GX200 is here!

[TEBnewyork]

I am impressed with Ricoh!

http://www.photographyblog.com/index...s/ricoh_gx200/

Added a great RAW buffer 5 shots continuous!

here are some highlights:
• Expanding buffer memory has made continuous shooting of up to five images possible in RAW mode, and it is also now possible to use the bracketing function to automatically change exposure settings when shooting in RAW mode. Other expanded RAW shooting capabilities include the ability to shoot 1:1 aspect ratio (vertical/horizontal ratio) format photography in RAW mode.
• The number of mode dial “My Settings” options for defining your own shooting settings has increased to three. (There were two on the Caplio GX100.)
• There are now one-push mode change function buttons both on the top surface and as one of the rear-surface cross keys. These buttons can be used for customized settings to, for example, to switch from JPEG to RAW or from colour to B&W. You can switch quickly to your preferred shooting mode when confronted with a sudden photo opportunity.


On the down side.....
They went to 12mp

[VladimirV]

It is, like the GRD II, a "minor" upgrade so that people who already have the GX-100 don't feel left out and a need to upgrade. The new accessories should also work on the GX-100 since there would be no reason why they shouldn't.

Depending on how the final image quality is it does seem to be the better option compared to the GRD II, more so than the GX-100 was compared to the GRD I.

Overall I was hoping for more, like a faster lens or weathersealing. Shame it lost the phase detection and still has the rocker switch instead of a wheel at the back.

Seems like a solid enough camera but I wonder how it will fare against the Panasonic LX-3 and Canon G10 once they are announced. The RAW buffer and excellent 24mm lens should help it to compete.

Due to the RAW buffer it is more "a compact camera with the power of a dSLR" than the DP1 is, unfortunatelly the IQ is not quite there.

[wbrandsma]

OK, I might have my doubt with the 12 MP pixels, but the GX200 doesn't seem like a minor upgrade to me. Many of the new features, like 1:1 RAW mode, extanded buffer memory for continuous shooting of up to five images possible in RAW mode, bracketing mode in RAW too, flash compensation are things owners of the GX100 asked for.

[Lili]

I like the RAW buffer and the 2.7inch 460,000 Pixel LCD
Hmmmmmmmm

[TEBnewyork]

Originally Posted by wbrandsma

OK, I might have my doubt with the 12 MP pixels, but the GX200 doesn't seem like a minor upgrade to me. Many of the new features, like 1:1 RAW mode, extanded buffer memory for continuous shooting of up to five images possible in RAW mode, bracketing mode in RAW too, flash compensation are things owners of the GX100 asked for.

I'm with you. There seems to be enough there to warrant giving and upgrade serious consideration.

[VladimirV]

With minor upgrade I meant that while the new features are great and I like them on the GRD II, they are not huge so you have to upgrade unless you need the RAW buffer or 1:1 RAW mode.
I still use my GRD I alongside the GRD II because it has some unique features not available in the GRD II and even with the RAW buffer, leveling system and 1:1 RAW mode it does not really make up for the useless jpg engine and lack of focusing speed in good light. This seems to be the same with the GX200.

[Guy Mancuso]

When does this hit the streets. Sounds very nice to me

[Prognathous]

Originally Posted by TEBnewyork

On the down side.....
They went to 12mp

They also dropped the phase-detect AF sensors and replaced the GX100 JPEG processing with the mushy Smooth Engine III.

Other than these three, it looks like a decent upgrade.

Prog.

[pollobarca]

All,

looks like Ricoh read these forums. heres another link:-
http://www.justnow-press.de/showPrAr...&nLanguageID=2

I see that the lens cap LC1 opens automatically in synch with the lens.
Also a 135mm equiv. telephoto adapter. Both can be used with the GX100! Must sell the LC1 as an accessory- I thought LC1 was drinking Yoghurt...

The flash is properly made now too. Slow curtain 1 and 2 as well as EV control.

That distortion correction is only for business cards or have they started to get
some perspective correction? Increased memory buffer, etc etc etc. I think my daughter may have a GX100 to play with soon!


b rgds

paul

[TEBnewyork]

Two interesting bits of info off the Ricoh site:

1.They specifically mention high signal to noise ratio so perhaps it is an improved sensor

2.Noise reduction is user controlled. The regular on/off is there but in addition you can keep it off at low ISOs and have it kick in at high ISOs. This actually could be interesting depending on how brutal the "Smooth Imaging Engine III" is.

[charlesphoto]

Never understood this 1:1 thing. Why not just crop? Also wouldn't that make it like a 6-8 mp file?

Looks like a decent camera but I haven't drunken the p&s kool aid yet and won't this time around either. Will be interesting to see what Leica/Pana have up their sleeves. Canon/Nikon have to take a look at Ricoh/Sigma and realize people want wide. 37mm or whatever the G9 is is not wide (and it has awful distortion at that). Give me a good 24-70 f2.8/4! The Sigma DP1 sounds ideal to me if it wasn't for the awful UI. I won't even go there no matter the file quality just because of that. Maybe DP2?

[Lili]

Originally Posted by TEBnewyork

Two interesting bits of info off the Ricoh site:

1.They specifically mention high signal to noise ratio so perhaps it is an improved sensor

2.Noise reduction is user controlled. The regular on/off is there but in addition you can keep it off at low ISOs and have it kick in at high ISOs. This actually could be interesting depending on how brutal the "Smooth Imaging Engine III" is.

Terry I saw that.
If one could completely turn off NR, ala' the first gen GRD, that would rock.

[asabet]

Originally Posted by wbrandsma

OK, I might have my doubt with the 12 MP pixels, but the GX200 doesn't seem like a minor upgrade to me. Many of the new features, like 1:1 RAW mode, extanded buffer memory for continuous shooting of up to five images possible in RAW mode, bracketing mode in RAW too, flash compensation are things owners of the GX100 asked for.

Pretty much agree. It pretty much addresses everything I would have hoped for as someone who was basically happy with the GX100. They also added the same kind of "expanded dynamic range" function everyone else is using to good effect, though this isn't of value to a RAW shooter. The PhotographyBLOG samples show impressive detail capture with the new 12MP sensor.

[TEBnewyork]

Originally Posted by charlesphoto

Never understood this 1:1 thing. Why not just crop? Also wouldn't that make it like a 6-8 mp file?

Looks like a decent camera but I haven't drunken the p&s kool aid yet and won't this time around either. Will be interesting to see what Leica/Pana have up their sleeves. Canon/Nikon have to take a look at Ricoh/Sigma and realize people want wide. 37mm or whatever the G9 is is not wide (and it has awful distortion at that). Give me a good 24-70 f2.8/4! The Sigma DP1 sounds ideal to me if it wasn't for the awful UI. I won't even go there no matter the file quality just because of that. Maybe DP2?

Yes, you can simply crop later but I really like composing in square when I want it to be square. It is nice to see what you composed on the computer screen.

I too am waiting to see what Leica serves up at Photokina. The reason I am enthusiastic about Ricoh is that they have got the UI right. If you could marry what they've done with a big sensor it would be amazing. I am not waiting for the DP2. After reading and absorbing a lot of information on the DP1 and SD14 the detail Foveon may capture is impressive but I have no desire to deal with the weirdness it also brings to the table.

[tom in mpls]

I found this link to sample shots at the dpreview forum:

http://www.photographyblog.com/revie...oh_gx200_3.php

[Lili]

Well I have "drunk the Kool-Aid" and drunk deeply.
I am very interested in this one if the NR can be controlled!
But I am waiting till I find if Sigma will improve their UI as well

[Player]

Lili, I think that NR will always be applied to JPEGS, even when it's turned off, and you'd need to shoot RAW to have none applied. Ricoh could surprise us though. You never know with that company.

[Jack Flesher]

Looks like a slightly better companion to the GRD2, not sure I will spring for it since I hardly use the GX100. Love the GRD2 though! On a side note, would be nice to have a 50mm version of the GRD2

[Player]

Originally Posted by Jack Flesher

Looks like a slightly better companion to the GRD2, not sure I will spring for it since I hardly use the GX100. Love the GRD2 though! On a side note, would be nice to have a 50mm version of the GRD2

AND a 75mm version of the GRD2.

[Lili]

Originally Posted by Player

Lili, I think that NR will always be applied to JPEGS, even when it's turned off, and you'd need to shoot RAW to have none applied. Ricoh could surprise us though. You never know with that company.

Sure Player, the GRD first gen basically used no NR. Of course the GRD II seems to actually apply NR to RAW which bites given the RAW buffer speed increase.
Maybe the GX200 has the ability to have no NR in RAW?

[Player]

Lili, there is a menu item for turning-off NR in the GRD2, since it is software-based, but it doesn't turn it off completely, just "lessens" it.

Folks have written Ricoh about updating the firmware to allow NR to be completely turned-off, but their response is that you need shoot in RAW if you want no NR, and they have no plans for doing so.

[Player]

Lili, this is from Pavel Kudrys who runs a Ricoh website and has extensively tested these cameras:

"If you are about to shoot in RAW, then there is nothing wrong with GRDII. In fact, it's much better in this (and not only this) area than GRD. The only real GRDII downside is NR in JPEG. But once you realize what's the RAW good for, you will never revert back to JPEG. Really. I'm telling you this from a position of the man, who previously shot only in JPEG. Now I found the RAW and I don't see any good reason (maybe except the speed and size) why to return back to JPEG.

For example, with RAW you don't have to care about WB. Of course, you can fix this or that color tint even in JPEG. But in RAW you can set correct WB even if it's completely wrong. RAW does this without an impact on image quality.

And next.. Even if Ricoh (hypothetically) decide to allow us to turn the NR completely OFF in JPEG, there will still remain some amount of image processing (obvious - contrast, sharpness saturation, less obvious - chromatic aberration removal or JPEG compression). And all these processing steps have some impact on final image quality and also the dynamic range! For example, higher contrast in JPEG files results to lower dynamic range. Additionally, you can recover some additional dynamic range from RAW, which is usually irrecoverably lost in JPEG."

[Chuck A]

It looks like Ricoh listened to its' customers. The changes are mostly things that people on this forum have asked for. We will have to see about the 12mp sensor but I am sure that with the addition of the RAW buffer the GX200 is going to turn alot of heads. I also like the addition of another function button and 1:1 RAW. Perhaps Ricoh will see fit to give us the 1:1 RAW in a firmware update of the GX100.

I just bought the GX100 because the prices went down and am very impressed with the camera. It is truly a photographers camera. I was worried about the 5-6 sec RAW times but I find that it hasn't been a problem yet. I have been working more slowly these days. One major complaint for me is how grainy the EVF is and I don't see anything about an upgrade to it. I have owned a few cameras with an EVF and they were miles better than this one.

I await Sean's wonderful review as usual.

[Lili]

Player,
Thanks, I was under the mistaken impression NR was affecting even RAW.
Good to know it is not.
At any rate, if the GX200 writes raw so very fast, it might induce me to give up jpeg shooting altogether (excepting the large files and storage issues)
One thing I love about the GRD first gen, is that ican adjust sharpness, contrast, and saturation to my hearts content in JPEG without NR artifacts rearing up.
Long Live Grain!

[Player]

Originally Posted by Lili

Player,
Thanks, I was under the mistaken impression NR was affecting even RAW.
Good to know it is not.
At any rate, if the GX200 writes raw so very fast, it might induce me to give up jpeg shooting altogether (excepting the large files and storage issues)
One thing I love about the GRD first gen, is that ican adjust sharpness, contrast, and saturation to my hearts content in JPEG without NR artifacts rearing up.
Long Live Grain!

Lili, you can get the nice grain look with the GRD2, it's just that you have to shoot RAW, and at a higher ISO. I suspect the situation is going to be the same with the GX200.

[Joan]

Sounds like a great upgrade to me in almost all respects, but those sample images on Photography Blog sure aren't a good advertisement for the jpegs ... they are simply smear city. :-( Has anyone downloaded the RAW files?

