Ricoh GR II

[Sean_Reid]

This is the new GR II thread. Welcome all who are interested. Some of the initial posts here are migrating from a thread on another board so things may seem out of order at first but that should sort itself out once we get past the original posts that are being impo

Hi Sean

I have the GX100 and noted some blockiness in fine detail (waves in San Francisco Bay). Is this just a manifestation of the small sensor, or did I push the USM too much?? Took some great shots in the fort at the base of the Golden Gate bridge. Even the flash did fine in some dark interior shots.

Interested now in the GRD II. Do u think that it complements the GX100, or is too similar for considering a purchase??

Enjoyed ur Pentax K10D review.

Martin

Hi Martin,

Start a thread with some 100% crops, noting the workflow, and lets take a look.

As to GX-100 vs. GR2. It mostly comes down to the lens difference and one of things I want to find out, in testing, is how much difference there really is.
So, its too soon for me to say but others may have some ideas.

Cheers,

Sean

 

[chris_tribble]

And here's the thing about this format...in order to fuse those two things together, I needed enormous depth of field. The droplets still needed to be droplets and the mother and child (second picture) needed to look like human figures. So, the GR2 at F/5.6. These cameras can allow us a kind of picture making that simply didn't exist (in photography) prior to their invention. Their invention allows visual inventions.

There's nothing "better" about this format but its really not all that much like 35 mm film and it has very interesting possibilities.

Cheers,

Sean

Sean - excellent point - and visually beautifully exemplified.

Thanks for sharing.

Best

 

[Sean_Reid]

Thanks Chris,

Cheers,

Sean

 

[Sean_Reid]

BTW, in black and white I'm finding that this camera does well at ISO 800 and, amazingly, even at 1600. I'm surprised.

Cheers,

Sean

 

[7ian7]

Nice work, everyone!

Caer's color is so evocative.

Sometimes these cameras produce results that
remind me even more of large-format than
of 35mm, however crazy that may sound, despite
the noise (which is appealing and sets it off again
in to its own category).

Very cool.

Greetings from the slushstorm, NYC.

 

[paralx]

Loving the GRD2 in Black+White all the way up to 1600. I haven't shot much color. But the few things that I have shot, it has a pretty unique character.

 

[orliekim]

some great images here....chris love yours..
andy

 

[Will]

I've not made the time to learn much of the RAW pp methods but I'm learning a lot from these threads. I'll have to start working on it. In the mean time I thought I'd post an in camera jpg I took this weekend that I quite like. Just croped it slightly and did some levels adjustment.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2260/2113140335_1e52e8488f_b.jpg

 

[Irenaeus]

Sean —

This is my first posting, though I've been avidly following this forum and its predecessors ever since your first articles on Luminous Landscape and Reid Reviews. I've found the pictures and discussions fascinating, both for approaches and insights that I already agree with and for those that stretch my understanding.

At the moment I'm concentrating more on post processing what I've already got than on making new photos but, nonetheless, I'm intensely interested in each of the three small Ricohs and in sorting out which of them will best suit my needs. I know the discussions and photos here, and your own forthcoming tests will, be a big part of that decision.

Since the original GRD is still a real contender as far as I'm concerned, I'm hoping that you're planning to do a three way comparison involving the GRD 1, the GX100 and the GRD 2. While I'm sure you could get part way there using data from your initial article, the firmware upgrades (and especially the 40 mme auxiliary lens) introduce significant new variables that could best be dealt with only by testing them all together. (I do know you've got lots on your plate, and don't want to overburden you, but....)

I'm sure I'm not the only one who'd eagerly await such "full disclosure" (not that we want to "await" any longer than's absolutely necessary!) so I hope you might agree and might be able to come up with a GRD1 to add to the other two without too much difficulty.

Not yet knowing how to post pictures, I'll sign off now with thanks to everyone.

