Is the GR still the best digital point and shoot?

It never was the best point and shoot.

>>3052151
Then why does /p/ worship it so much?

>>3052156
Because /p/ is full of pentacks fanboys and contrarians. It's not a bad camera by any means though but there are better alternatives.

It's the best point and shoot I own and it still takes good photos. Maybe something with more megapixels or ISOs or whatever useless shit has come out since I bought my GR, but you should probably ask the gear thread about that.

>>3052150
It's more than just a point and shoot

>>3052150
>tfw too autistic to use anything without a viewfinder

what's the best digital point & shoot or fixed lens camera with a viewfinder?

>>gear thread

>>3052158
What better alternatives are there at that price point though?

>>3052177
stop trying to kill this board you fucking idiot

I absolutely love mine despite the dust issues. i can get it served by pentaxricoh pretty cheaply when i want it cleaned.

>>3052286

At that price point, literally nothing.

If money isn't a concern, I'd say the Leica Q puts in a good fight.

File: .jpg (106KB, 643x469px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 643x469px

>>3052378
>Leica Q
RX1R M2 is better by a mile

nah

Leica Q and Sony RX1R2 are 'the best' (whilst not necessarily being the best value for money)

>>3052378
I have the Q

It's definitely the best P&S I've ever used. I was originally going for the RX1R ii but the speed and responsiveness of the Leica swung me, even though it's quite a bit bigger and I'm usually more comfortable with 35 than 28.

I did a bit of side by side testing recently as a friend owns the Sony. I love both but glad I went for the Leica. Just wish it was as small as the RX.

I bought it because I keep not bringing a decent camera with me on adventure trips, have a decent 5D system but I'm sick or bruised ribs when I'm scrambling. The Leica fits in the big front pocket of my GoreTex shell perfectly and I've grown to love the focal length and the highlight retention/falloff rivals the 5D 4.

>>3052150
yes

File: great stuff.jpg (45KB, 624x351px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 624x351px

>>3052386
>RX1R M2

>Fixed 35mm lens
>$3000

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	96 dpi
Vertical Resolution	96 dpi

>>3052395
its too bad you can't take a passable photo with it without flying to iceland

X100F is the ideal point and shoot.

File: IMG_2203.png (30KB, 233x347px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 233x347px

>dat form factor

honest question: why would i spend more than a few hundred bucks for a fixed lens point & shoot? the price of the GR II is already pushing it

>>3052414

Point and shoot is something of a misnomer, and it's more accurate to call these cameras "compacts".

You spend more than a few hundred bucks for the surprisingly-hard-to-find combination of small size and image quality. The ricoh gr literally fits in your pocket, has an amazing quality 28mm equivalent lens and a huge aps-c sensor. There are plenty of other cameras that can fit in your pocket, but very few have a large sensor.

File: ripping_yarns.jpg (38KB, 205x312px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 205x312px

>>3052395
>adventure trips

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop 7.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2005:05:30 02:34:19
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	205
Image Height	312

File: 810_8854-top.jpg (96KB, 1200x524px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 1200x524px

>>3052150

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:

Image-Specific Properties:

>no mention of the Sony RX-100 and descendants so far

easily the best compacts out there

>>3052156
because some nip use it.

anyway, rx100v is the best compact.

>>3052422
>f8 is center
what does that tell you?

>>3052434
that f8 is where the lens performs at its best sharpness?

>>3052414
What makes it harder to justify the price for a point and shoot? The GR is a dead serious camera with all the capabilities of any APS-C camera, the trade-off is you can't change lenses and there's no viewfinder. But it's an excellent lens built to suit the camera perfectly, so you won't ever want anything else as long as you're happy with the focal length.

There's no reason why a GR or some other similar compact couldn't be your only camera ever if all you wanted was 28mm. In fact it's almost like just buying a 28mm lens to go with your existing camera kit, except it comes with a free camera attached and yet it still manages to be smaller than a lot of 28mm lenses.

>>3052434
that its the best for a photo because then the ring is centered

>>3052443
>with all the capabilities of any APS-C camera

You realise that's not a very big brag considering you could just save up for a proper camera (Full frame).

I dont know how camera companies still dare to produce APS-C cameras at this point.

Its like a company promoting mud huts when they also sell modern houses.

"Buy mud huts! They keep you warm just like full sized houses! I mean, they don't have heating or water supply, or electric lighting, or windows, but they still perform almost as well as a real house! They still keep the rain out relatively well, I mean not completely, but fairly well..."

>>3052422
doesnt fit in your pocket

lens cap makes it fuckhuge

>>3052454
because in 99 percent of situations you cant tell the difference between a modern apsc sensor and a modern full frame sensor

>>3052457
Stop and ask yourself why you would bother responding seriously to that post.