[ShiroKuro]

This looks really interesting, LC1 attached ..... Think there will be a GRD lll soon to follow....

[ShiroKuro]

and with the TC1

[VladimirV]

Originally Posted by Joan

Has anyone downloaded the RAW files?

Yes, and the RAW files are vastly superior, no smearing and reds do stay red and don't desaturate. Unfortunatelly the GX200 has the same smeary and horrible jpg engine that plagues the GRD II. If you shoot RAW all is fine and the IQ is great but jpg is useless. For jpg shooters the GRD I and GX100 are still the better option.

[TEBnewyork]

Originally Posted by VladimirV

Yes, and the RAW files are vastly superior, no smearing and reds do stay red and don't desaturate. Unfortunatelly the GX200 has the same smeary and horrible jpg engine that plagues the GRD II. If you shoot RAW all is fine and the IQ is great but jpg is useless. For jpg shooters the GRD I and GX100 are still the better option.

I just don't understand with programs like Lightroom and Aperture etc. why you would shoot jpegs these days. The work required on a raw file is really not different than a jpeg and you have so much more flexibility. I'm not trying to be snobby but would love a good reason for shooting jpeg.

[VladimirV]

Originally Posted by TEBnewyork

I'm not trying to be snobby but would love a good reason for shooting jpeg.

For me is just the ease of use, if I can get a good jpg out of the camera I do not have to process it at all, the GRD I allows this for b&w and low ISO color pictures. In fact the GRD I jpgs are not that different from the RAW files after a normal conversion. It might also be that I do not like the workflow in Lightroom and take too many pictures so instead of processing them I'd rather look at them or go out and take some more .

[Lili]

Terry,
With GRD First Gen, I have enough control over the various image parameters, that I seldom need to do any post processing.
Also, the jpeg engine in the GRD is superb. It is hard for me to match the quality unless I want low-noise, Hi-ISO images.
Which I normally do not, liking the noise/grain/texture in such cases.
Now that the New Gen Ricohs have buffers, and seem to have smeary JPEGS, should I get one I would perforce use RAW.
Abit off topic; I do like the customisable "MY" settings on the GRD II, GX100 and GX200.
Very very useful, those are

[naoip]

Originally Posted by Jack Flesher

On a side note, would be nice to have a 50mm version of the GRD2

That would personally be my dream camera!!

I wonder if the GX 200 will be a quieter camera,i found the GX100 pretty loud..The new lens cover is a major plus,i found the old one a pain after a while..

[TEBnewyork]

Originally Posted by Lili

Terry,
With GRD First Gen, I have enough control over the various image parameters, that I seldom need to do any post processing.
Also, the jpeg engine in the GRD is superb. It is hard for me to match the quality unless I want low-noise, Hi-ISO images.
Which I normally do not, liking the noise/grain/texture in such cases.
Now that the New Gen Ricohs have buffers, and seem to have smeary JPEGS, should I get one I would perforce use RAW.
Abit off topic; I do like the customisable "MY" settings on the GRD II, GX100 and GX200.
Very very useful, those are

I never used the first GRD so I can't comment there. However, with all of my cameras I seem to like the camera to give me the most neutral results that I can adjust later (for example: easier to add contrast later). Also, for me idiot that I am, the less I have to mess around with image parameters while shooting the better chance I have of not making a mistake on my settings. I tend to forget to set things back to normal.

[Player]

And shooting Raw is easier in the sense that you don't have to worry about in-camera white balance.

[Lili]

Originally Posted by TEBnewyork

I never used the first GRD so I can't comment there. However, with all of my cameras I seem to like the camera to give me the most neutral results that I can adjust later (for example: easier to add contrast later). Also, for me idiot that I am, the less I have to mess around with image parameters while shooting the better chance I have of not making a mistake on my settings. I tend to forget to set things back to normal.

