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!

GRD2 v GX100, shootout or an ideal pair?

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Hell i may just a used one. LOL

BTW partner nice testing , you know i COMPLETELY trust your opinion.
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
LOLOL! Yep, I know ;)

Here is a quick grab at lunch with the GRD2 in snap-focus and square mode. It was DARK in this restaurant. Hand-held, ISO 400, 1/18th sec wide open at f2.4, first one as shot -- color and lighting are dead-on for that room:



Here I pushed the shadows way up and converted to B&W in ACR -- why we shoot raw:



And here is about how I'd process this for a final. An impressive amount of ability to push these files around. Most impressive for a P&S:



Oh, and the look is because the waiter had just told him they were out of the dish he wanted :ROTFL:
 

Terry

New member
I'm captivated by Jim's less than pleased expression in contrast with his "happy" penguins.
 

sizifo

New member
Charley
are you possibly biased
w/a grd1 & 2 :ROTFL::ROTFL::ROTFL:

and YEA !!! GO GREEN GO
Second that.

But seriously, for me the crispness of the prime comes through in most of these comparisons. The GRDII definitely really hits a sweet spot with the combination of lens and sensor.
 

nostatic

New member
it is interesting to see, because I got my GRD2 yesterday and after taking about 100 photos last night I'm going to sell it. I prefer the look of my DLux3 images, and also find the interface on the Panaleica to be better for my use. That is likely due to the fact that I am used to it though...

Could be that I just haven't spent enough time fiddling but I actually have been pretty happy with the DLux3. Other people here get amazing shots with the GRD2, but everyone is different I suppose. One thing I notice is that for me, IS makes a *big* difference.
 
Last edited:

nostatic

New member
hmm, maybe I spoke too soon. I shot a few comparisons and it is interesting. The colors on the GRD2 indoors are more accurate (using auto WB) than the DLux3, and while the image from the Leica looks a tad "cleaner", it is at the expense of nice grain. It looks like there is some NR going on in the Leica raw file. As Jack noted above, when you "push" the GRD2 file it looks quite nice, the DLux3 less so.

I'm going to a show reception tonight (two of my Yosemite pieces are in it) and I figure I'll take the GRD2 and see what I can get. The shots last night at the Dodger game didn't thrill me, but likely that was more operator than tool :p


grd2


dlux3

 
Last edited:

rich s

New member
hmm, maybe I spoke too soon. I shot a few comparisons and it is interesting. The colors on the GRD2 indoors are more accurate (using auto WB) than the DLux3, and while the image from the Leica looks a tad "cleaner", it is at the expense of nice grain. It looks like there is some NR going on in the Leica raw file. As Jack noted above, when you "push" the GRD2 file it looks quite nice, the DLux3 less so.
That's pretty much the conclusion I came to as well, and one of the main reasons I sold my D-Lux 3. Added to that was the RAW speed of the GRDII, the "gripability" of the body, the superb controls and handling compared to the Leica. I'm quite happy with the Ricoh grain with the sort of shooting I do!
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
Okay, had LOUSY weather all weekend at Tahoe for doing any kind of constructive comparison of these two cameras. Here is one image from the GRD2 anyway, ISO 100 but processed to add noise, desaturate colors and increase contrast to accentuate the ominous sky -- and this is as good as it got. Most of the time, was just plain gray, no visible clouds...



In addition, I did shoot the GRD2 indoors during evening game sessions -- or when the kids were acting up. Here are my three girls playing with their flatware after an evening meal. Taken at ISO 800 with on-camera flash, spot AF (I have the AF helper light turned off and it nailed focus in this low light) and AWB. In post I used ACR standard settings, exposure brought up a stop, fill and blacks brought up a little for an effective ISO 1600+, color was as-shot and no added NR was run. Note that ISO 800 pushed one stop has superior noise character than ISO 1600 native:



then,



~~~

All in all, I have reached my bottom line conclusions about these cameras, offered IMO/FWIW only...

1) I find I almost always grab the GRD2 if I want a small camera. First it's very fast and intuitive to shoot with, and next I find the fixed 28mm focal freeing and not restrictive as it removes one other decision factor from the image making process; it forces me to see 28mm images with it. I step in if I need tighter, step back if I need looser, of make a composition that fits what I got if I can't do either of those. Next I can click once and can click a follow up instantly if I need to; neither the GX100 or D-Lux3 allow the fast follow shot in raw mode.

1a) IMO the GRD2 may be the ideal evening-out/dinner-table camera when you don't want to lug a DSLR or the M8 :cool:

2) If you need a zoom, then the GRD2 is out. But if you want to push yourself, then the single focal restriction may be an asset...

3) For a zoom camera, IF the GRD2 is already in your stable and you love it, then the GX100 is the answer IMO. It offers a nearly identical control layout and similar enough UI that it is the logical choice for user convenience and I'd choose these over the slightly better IQ and color advantages of the D-Lux3.

4) However, if you are looking for a SINGLE small camera with zoom, then my leaning would be to the D-Lux3 over the GX100. Here I feel the D-Lux3's better native color and image quality along with being touch smaller and better looking (yes, I think the Leica version almost qualifies as evening-attire accessory jewelry :D) win this decision.

5) However both are very good in their own right, and there are some other considerations: The GX100 has a 24-72 focal equivalent while the D-Lux has a 28-90 range -- probably significant if you prefer wide or long. The Leica is 16:9 native for convenient playback on most modern television sets while the GX100 is 4:3, a more useful aspect ratio for most imaging, especially if you go vertical. At the end of the day though, I would not necessarily move to one if you already owned the other.

Cheers,
 

Bob

Administrator
Staff member
I think that the one single GRD II benefit over ANY other P&S I have handled is the very low time from pocket to shot and negligible shutter delay capability. For that alone it is a great walkabout pocket camera.
-bob
 

simonclivehughes

Active member
I also have both cameras and find they work well paired. Typically, I have the GRD2 with the 21mm lens mounted, and the GX100 set to 72mm with a CV 75mm VF on it. I have the 50mm CV VF also as well as the CV 28/35 minifinder so you can tell I love shooting with the finders. I prefer the file quality of the GRD2, but the GX100 is nice to have for the longer focal lengths.

I will be finishing up a multipage article on the GRD2, GX100 and DLUX2 (hopefully soon) which will be submitted to Amin's Serious Compacts website (as well as on my own site). We just got back from a month-long driving trip from Vancouver down the coast to SF then on as far as Morro Bay then over to Yosemite and finally back home, I've got over 2000 pictures to go through, (they were all shot with the D300s I bought before leaving) so the article may not be finished as quick as I'd like!

Cheers,
 

nostatic

New member
I didn't want to clutter up this thread with too much of the DLux3 talk so I started another (with legal disclaimer ;)). My bottom line so far is that the GRD2 and Dlux3 are just different cameras with different looks. To my eye the iso800 performance of the GRD2 is a particular strength. I can shoot the DLux3 high iso, and the shake reduction helps out in low light. But I prefer the look of the GRD2 files at higher iso.
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
To my eye the iso800 performance of the GRD2 is a particular strength. I can shoot the DLux3 high iso, and the shake reduction helps out in low light. But I prefer the look of the GRD2 files at higher iso.
I would agree totally, and add that IMO ISO performance between the GX100 and D-Lux3 are not significant; the GRD is superior to both of them.
 

JimCollum

Member
I'm captivated by Jim's less than pleased expression in contrast with his "happy" penguins.
i'm surprised that Jack, who so often is captured with 'less-than-pleasing' expressions and poses, would so fool-heartily throw such a gauntlet into the ring.

So Jack.. just when you think there can't possibly be a camera around for miles.....'snap'...

:)
 
Last edited:

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
FTR, it was so dark in that restaurant, I could not even see your face until I processed the images. Seriously, you looked to me just as you do in the first image.
 
Top