GRD II review

[Terry]

Sean Reid's review of the GRD II has been posted at his site reidreviews.com Sean's reviews are great and well worth the subscription price.

http://www.reidreviews.com/reidreviews/

terry

 

[Sean_Reid]

Thanks Terry,

Cheers,

Sean

 

[Caer]

Just finished reading the review, well worth it!

 

[Mitch Alland]

It really is an excellent review and, in addition to direct and extensive comparisons with the GX100 and G9, there is a good deal of discussion of the original GRD as well.

As I've written elsewhere I think that Sean's thorough and systematic reviews are better -- in the sense that they contain well-designed comparisons as well as balanced qualitative judgments by an excellent photographer -- than anything available on the web or in magazines. This review provides the basis for people who are trying to decide which camera to buy. For me, the review gives me specific performance reasons for my own conclusions on the GRD2 vs the GX100 that I posted some days ago, based on use of the two cameras without any specific A-B testing.

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

 

[Lili]

I just finished reading Sean's thourough and thought provoking review of the GTD II.
As has been mentioned it was well worth the subscription.
And far more geared towards those wanting to use this camera as a tool rather than the average consumer.
I especially liked Sean's comments about manual focus.
Still digesting the rest, but Bravo!

 

[Irenaeus]

You do such beautiful work, Sean!

Your methods seem irreproachable, your prose concise and informative but your pictures really tell the tale! The test samples, on the one hand, allow one to SEE the the points you are making and to evaluate for oneself. That's good pedagogy.

The photos of your life with the camera, though, are what really delight. You've made them within just the sort of situations that I, personally, would want such a camera for, and they reveal your friends and family (and locale) so lovingly that the whole endeavor of such photography (and of the effort of learning to do it for oneself) is shown to be EMINENTLY worthwhile!!

Thank you so very much for all this. You've enriched my life.

Irenaeus

 

[Sean_Reid]

Wow, thank you these comments. I'm happy to discuss the review further here. A review like that (and I've done a lot of them) is such an involved process that preparing and writing it is almost like taking a long road trip. I was just telling my wife that it's like waking up in Maryland and having dinner in Georgia. By Georgia, its hard to remember what it was like to be in Maryland. I'll try to explain that better tomorrow since it may not be clear and my brain is a little tired.

For those people reading who are new to the site, I really recommend, in addition to the GR II review, the various essays there that deal with photography and art generally.

ie:

- On Small Sensor Cameras
- Correct Exposure and Other Myths
- "Street Photography"
- Photographing Strangers
- Photographing People We Know

Also, to those who don't mind the long trip many of those equipment reviews are (Guy Mancuso keeps asking me for the "Cliff Notes" versions), most of them discuss aspects of photography that may be of interest even if one is not specifically interested in the particular camera or lens under discussion. They're always about the subject of the review but, hopefully, they're also always somewhat about larger aspects of photography itself - technical or otherwise.

A lot of discussions about RR on the web debate the cost questions. But, business issues aside, I'm really interested in communicating ideas and information to other photographers who really care about making pictures. A lot of people care about equipment but I'm really writing to the people who truly only use it as a means to an end.

Enough tired rambling for now but its always great to hear back from people who find one's work useful so thanks once again.

Cheers,

Sean

 

[Chuck A]

You do such beautiful work, Sean!

Your methods seem irreproachable, your prose concise and informative but your pictures really tell the tale! The test samples, on the one hand, allow one to SEE the the points you are making and to evaluate for oneself. That's good pedagogy.

The photos of your life with the camera, though, are what really delight. You've made them within just the sort of situations that I, personally, would want such a camera for, and they reveal your friends and family (and locale) so lovingly that the whole endeavor of such photography (and of the effort of learning to do it for oneself) is shown to be EMINENTLY worthwhile!!

Thank you so very much for all this. You've enriched my life.

Irenaeus

You hit it right on the head. I have been reading Sean's reviews since well before he opened his new site, as lots of us probably have. I look forward to them, even looking through some that are about products I may not be as interested in just to see the wonderful photos Sean includes.

If you get the chance head over to http://www.still-photo.net/still-photo/index.htm and see some of his gorgeous wedding work. (I hope Sean doesn't mind the plug)

I am currently in a debate over whether to get the GX100 or the GRDII, as I think some others are as well. Both cameras offer strengths and weaknesses and Sean's reviews will be right there helping me make the decision.

Sean is right that these are photographers cameras that should be used to create images. The wonderful images I have seen from these cameras have inspired me. I love the small sensor format and have been looking for a small sensor camera that inspires me for a long time.