I quite understand, Terry.
My in-camera workflow is helped by the fact that I have, through diligent practice (and a lotta tears), learned to be able to evaluate the image using the LCD, both live preview and review (if there is time).
This is a luxury that I never had with film and only works if I've time to do so.
Plus, I never show my failures

[Lili]

Originally Posted by Player

And shooting Raw is easier in the sense that you don't have to worry about in-camera white balance.

WB is one of the quickset on the mode wheel on my GRD, but your points welltaken Player

[Joan]

Vladmir, thanks for the confirmation that the RAW files are superior to those sample jpegs. I assumed they would be, but when I tried to download one, it was going to take almost 20 minutes on my connection and I gave up.
17 MB is a big file for each shot!

Terry, I agree with you in principal that RAW is not much harder to process than jpeg, but honestly, 9 times out of 10, I really LIKE the jpegs from the Digilux 2 (iso 100) ... they've already taken care of the noise, the colors are fab, and it all looks beautiful. So, I toss the raw and keep 'em! Same was true with the E410, jpegs were so nice, I rarely needed to mess with the raw files. Only reason I shot both was if I needed to rescue the highlights that the E410 often clipped.

Am I just a lazy slob?

[Guy Mancuso]

Yes . LOL

Kidding Joan but the best quality of image will come from a Raw file since this gives YOU ultimate control. The issue with any camera and in camera jpegs is you are letting the OEM make the call with the firmware algorithms which are not always correct and not always correctable without getting into PS and making corrections Also the more corrections and saves you make with a jpeg the more you will knock the quality of the file down. So you are best to always shoot Raw and make non destructive corrections in a raw processor than save out to a Tiff as you master file . Than if you want to post,e-mail or whatever you can make a jpeg from your Master Tif file. I know it sounds like a lot of work but the results and obviously the control you gain will be worth it. Not saying you can't get nice results from jpeg, you can but your are stuck in the mud with it. Raw you have the option to reprocess it next week or next year and make more non destructive corrections to it in a different way and output a master. Also software changes and improves so this is also a benefit of Raw. For someone getting into this like you, I would rather teach you the best path than short change you and that path is Raw.

[Guy Mancuso]

Let me add something . Be nice if a camera can shoot both though. So if your not in the mood or in a hurry you can just send or use the in camera jpeg. Than as time permits and or need to improve the image than you have the Raw to do that.

Dumb question does this shoot both at the same time

[Player]

Originally Posted by Lili

WB is one of the quickset on the mode wheel on my GRD, but your points welltaken Player

You're point well-taken too Lili , but what if you were shooting indoors under mixed lighting, and/ or the WB you or the camera chose is not optimum? Then what hell are ya gonna do?

[Joan]

Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso

Yes . LOL

Kidding Joan but the best quality of image will come from a Raw file since this gives YOU ultimate control. The issue with any camera and in camera jpegs is you are letting the OEM make the call with the firmware algorithms which are not always correct and not always correctable without getting into PS and making corrections Also the more corrections and saves you make with a jpeg the more you will knock the quality of the file down. So you are best to always shoot Raw and make non destructive corrections in a raw processor than save out to a Tiff as you master file . Than if you want to post,e-mail or whatever you can make a jpeg from your Master Tif file. I know it sounds like a lot of work but the results and obviously the control you gain will be worth it. Not saying you can't get nice results from jpeg, you can but your are stuck in the mud with it. Raw you have the option to reprocess it next week or next year and make more non destructive corrections to it in a different way and output a master. Also software changes and improves so this is also a benefit of Raw. For someone getting into this like you, I would rather teach you the best path than short change you and that path is Raw.

Hi Guy,
I hear you loud and clear, and I know that best practice is to shoot raw ... maybe I just need better PP skills to get my raw files to look as good as the jpegs from the 2 cameras I mentioned. I'm pretty sure you can shoot both simultaneously with the GX200, someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

I've been trying out various RAW converters and haven't settled on one yet. Aperture and Lightzone are my 2 favorites. For some reason Lightroom is difficult for me to figure out. I guess I need to save up for one of your workshops and let you teach me how to use it!

