Ricoh GR comparative review
JPEG - Low, Mixed Lighting
These shots were taken moments apart, to show how the cameras behave outside the studio. The shots were both taken and F3.2 and Auto ISO, with exposure compensation applied on the Nikon to more closely match the Ricoh's exposure. The Nikon image has been re-processed in-camera from a Raw file with noise reduction turned off, to match the Ricoh's setting.
|Ricoh GR - F3.2, ISO 1600||100% Crop|
|Nikon Coolpix A - F3.2, ISO 1400||100% Crop|
JPEG - Daylight
Shot in daylight, we found no clear winner between the Nikon and the Ricoh - in general the Nikon will meter less conservatively than the Ricoh, so is more likely to produce brighter, punchier images. At the same exposure, the Nikon's images tend to be around one third of a stop brighter than the Ricoh's (suggesting the Ricoh's ISO sensitivity is a fraction over-stated).
Some moiré appears in the Ricoh shot as green and purple edges to some window frames in this shot - we'll look at the options to reduce this, in-camera, later in the review.
|Ricoh GR - F5, ISO 100, 1/1250th sec||100% Crop|
|Nikon Coolpix A - F5, ISO 100, 1/1250th sec||100% Crop|
There's no appreciable difference in image sharpness between the two cameras' JPEGs, though the Ricoh is exhibiting a touch more false color (pink and green tinged wooden frames in this image). The GR has an option to reduce color moiré if you re-process a Raw file in the camera. We'll look more at this feature in our review of the Ricoh.
|Ricoh GR - F8, ISO 100||100% Crop|
|Nikon Coolpix A - F8, ISO 100||100% Crop|
One of the noticeable differences in specification between the Ricoh and the Nikon is the Coolpix A's ability to capture 14-bit Raw files, rather than the GR's 12-bit DNGs. We look at the difference this makes, later in the review.
Apr 18, 2016
Mar 23, 2016
Dec 14, 2015
Jul 27, 2015