 

[scott kirkpatrick]

I enjoyed the review, loved the pictures. Sean, how many shots does it take to get all those kids waiting to see Santa to simultaneously smile and present nice profiles? And how do you get your kids to light up in white, while surrounded by grey relatives? Does an unobtrusive camera help to wait for such moments? Of course that's a function of the photographer, too. I also thought the first of the rainy, snowy shots from inside the car was very strong, besides being a great demonstration of small-sensor DOF.

I got a GR-D based on Sean's previous article, used it a lot while waiting for the M8 to finally be available, and am still using it quite often because of its convenience. I wish there were more GR-D GR2 comparisons possible, to make this an informed decision, but getting a GR2 is very tempting even though it might sideline a perfectly good camera. There seem to be two views on the difference, Walt Odets claiming that he can now stop being frustrated by the excessive tidiness of his M8 (and its failings) and use the GR2, and Mitch Alland disliking the excessive tidiness of the GR2 (too "Leicalike") when used at low ISO. I thought it was known that the lens in the two cameras is the same.

I'd like to know more about the 40 mm lens adapter and about viewfinders now sold for this camera. What is widest aperture with the GT-1? I gather that it doesn't reduce it by the ratio of 40 to 28, as would a converter after the prime lens. And is the new viewfinder a low profile 28-only, that fits the new carrying case? How does it compare in size with the 28/21 that I got with my GR-D?

The Ricoh film GR and GR21 were great favorites in Japan, so Ricoh has experience selling two models with different focal lengths. Sean, if you get some interview time with Ricoh people, please ask what lessons they are taking from that era with regard to supporting two fixed lens models in the digital era.

regards,

scott

 

[Sean_Reid]

Hello my friend,

Scott wrote:

"I enjoyed the review, loved the pictures."

Thanks very much.

"Sean, how many shots does it take to get all those kids waiting to see Santa to simultaneously smile and present nice profiles?"

One. But it has to be the right one.

And one has to learn as much as he or she can from Breughel and Winogrand and many others. This must be the first two pictures in the article that you're thinking of. They're not all smiling but the different profiles are important and intentional. And the finder is really important because at the moment of exposure one really has to be able to see the whole space of the picture precisely. That's the main reason that I love RF cameras and that the M8 is my main squeeze. But, as you know, the GR2 with an optical finder is a lot like a rangefinder camera. With rare exceptions, I only use an SLR if I'm being paid to do work that an SLR is best for.

"And how do you get your kids to light up in white, while surrounded by grey relatives?"

Oh, they're just like that. Even the best relatives are always at least a bit grey and these two girls just shine and shine.

"Does an unobtrusive camera help to wait for such moments?"

It helps but I've done the same kind of pictures with a Graphlex...a long time ago. You know that my wife is also a professional photographer and Cheyenne is also a serious photographer. It may be only a matter of time for Emily. So we're all used to cameras being a part of life. Even the littlest one knows what an RF lens looks like.

"Of course that's a function of the photographer, too. I also thought the first of the rainy, snowy shots from inside the car was very strong, besides being a great demonstration of small-sensor DOF."

Thank you. I'm going to keep making these when we get snowstorms. Thank heavens for water and glass. It's really the summer water pictures of the last few years in a slightly different form.

"I got a GR-D based on Sean's previous article, used it a lot while waiting for the M8 to finally be available, and am still using it quite often because of its convenience. I wish there were more GR-D GR2 comparisons possible, to make this an informed decision, but getting a GR2 is very tempting even though it might sideline a perfectly good camera. There seem to be two views on the difference, Walt Odets claiming that he can now stop being frustrated by the excessive tidiness of his M8 (and its failings) and use the GR2, and Mitch Alland disliking the excessive tidiness of the GR2 (too "Leicalike") when used at low ISO. I thought it was known that the lens in the two cameras is the same."

Mitch, I think, is coming around to a different point of view on this. The main differences are that the GR has more noise in its files and is much slower in RAW. Of course, its still a great camera but, objectively, that's really where the two differ. Some people miss the noise, which I understand, but its important to know the differences for what they really are. Given that the GR2 is so much faster than the GR, I think the real choice (among the Ricohs) is between the GR2 and the GX100. Hence, that was the emphasis in the comparisons.

It goes without saying, almost, that people could continue to use the GR for years and get excellent results.

"I'd like to know more about the 40 mm lens adapter and about viewfinders now sold for this camera. What is widest aperture with the GT-1?"

Same - F/2.4, you'll see it in the picture captions.

"And is the new viewfinder a low profile 28-only, that fits the new carrying case?"

Also the the GV-1 if desired or CV/Zeiss finders...

"How does it compare in size with the 28/21 that I got with my GR-D?"

Its much smaller but your current finder will be fine on the GR2...

"The Ricoh film GR and GR21 were great favorites in Japan, so Ricoh has experience selling two models with different focal lengths. Sean, if you get some interview time with Ricoh people, please ask what lessons they are taking from that era with regard to supporting two fixed lens models in the digital era."

