DP1 vs GRD2

[Rawfa]

Ok, so I've been looking into these two babies and the only conclusions that I've reached are image wise. The DP1 is simply incredible. The latitude using Raw looks like HRD! The detail is awesome and the grain is sooo film like even at 800 iso. The bad thing is that I've read some real horror stories regarding how slow this camera is (is it really that bad???).
So, what are your thoughts?

[asabet]

I have the DP1 and am in the process of doing a review of the GRD2. Compared to the GRD2, the DP1 is slow in all aspects. However, there are only two areas in which the DP1 operational slowness bothers me: 1) AF is slow. This is only a minor problem because one can use the excellent manual focus dial for zone focusing. 2) Shot to shot time is slow. One has to wait 4-5 seconds between shots, which can cause one to miss shots. This bothers me, but I can live with it.

[Rawfa]

Thanks for the quick reply.
How about writing times with RAW? From what I've read this is where the difference is at. I mean, I've seen a jpeg vs raw comparison where the difference was really brutal.
also, can the GRD2 go up to 800 with that lovely DP1 film grain?

[asabet]

Originally Posted by Rawfa

Thanks for the quick reply.
How about writing times with RAW? From what I've read this is where the difference is at.

Shot to shot time is 4-5 seconds in the DP1 with a fast card whether you shoot RAW or JPEG.

Originally Posted by Rawfa

I mean, I've seen a jpeg vs raw comparison where the difference was really brutal.

Neither camera is a good JPEG cam IMO. The DP1 has blotchy color noise at high ISO and the GRD2 is too aggressive with noise reduction if you shoot JPEG.

Originally Posted by Rawfa

also, can the GRD2 go up to 800 with that lovely DP1 film grain?

I assume you're talking about black and white here, because the DP1 doesn't show grain-like noise in color conversions. The quality of luminance noise is highly dependent on the RAW converter and conversion settings used, but in general I would have to say that the DP1 produces more appealing noise at any given ISO. However, the GRD 2 lens is more than a stop faster, so you really ought to compare GRD 2 noise at ISO 400 to DP1 noise at ISO 800. Then again, the B&W setting in Sigma Photo Pro seems to pull an extra stop of light out of nowhere. You really need to use it to understand that last point.

From an image quality standpoint, especially for B&W, I think the DP1 is a clear winner.* The main question is whether you can deal with a slow shot to shot time.

*That is not to say that the GRD2 has poor image quality or even poor for B&W. People are getting terrific results, and if I were a street/documentary photographer, I would probably lean towards it over the DP1 because of all the custom controls, better shot to shot time, easier pocketability, etc. For example, look here to see some nice filmlike results with the GRD2.

[Rawfa]

5 sec is anoying but I can live with that if the quality pays for it.
I've seen some pretty amazing stuff from the GRD2, but the DP1 (when at it's best) seems to have a "magic" to it that is a mixture of 3D and HRD.

[bbodine9]

Amin,

Any idea when your test of the GRD2 will be finished and will it be compared at all with the DP1? Thanks!

[asabet]

Should be done by the coming Monday. I'll probably post it one part at a time. I've been putting this off a long time now, but I imagine Ricoh wants their camera back! There will be comparisons to other cameras. Mainly the DP1, but also D-LUX 4 and maybe a little G10 thrown in there .

[Rawfa]

Amin, there's some seriously cool photos on the link you've posted.

[ddk]

Originally Posted by Rawfa

Ok, so I've been looking into these two babies and the only conclusions that I've reached are image wise. The DP1 is simply incredible.

Its pretty good but I wouldn't go that far to call it incredible but so is GRD's, just with little less resolution. DP1's lens has a particular look/rendering which isn't to my taste, I much prefer Ricoh's lens over Sigma's.

Originally Posted by Rawfa

The latitude using Raw looks like HRD!

Not true, DP1's DR is a little better that Ricoh's but nothing special to get excited about.

Originally Posted by Rawfa

The detail is awesome and the grain is sooo film like even at 800 iso.

The images are sharp and detailed but definitely have a very digital look to them. For film like grain the original GRD is still the best imo.

Originally Posted by Rawfa

The bad thing is that I've read some real horror stories regarding how slow this camera is (is it really that bad???).
So, what are your thoughts?

For me the DP1 was the worst handling camera I ever bought, its horrendous! Bad enough that I just couldn't get one acceptable for me image with this camera and after few months of struggling with it I could care less about its IQ when I'm not able to get the shot! And the reality is that as good as the IQ is, it isn't that great to warrant the effort, any of my dslrs can outgun the DP1 in every parameter with no fuss at all.

Let me itemize what I didn't like about the DP1

- Not very pocketable compared to the GRD, important for me and my main reason to own a small camera.

- Not very keen on DP1's lens, I'm not crazy about the look, but then again I never liked Sigma lenses. I really like Ricoh's, its very much to my tastes and Ricoh also has a fantastic 21mm and a pretty decent 40mm attachment which add to the versatility of system, Sigma has nothing.

