The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

R-d1 vs GXR vs NEX 5N

thrice

Active member
Work gave me a NEX-5N to use and it is quite excellent, focus peaking works exceptionally well! I have yet to try my M lenses on it though. The offset microlenses are supposed to work very well, but I haven't confirmed that for myself yet.
 

LCT

Member
Oh - none - I've just looked - the point really was a criticism of the Sony jpg files rather than a criticism of the Ricoh RAW (and ricohs have always produced good jpgs). But when it comes to RAW, the sensor in the NEX5n is really excellent - the extra resolution isn't wasted, the dynamic range and high ISO are excellent, and the colour is also good. I use Aperture.
My feeling about the Sony's raws as well but the Ricoh's are somewhat more MF or Leica like i feel in that they need less sharpening than the formers. Might come from the fact that the Ricoh's sensor has no AA filter perhaps i don't know.
 

Michiel Schierbeek

Well-known member
Can't speak about the Sony's but the Ricoh files are subtantially sharper then what comes out of my GH2. Eventhough one never ones to take a step back in MP's it is worth it this time especially for M mount (wide angles) lenses.

The only draw back for me is focussing, in some conditions, when you need to do it fast.
It is a little slower stil then with the GH2, but I am still in the adapting stage and playing with different focus settings.

Michiel
 
V

Vivek

Guest
Can't speak about the Sony's but the Ricoh files are subtantially sharper then what comes out of my GH2.
Michiel

Depends on the total amount of glass in front of the sensor (including the fixed cover plate).

The GH-2 sensor has a total of ~5mm (!) of glass. Even after removing the AA filter, the addition of a plain glass with similar thickness to maintain the registry focus, the sharpness (or the fuzziness) remains the same.

The Sony NEX have a total glass thickness of ~2.5mm in the optical path of their sensor.

It could be that Ricoh might have even thinner glass, thus reducing the amount of aberration.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
AA filter isn't the only thing between the sensor and a lens in a camera.

A sensor normally has a cover glass to seal it and protect it from the environment. This is usually ~1mm (perhaps a tad less in APS-C sensors).

Then there is AA filter and then there is UV/IR cut filter.

If the Ricoh does not have an AA filter, it still would have an UV/IR cut filter and that may double up as the cover glass (as in the Leica M8) thus reducing the overall "glass" in the optical path.

The Epson RD1s is quite a dog in this aspect. >3.5mm of glass on the sensor.
 
Do any of the Nex or similar cameras have a proper shutter speed dial or is it all done by menus or auto-exposure? That, and the absence or otherwise of an optical viewfinder would be the determining factors for me. I bought a RD-1 when they first came out (late 2004?) and was pretty underwhelmed at the time but I'd take the RD-1 any time in preference to shoehorning an M lens onto what looks like a glorified P&S digicam.*

*Maybe I'm missing something but putting M lenses on these Sony things seems about as attractive a proposition (from a user/ergonomic perspective) as sticking a lens on my iphone.
The rear dial of the NEX can be used as a shutter speed dial.

OVF can't match the accuracy of a zoomed in EVF. Focus peaking is also a nice tool to use.
 
i've read that GXR's like to be focused wide open then stopped down for the shot?

from luminous landscapes:
Just one parenthetical note. Because Leica M lenses have manual aperture rings one will always achieve best focus by doing so with the lens wide open. If you try and focus with the lens stopped down to shooting aperture, particularly at smaller apertures, depth of field can lead to some inaccuracy. My method of working is to open the lens wide (counter-clockwise), focus, and then stop down to shooting aperture. Once you know how many "clicks" it is to a given aperture one can do this with the camera at eye level.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
i've read that GXR's like to be focused wide open then stopped down for the shot?

from luminous landscapes:
What the Luminous Landscape quote says is accurate, but it's a matter of what works best for you. The GXR doesn't care or enforce any particular methodology ... how you focus the lens is your preference.

I find that at my usual working lens openings (between f/2 and f/5.6) I get spot-on focus using the magnification and focus assist tools without bothering with going to wide open then stopping down again. Exactly what magnification and assist mode works best depends on both the subject matter and the lens, and to some degree on what lens opening I've chosen.

