M
Mitch Alland
Guest
A consensus seems to be forming here and on the dpreview Ricoh Talk forum that Ricoh has introduced too much noise reduction in the GRD2 in-camera processing of JPGs, particularly at higher ISOs. Although I don't normally shoot in JPG mode on some occasions I have done so, when, for example, I was running out of space for DNG files on an SD card. Today I've looked at GRD2 JPG files and it does look like there is substantially more noise reduction in the GRD2 JPGs than in those from the GRD.
But what concerns me more is how the RAW files look. While I am happy about the look I can get from the GRD2 at ISO400 and 800 which, in some of my shots I like better than that of the GRD, at ISO200 and below I find the look of the GRD2 too "fine grained" or "too smooth" for my taste compared to that of the GRD. Some photographers have written that the GRD2 has lost most of the "character" that the GRD had. I think that there is something to this, particularly at ISOs below 400.
In processing RAW files of ISO200 I have sharpened the grain in an effort to get the look that I want; but I'm not that happy with the results, which you can see on my flickr site in the link under my signature below.
The GRD, like the GR1/GR21 film cameras, has been a niche product, with virtually a cult following in Japan. It looks like Ricoh is now trying to reach out to a broader market, which seems risky to me because they run the danger of losing their grip on their core constituency of experienced photographers, who have been enthusiastic about the camera. Me feeling is that the GRD has been bought by many people after seeing photographs online produced with this camera — I know that quite a few photographers bought the GRD after seeing my B&W pictures on flickr.
On the other hand, many color photographers may prefer the look of the GRD2.
Any thoughts on whether the GRD2 has lost much of the character of the GRD and whether Ricoh has gone off in the wrong direction? But please specify whether you are referring to the look of JPG or RAW files.
—Mitch/Bangkok
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/
But what concerns me more is how the RAW files look. While I am happy about the look I can get from the GRD2 at ISO400 and 800 which, in some of my shots I like better than that of the GRD, at ISO200 and below I find the look of the GRD2 too "fine grained" or "too smooth" for my taste compared to that of the GRD. Some photographers have written that the GRD2 has lost most of the "character" that the GRD had. I think that there is something to this, particularly at ISOs below 400.
In processing RAW files of ISO200 I have sharpened the grain in an effort to get the look that I want; but I'm not that happy with the results, which you can see on my flickr site in the link under my signature below.
The GRD, like the GR1/GR21 film cameras, has been a niche product, with virtually a cult following in Japan. It looks like Ricoh is now trying to reach out to a broader market, which seems risky to me because they run the danger of losing their grip on their core constituency of experienced photographers, who have been enthusiastic about the camera. Me feeling is that the GRD has been bought by many people after seeing photographs online produced with this camera — I know that quite a few photographers bought the GRD after seeing my B&W pictures on flickr.
On the other hand, many color photographers may prefer the look of the GRD2.
Any thoughts on whether the GRD2 has lost much of the character of the GRD and whether Ricoh has gone off in the wrong direction? But please specify whether you are referring to the look of JPG or RAW files.
—Mitch/Bangkok
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/