- I had 3 Sigma batteries and none would hold their charge for more than a week, the one in the camera would last only a few days at best, and of course they're always drained when you need them most. Ricoh's on the other hand hold their charge for months, even the one in the camera remains charged, I never have to worry about that.

- Sigma raw files are proprietary and you're stuck with their software, another a$$ backwards piece of engineering, I've never come across any modern software so counter intuitive, this adds significantly to the stress and difficultly of getting a decent image from this camera. I heard from some that PS supports Sigma files now but I haven't been able to open them with CS4, do you really want to be limited like this, that you can't even view the thumbnails without Sigma's Photo Pro?

Ricoh's raw files are DNG, you're free to use all major and most minor raw processors on the market.

- Handling, or lack of! The body is a boxy and fat, not very convenient to hold. AF is worthless under most circumstances making the RF attachment useless since you have to constantly check focus with the LCD which isn't easy given its poor quality. The manual focus that people talk about is basically hyperfocal, otherwise there's no real focus here.

The controls and menus are asinine, they really get in the way of your shooting. The DP1 package reminds me of 1970s Volvos, ugly box design, slow, basically horrible to drive with absolutely no road feel but with one claim to fame, they claimed that it was safe, kinda like the DP1, horrible but with one claim to fame, a full APS size sensor!

In contrast the GRD is a thoroughbred GT, it has one of the best industrial designs that I've seen in any camera. You just pick it up and you'll fall in love with it instantly. The body is beautifully molded and controls are logically placed with easy and sensible menus. Great accessories too, all in all it will enhance your shooting skills instead of getting in the way and depriving you of the shot. And its slim enough to fit in my shirt pocket with the RF attached.

If you think that I'm exaggerating, take a look at DP1 posts online, you'll most are very heavily pp'd files of mediocre images by otherwise good photographers to make them acceptable and I don't mean basic stuff or just color enhancement, I really mean heavy. I know that I went down that path myself all because of the promised IQ from the Faveon sensor, but it turned out to be a mirage. The reality is that while GRD's IQ might not be as good as the Sigmas, it really is still pretty good and good enough for my purposes.

At the end of the day, beyond the initial techno lust, the camera is only a tool to assist you with your main purpose of creating images, I find the GRDs one such tool, the Sigma on the other hand failed its purpose for me, but that's my experience, your mileage might be different.

[Rawfa]

Man, that was some intense hatred for the DP1.

[Rawfa]

Amin, how does the DP1 and the GRD compare to the LX3?

[ddk]

Originally Posted by Rawfa

Man, that was some intense hatred for the DP1.

Its not really hatred of DP1 but great admiration for the GRDs, they have set the bar very high in small camera world and since you asked for first hand experience I thought that I should alert you to some of DP1's ills rather than saying great sensor but a little slow...

[asabet]

Originally Posted by Rawfa

Amin, how does the DP1 and the GRD compare to the LX3?

The LX3, like the GRD2, pretty much has its act together. They are both more "polished" than the DP1, in that they both have good RAW buffers (no shot to shot waiting), reasonably fast AF, good LCD screens, etc.

The LX3 lens is faster than the other two, plus it zooms. In exchange for those niceties, you get some pronounced barrel distortion. The good news is that the in-camera JPEG engine and several major RAW converters (ACR/LR, C1, Silkypix) will automatically correct the distortion, as will PTLens. The bad news is that ZCR/LR, C1, and SP don't give you the option to leave the barrel distortion uncorrected.

From use, I find dynamic range to be significantly greater on the DP1 than the LX3, and slightly greater on the LX3 than GRD2. I've yet to do the tests to see if my subjective impression is on target, but in particular I find that highlights proceed more gently to the clipping point on the DP1 and that shadow detail can be pulled out without the pattern noise that plagues the small sensor cameras.

In terms of portability, the DP1 and LX3 are pretty similar. The GRD is easier to take everywhere. Of the three, it's the only one that could be considered a shirt pocket camera IMO, and it's the most comfortable in a jeans pocket. However, the nice thing about the oft-maligned dangling cap on the DP1 and LX3 is that there is no concern for lens protection in the pocket. The self closing lens covers on the GRD and G9 can be pushed open by the fabric of one's pocket.

Those are a few things that come to mind and that I have time to write at the moment, but there is much more to say. If I had to pick on the basis of image quality, I'd say DP1 >>> LX3 > GRD2. If I wanted to have a camera with me literally all the time, I'd choose the GRD. Best feel in the hand is the GRD. Best controls, GRD.

[ddk]

Originally Posted by asabet

The LX3, like the GRD2, pretty much has its act together. They are both more "polished" than the DP1, in that they both have good RAW buffers (no shot to shot waiting), reasonably fast AF, good LCD screens, etc.

The LX3 lens is faster than the other two, plus it zooms. In exchange for those niceties, you get some pronounced barrel distortion. The good news is that the in-camera JPEG engine and several major RAW converters (ACR/LR, C1, Silkypix) will automatically correct the distortion, as will PTLens. The bad news is that ZCR/LR, C1, and SP don't give you the option to leave the barrel distortion uncorrected.

