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!

The GRD2 in San Juan

Joan

New member
Yup, lovely! The only thing that might bug me a tiny bit is seeing grain (noise) show up in the blue sky area. Have you got the NR turned off completely? Easy enough to smooth out with a little Noise Ninja action though, so not really an issue.
 

helenhill

Senior Member
I think their ALL Divine.......Pure Magic & so little Effort
Terry, you took to the Ricoh like a Duck to Water :D /excuse the cliche

Best, H
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Jack and I are really liking this little gem. Terry is having fun with it and we are enjoying the images she has been taken
 

Joan

New member
Great B&W shots, Terry. And I love the one you posted in the Workshop gallery thread. Awesome!
 

Terry

New member
Thanks Robert, Lili, Helen, Will and Joan. The GRD2 is a great addition to my camera stash. I keep saying I am going to sell some stuff. Now is the time!

I was playing musical cameras this trip. This morning I only took the D300 and one lens (LOL 18-200 - and covers everything) and got some great sunrise shots. Just got back to NY and will do some processing and post to the San Juan thread.
 

Joan

New member
Looking forward to seeing how you did with that lens and camera combo, too, Terry. You are amazing ... I don't know if I could flip that quickly between the 3 totally different types of cameras.
 

Terry

New member
You are amazing ... I don't know if I could flip that quickly between the 3 totally different types of cameras.
Well that is truly a laugh....In Carmel I switched to the M8 and forgot to focus. On the GRD fixed lens does not mean fixed aperture and low light would have been easier at f2.4 instead of f4.5 (where I had it set the other night). This morning I went out with no CF card in the D300 thinking I didn't shoot the Nikon last night so I should have plenty of card space....and the list of other dumb mistakes is long.
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Terry needs to get a commission check -- I think her demoing it for us in PR sold about 5 of them! :D Anyway, it's about the size of 3 M8 batteries if you leave the optical finder off, good enough reason to stuff it in a bag pocket as a fun available light or back-up cam.

:thumbs:,
 

jonoslack

Active member
HI Terry
Great shots - and a nice little camera - it looks like a fine time - I know the interface like the back of my hand (as I have the GX100).

So, tell me this - what do you reckon the advantages of the GRD2 over the GX100 are . . . and are they worth it?
 

Terry

New member
HI Terry
Great shots - and a nice little camera - it looks like a fine time - I know the interface like the back of my hand (as I have the GX100).

So, tell me this - what do you reckon the advantages of the GRD2 over the GX100 are . . . and are they worth it?
That is an easy question....I have no idea. Seriously, I had always been intrigued by the reviews of camera handling and controls in both the GRD and GX100. When we met up in NY Helen brought her GRD2 and I was very captivated by how speedy the camera was. For one thing the LCD seems very instantaneous, meaning there doesn't seem to be any perceptible lag between the time you move the camera to what is showing on the screen and even better changing controls was a breeze. The reality is that I need another small camera like a hole in the head but, that encounter had me thinking over and over again about the Ricohs (don't forget they aren't distributed in the US so there aren't a lot of places that carry them). A couple of days later a GRD2 was listed on the forum for sale and I pounced on it. If I had sat back and intellectualized about the two cameras I might have walked away with a GX100 because of the zoom. However, having the prime lens is one less thing to think about and I think my photography is sometimes better just taking the steps forward or backward to frame the shot properly.
 

mark1958

Member
I have a question about this camera that I had just posted in the Buy/Sell forum because I had not seen this set of threads. I had read somewhere about concerns that the RAW files had an auto NR algorithm set at isos higher than 200? Is this correct. I had seen some real problems when Leica did this to their DLUX-2 to DLUX-3 upgrade release. I am wondering what the consensus was based on your experiences.
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
I seriously don't know Mark, I didn't spend that much effort evaluating it... Bottom line was the files still look they came out of a P&S, with ISO 200 being like fine grained film, ISO 400 looking like Tri-X and ISO 800 looking like T-Max 3200. But the shutter is instant as is the LCD, so no lag and the lens is relatively fast so you can get a more limited DoF than with most other P&S cams. Also has several "quick-modes" that allow it to fire really fast, a B&W mode and a square crop mode, all of which I like with the relatively fast fixed 28mm lens. For me, it's the natural P&S for an M shooter since it has that kind of single focal "feel" to it, and not sure I'd want the zoom version. They do make a 40mm tele adapter that may be interesting though...
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
That's my point -- the files look pretty much like the D-Lux 3 which I love too. The big difference is speed, UI and handling.
 

jonoslack

Active member
Jack, Ray, Mark

Okay, mine was a leading question. Sean did a good review of these cameras, and I've owned both (the GX100 twice). My criticism of the review is that it dealt minutely with IQ differences, but, let's face it, compared to larger format cameras the quality is rubbish on all small cameras . . . okay, you can make a virtue of it and lots of people have proved you can take wonderful pictures with them, but deciding on one on the basis of minute differences in image quality is seems pretty odd to me.

My take on it is this:
1. the GRD II has slightly better micro contrast, but the lens isn't fundamentally much better than the zoom on the GX100
2. The GRD applies some noise reduction in the RAW files (not so good)
3. adding the adaptors for 21 and 40 on the GRD is fine . . . but then it's bigger than an M8 - so if you have an M8 . . .
4. the 24-72 zoom on the GX100 can be put into 'step' mode, which means that you have 24, 28, 35, 50 and 72 mm 'click' stops, AND it remembers where you were, so if you want to treat it like a 28mm, then put it there and leave it. (but you still have the others if you want them)
5. the controls and speed of action are the same.
6. the longer focal length of the GX100 is much better for macro . . . which is the one place where small sensor cameras really offer advantages with their big depth of field.

So, with the GRDII it's arguable that you'll get very slightly better IQ than the GX100, but it's very very marginal. Handling is a wash. On the other hand, the GX100 has a very useful zoom lens with an unusual wide angle.

Until some smart company puts out a 4/3 sensor in a small camera with characteristics like the Ricoh, then there are obvious shortcomings in all these cameras - so it's always going to be a compromise. At least the Ricohs work like 'real' cameras, and to me, the compromises of the GX100 are much more attractive than those of the GRDII.

I haven't mentioned the SD1, simply because I'm not going to use a different raw converter just so that I can use a compact camera with a 28mm f4 lens and cruddy interface - even if it does have a bigger sensor (mind you, that's just me, not knocking the results).
 
Last edited:
Top