/125mm as more important
i also find out exposure and AF is usually better on phone than all my real camera

1 week ago*
cosinaphile

due to the very tiny sensor one could in theory have a fixed focus cellphone camera.in fact,that used to be the case. I know cellphone make good images. are almost foolproof, so serve their audience well
frankly they improve & advance much quicker than cameras to their credit

While i love to listen to music on a phone \ have dozens of bands full discographies , i dont delude myself to think my phone is my audio system.. cause it isnt
also,though i love having a pocket media server with tons of content, i never ever think my phone is my home theatre cause it aint.
my cellphone is my primary phone however, a role that seems to fit perfectly
while i enjoy games on my phone, it is not the nintendo switch. no one i know would imagine its gaming machine, its not, not a console not a gaming machine with high end gpu. i enjoy it for exactly what it is
When i need to send visual info or accept some my phone is there

my phone takes useful images, but is not & will never be a camera

1 week ago*
Jefftan

due to the very tiny sensor one could in theory have a fixed focus cellphone camera

i don't think so.
my p30 pro has a not too tiny 1/1.7 sensor, its superior AF is due to having both dual pixel and a depth sensor
everyone can decide how much IQ is enough but the latest p30 pro/pixel phone IQ has get to quite decent level

and the all important processing of jpeg, i rarely see extreme dark shadow in phone pics but is common in jpeg of my A6500
no matte how much dynamic range is in the sensor, one need to do RAW for each individual pic or rely on Lightroom "auto" to get it

phone has many advantage besides decent IQ and so their popularity is well deserved

1 week ago*
larkhon

"many don't need the best IQ but view a waterproof device with 3 FL 16/27/125mm as more important"

Somehow this is funny because people might think the same, put $800+ in a smartphone to have that range when a $200 camera would do the job. Sometimes people think the same way as when they're buying a huge car ; twice the year they go on holiday or buy furniture, and need the space, but most of the time they just go to work with it. Yet to carry bigger stuff they need to rent a truck anyway...
The same way, most people are using digital zoom on their phone, with the quality compromises we know about. But if we don't care so much about IQ why go for the better zoom on P30 Pro? Would we trust someone to capture our wedding with that?

1 week ago
larkhon

There are lots of compact cameras made with a 1/1.7", my LF1 is still unbeaten for range/size/weight/IQ ratio. A difference though with P30 Pro would be that the 1/1.7" covers all focal lengths on a dedicated camera, while other sensors on P30 Pro have smaller sensors.

1 week ago
Jefftan

which $200 camera have 3 FL 16/27/125mm?
also the stupid F3.5-5.6 kit lens compare with p30 pro 27mm F1.6

1 week ago
larkhon

oh that's true, I forgot about the UWA there. My bad, there is no such camera. Then again, it will get more and more difficult to integrate longer focal lengths.

Yet I can't find the different sensor sizes involved, and how a P30 Pro compares to a compact travel zoom camera, for instance.

1 week ago
cosinaphile

remember the equiv factor constantly used to compare apsc or m43 to the equiv standards

so the eqiv speed of that cell lens on a 1 1.7 sensor is f8.19
https://mmcalc.com/

1 week ago*
larkhon

yeah but I don't think it matters so much for a wide angle lens. Before we had 1" sensor we were pretty happy with 1/1.7" and a fast lens. I'd more worried about the other sensors, I can't find much information yet. I believe on the P20 Pro there was a 1/3" sensor for the longer focal length, this one will be definitely worse. Can the bigger sensors compensate?

1 week ago
brett nz
brett nz

So many comments from people who arent interested in street photography. Check this out before you cast too much ill placed judgement: http://michaelkowalczyk.eu/ricoh-gr/ricoh-gr-zone-focusing-tips/

1 week ago*
Sezano
Sezano

Very useful page. The photographs included though are examples of what not to aim for, in street photography.

1 week ago
brett nz
brett nz

I thought the photos further down the page were stunning examples - the guy with cigarette is one of the best I have ever seen!

1 week ago*
MyReality
MyReality

Agree with Sezano. Look at what some of the best street photographers are doing and using on 1x, they are not using GR cameras.

1 week ago
KaanG

Wow great image samples in the article. I wonder how can he still be "candid" while staying this close to the people. I get nervous shooting even 5m away

1 week ago
MikeFairbanks

Aside from a cellphone, I can't see myself enjoying a fixed prime lens.

Obviously there's a market for it, and maybe I'd change my mind if I tried one, but I can't see myself taking that risk.

1 week ago
photomedium

That's interesting. Every time I pickup a camera and look through the viewfinder I naturally want to zoom. ;-)

1 week ago
Daft Punk

Stopping using a zoom lens and moving to a couple of fixed lenses is the best thing I have EVER done in terms of improving my pictures.

1 week ago
MikeFairbanks

Daft Punk: I like prime lenses. I was talking about a fixed prime that can't be removed.

1 week ago
David610

Every DPReview review of Pentax/Ricoh has a silver lining?

1 week ago
Mortal Lion
Mortal Lion

There should be a law against the use of the word video in a review of a camera like this.

1 week ago
David610

At least the review is not in video form.

1 week ago
PremiumBitter

As I said in a review on Amazon: "If you've bought a cellphone in the last 4 years, you can probably take better video than this."

It's so terrible they should not have even bothered.

Having said that, I love this camera for stills.

1 week ago
FoxShutter
FoxShutter

Than Ricoh shouldn’t even bother with including a video mode in a camera . Otherwise, it should be reviewed and get a score.

1 week ago
dissonate

It is not perfectly clear from the review if it was tested with the upgraded firmware.
There is a brief mention that its a bit better, but its kind of like an afterthought.
This youtube suggests it is much much better -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tv4wSsvGOb0

Possibly that video was set up in a way to highlight a benefit in a very specific use case that is not representative of the general improvement in autofocus.

1 week ago
dissonate

I dont think I saw mention of a couple of positives

No lens cap - this is an absolute must for me, I sold my Fuji x70 because it has a lens cap.
Internal memory - nice to have, would have saved me on two previous occasions, once where I forgot the card, once where I had a card fail. 2GB for a day is enough for me.

Also for my use, IBIS is the most needed feature, so I am in the back order queue for one of these.

1 week ago
Total: 116, showing: 1 – 50
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »