Photon-hunter
New member
Hi to everyone here. First I would like to introduce myself to all the members of this peculiar new forum. After years reading and posting in places such as DP, FM and Luminous-Landscape, I have found this place very refreshing, and have found some really interesting read in the days I have been around as a lurker...It´s funny how I allready feel so familiar with some of the regular posters, and it´s great to find here "old friends" like Sean Reid. All in all I really like the "atmosphere" around here.
My photographic background is mainly digital. I learnt photography with digital cameras and have been shooting Canon DSLR´s for years now. But a few years ago, being mainly interested in BW, I felt "the call" of film and started playing around with negatives..doing my own developing and so..I thought it was fascinating and to make a long story short I ended up investing in a Leica outfit: M7 with 35 and 50 Crons and a 90 Elmarit. I loved the thing and found that surprisingly I liked the approach to the process of creation an image that the rangefinder imposes. But film wasn´t for me. Being an enviromentally concerned person I was never comfortable with the chemicals and the amount of water needed to develop the film( I live in a small island where water is a valuable and scarse good), plus I was probably too used to the "inmediacy" (if the word exists at all) of digitall and I ended up selling the thing. I don´t enjoy shooting DSL´s, I do so simply because they allow me to use the specific lenses that I need at times (tilt/shift lenses and long tele..).
And that is where the Ricoh thing comes into the ecuation...I am considering buying one of the Ricoh cameras. I tend to favour the GX mainly because of the lens. When I had the Leica the 35 Cron was nearly glued to the body and I found that focal length very comfortable(I used the 50 maybe only 20% of the time and the 90 was completely unused when I sold it, I simply couldn´t find the use for it). If I don´t go for the GRII is because I am afraid of the 28 FOV (for sure not an easy one to master..). On the other hand, I am a fast prime junkie, and do a lot of available light shooting, so the slight advantage of the GR keeps me undecided..
A few questions i would like to ask:
1- Using the step-zoom on the GX, can anyone tell me what the maximum apertures are for the 28-35-50 and 72 positions?
2- A lot has been said about how the agressive noise reduction affects the JPEGs in the GRII (no-one seems to like them..). If I was to shoot JPEGs will the GX be a better option?
3- I believe the longest shutter speed in both mdels is 3 min. Is that correct?
4- Does using the 19mm adapter on the GX affect the lens apperture or does it work in the same way as the adapters for the GRII?
As a curious note, it shocks me that everybody seems to find the GRII so expensive when here in Spain (at least where I live) the GX100 is 30 Euro more expensive...518€ for the GRII, 548€ for the GX100. Are this prices any good?
Sorry for such a long post, and excuse my english, it´s a bit rusty..
Thanks in advance for all your kindness and all the best to you all.
Erik.
My photographic background is mainly digital. I learnt photography with digital cameras and have been shooting Canon DSLR´s for years now. But a few years ago, being mainly interested in BW, I felt "the call" of film and started playing around with negatives..doing my own developing and so..I thought it was fascinating and to make a long story short I ended up investing in a Leica outfit: M7 with 35 and 50 Crons and a 90 Elmarit. I loved the thing and found that surprisingly I liked the approach to the process of creation an image that the rangefinder imposes. But film wasn´t for me. Being an enviromentally concerned person I was never comfortable with the chemicals and the amount of water needed to develop the film( I live in a small island where water is a valuable and scarse good), plus I was probably too used to the "inmediacy" (if the word exists at all) of digitall and I ended up selling the thing. I don´t enjoy shooting DSL´s, I do so simply because they allow me to use the specific lenses that I need at times (tilt/shift lenses and long tele..).
And that is where the Ricoh thing comes into the ecuation...I am considering buying one of the Ricoh cameras. I tend to favour the GX mainly because of the lens. When I had the Leica the 35 Cron was nearly glued to the body and I found that focal length very comfortable(I used the 50 maybe only 20% of the time and the 90 was completely unused when I sold it, I simply couldn´t find the use for it). If I don´t go for the GRII is because I am afraid of the 28 FOV (for sure not an easy one to master..). On the other hand, I am a fast prime junkie, and do a lot of available light shooting, so the slight advantage of the GR keeps me undecided..
A few questions i would like to ask:
1- Using the step-zoom on the GX, can anyone tell me what the maximum apertures are for the 28-35-50 and 72 positions?
2- A lot has been said about how the agressive noise reduction affects the JPEGs in the GRII (no-one seems to like them..). If I was to shoot JPEGs will the GX be a better option?
3- I believe the longest shutter speed in both mdels is 3 min. Is that correct?
4- Does using the 19mm adapter on the GX affect the lens apperture or does it work in the same way as the adapters for the GRII?
As a curious note, it shocks me that everybody seems to find the GRII so expensive when here in Spain (at least where I live) the GX100 is 30 Euro more expensive...518€ for the GRII, 548€ for the GX100. Are this prices any good?
Sorry for such a long post, and excuse my english, it´s a bit rusty..
Thanks in advance for all your kindness and all the best to you all.
Erik.