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 GR II

D

dlw

Guest
In 13 x 19 print, it looks excellent. In 16 x 20 it looks very good. As I've noticed in some other images from this camera, the noise can look peculiarly defined and tight, which in the 16 x 20 calls some attention to it. By contrast, the M8 noise is softer edged, blurrier. I have no idea what this is about. I upsized the 16 x 20 image in Alien Skin Blow Up with their default 100% sharpening, which they say only compensates for the increase in size and which I have found to be true with other images. Perhaps it slightly oversharpened this image.

Also, notice in the 13 x 19 100% crop that there are peculiar artifacts, JPEG like, and that they are gone in the 16 x 20. I don't know what to make of either of these issues. In the 13 x 19, do you think it might be the chroma NR or oversharpening in PS? As I said, the 13 x 19 print looks excellent and I can see none of this JPEG-like stuff in it. The 16 x 20 doesn't show that either, but shows the "sharp" noise when looking closely.
Hi Walt.

I played around a bit with the DNG that was posted in the Ricoh forum that Jorge mentioned and I have a much better understanding of what you're talking about now.

I can't say as I know what is going on, but I thought the noise pattern fluctuated quite a bit depending on how close to being properly exposed (which is expected, right?) and then responded quite a bit to different sharpening algorithms.

In Raw Developer you can choose between four sharpening techniques, my preferred is the R-L deconvolution, which I thought looked quite nice with these files - close to a warm color print using 400 speed film. But when I applied either Hybrid or USM sharpening I thought the noise texture got a little weird and started to remind me of reticulation, which is what your 13x19crop reminds me of.

All that aside, there is a basic noise pattern to the file at 200iso which I'm guessing different software will handle differently based on how the interpolation techniques get applied to the pattern. So, yes, I think what you're seeing could be a result of the sharpening in Photoshop and maybe some interpolation that Alien Skin has in their enlargement technique. You could try running the file out of ACR at a slightly higher resolution to get a larger image size and see what the difference is like.

Take care,
David
 
D

dlw

Guest
Well, I've only looked at a 200iso file, but I'd say there is a grain/noise texture to the image here as well, so it may be a consistent element to all files coming out of the camera.

I think 100% crops can be misleading if you are a full frame printer, but they are also important if you are a detail fanatic. What you see at 100% is going to get more pronounced as you push the files more and enlarge them, so I've found it's good to do sharpening at 100% but tonal evaluations in full view. I think it's also important to move the image around a lot while sharpening, different parts of the tonal range will show you different things about what's going on. CaptureOne and Raw Developer both allow sharpening at 100% in a more usable way than I think Photoshop does.

The other thing about the GR-II files that I thought was ironic in relation to this thread - part of the attraction of the camera is it's endemic hi-speed film look, but the image size is 1.3 ratio whereas the basic M8 files are much closer to a low speed medium format look yet are in the classic 35mm 1.48 ratio.

- David
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Just a note folks. Enjoy your new space but Jack and I invite you to look around and use the Gallery for images you like to post and please also put images in the threads and such. This is what you make of it and we welcome you here. Have fun and enjoy. The forum mission statement is about learning and sharing. Thanks
 
M

Mitch Alland

Guest
...The other thing about the GR-II files that I thought was ironic in relation to this thread - part of the attraction of the camera is it's endemic hi-speed film look, but the image size is 1.3 ratio whereas the basic M8 files are much closer to a low speed medium format look yet are in the classic 35mm 1.48 ratio...
David:

When I started shooting with the GR-D almost 18 months ago, it was my first digital camera and initially I had a feeling that I wanted to keep as close as possible to a 35mm film look — it was purely emotional — and I shot in the 3:2 format. Later, as I got more comfortable with the camera i switched to the 4:3 format, which I now, most of the time, find easier to compose in. Although great master paintings come in all sorts of formats, including 1:1 and 16:9, a survey taken of great paintings in museums, shows that on the average, mist tend to be in a format close to 4:3. Of course there is a reason that painters have chosen mostly this type of format — and it's ease of composition. So, to me, there is no irony here.

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

Mitch Alland

Guest
I'm curious about what I'm seeing in the sample JPEG's posted, there seems to be quite a bit of barrel distortion and/or blurring out towards the edges of the images. Though it's not consistent across the images posted so far...
I don't see the barrel distortion in the GRD/GRD2 files, although there is quite a bit with the GX100, particularly at 24mm. The blurgring out toward the edges is from my burning in on some of the pictures.

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

chris_tribble

Guest
I wonder if any one out there ever used the Rollei TS or SE or the original Olympus Mu... What I think I hope the GRII is going to be is a real complement to my M8 system, and which can give me the sort of performance up to 400 or 800 that I was able to get from that film based system.

TRULY pocketable, high quality glass lens, 28mm FOV, point and shoot if that's what you want, or wide range of manual control, optical finder...

