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!

Ricoh "40 mm" Adapter

S

Sean_Reid

Guest
Hi Maggie,

I really like the D-Lux 3 as well. In addition to the hotshoe (for finders) which one can glue on to a D-Lux if he or she is a bit handy, the GX-100 also has a stepped zoom which is enormously useful to anyone who wants to work with "prime" lenses and, sometimes, finders.

The Leica/Panasonic, of course, has that lovely 16:9 ratio available natively.

Cheers,

Sean
 
C

Chuck A

Guest
There seems to be a bit of a feeding frenzy around here surrounding the Ricoh cameras and I can't help but wonder if it's obscuring some very fine alternates.

Might I suggest the Leica D-Lux 3 for those who want a zoom-lens-ed compact camera? IMO, the only things the GX-100 has over it are the hot shoe and the stepped zoom. From the photos I've seen, the D-Lux 3 is capable of producing superior images, so if you're not totally committed to using an external VF, the Leica is a better choice.

Just because Mitch couldn't get his look with ISO800 on the D-Lux 3, that's no reason to rule it out for anyone else's work.

Maggie,

Thanks for the input. I have looked hard at the D-lux 3. From what I can tell the jpgs above ISO 200 are crippled by noise reduction. The Ricohs seem to be much better in that respect. Shooting RAW will help this but one of the reasons that I got rid of the Pan LC1 was the smoothing of the jpgs. I don't always shoot RAW and want access to virtually no noise reduction. The GX100 and the LC1 both take about 5-7 secs to write a RAW file so it is not always useable. If I have can shoot good quality jpgs then it will be much less of a problem.

You are correct though. I have looked hard at the photos from the Leica and the lens produces a very nice image file with a very 3D look to it. I guess that it is not a bad thing to have so many choices. I am basically looking for a small version of the Leica M and Tri-X combo. A good clear finder and sharp lens that produces great 11x14 size prints even if there is some grain to be had. I used this combo for years. The things that the small sensor format adds above the Leica M is the great DOF and smaller size.
 

Maggie O

Active member
FWIW Chuck, the D-Lux 3, with a San Disk eXtreme III card has a RAW write time of around 3.5 seconds.

I've gotten some pretty good results at ISO400 with JPEGs and even at ISO800, with the right conditions. Shooting RAW, the D-Lux 3's ISO800 files are gorgeous.
 
C

Chuck A

Guest
Hi Maggie,

I really like the D-Lux 3 as well. In addition to the hotshoe (for finders) which one can glue on to a D-Lux if he or she is a bit handy, the GX-100 also has a stepped zoom which is enormously useful to anyone who wants to work with "prime" lenses and, sometimes, finders.

The Leica/Panasonic, of course, has that lovely 16:9 ratio available natively.

Cheers,

Sean
I have a Panasonic camera that gives me the 16:9 format and I find that I don't use it. I am not very fond of it, but I am very attracted to the 1:1 format of the Ricohs though. Having used a Yashicamat for many years until it broke and I miss the square format.

The stepped zoom of the GX100 is also very interesting. Your idea of carrying separate finders and using the step zoom in ingenious. It can get a bit expensive though.
 
C

Chuck A

Guest
FWIW Chuck, the D-Lux 3, with a San Disk eXtreme III card has a RAW write time of around 3.5 seconds.

I've gotten some pretty good results at ISO400 with JPEGs and even at ISO800, with the right conditions. Shooting RAW, the D-Lux 3's ISO800 files are gorgeous.

You would have to add some more wrenches into the works. LOL! I will take another look at the Leica just to make sure. Thanks for the input.
 

Lili

New member
Chuck,
I think working with your K10D with a 28mm EFL lens is good way to decide on this.
Lili
 
P

Player

Guest
Just to let you guys know, I received my Voigtlander 40mm VF, and it's really sharp and bright. The only negative I can see is that the flash doesn't clear.

I was curious about something, just underneath the top frameline there's a dashed line. Is that for 3:2 format and the top solid line is 4:3? That doesn't seem correct because the VF was made for film cameras. Can someone enlighten me? Thankyou.
 
