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!

Fun with the Ricoh GR III

biglouis

Well-known member
I thought we should open a dedicated thread to the photography rather than the discussion. I got mine today and I've been out and about with it. I also took comparison shots with my Ricoh GR (which if anyone is interested in, will shortly be on eBay - so PM me for an ex-eBay price - probably only worth it to UK residents).

As someone has already mentioned, thank goodness the rocker bar has been removed from exactly where your thumb rested - the number of times I have gone to take a photo only to find I have added +3EV is many.

Not entirely convinced about the smaller size. The larger size of the GR is pleasantly reassuring but I'm sure over time I will forget this. I have never been a fan of touch screen AF but having just taken a load of photographs I am completely converted. Somehow, and I can't put my finger on it (no pun intended) it just works on this camera in a way it has never worked on any of my other bodies with the feature. Is it holding the camera at arms length which makes the difference, methinks?

One other point: I tried to see if my wide angle adaptor would fit on the GR III. It doesn't - or rather I wasn't about to bugger up the ring on my new camera trying to force it. I think Ricoh have been a bit naughty here but what can you do?

At least I can continue to use my GV-1 optical viewfinder.

I am also a little annoyed that the strap point bore has gotten smaller so that I now cannot seem to get my Peak Design anchor threaded into it. So, no more Peak Design cuff which was damn useful.

I will post some comparison photos next and give links to the full sized jpegs and dng files.

Looking forward to contributions from others!

Here are a couple of photos of both cameras but shot with my Huawei P20 Pro.



 
Last edited:

biglouis

Well-known member
Here are some comparison photos. I'll do them in the order of GR then GRIII below. All photos are dng taken into Lightroom. In Lightroom I have used the 'auto' function to adjust the photos. So you can see the details, I've linked to full sized jpegs and so you can appreciate the dynamic range of the sensors I have also linked to the dng raw files. (Please do not repost!).

Looking at them on screen, I'm not sure I can tell much if any difference between the two cameras! I think the differences will only be apparent looking at the full sized jpegs and raw files.

Worth remembering that with the GR, the IQ is already starting from a higher bar than many DSLRs - even current ones, imho.

Soane Mausoleum, St Pancras Old Church Graveyard

Ricoh GR, iso200 f8 1/200

Full Sized Jpeg (19mb) : Full DNG (19mb)

Ricoh GRIII, iso200 f8 1/200

Full Sized Jpeg (19mb) : Full DNG (19mb)

'Hardy Tree', St Pancras Old Church Graveyard
Ricoh GR, iso200 f8 1/200

Full Sized Jpeg (19mb) : Full DNG (19mb)

Ricoh GRIII, iso200 f8 1/200

Full Sized Jpeg (19mb) : Full DNG (19mb)
 

Thorkil

Active member
Thank you Louis,
just looking at the computerscreen itself, no, there appears to be no difference, or very little, but downloading the DNG's og the tombstone picture, reveals a totally different story, enlarging to the the metalplate on the one tombstone, reveals at the GR III picture a nun and 3 children, the one child with front towards the spectaters, and you are just about able to read some of the letters at the buttom. At the GR you can see absolutely nothing of the details on the plate, just asuming its a metal plate. There are a heaven in difference, and that in itself is a huge argument for the GR III. Now it finally got a sensor that equals the lensquality.
Best
 

biglouis

Well-known member
Thank you Louis,
just looking at the computerscreen itself, no, there appears to be no difference, or very little, but downloading the DNG's og the tombstone picture, reveals a totally different story, enlarging to the the metalplate on the one tombstone, reveals at the GR III picture a nun and 3 children, the one child with front towards the spectaters, and you are just about able to read some of the letters at the buttom. At the GR you can see absolutely nothing of the details on the plate, just asuming its a metal plate. There are a heaven in difference, and that in itself is a huge argument for the GR III. Now it finally got a sensor that equals the lensquality.
Best
That is my early conclusion as well. If you look at the engraving on the entrance of the Soane Mausoleum taken with the GRIII at 100% you can read the inscription whereas it is only barely legible with the GR.

However, the GR holds up very, very well. I was always going to get the GRIII no matter what. That is how much I love my GR but if I was not inclined to do so, the GR and GRII are still fantastic cameras with incredible IQ.

LouisB
 

biglouis

Well-known member
A couple more to look at from inside the recently opened 'Coal Drops' mall at Kings Cross. This is a particularly interesting example because it demonstrates the dynamic range of the sensors. The GRIII shot was easier to take because I could use the touch screen to quickly and exactly place my AF point on the couple walking in the shot.

Once again, I used the 'auto' function in LR to balance the highlights with the shadows. Some additional noise reduction might help but I didn't use it. However, I forgot to adjust the camera setting so they were identical.