[Lili]

Originally Posted by Player

You're point well-taken too Lili , but what if you were shooting indoors under mixed lighting, and/ or the WB you or the camera chose is not optimum? Then what hell are ya gonna do?

Black and White?


Edit; Seriously; I've only just started doing RAW on a regular basis and am learning the Ropes (SIlkyPix for K100D and S7RAW for S6000fd, the GRD I have not yet done RAW yet). I have seen some very very nice results but the learning curve, she is very very steep

[Player]

Originally Posted by Lili

Black and White?


Edit; Seriously; I've only just started doing RAW on a regular basis and am learning the Ropes (SIlkyPix for K100D and S7RAW for S6000fd, the GRD I have not yet done RAW yet). I have seen some very very nice results but the learning curve, she is very very steep

And it's pretty tough to argue with the quality of your photography. Great stuff!

Right, for b&w it's moot.

[Guy Mancuso]

Originally Posted by Joan

Hi Guy,
I hear you loud and clear, and I know that best practice is to shoot raw ... maybe I just need better PP skills to get my raw files to look as good as the jpegs from the 2 cameras I mentioned. I'm pretty sure you can shoot both simultaneously with the GX200, someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

I've been trying out various RAW converters and haven't settled on one yet. Aperture and Lightzone are my 2 favorites. For some reason Lightroom is difficult for me to figure out. I guess I need to save up for one of your workshops and let you teach me how to use it!

Well this stuff takes time to learn , no question and honestly workshops are a great way to learn ,no promotion there but for me you learn by doing and I am self taught and I think the best way but if you can learn from others it short cuts a lot of learning. BTW love to have you at a workshop. But for now shoot both and practice. Aperture is a nice program and if you can work in that there is a lot of control. Pick one or two and stick with it than trying a bunch and not learning anything. Sorry we went OT a little , back to the GX200

[charlesphoto]

I urge people to think of the RAW file as their negative. The jpeg as a work print and a TIFF (or PSD) as the fine art print. Would you want to be stuck with a timeless image merely in a work print form? The RAW file allows one to make global changes without any destruction. Over the almost thirty years of darkroom printing I became much better and better, even and esp with the same neg. I'm sure the same will be true of my digital post skills. So best to have a "negative" at your disposal.

I can understand some hard pressed photo journalists in far flung places with deadlines to meet via satelitte phone shooting jpegs (usually in conjunction with RAW) but otherwise it really makes no sense.

[Lili]

Originally Posted by Player

And it's pretty tough to argue with the quality of your photography. Great stuff!

Right, for b&w it's moot.

Thanks so much Player, I AM learning RAW, for the reasons Guy and others have mentioned.
Mayhap a GX100/200 is in my future

[Guy Mancuso]

Just keep practicing it Lili and don't forget we are all here to help . If you want to start threads on this and anyone else in the image processing section. More than happy to see that stuff. We ARE the darkroom now.

[Joan]

Originally Posted by Guy Mancuso

Well this stuff takes time to learn , no question and honestly workshops are a great way to learn ,no promotion there but for me you learn by doing and I am self taught and I think the best way but if you can learn from others it short cuts a lot of learning. BTW love to have you at a workshop. But for now shoot both and practice. Aperture is a nice program and if you can work in that there is a lot of control. Pick one or two and stick with it than trying a bunch and not learning anything. Sorry we went OT a little , back to the GX200

I WILL be there for one of them, by hook or by crook. It's only my limited budget that messes up the works, otherwise I would have been to one already! Thanks Guy.

And, Lili, I agree with you about the steep learning curve. You, at least, have the TAKING great photos part down already. I am struggling with both capture and processing. Long road ahead ...

[praktinafan]

Joan,

I use Aperture (2.1) for some time now - and sometimes I forget that it is RAW I am working with. The dynamic range out of my GX100 is so much better.
And: even with the Leica Digilux 2 I switched from jpg to RAW. Slow - yes - but fast compared to my old SLR set (out of the 1960-70s manual winding heavy metal bodies and external exposure metering)

RAW is the best "film" Material you can achieve for your cam - and it is built in!

Willi