Irenaeus

 

[roberth]

I am really enjoying these images, for someone that thought he loved that soft out of focus stuff these are really working for me in all of their infocus strong lines. Maybe a part of me learning to draw (with much patience), this type of line drawing is becoming very appealing.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Sean —

This is my first posting, though I've been avidly following this forum and its predecessors ever since your first articles on Luminous Landscape and Reid Reviews. I've found the pictures and discussions fascinating, both for approaches and insights that I already agree with and for those that stretch my understanding.

At the moment I'm concentrating more on post processing what I've already got than on making new photos but, nonetheless, I'm intensely interested in each of the three small Ricohs and in sorting out which of them will best suit my needs. I know the discussions and photos here, and your own forthcoming tests will, be a big part of that decision.

Since the original GRD is still a real contender as far as I'm concerned, I'm hoping that you're planning to do a three way comparison involving the GRD 1, the GX100 and the GRD 2. While I'm sure you could get part way there using data from your initial article, the firmware upgrades (and especially the 40 mme auxiliary lens) introduce significant new variables that could best be dealt with only by testing them all together. (I do know you've got lots on your plate, and don't want to overburden you, but....)

I'm sure I'm not the only one who'd eagerly await such "full disclosure" (not that we want to "await" any longer than's absolutely necessary!) so I hope you might agree and might be able to come up with a GRD1 to add to the other two without too much difficulty.

Not yet knowing how to post pictures, I'll sign off now with thanks to everyone.

Irenaeus

Read this for posting images . Have Fun http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=54

 

[Sean_Reid]

Sean —

This is my first posting, though I've been avidly following this forum and its predecessors ever since your first articles on Luminous Landscape and Reid Reviews. I've found the pictures and discussions fascinating, both for approaches and insights that I already agree with and for those that stretch my understanding.

At the moment I'm concentrating more on post processing what I've already got than on making new photos but, nonetheless, I'm intensely interested in each of the three small Ricohs and in sorting out which of them will best suit my needs. I know the discussions and photos here, and your own forthcoming tests will, be a big part of that decision.

Since the original GRD is still a real contender as far as I'm concerned, I'm hoping that you're planning to do a three way comparison involving the GRD 1, the GX100 and the GRD 2. While I'm sure you could get part way there using data from your initial article, the firmware upgrades (and especially the 40 mme auxiliary lens) introduce significant new variables that could best be dealt with only by testing them all together. (I do know you've got lots on your plate, and don't want to overburden you, but....)

I'm sure I'm not the only one who'd eagerly await such "full disclosure" (not that we want to "await" any longer than's absolutely necessary!) so I hope you might agree and might be able to come up with a GRD1 to add to the other two without too much difficulty.

Not yet knowing how to post pictures, I'll sign off now with thanks to everyone.

Irenaeus

Hi Irenaeus,

Welcome and thanks very much for the comments. For the sake of simplicity, the set I'm going to compare will be the GR2, GX100 and Canon G9. Hopefully that information, combined with the previous GR review and the input from forum members, will help people to get a sense of the new GR vs. the old.

In a nutshell (compared to the old camera) the GR2 is much faster (in RAW mode) and has slightly higher resolution along with a better S/N ratio (seems to be about a stop better but I'll know more when I do direct tests). I understand that some, for visual/stylistic reasons, may prefer the higher noise levels of the original GR but, of course, those noise levels also come at the expense of some dynamic range (which is always true for any digital camera, of course).

So, for many photographers, the choice may well come down to GR2 vs. GX100. And, of course, the million dollar question there is, "How different are the lenses on these two cameras, in practice?" The G9 is a reference camera and is also being tested on its own.

Cheers,

Sean

 

[Huwge]

In London last weekend I bought a GRD 2 on the spur of the moment and am not regretting the decision. A lack of spare time currently means that I am still trying to identify the best workflow for processing RAW images and am unhappy that C1 does not work. I hear good things about Silkypix but have found Aperture and CS3 less easy to manage than C1.

Anyway, here is an example processed in CS3

Huw