I'm in good communication with Ricoh Japan now and so that's something I can discuss with them. I'm always in communication with several camera companies of course, but Ricoh's actually listening <G> unlike another company which listened a lot more in 2006 than it does at the moment.

Cheers,

Sean

 

[cam]

Sean, wonderful review! i just wish you hadn't put it up so late here in europe as it kept me up way past my bed time... it has definitely encouraged me to play around with the manual focus and i really need to adapt to RAW...

on that point, is Silkypix your preferred RAW conversion program for the GRDII?

what would you consider the "sweet spot" Aperture setting for street photography? i often shoot whilst walking and don't even look at the LCD (never mind the VF) when doing so. i don't always have time to twiddle with the settings to make them perfect. i gather you thought f/2.8 to f/4.0 was the sharpest during tests, but what about real world use?

and, lastly, since you have the ear of Ricoh, i'd like to bring up a point you didn't mention that still bothers me. i do enjoy using the bracketing or continuous mode (especially when i can't look at what i'm shooting). this means i need to shoot JPEG. currently, turning the NR off does not mean that it is currently off. i would much rather have the noise in all it's glory rather than losing details in JPEG.

due to size or time constraints, especially for social settings, i think there are instances where others will use JPEG as well. in this respect, the original GRD shines. the JPEGs capture more detail in certain situations (even with no NR settings) than the GRDII with NR off.

thank you again for the lovely review!

cheers,
cam

 

[orliekim]

Sean,

good review...I enjoyed reading it into the early hours.
I particularly like the style and the real life situations you use.As I am still in the first months of the GRD1 I also enjoyed your referencing to that product.

I won't be upgrading just yet as it would be such a shame to make my GRD1 redundant, even though the lower noise and faster RAW times are attractive.
I have set myself a goal of getting the absolute maximum out of my cameras before trading in and upgrading all the time.
Therefore the best feature of the GRD models is for the the REAL pocketability of it and the shockingly good user interface and controls.These two features will, I hope enable me to improve my overall photography.

Hat off for a really interesting and factual read....
REGARDS

andy:salute:

 

[Mitch Alland]

...and Mitch Alland disliking the excessive tidiness of the GR2 (too "Leicalike") when used at low ISO...

Scott,

As Sean states, since my original posting on that subject and after more experience with the GRD2, I now indeed like it more than the GRD — a conclusion that I came to by the end of that same thread. The GRD2 files offer more flexibility for the way I tend to manipulate contrast, without, as Sean suggests, being overtaken by noise.

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

 

[Mitch Alland]

Sean:

I guess you shot mainly or entirely in the 4:3 aspect ratio. How do feel about this these days compared to 3:2?

On another subject, as discussed in another thread here, the maximum shutter speed that can be used at f/2.4 is 1/760 sec and at f3.2 is 1/1000,owing to the fact that the iris is also used as the shutter, which means that, at these larger apertures, the iris-shutter has to travel too far to allow faster shutter speeds. Unfortunately this limits what one can do when one wants to shoot at ISO 400 is bright light because, in order to be able to use the maximum 1/2000 sec shutter speed, one is forced into the smaller apertures that are subject to diffraction effects. Any thoughts on this?

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

 

[Jonathon Delacour]

Golly, I've come late to the party only to find that pretty much everything I wanted to say about Sean's GRD2 review has already been expressed more eloquently than I could have done myself.

Like Scott Kirkpatrick, I bought a GRD after reading Sean's review (and also seeing a large selection of Moriyama Daido's work at the Art Gallery of NSW). Although I'd purchased one of his books a few years ago in Japan, I wasn't aware -- until Mitch Alland pointed it out -- that Moriyama used the Ricoh GR cameras.

The original GRD review and now this latest GRD2 review are typical of Sean's approach which, because it is built upon a foundation of photographic practice, is totally unique. Reading Sean's reviews -- which combine rigorous testing, insightful analysis, a broad knowledge of photographic history, and (happily) marvelous images -- one can almost feel what it might be like to use the particular camera or lens. This felt sense makes it so much easier to imagine whether or not the instrument under consideration might match one's own favored content and style. When I took the GRD home and started using it, it worked exactly as I'd expected it to; in other words, it worked just as Sean had said it would.

For me -- apart from the entrancing images of Sean's family and community -- the most useful part of the review was devoted to the (40mm EFoV) GT-1 add-on lens. I realized that the GT-1 would turn the GRD2 into something that would no longer feel (or function) like the camera I've come to love. But a GR40? Well, I'd buy that in an instant. In any case, I hadn't intended to replace (augment?) my GRD with a GRD2, but now I might have to think again...

