Ricoh GXR - M Lens camera unit almost there ...

[sinwen]

UWE,

I am interested in this GRX for the many reasons mentioned in Dpreview, but I am shy with the dated sensor and EVF. The big + is of course I could use both M & R lenses on a non-gadget camera without thousands of useless settings & buttons.

1) Don't you think there is more depth in your pictures with this camera ? On my screen at least, it is evident.

2) How would you compare IQ between this M Ricoh module and all the other (comparable) cameras that passed through your hands ?


Thanks
Michel

 

[Godfrey]

I'm not Uwe ...

Personally, I'm totally unconcerned with how "dated" a sensor might or might not be. My 2003-2004 generation Olympus E-1 still produces superb, compelling photographs with its ancient, low megapixel sensor.

I'm concerned with how well a particular camera works and what image quality it produces. The Ricoh GXR and A12 AF modules produces superb quality images and works as I like a camera to work. My brief preview of a couple of lenses on the preview A12 Camera Mount that Uwe allowed me to try indicates that it is more of the same ... excellent quality images, excellent handling.

Who knows? NEX, Micro-FourThirds and NX cameras to date have shown only so-so performance with RF camera lenses, the GXR+A12-M seems to do as well or better than they do or even the last non-Leica dedicated RF lens camera (the Epson R-D1). On that basis, I've chosen to go with it.

Keep it simple, concentrate on the photography not the equipment ... my new mantra ...

 

[ustein]

Even if Godfrey is not "Uwe" I am very much in line with him.

Here are the questions I ask and will try to answer for me:

0. I also don't worry much about the sensor. I think the D90 is know for excellent image quality and uses the same as far as I know.

1. How much better is the image quality compared to the G3 with same lenses. The lack of AA is clearly a plus. Does it matter beyond pixel peeping, I don't really know.

2. I have a NEX-5n on oder and will compare it too with same lenses.

I honestly love the GXR-M but also own many cameras

 

[sinwen]

I'm not Uwe ...


Keep it simple, concentrate on the photography not the equipment ... my new mantra ...

That's not a new mantra to me it has always been, I am interested in this camera precisely to keep it simple as expressed in my post above.
For example once I saw the following video, I knew I won't buy a NEX:

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/...tal-camera-review-a-monster-full-of-features/

You'll be surprised to know that until now I haven't buy any digital camera (except a compact Pana TZ3) for these same reasons, too many useless features

But you know that new sensors handle things like noise much better, I am not talking "pixel race" here.
One good reason is that a sensor with more pixels should complicate a lot the micro lenses array.
12Mp fit my bill very well, I am not printing big anymore.

 

[ustein]

There are two factors that are important to me (remember I used too many DSLRs since the Nikon D1 in 2000).

1. Image quality (mostly at lower ISO is fine)

2. Handling (getting the preview and so)

Some cameras make me nervous in terms of handling (X100 and Leica X1) so that I don't even get to the point to appreciate the image quality. In the end I could live with the X100 if it had interchangeable lenses. The GXR-M never got me frustrated in any way and the keeper rate is very high (partly because of the MF).

Images from this morning with Nikkor 35mm f/2 (don't like the plastic feel a bit but it does the job).

Nikon 20mm f/3.5:

 

[Godfrey]

That's not a new mantra to me it has always been, I am interested in this camera precisely to keep it simple as expressed in my post above.
For example once I saw the following video, I knew I won't buy a NEX:

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/...tal-camera-review-a-monster-full-of-features/

You'll be surprised to know that until now I haven't buy any digital camera (except a compact Pana TZ3) for these same reasons, too many useless features

But you know that new sensors handle things like noise much better, I am not talking "pixel race" here.
One good reason is that a sensor with more pixels should complicate a lot the micro lenses array.
12Mp fit my bill very well, I am not printing big anymore.

It was something of a joke to list it as my "new" mantra too.

I've not yet seen a NEX model that I liked much as a camera yet. Perhaps the NEX 7's ergonomics will be improved.

The number of features I don't use on a camera isn't an issue unless they get in the way. While I would love something with the direct simplicity of the Leica M4-2 I bought recently, as long as what I'm using has the basics laid out simply such that the extra stuff I don't want to bother with isn't bugging me, I don't care too much. The GXR has been delightful this way: I can configure it to work just as I like and then forget about all the options I don't need or want.

I've printed to excellent 20x24 inch prints with 5 Mpixel captures, 12 Mpixels gives plenty of editing overhead and resolution. More's better, but there's a limit to how much is truly needed and useful unless you're always printing massive, gigunda sized prints.

Someone will undoubtedly say, "what have you got against more pixels?" The answer is: nothing. I don't see the need for them, that's all.

 

[Godfrey]

Uwe,

You're certainly having fun with that camera. I can't wait for mine to arrive.

The Rayqual Nikon F to Leica M mount adapter arrived. Much trimmer than the COMA in appearance, lighter too, and it feels just as precisely made.

 

[ustein]

>"what have you got against more pixels?"