The focusing tools are so effective that I've lately been spending time not using them because for speed and fluidity when shooting I find it important to be able to at least get an acceptably sharp focus setting without them. This is easy with normal and longer focal length lenses, a bit trickier with wides. But then with wides you can put more into presetting the focus zone anyway at smaller apertures.

The EVF/LCD does eventually darken too much to be useful, but only in relatively dim circumstances where nearly any other TTL camera's focusing system is compromised as well. I've not yet come to a situation where I couldn't get a precise, critical focus if I concentrated on the task (usually I blow the focus by simply being too casual about it... !).
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
...OVF can't match the accuracy of a zoomed in EVF. Focus peaking is also a nice tool to use.
With wides as well?
There's a difference between accuracy and use. Rangefinder focusing with wide lenses allows you to align the images and obtain a precise setting very easily in use, but exactly how accurate it is you cannot tell until after you make the exposure and check the results. The accuracy depends upon how well calibrated the focusing system in the body and the lens are.

With a TTL viewfinder system that includes magnification, you can know up-front exactly how accurate the focus is with any lens because you are looking at the actual image the sensor is recording. Here the accuracy of the focus depends on how well you can see the correct focus point, which varies from person to person, and it might not be as easy to see the point as the alignment of two images in a rangefinder, but it is always more accurate.

I tend to like working with RFs for wide lenses hand-held because ultimate focusing accuracy is rarely so much of a bother ... just stop down a little and DoF covers minor focus errors nicely ... but when I'm doing tabletop or landscape work with a wide, I lock the camera onto a tripod and prefer a TTL viewfinder as then critical focusing accuracy and camera movement are the bottom line in obtaining the desired high-detail image I'm after.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Occasionally you can find the R-D1 available at around that money. At present, there's one listed on Ebay for $1400 BIN from Matsuistore in Japan ... but camera, charger, battery only, not mint. I am tempted myself, but then I think to myself, "That's money that I could keep in the bank for an M9-P next year."

Although I'm champing at the bit, the truth is that I'm horrendously busy right now and even the GXR-M is only getting light use. I think I'm just going to force myself to be patient and acquire what I really want, the M9, next year when I planned to. ...
Famous last words.

Yesterday a clean looking R-D1 with "S" firmware popped up at a very good price. Another friend of mine wants it but can't afford it at present, he's the one who pointed it out to me. So I figured I could buy it, use it for a few months to fully vet the digital rangefinder experience, and he'll buy it from me when I go for the M9 ...

Sigh.. This stuff is so addictive. At least I have all the lenses I need already.

Anyway, the R-D1 should be interesting to work with. It will be fun bunging about with it and the M4-2.

onwards into the breech ...
 
V

Vivek

Guest
The RD1s is a fun camera for sure. :)

I swapped mine for an USB spectrometer (~$1,000) a few years ago.


Untitled by Vivek Iyer, on Flickr

Epson R-D1s, Rokkor 40/2, Baader U 2" filter (false color ultraviolet capture) from 4 years ago.
 

agfa100

New member
Another vote for the Ricoh GXR M module. A year a go I got a Nex 3 to play with and use my M lenses, after about 6 months I kept looking at my pictures and saying they are just not sharp. I was intrigued with the Ricoh before the M module, but because of the price I stayed away. But everyone on the forums really liked the ability to make adjustments and set the camera up how they wanted it to work. So I kept my mind open on it, when they leaked that there was going to be a M module I really started to pay attention.

Well long story short, I put a order in on a GXR and M module when Adorama had their sale price on them. It took 2.5 months for the camera and module to show up but I am very happy and have nice SHARP pictures when I focus correctly. Plus it has a Leica like feel to it, just my .02 worth.
wbill

I have been using M cameras since 72.
 

kanzlr

Member
I now have both the NEX and GXR (and had used an M8 for quite while *g*) and have to say that, as long as you do not really want/need a rangefinder (for the fact that you see what you exclude during composition, which I love), the GXR is superb.

to my surprise, focusing is easier than with the NEX for me. Mode2 (the grey highpass one) is just so much better. Also, focus assists and Zoom are so much better implemented.

for example, it shows the full color, zoomed out (total) view when you halfpress the shutter. This allows for a focus and recompose method, that you use with an M oftentimes. Basically, I always have the screen zoomed in (Fn1), focus, halfpress shutter, recompose, shoot. Quite fast.