If any of those using the GR2 can reflect on their experience and think back on how it compares I'd be grateful...

I have the feeling I'm going to buy myself a Christmas present...

Thanks

Chris Tribble
--
www.ctribble.co.uk
 
M

Mitch Alland

Guest
...What I think I hope the GRII is going to be is a real complement to my M8 system, and which can give me the sort of performance up to 400 or 800 that I was able to get from that film based system...
Chris:

I think that the GRD II does exactly that in producing film-like results at ISO 400 and 800, which are speeds that I like on this camera. At ISO 200, it produces results that are more like Ilford Delta 100 or FP4 or PanF+, depending on how you post process — and I haven't even tried ISO 100 because I only got the camera last week. Here are some more pictures at ISO 400:













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

Mitch Alland

Guest
Auto-focus issues

Sean:

Generally I shoot with the GRD2 in SNAP focus mode, but the few times I used SPOT AF I found that the camera intermittently had a substantial focus/shutter lag that made it useless for street photography in that mode. There were a series of posts on dpreview that discussed the differences in the focusing mechanisms in the GRD2 vs the GRD that I didn't follow closely but, as I recall the original camera had two focusing methods, active and passive, while the new one has only one. Possibly, Ricoh dropped the second focusing method because the primary one has been improved on the GRD2, or maybe it's a matter of manufacturing cost. In any case, I had similar shutter-lag issues with the GRD in SPOT AF mode, which is the reason that I shot in SNAP mode.

As this is an issue that interests many people it might be a good idea for you to look into this and to discuss it with Ricoh as well.

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

Sean_Reid

Guest
Re: Auto-focus issues

Sean:

Generally I shoot with the GRD2 in SNAP focus mode, but the few times I used SPOT AF I found that the camera intermittently had a substantial focus/shutter lag that made it useless for street photography in that mode. There were a series of posts on dpreview that discussed the differences in the focusing mechanisms in the GRD2 vs the GRD that I didn't follow closely but, as I recall the original camera had two focusing methods, active and passive, while the new one has only one. Possibly, Ricoh dropped the second focusing method because the primary one has been improved on the GRD2, or maybe it's a matter of manufacturing cost. In any case, I had similar shutter-lag issues with the GRD in SPOT AF mode, which is the reason that I shot in SNAP mode.

As this is an issue that interests many people it might be a good idea for you to look into this and to discuss it with Ricoh as well.

—Mitch/Bangkok
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/
I will indeed ask them about that. My experience is that virtually every small sensor camera I've ever worked with has been too slow in AF for fast work - including the GR. The only one that came close to being fast was a Sony V1.

Cheers,

Sean
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I'm embarrassed to say this but I feel like a real dummy on this Small Sensor camera's. Sean thanks for calling me last night about all this but now your making me read this whole thread to learn more. Looks like fun stuff, i will have to catch up here.
 
S

Sean_Reid

Guest
Hi Guy,

On my site, read the article called "On Small Sensor Cameras". Its not too long so you won't need Cliff Notes <G>

Cheers,

Sean
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
I will do that , thanks Sean. i woke up to a lot of new members hopefully there all on board now.
 
S

SimonL

Guest
Re: Auto-focus issues

Possibly, Ricoh dropped the second focusing method because the primary one has been improved on the GRD2, .............. As this is an issue that interests many people it might be a good idea for you to look into this and to discuss it with Ricoh as well.

Mitch,

I forget where but I seem to remember a Ricoh statement saying that the phase detection focus had been dropped as a result of improved contrast focus.

Simon
 

Stuart Richardson

Active member
Thanks to all for directing me here. I look forward to seeing some more stuff from the GRDII. In terms of absolute image quality, how does it compare to the GX100 at 28mm? Is it mostly less distortion in the GRD II, or are there other differences? Is there a difference in character or usability between the two cameras, because they both look like good options and I am having difficulty choosing between the two.
 
S

Sean_Reid

Guest
I think what I'll do is to ask for a review copy of the GX-100 and compare the following:

GR with GX-100 at "28 mm"
GR with "40 mm" adapter and GX-100 at "35 mm"

I'm very backlogged with reviews so my feedback on that will take awhile but Mitch has both camera so maybe if we ask very nicely...

The two cameras, BTW, are quite similar so its largely going to come down to lens performance.

Cheers,

Sean

Cheers,

Sean
 

Stuart Richardson

Active member
Thanks Sean. No hurry. But Mitch, if you could comment on it, I would appreciate it.


By the way, is anyone else's thread upside down? The new posts are at the top for me...it is backwards for me and driving me crazy. Is there a way to change it?
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Stuart look above on top left and hit User CP than go in and hit Edit options than scroll down to Thread display options. Than you will see Thread display mode and a drop down box i have Linear- Oldest first. Try that
 
Top