From use, I find dynamic range to be significantly greater on the DP1 than the LX3, and slightly greater on the LX3 than GRD2. I've yet to do the tests to see if my subjective impression is on target, but in particular I find that highlights proceed more gently to the clipping point on the DP1 and that shadow detail can be pulled out without the pattern noise that plagues the small sensor cameras.

In terms of portability, the DP1 and LX3 are pretty similar. The GRD is easier to take everywhere. Of the three, it's the only one that could be considered a shirt pocket camera IMO, and it's the most comfortable in a jeans pocket. However, the nice thing about the oft-maligned dangling cap on the DP1 and LX3 is that there is no concern for lens protection in the pocket. The self closing lens covers on the GRD and G9 can be pushed open by the fabric of one's pocket.

Those are a few things that come to mind and that I have time to write at the moment, but there is much more to say. If I had to pick on the basis of image quality, I'd say DP1 >>> LX3 > GRD2. If I wanted to have a camera with me literally all the time, I'd choose the GRD. Best feel in the hand is the GRD. Best controls, GRD.

hmmm, you're beginning to tempt me with the LX3 Amin, even when I'm not in the market for another small camera.

[Oxide Blu]

Originally Posted by asabet

For example, look here to see some nice filmlike results with the GRD2.

Ditto that! That is exactly what I have been doing the last couple of months; GRDII + Silver Effects Pro. Can't get enough of it, love it, and at the same time can't really seem to ever get satisfied with it, either. Where have we heard that before?

At dinner the night before I was to come back to Calif I killed my GRDII. It was not a pretty sight. Anko, the liver of angler fish, delicious, served with Japanese vinegar. Now is anko season. The distance from lens to object in the GRDII's macro mode is measured in angstroms. I got to close, tipped the bowl, angler fish liver and vinegar went right into the open lens of my camera. I'm blaming it on the continuing evils in the quest of a full shochu experience. As a man I think I am allowed to do that.

[charlesphoto]

I so wanted to like the DP1 because of it's IQ. But I just couldn't get past the handling, and it just seemed to awkwardly shaped for me. In the end I always felt I may as well just grab my M8.

Hopefully someone will come out someday (Leica, please!) the perfect fixed lens digital compact ala the legendary Contax T2/3, Leica CM, Hexar AF, and Nikon 35/28ti. Why it hasn't been done is beyond me.

[asabet]

Originally Posted by ddk

hmmm, you're beginning to tempt me with the LX3 Amin, even when I'm not in the market for another small camera.

Well, don't just take my word for it David. I think I have a tendency to see the good side of a lot of these cameras. At least, that would explain why I'm sitting next to a DP1, G10, D-LUX 4, and GRD2. At least the GRD is on loan from Ricoh .

If anyone is interested in the D-LUX, Adorama is selling them for $800 now, which comes to $650 after the current $150 rebate from Leica. Still a couple hundred more than the same camera from Panasonic, but the gap has closed by half.

[Rawfa]

Thanks for the response, Amin. The reason I ask is because I already own an LX3 and I'd like to know if there's anything that would justify the DP1 for certain circumstances.

[Rawfa]

I have to say that one of the comparison photos that make me crave for the DP1 (other than some amazing photos I've seen) was the one bellow:

JPEG : http://images.quesabesde.com/images/...ra_en_jpeg.jpg

RAW : http://images.quesabesde.com/images/...ura_en_raw.jpg

This is from a very respected photography website here in Spain, so I know that this HAS been impartially reviewed.

[Rawfa]

Also, check out these DP1 photos on flickr: http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=dp1&w=89912725%40N00

[gromitspapa]

There's this from here:

[ddk]

Originally Posted by Rawfa

Also, check out these DP1 photos on flickr: http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=dp1&w=89912725%40N00

Some great stuff here, thanks for the link.

[4season]

I've owned the DP1 for a few months and I agree that some of the controls aren't well thought-out: For example, you can view a histogram, but not "live". You can customize the zoom buttons, but cannot do EV+/- in this manner. And when manually focusing the camera, you can magnify the view, but it's a hassle to do so.

And yet, it takes great photos! I still like my Ricoh GX100 as a macro-camera and as a companion to my Leica M8, but when I can only carry one small camera, the camera I choose is often the DP1.

Sigma Photo Pro seems to add sharpening by default, but it's really not needed. Setting Sharpness to -.7 seems about right.

[nostatic]

I haven't shot the DP1, but did have a GRD2 for awhile, had a DLux3, and since replaced that with a DLux4. At first I had some purchase regrets on the DL4, but after shooting it for awhile I am incredibly impressed. In fact I may ditch my Pentax K20d because frankly the DL4 will give me a look that I prefer under some conditions. If only it had interchangable lenses.

The GRD2 is a great camera for what it is - a fixed 28. I have to admit that while I shoot primarily primes with my K20d, for some reason I find having some zoom very convenient on the DL4. Pocketability is much better with the GRD2 though, and I'm thinking that I might get one as an "always with me" cam since the prices seem to be dropping. Now what to do about a hi-rez replacement...

[Rawfa]

Amin, that was a great article you've posted at seriouscompacts.com . Congratulations.

[asabet]

Thanks Rafa!