I always like more good quality pixels but not at any price. If I don't have them I just print smaller .

 

[sinwen]

I always like more good quality pixels but not at any price.

Exactly ! I won't buy a leica M digital for this reason.
So as you have many different cameras, I repeat my question differently then, how good is this sensor compare to what you have else.
And I repeat also that I wonder if the sensor in this A12-M is a bit out today and you are well in position to answer that I think.

Thanks
Michel

 

[ustein]

>And I repeat also that I wonder if the sensor in this A12-M is a bit out today and you are well in position to answer that I think.

Don't see this as a problem at lower ISO anyway. That said I have a NEX-5N + EVF on order. For me this maybe the real competition. But I could live very long with the GXR.

 

[Godfrey]

Exactly ! I won't buy a leica M digital for this reason.
So as you have many different cameras, I repeat my question differently then, how good is this sensor compare to what you have else.
And I repeat also that I wonder if the sensor in this A12-M is a bit out today and you are well in position to answer that I think.

Michel,

It's the same sensor as in the other GXR A12 camera units, although it has been optimized for use with the M-bayonet RF lenses.

Comparing the image output to my other cameras of recent years, in broad strokes it's on par or better performance than my Pentax K10D, Panasonic L1 and G1, and Olympus E-1. The Olympus E-5 supports ISO 6400 in addition to the ISO 3200 supported in the GXR A12 module, but the GXR's noise and quality at ISO 3200 is right on par.

The E-5 also has the least anti-aliasing of any of the other cameras (whether it has none or simply very little I"m not sure or) so it is a good comparison to the A12-M with respect to acutance. It's a smaller sensor (13x17.3 vs 16x24 mm) so slightly higher pixel density, but with equivalent FoV focal length proves to have very similar to slightly better acutance to the existing A12 AF camera units, and my quick test of Uwe's A12-M shows it to be in the same ballpark. I think I'd rate the E-5's sensor and supporting electronics slightly better performing on that basis, since it is somewhat smaller, but i'm splitting hairs there.

So whether this sensor is "outdated" or not makes little difference to me. From what I've seen, it is an excellent sensor with outstanding acutance, dynamic range and sensitivity. The sensitivity and dynamic range is as much as I need. Presuming that its optimization for the RF lenses it was designed to work with works as advertised (and it seems to), I see no problem at all in adopting it as my standard camera. The E-5 has advantages in speed and responsiveness, but I only rarely need those qualities ... the advantages of the GXR+A12-M in size and use of Leica M-bayonet lenses is quite valuable to me. It's also nicely less expensive than the E-5 body.

Of course, I retain the freedom to change my opinions and evaluation once I've had a month or three to work with the A12 Camera Mount. Mine should arrive next week... And I'm eager to have it!

 

[sinwen]

Thanks for your reply Godfrey.

You know I don't buy a camera every now & then, as far as it fits my needs I keep it, so the decision has to be well thought and I am in no hurry.
That's where such forum can help.
I understand your eagerness and I am in the same mind waiting to see your pictures.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Uwe,

You're certainly having fun with that camera. I can't wait for mine to arrive.

The Rayqual Nikon F to Leica M mount adapter arrived. Much trimmer than the COMA in appearance, lighter too, and it feels just as precisely made.

Godfrey,
Do you know if they make an OM to M-mount adapter as well? If that is the case, this may be a more interesting camera to me than the E-5, assuming that they have similar sensor/filter characteristics, and since I seem to be leaning towards a GH2 for sports etc.

 

[Godfrey]

Godfrey,
Do you know if they make an OM to M-mount adapter as well? If that is the case, this may be a more interesting camera to me than the E-5, assuming that they have similar sensor/filter characteristics, and since I seem to be leaning towards a GH2 for sports etc.

Rayqual makes an Olympus OM to Leica M-bayonet mount adapter. I bought one of the Rayqual adapters for Nikon F mount, it seems very nicely made. They can be obtained from Japan Exposures (and other places too, I'm sure):

http://www.japanexposures.com/2010/03/29/rayqual-slr-lens-to-leica-rangefinder-adapter/

The GXR is a very different camera compared to the E-5 in many ways, but they both produce outstanding image quality.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Thank you for the link, Godfrey.

What I particularly like with the E-5 is the "crispness" of the photos. If I can get the same crispness out of a body that is half the weight and size and somewhat cheaper than an M9, it's all good, isn't it?

 

[Godfrey]

Thank you for the link, Godfrey.

What I particularly like with the E-5 is the "crispness" of the photos. If I can get the same crispness out of a body that is half the weight and size and somewhat cheaper than an M9, it's all good, isn't it?

LOL ... Buying the E-5 plus the GXR+A12 Camera Mount+VF-2 altogether comes to "somewhat cheaper than an M9" ... ! ]'-)

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

LOL ... Buying the E-5 plus the GXR+A12 Camera Mount+VF-2 altogether comes to "somewhat cheaper than an M9" ... ! ]'-)

Good idea, and if I skip the Noctilux as well, I can add a new car to the package