Pull the trigger on a GRD2 or not?

[S2C]

So, I've been holding off the purchase of a GRD2 for awhile now. Primarily for 2 reasons - Lack of optical zoom (I know it's something I'll need) and I hate the idea of buying it only to have GRD3 come out in several months.

But with so many posts here raving bout the greatness of it, I'm back to seriously considering it again.

Should I...?

 

[Will]

yes

 

[Amin]

I say no. You've given two perfectly good reasons for not getting it. Your first reason is especially good. If you know that optical zoom is something you'll need, don't get a GRD II.

 

[VladimirV]

Although I have one GRD II and two GRD I, I agree with Amin, if you really need a zoom it's not the camera for you. Look at the GX200 instead which is as good and offers a zoom.

Having said that, not having a zoom could be a very good thing and inspire you to try out different things to get the pictures you want. It might be a challenge at first but could benefit you in the long run. The GX200 however offers a step zoom so you can use it like a GRD if you like and see how you get on with it.

As for your 2nd reason, there will always be something else coming out and if you keep waiting for that you will never buy any camera and miss all those pictures. There will be a GRD III coming out next year but I would not expect anything before October/November.

 

[ShiroKuro]

Absolutely

 

[Oxide Blu]

... if you really need a zoom it's not the camera for you. Look at the GX200 instead which is as good and offers a zoom.

I have a GRDII, tho I killed it so it is with Ricoh being reanimated, and I have a GX200. They are NOT the same camera. I think the GRDII produces cleaner (less noise) pictures. For me the step zoom is a pain in the astronomy (less the tronomy). When I want to zoom, I want to zoom, not zoom-stop-zoom-stop-zoom-stop... Just turn off the step zoom mode, use it like a normal zoom camera. The GX200 has anti-shake but I'm not entirely convinced that is not the source of some of the extra noise the camera produces compared to the GRDII without the anti-shake feature. Haven't taken the time to investigate this, yet.

The big plus on the GX200 is the 3rd My Setting available on the dial, and the second programmable function button next to the flash pop up button, compared to the single function button on the GRDII. I also give huge, huge kudos for the eVF because it works at 90-degs, meaning I can set the camera very low on a mini-tripod and look down thru the top to compose, expose.

There is enough diff between the two cameras that I would say there is somewhat of a learning curve going between the two. Not much, but some, enough. I don't see myself parting with either of these cameras. But as it stands not my preference is the GRDII with the optional 40mm accessory lens thingy. The 28mm and the 40mm get me everything I need. The down side of that combination is the lens flare with the 40mm lens thingy and the sun and no way to mount a lens shade.

The problem with buying a new GRDIII is that you should have waited for the GRDIV. At some point you have to stop waiting and start getting involved in taking pix. There will always be a new camera that you want and don't have. Meanwhile you are stagnant.

 

[VladimirV]

They are NOT the same camera. I think the GRDII produces cleaner (less noise) pictures. For me the step zoom is a pain in the astronomy (less the tronomy). When I want to zoom, I want to zoom, not zoom-stop-zoom-stop-zoom-stop...

I have also both and at low ISO the GX200 produces more detail in the images but has more noise, especially at high ISO. Particulary ISO 1600 is almost unusable on the GX200 and still ok on the GRD II (the GRD I JPGS are IMO again much better at this ISO setting). You need to sharpen the GX200 images more and add some contrast but there is not much difference and the JPGs from the GX200 are better up to ISO 400 with less smearing.
Where the GRD II is much better is when it comes to the dynamic range and the highlights you can recover and of course the very low distortion of the lens.

The step zoom for me is great since I always know what I will get in the image and how far I zoomed in without even looking at the screen. But if it does not work for you, you can always leave it on default zoom.

Like you, I have both adapter lenses and while the quality of both is very good they do make the camera considerably bigger and heavier. For normal use the zoom of the GX200 is much more practical.

Still, I mantain that the GX200 is as good a camera as the GRD II and both have their own strengths. For the original poster however the GX200 is probably the better camera and he will be happier with it than with the fixed lens of the GRD.

 

[Tim]

For me, I have the GRD II. It works for me because it has a great interface, the menus, controls, design and construction work together to make a fantastic camera. The fixed 28mm works for me as when I am carrying the GRD I tend to "think" and "see" in 28mm only. When carrying the GRD I look for framing that fits 28mm or move to fit the framing IF I can. Sometimes I miss an image as I need a longer or shorter focal length but this is rare.

I once took only the GRD II with me on a weeks holiday and only once or twice did I miss another focal length but this is me, you may be different. I often take the GRD when I am carrying a camera but don't intend to take images. I have also come from film cameras like the Contax T2/T3, the Nikon AF600, and others that have fixed lenses so I am used to one lens.

I also find that having only one focal length means I often take the camera out and "grab" a image quickly without missing the opportunity because I didn't stand there composing with a zoom.

This may work for you? only you can answer.

 

[cjlacz]

I have the GRD2 and love it. As others have said, the interface is great. I wasn't sure if I wanted to get it because it didn't have a zoom, but I found being restricted to one focal length has been good for me. If you need the zoom, or 28mm and you just don't get along then you should probably pass.

The 21mm and 40mm conversion lenses work well. It does make the whole package larger, but I do carry them quite a bit.

 

[kweide]

What are you waiting for ??
It´s your decision how you want to see your world.


View attachment 10415

 

[Oxide Blu]

I have also both and at low ISO the GX200 produces more detail in the images but has more noise, especially at high ISO. ...

Do you turn on (or off) the in-camera image stabilization thingy on your GX200? The camera is still new to me, but I've gotten a couple of images in well lit scenes, lower ISO, that had noise in them like they were shot ISO 800 or above with a slow shutter. Had left the image stabilization to factory default; 'on'. I'm now shooting with it 'off' to see if I can get the same yucky results. So far, nope, but other than that I can't see any real diff with it on or off.

 

[Oxide Blu]

... The 21mm and 40mm conversion lenses work well. It does make the whole package larger, but I do carry them quite a bit.

With the GX200 I have only taken 1 image at the widest, 24mm. I really don't have a need for the wide lens on my GRDII, but usually I carry the 40mm lens with me and use it quite a bit for macro stuff. But like I said, it's miserable in sunlight with regards to lens flare, and no lens shade/hood unless I tape something (a piece of cardboard) to the lens.