C

Chuck A

Guest
Just to let you guys know, I received my Voigtlander 40mm VF, and it's really sharp and bright. The only negative I can see is that the flash doesn't clear.

I was curious about something, just underneath the top frameline there's a dashed line. Is that for 3:2 format and the top solid line is 4:3? That doesn't seem correct because the VF was made for film cameras. Can someone enlighten me? Thankyou.
Could be for parallax correction.
 
P

Player

Guest
Interesting Chuck, I never thought of that. Thankyou.

Could someone confirm? Thanks.
Could be for parallax correction.
Chuck, I did a little research, and I think you're spot on. I found some specs and it says: "Symbol for parallax correction." The use of the word "symbol" seems odd to me, but it must be referring to the dotted lines.

As I think about this, there's really nothing else it could be, and with a VF mounted above the lens, it would be the top of the frame that gets cut off.

Thanks again!
 
C

Chuck A

Guest
Player,

Sean would probably know for sure. I am not sure how close the subject has to be to use the parallax lines though.
 
P

Player

Guest
Player,

Sean would probably know for sure. I am not sure how close the subject has to be to use the parallax lines though.
Chuck, I did a little more research and I found this:

"Like most wide angle finders, it has no manual parallax compensation -- but it does have parallax compensation marks in the finder. The lower dotted brightlines indicate the approximate view at about 3 feet. The upper solid brightlines indicate the approximate view at infinity."

Another case cracked. :clap:
 

Lili

New member
In using my CV 28mm OVF, I never use it for close ups enough to test the parallax correction marks. If I get that close it is no longer a matter of discretion or 'candid' and I can use the LCD.
Then the matter is moot.
 
P

Player

Guest
In using my CV 28mm OVF, I never use it for close ups enough to test the parallax correction marks. If I get that close it is no longer a matter of discretion or 'candid' and I can use the LCD.
Then the matter is moot.
Lili, even the VFs themselves are a moot point considering the LCD, but maybe that's why they're an optional accessory. :toocool:
 
S

Sean_Reid

Guest
Chuck, I did a little more research and I found this:

"Like most wide angle finders, it has no manual parallax compensation -- but it does have parallax compensation marks in the finder. The lower dotted brightlines indicate the approximate view at about 3 feet. The upper solid brightlines indicate the approximate view at infinity."

Another case cracked. :clap:
Yup, that's what the line is for.

Cheers,

Sean
 

Martin S

New member
Sean:

When will u post some info on your 40mm analysis??

I have held off purchasing the GRD II and the 40 mm adapter until I get some more info.

Thanks.

Happy New Year to all.

Martin
 
M

Mitch Alland

Guest
Martin, sorry but I can't help reacting by saying, "I guess it will be ready when it's ready". It seems to me that it's impossible to push someone on such a thing, as this type of testing is time consuming and we would not want Sean to take short cuts because we all want the type of good and thorough review that he always does.

On the other hand there is a lot of information on the GRD2 on this forum and on others, including RAW and JPG files from the camera that can be downloaded; so if you're in a hurry you could make decision on the basis of the information already available.

As for the 40 mm EFOV tele-converter, I haven't seen much information on this, but I would bet that it's of similar quality to the 21mm wide-converter, which is excellent. Also, as it's not expensive, you could take a chance and buy it of you're in a hurry; or you could buy the GRD2 and hold off on the tele-converter until Sean's review is ready.

—Mitch/Bangkok
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/
 

Lili

New member
Lili, even the VFs themselves are a moot point considering the LCD, but maybe that's why they're an optional accessory. :toocool:
Ah true.
But is the sun is fairly low and directly behind one then the LCD is VERY hard to see.
:confused:
Having accurate OVF is a life-saver then as it was in this shot;


:)
 
P

Player

Guest
Lili yes, it's nice to have options. :cool:

Nice shot! Really like it!

Taken with your GRD? What ISO was that?
 
Top