Dear DPReview

Is there going to be a full review of this camera or is this all there is going to be ?

This is a beautiful lean mean street machine.

I'm getting one, definitely, as I had always dreamed about moving up to whopping 640 x 480 pixel VGA class video. That is higher resolution than them HD cams can deliver, correct? CCD sensor is great, too, I love that new technology over yesteryear's CMOS. All in all, a total winner for placement under the tree at Christmas 2012.

Dude where is the review?

In September last year, snake_b said, 'where's the review?' It's now September 2012. Has this review been cancelled?

I have been using the Ricoh GR IV and must admit that there are certainly some great improvements over the GR III.

I do understand the passion for high quality primes, but for me please fit the excellent zoom lens from the GX200 and I will replace mine as I would love the CCD sensor and hybrid AF system. I know the GRX is the obvious choice for users like myself, but the cost of that system outweighs my usage.

There is no finer user interface and handling experience than the GR / GX series. Let's have a GX300 please!

Ricoh's CCD is an interesting choice. In an chinese interview, Media asked why Ricoh is not using a backlit CMOS sensor in the GRD IV. The answer is backlit CMOS sony produces cannot produce colors Ricoh desired - colors are just too "plain"

Which is true - look at the sample image from pentax Q, and latest sony compacts, they adopt a "natural" look, but that natural look is not their choice, but actually limited by the sensor.

CCD is still producing much better colors, look at the sample image from Ricoh or XZ-1 or LX5, which using CCD over CMOS. CMOS, however, has better high ISO ability than CCD, but that's not necessary given the fast lens any of those camera have. 90% of the time, people only use ISO 100 or 200.

I am thankful Ricoh had not changed the GR formula, except with making image improvements.

I think most here would agree:
(1) I don't want a zoom lens. Just the best quality 28mm please.
(2) I don't care about GPS ... whatever movie mode.
Just the best image please.
(3) The snap mode is the best thing ever. In fact, I don't want no face recognition.

This camera is unique and best for pros.
This is meant for those who understand photography.
Newbies, noobs, go away.

Nowadays, Canon and Nikon are not exactly selling cameras.
Instead of making true photographic tools, they adding too much peripheral functions. HD recording .... GPS ... a whole lot of distractions.

I always ask:
How has this improve the quality of the photo taken?
A brighter lens? Higher quality processing?
Higher bit raw? Lower noise?

Now Canon is doing something else
They are pushing a faster digic engine ...
A distraction only what you want is not a faster processor
But better quality DNG raw file.

Too many people commenting here seem to just be comparing zooms vs primes.

As anyone who has actually used the GRD III will tell you, you'll find that the S95 and other top compacts don't even come close to the handling and customization that the GRD series offers. Majority of street photographers looking for a compact digital will pretty much agree that the GRD IV is pretty much in a league of its own. And 28mm is a pretty sweet spot for street photography.

Although obviously, it's not for everyone, if you don't like primes, or if you feel the need to cover every single FL, if you think HD video is useful, then go and get yourself an S100 or an XZ1 or the myriad of other me-too compacts that Canon and Sony churn out every year.

Personally, the only thing I'd want on this little baby is a built in VF, even at the expense of size. Although that Tri-Elmar idea posted a few comments down sounds pretty good too. I wouldn't mind a 24/35 two-in-one lens.

Weight and size similar to my Panasonic LX3 and the sensor is around the same size, and at last they've joined the 21st century with image stabilisation. With an optional external viewfinder it looks like it could be interesting. Assuming they don't do a Fuji and send a half finished product to market....

Very nice. I had the GRD I & II and really miss them. Yes, the sensor was too small but everything else was so good, it got 90% of the way there. I got an LX5 which is pretty good at the long end but as expected (but hoped wouldn't be the case) at 24mm-28mm the corners are soft. But that's why the Ricoh doesn't have a zoom.

This sounds a fantastic new camera - I handled a GRD3 shortly after it came out and was really impressed by it's build quality and no-nonsense design.

The new screen should improve the usability in bright light, but on first reading I thought it was higher resolution than previously - quoting the higher dot count is somewhat misleading.

Why does DPR always get the shutter speed wrong every time. On the grd3 they listed it as starting at1 sec. And here they have done the same. As a grd3 fan and owner it truly peeves me.

Phew, nothing really stands out as worthy of an upgrade. I'm glad it doesn't have a zoom (don't need) and a new sensor (honestly, I don't care).

I understand why some people don't like this camera. But I can't seem to understand why they get so upset about a camera they would never buy.

What I don't understand is why Ricoh refuses to design a new GR digital with an adequate sensor in it. In the film days GR-1 was popular (you could say even had a cult following), despite being expensive, mainly b/c of image quality one could get with that lens.

With every new release of GR digital though I wonder, why Ricoh preserved all the good elements from the film version (controls, lens) and skip on arguably the most important part - the sensor?

"30fps VGA video capture"...

Ricoh, please do something better or do nothing.

I've been a fan of the GR series since the film ones & I've owned the GRD II & now III. This one I won't upgrade to but that's because I don't see a need. Having read through some of the detractors here I would just say "That's fine the camera is clearly not for you". I like this camera because of its ergonomics and fixed lens. To me, it's the perfect unobtrusive street shooter.

It may only be an incremental improvement over the GRD-III, but I think Ricoh are to be applauded for their efforts. Make no mistake, this is a classy compact. The GR series from the film era won many fans, and it says a lot about Ricoh's philosophy that they are willing to cater so faithfully to those photographers.

I won't make any claims about cause/effect, but there seems to be a correlation between 'shooting with a GRD-III' and 'making photographs I like the look of on 500px'.

If small cameras can have pop-up flash units, why not pop-up OVFs?

I wonder if it too will start to fall apart after a couple of years, just like my GRD III and just in time for the release of the GRD V?

Sorry, no sale Ricoh. Too little, too late, once bitten twice shy.

I don't like the fixed "touristic" 28mm lens and if it really only has a 640 x 480 video then it would be better if they left it out altogether. I would agree with bigdaddave that when you consider the alternatives like LX-5, XZ-1 or even S95 it kind of appears pointless unless you really shoot at 28mm all the time.

When will it be available.
@bigdaddave If you explained your thoughts they would be more valid.
I consider it a very useful product. Good lens, small, now faster with IS, should be little need for a flash. Excellent UI. For a pocket stills camera there is little left wanting for, if, like me you're not fussed by movie or zoom.

I actually like it that these are the guys who will be running Pentax from now on :)