 

[Mitch Alland]

...Like Scott Kirkpatrick, I bought a GRD after reading Sean's review (and also seeing a large selection of Moriyama Daido's work at the Art Gallery of NSW). Although I'd purchased one of his books a few years ago in Japan, I wasn't aware -- until Mitch Alland pointed it out -- that Moriyama used the Ricoh GR cameras...

Jonathan,

I also bought my GRD after reading Sean's Review.

I was completely blown away by Moriyama's 100x150cm (40x60 inch) prints at the Sydney Biennale from, most likeley Tri-X and Neopan 1600 film, taken with the GR1 and GR21 cameras. The fact Moriyama made these marvelous photographs with 28 and 21mm lenses made me receptive to the 28mm EFOV of the GRD at a time when 80% of my shooting was with a 50mm lens and the rest mainly with a 35mm lens. And the size of his prints made me experiment with printing this large with GRD files and framing the pictures the same way.

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

 

[Sean_Reid]

Sean, wonderful review! i just wish you hadn't put it up so late here in europe as it kept me up way past my bed time... it has definitely encouraged me to play around with the manual focus and i really need to adapt to RAW...

on that point, is Silkypix your preferred RAW conversion program for the GRDII?

what would you consider the "sweet spot" Aperture setting for street photography? i often shoot whilst walking and don't even look at the LCD (never mind the VF) when doing so. i don't always have time to twiddle with the settings to make them perfect. i gather you thought f/2.8 to f/4.0 was the sharpest during tests, but what about real world use?

and, lastly, since you have the ear of Ricoh, i'd like to bring up a point you didn't mention that still bothers me. i do enjoy using the bracketing or continuous mode (especially when i can't look at what i'm shooting). this means i need to shoot JPEG. currently, turning the NR off does not mean that it is currently off. i would much rather have the noise in all it's glory rather than losing details in JPEG.

due to size or time constraints, especially for social settings, i think there are instances where others will use JPEG as well. in this respect, the original GRD shines. the JPEGs capture more detail in certain situations (even with no NR settings) than the GRDII with NR off.

thank you again for the lovely review!

cheers,
cam

Hi Cam,

Thanks very much. I agree with your point about NR still being applied even when NR is, supposedly, "off" and I will discuss that with Ricoh.

The sweet spot aperture for the GR2 is F/2.8 but anything from F/2.4 - F/4.0 (maybe F/4.5) is also great. Of course, one can stop down more but there are diffraction losses.

I like Silkypix very much for the Ricohs. I'm mostly a C1 guy, though, (for many years now) and so my favorite program for RAW conversion right now is C1 4.0 (despite it having some annoyances they need to sort out). I like being able to use the JFI profiles in C1 since most of my work (unless I'm being paid to shoot in color) is in B&W. But Silkypix is an excellent alternative to C1.

Cheers,

Sean

 

[Sean_Reid]

I have set myself a goal of getting the absolute maximum out of my cameras before trading in and upgrading all the time.

I think that's a great perspective. I stuck with a Canon 1Ds for years after newer models had been introduced. "If it ain't broke don't fix it."

Cheers,

Sean

 

[Sean_Reid]

Scott,

As Sean states, since my original posting on that subject and after more experience with the GRD2, I now indeed like it more than the GRD — a conclusion that I came to by the end of that same thread. The GRD2 files offer more flexibility for the way I tend to manipulate contrast, without, as Sean suggests, being overtaken by noise.

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

Hi Mitch,

Yes, as you say, that's something that I discussed in the review and it really can make a difference for photographers who tend to do a lot of work with local contrast.

Cheers,

Sean

 

[Sean_Reid]

Sean:

I guess you shot mainly or entirely in the 4:3 aspect ratio. How do feel about this these days compared to 3:2?

On another subject, as discussed in another thread here, the maximum shutter speed that can be used at f/2.4 is 1/760 sec and at f3.2 is 1/1000,owing to the fact that the iris is also used as the shutter, which means that, at these larger apertures, the iris-shutter has to travel too far to allow faster shutter speeds. Unfortunately this limits what one can do when one wants to shoot at ISO 400 is bright light because, in order to be able to use the maximum 1/2000 sec shutter speed, one is forced into the smaller apertures that are subject to diffraction effects. Any thoughts on this?

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

Hi Mitch,

I could work either way. I liked the way the camera and GV2 fit into that case and so I thought I'd work in 4:3 for awhile. I also figured that, for evaluation purposes, I'd use the full sensor area and see what I noticed.

I should add a section about those shutter speed ranges. This limitation happens often with small sensor cameras but, like yourself, I would like to be able to get to 1/2000 at F/2.4. So, this is another item for me to discuss with Ricoh (I nearly wrote Leica) about future directions for their camera.

Cheers,

Sean