Ricoh GR, iso100 f8 1/200

Full Sized Jpeg (19mb) : Full DNG (19mb)

Ricoh GRIII, iso200 f8 1/50

Full Sized Jpeg (19mb) : Full DNG (19mb)
 

Thorkil

Active member
..and by pointing-press I guess both AF and meetering will be at the pressed poiint, or I guess one can decide in the menu whether its only AF or both AF and meetering at pressing-point, and I guess the DNG at 24Mp will be solid/healthy enough for rather strong altering the light in post without heavy noise ???
:)
(PS it looks like there is something wrong with the DNG file from the GR on the tombstonepicture while the Jpg is far better in details)
 
Last edited:

biglouis

Well-known member
..and by pointing-press I guess both AF and meetering will be at the pressed poiint, or I guess one can decide in the menu whether its only AF or both AF and meetering at pressing-point, and I guess the DNG at 24Mp will be solid/healthy enough for rather strong altering the light in post without heavy noise ???
:)
(PS it looks like there is something wrong with the DNG file from the GR on the tombstonepicture while the Jpg is far better in details)
Yes, you have three options AF Point, AF Point+Focus, AF Point+Focus+Shoot

I find the last option is so aggressive that I dare not use it!

LouisB
 
Thank you Louis,
just looking at the computerscreen itself, no, there appears to be no difference, or very little, but downloading the DNG's og the tombstone picture, reveals a totally different story, enlarging to the the metalplate on the one tombstone, reveals at the GR III picture a nun and 3 children, the one child with front towards the spectaters, and you are just about able to read some of the letters at the buttom. At the GR you can see absolutely nothing of the details on the plate, just asuming its a metal plate. There are a heaven in difference, and that in itself is a huge argument for the GR III. Now it finally got a sensor that equals the lensquality.
Best
Saying that you can see no details on the plate of the GR II image is a bit of a stretch I think, looking at the JPEGs there is a difference but you can see details on both.
Also the GR II image is shot at 1/200s iso 400 where the GR III image is shot at 1/80 iso 200 so a bit of an unfair advantage there, which might make more of a difference than the sensor improvements.

The first set of images are shot at the same exposure settings and are much closer in quality.
 

Thorkil

Active member
Saying that you can see no details on the plate of the GR II image is a bit of a stretch I think, looking at the JPEGs there is a difference but you can see details on both.
Also the GR II image is shot at 1/200s iso 400 where the GR III image is shot at 1/80 iso 200 so a bit of an unfair advantage there, which might make more of a difference than the sensor improvements.

The first set of images are shot at the same exposure settings and are much closer in quality.
Yes Chris I found out too afterwards, that the raw files were wrong and the jpg were closer at each other
But anyway yesterday I went off to Bjarke Ahlstrand and his little peculiar photoshop, "One of many Cameras",at Gråbrødre Torv in Copenhagen, the funniest shop I'm aware of at all, and nice mood too. Got the last GRIII (in Europe Bjarke claimed)
It seems more complicated than the II, but I found out the street settings at M mode, with snapdistance(prefocus setting) that is a two-button change, and pressing the iso at first you can shift between auto-iso with the FN button and back to the iso setting you shoose with the wheel to the right from the screen...nice.
So now I'm just looking for time to get it in using-mode...
 
Yes Chris I found out too afterwards, that the raw files were wrong and the jpg were closer at each other
But anyway yesterday I went off to Bjarke Ahlstrand and his little peculiar photoshop, "One of many Cameras",at Gråbrødre Torv in Copenhagen, the funniest shop I'm aware of at all, and nice mood too. Got the last GRIII (in Europe Bjarke claimed)
It seems more complicated than the II, but I found out the street settings at M mode, with snapdistance(prefocus setting) that is a two-button change, and pressing the iso at first you can shift between auto-iso with the FN button and back to the iso setting you shoose with the wheel to the right from the screen...nice.
So now I'm just looking for time to get it in using-mode...
Thank you for buying the last one, then I'm not going to be tempted :salute:
 

Thorkil

Active member
..friday





Ricoh GR III at iso100 1/50 f5.6 through C1pro12win





Ricoh GR III at iso100 1/800 f5.6 through C1pro12win





Ricoh GR III at iso100 1/40 f2.8 through C1pro12win





Ricoh GR III at iso2500 1/20 f4 through C1pro12win
celebrating Nikolaj's 30' birthday




thorkil
 
Last edited:

Thorkil

Active member
(PS. would just like to add: the birthday-picture is handheld at 1/20, above my head, so the IBIS might be just as effective as on the Z7....and that's rather nice to have(!!!)..)(but noise seems to crawl in at these iso2500)
 

biglouis

Well-known member
(PS. would just like to add: the birthday-picture is handheld at 1/20, above my head, so the IBIS might be just as effective as on the Z7....and that's rather nice to have(!!!)..)(but noise seems to crawl in at these iso2500)
I must do some testing of the IBIS at all speeds. I've found iso2500 acceptable.
 

Thorkil

Active member
well..Casone, Lagi di Garda, Irene, Josephine, Aperol Spritz and that splendid pizza - what a way to arrive..






Ricoh GRIII at iso100 1/60 f4.5 through C1pro12.0.3win



thorkil
 
Top