The NEX cannot do that as easily. Also, the Mode2 is superior for me. For example, I cannot focus the 28/2.8 reliably on the NEX, even with the superb EVF, while with the GXR I can do this reliably, in Mode2, even indoors with tungsten light.

the only thing the NEX has going for it is the superb EVF that allows focusing without peaking, because it is that high in resolution. But the layout, controls, and how it feels in the hand, as well as the small details in use make the GXR a much better camera, regardless of things like noise, resolution, etc. Oh, and it can trigger my studio lights :)

 
V

Vivek

Guest
I now have both the NEX and GXR (and had used an M8 for quite while *g*) and have to say that, as long as you do not really want/need a rangefinder (for the fact that you see what you exclude during composition, which I love), the GXR is superb.

to my surprise, focusing is easier than with the NEX for me. Mode2 (the grey highpass one) is just so much better. Also, focus assists and Zoom are so much better implemented.

for example, it shows the full color, zoomed out (total) view when you halfpress the shutter. This allows for a focus and recompose method, that you use with an M oftentimes. Basically, I always have the screen zoomed in (Fn1), focus, halfpress shutter, recompose, shoot. Quite fast.
Thanks for posting that! I am now waiting for the A16. Hopefully there is a possibility to use the EVF and the hotshoe for flashes.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
Thanks for posting that! I am now waiting for the A16. Hopefully there is a possibility to use the EVF and the hotshoe for flashes.
I posted this on another thread with respect to flash and the GXR. I don't expect anything to change unless they add a flash sync terminal...

Ricoh makes a dedicated flash but I don't own or use much in way of dedicated flash units. I usually use simple manual or on-board auto flash units triggered by either optical or RF remotes.

a- If you want to use the EVF while shooting with a flash, using optical remotes is easiest: the popup flash on the camera can be set into manual mode and you can adjust power output down to 1/64 power. Add a little IR shield and fit optical slaves to your flash heads and you're off and away.

b- If you don't need to use the EVF, you can fit an RF transmitter to the hot shoe and receivers to your flash heads. You're off and away.

c- If you want to use both EVF and an RF trigger, it's a little more fussy to set up. I got this trick from someone using a GF1 with RF flash triggers: take any hot-shoe extender cable (you know, one that slides in the hot shoe and allows you to put the flash on the other end - I understand the Canon or Nikon cable might work well) and cut off the end that fits in the camera hot shoe. Glue or bolt the shoe end to a bracket that you can bolt onto the camera using the tripod socket. Determine the wires going to center and side terminal ... those are the flash trigger trigger wires, not the control protocol terminals ... and mark them out. Trim back the other wires. Bare the ends and tape them to the center terminal and to the hot shoe shoe itself with thin tape. Be careful not to connect one wire to two terminals. Now carefully slide the EVF in over the taped connections. Voila! you have a remote RF trigger hot shoe camera.

(This works because the EVF does not use any of the flash terminal connections, it connects to the camera through its own rear mounted plug and just uses the accessory shoe to physically secure it to the camera. It might take a little fussy work to make the connections fit, but once you've got it set up it'll work great. And yes, I wish they'd put another flash sync terminal on the body ...)

I mostly use method b as I most usually use flash when shooting tabletop work on a tripod where I prefer the LCD or at parties where precise framing isn't such a big deal. I have both Cactus V2 and Cactus V5 RF remotes and they both work very well.
 
V

Vivek

Guest
I posted this on another thread with respect to flash and the GXR. I don't expect anything to change unless they add a flash sync terminal...
Yes.

I need both. This or that is a no go for me.

I hope they will wake up and add a flash sync contact.
 

MikalWGrass

New member
I have an R1-ds that can never seem to stay in focus even though it has been repaired twice. I didn't send the camera to Epson though maybe I should. Right now it is gathering dust because I am using an a900, and a Leica M6.

The camera is great, the richness of the pictures is incredible, but the damned thing sounds like a canon going off everytime I hit the shutter.

6 mps isn't alot either but it is fine if all you are printing small and / or sending pics over the internet.
 
Top