GXR/A12 vs GF1

When I bought into micro 4/3 it was because of the huge variety of lens options. Bodies/sensors will improve, but the lens investment lives on. Not so with the GXR...

Ricoh's questionable quality control and the USA warranty service contractor are deal killers for me.

but John, don't be discouraged ... some of us want to hear your experiences!

say, if your GF goes on the market, does it come with the 20mm?

m4/3rds is a big hit because of the interchangeable lens possibility in a mirrorless cam system.

The Samsung NX (and others in the future) would also be similarly placed.

GXR and such are fixed lens P&S cams. Can't understand why it should be modular in this fashion at all.

Whether you keep one body over the other, John, is your prerogative. Not many of us would even consider buying a GXR or an X1, etc.

I fully understand all of the points being made. It would be very helpful if Ricoh were to provide a roadmap for the future which they seem to be reluctant to do. However, they may choose to, or be forced to, offer an APS-C module with interchangeable lens mount which would change the entire picture. The NX sample images on the DPR Samsung thread are a real mixed bag so far. The thread comparing ISO cropping's against the GF1 don't reveal as much image detail as the GF1 with far too much in camera smoothing. While the GF1 shows more noise there is also much more detail throughout the range.

Vivek said:

GXR and such are fixed lens P&S cams. Can't understand why it should be modular in this fashion at all.

Click to expand...

There is no good technical reason, it's simply money.

With an interchangeable lens system, the lenses hold value while the body depreciates to near zero. A new body generates no new lens income for the OEM. Tying the sensor to the lens is brilliant, but not for photographic reasons.

Robert, Frankly, I am one of those (perhaps very few) who do not consider lenses/gear as some sort of hidden assets to be cashed later.

If something is going to be useful now then it is worth the bother.

As I understand, there is nothing earth shattering about the Ricoh GXR.
It probably has an aesthetic and cosmetic appeal to some who want something compact and elegant.

barjohn said:

The NX sample images on the DPR Samsung thread are a real mixed bag so far. The thread comparing ISO cropping's against the GF1 don't reveal as much image detail as the GF1 with far too much in camera smoothing. While the GF1 shows more noise there is also much more detail throughout the range.

Click to expand...

These are very valid points, John. Dp revs threads- I don't read them. I take your words for it.

Vivek said:

Robert, Frankly, I am one of those (perhaps very few) who do not consider lenses/gear as some sort of hidden assets to be cashed later.

If something is going to be useful now then it is worth the bother.

Click to expand...

This isn't to say the GXR won't be useful, just that this sensor/lens combination isn't really a solution to anything that needed to be solved, other than the self-interest of Ricoh.

For a small company that wants to keep up with technology there are some advantages to this approach. As new sensors are developed, the company can focus on just the lens/sensor combination or just adding a new sensor if a module that allows interchangeable lenses is developed, and a standard interface to the body so the development time and cost is reduced and it can be brought to market faster without the cost to develop the body and user interface.

However, to make this approach work, the body has to be really well thought out and engineered so that it can support technologies that are in the R&D pipeline but have not seen the light of day yet. Whether Ricoh accomplished such a feat remains to be seen.

Hmm. If Ricoh has that much difficulty designing a new housing or migrating a user interface from one model to the next...I have doubts they'll be able to engineer a body housing that supports future technologies.

To have the system truly upgradable, they'd need to have an "all singing, all dancing" body, both hardware and firmware capable. Otherwise, you'll have to change it out at some point to implement the capabilities that the evolving lens side brings to the table.

Mind you, Ricoh really nailed the physical interface some time ago.

Cheers,

I have a GXR/A12 arriving today as well. As a big fan of the GRD cameras I had to try it. I'm smitten with the E-P2, but had to give the Ricoh a shot as well. I can return it if it does not please, but the few samples I've seen have looked good to my eye. The focal length and macro ability will fit my style.

As anyone that works in the computer field knows, designing a good flexible standard interface is a major challenge. If Ricoh succeeded here, then it is far easier and quicker to design a new sub-assembly that uses the interface than to design a completely new and integrated system. Development is usually done by teams of engineers with mixed areas of expertise. Optical engineers, electronic engineers, computer engineers and software developers to name a few. Usually, each works on a particular part of a design and then later the design elements are integrated. This last step is where the biggest headaches originate as sub-elements fail to work together as envisioned due to misunderstandings or failed communications between groups and this where the heavy time consuming testing takes place where bugs are identified and fixes are implemented and retested. Sometimes major design errors are found and it takes a great deal of time to fix these. With a removable module design, Ricoh engineers were forced to design an interface with solid electronic, mechanical and timing characteristics. Adding a new module where the interface is well defined and understood is a lot easier and quicker. The key is whether the company can capitalize on this characteristic. Another factor is the ability to design the optics to match the sensor characteristics. Suppose you want a full size sensor, it may be easier to accomplish when you can design the optics to overcome sensor short-commings.

IMHO Ricoh has quality engineering. This to me is something that was done to increase revenue, not to save engineering costs. My viewpoint is based on 20+ years of product development, electronic design and manufacturing.

It's not incompatible with the engineering goal.

No, it isn't. Will be interesting to see if their marketing department can convince buyers.

There lies the problem.

Good luck to them (i think they do need lots of it).

I finally received the camera at 7:00pm (leave it to UPS to make me last on their delivery list after I sat home all day waiting because I had to sign for it). The battery is charging as I write this. My first impression was this is heavier than I expected, especially the A12 but even the 1/2 empty body was not light. It does feel very solid and the ergonomics of holding the camera are surprisingly better than the GF1 that isn't bad in that department either. The shape of the grip and where you fingers come to rest just feels better to me, more natural and easier to hold one handed. The A12 lensor feels very solid and well made with the focus ring being wide and having a soft rubber feel to the ribs. It protrudes further than the Panasonic 20mm f1.7 pancake but seems surprisingly small compared to the Panasonic 14-45mm zoom kit lens.

The other surprise to me was the size comparison between the two cameras. In the images I have seen they appeared to be nearly the same size. In real life the GF1 seems to dwarf the GXR making it look more like a tiny P&S. Even adding the EVF that is larger on the GXR and the overall camera stills seems tiny in comparison to the GF1. I have uploaded three shots taken with my iPhone to give you some idea of what I mean though the images really fail to fully capture what sits before me.

Untill the battery charges I won't be able to say much more but I would think with the SX10 module it would be easily pocketable in a light jacket or cargo shorts. Still too big for pants in my opinion though I'm sure there are those that would do it. The rubber on the front of the grip protrusion and on the back where the thumb rests feels very grippy and secure. Even with the leather Panasonic 1/2 case the GF1 does not feel as secure and is harder to hold one handed. In fact the balance of the GXR is clearly designed for single handed use as it feels secure and comfortable without place strain on the fingers. From what I have seen on the X1, without the optional hand grip it will be uncomfortable to hold in comparison.

I am surprised that Ricoh did not put a threaded tripod mount on the lensor as there appears to be room and they could have centered it on the lens center line and left the other thread mount for those cases where the lensor lacked room. My initial impression of the mechanics is that everything is just a little higher quality and a little better thought out. On the other hand it costs more so those things should come with it.