>>3052454
What kind of car do you drive? I bet it's not a Ferrari.

>>3052461
The price of a ferrari is a little different to the price of a second hand full frame camera, friendo.

>>3052454
>Its like a company promoting mud huts when they also sell modern houses.
This is the worst analogy I've ever seen.
The actual comparison is a company that sells both modest 3 bedroom houses and 7 bed mcmansions.
>it performs literally every function of the larger house, except that it's smaller and substantially cheaper
>cheaper to buy, cheaper to furnish, more energy efficient
>people with no house, or even people who have a big house but who had not been informed of the total size of your house beforehand, would find no fault with the quality of accomodation rendered by this house
>but by all means, if you're sure you need 7 rooms every day, or even on a lot of days, get the big house

>>3052456
this is totally pocketable unless you're on of those skin tight pant wearing folk

any relaxed fit pair of jeans or pants will work, half the time the not in use it would be in a small pouch on my side anyways

>>3052475
I forgot to mention warmth of accommodation. Most of the time, when you want every part of the house to be accessible, the smaller house provides greater WoA.
For examble, if you're focused on a task in the kitchen and you need to see what's going on in the loungeroom and the first bedroom at the same time, the smaller house will make that easier to acheive.
If you're new to houses, however, and not yet capable of basic "living in a house" skills like making a space an expression of your own style, cooperating with others in close proximity to you, or keeping a home clean and tidy; and you have a lot of money to throw around, the McMansion enables you to ignore developing a lot of these skills and just extoll the virtues of living with as little WoA as possible. Intimacy amd sharing and ease of communication aren't the reasons people chose to live in houses in the first place anyway. You want that sense of isolation.
Big empty rooms are everywhere, and you can simply switch rooms for different simple tasks, rather than making any of them truly function effectively.
I mean, why bother keeping a 200SQF room really neat and tidy when you've got 12800SQF to play with? Sure, the 1600SQF dining hall can get a little noisy, but you can use it whenever you want. Can you imagine being one of those plebs who has to actually go outside, or set up extra furniture when they run out of dining space?!
WoA is a meme for cucks, I shouldn't have even brought it up. I mean, you can always just shut doors in your big house if you want more "WoA", right? I mean who even cares that it takes 1 minute to walk 22m down a flight of stairs to get from my wardrobe to the laundry, compared to 11m and 1/4 minute in the smaller house? How often do you have to wash clothes anyway?

>>3052475
This is what people who cant afford full frame believe

You're trying to say that you would turn down a mansion, and lets face it, you wouldnt.

Full frame cameras produce notably higher resolution, sharper images, and less visible noise. You get smoother colour transitions, and you can put shitty crop lenses on them and still get better image quality than a crop camera could. PLUS your ultrawide lenses actually ARE ultrawide - not just kinda wide like on crop.

If you want to take print worthy photographs buy a real fucking camera. Stop playing with these crop toys, you might as well be using a phone camera.

>>3052510
full frame is cheaper than flagship aps-c
its also shittier if its more than two generations behind (which it is if you're using it, anon)

File: DSC_0055.jpg (246KB, 900x1200px) Image search: [Google]

246KB, 900x1200px

>>3052510
Please just stop

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Sony
Camera Model	D6503
Camera Software	17.1.2.A.0.314_9_f300
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2016:04:26 15:39:51
Exposure Time	1/100 sec
F-Number	f/2.0
ISO Speed Rating	80
Exposure Bias	1.3 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	4.90 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	900
Image Height	1200
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Subject Distance Range	Unknown

>>3052462
Thats subjective.

>>3052522
it really isn't

>>3052434
fuji believes in f8 and be there

>>3052510
Only thing I can confirm is that ultra wide on full frame is exactly that... ultra fucking wide.

Just got my 16-35 Zeiss and I was absolutely blown away with just how fucking wide it really is. On my a6000 I used to use a samyang 12mm but that never had the punch that this does.

>>3052459
i

i dont know anymore

[spoiler]i used to have filters for these threads, but i cleared my browser history and they're all gone. Where do people go for a neverending famous inspo thread? those are the only ones i like.[/spoiler]

>>3052168
that's not autism lol. The lack of a viewfinder is a huge deal. I imagine Ricoh might throw one in there for the next iteration though.

>>3052386
the rx1rm2 is a pretty fucking sexy camera - on paper anyways. I don't know how she handles.

There are most definitely other compacts out there that have better high ISO capabilities, framerates, etc, but none of them have the features, image quality and usability at such a price point and form factor. I spent 5 years waiting for the perfect compact, but when I realized that there isn't such a thing, I just went ahead and bought the GR, as it met most of my criteria of what I was looking for in a compact.

Well at least for me it is. Still shoot it everyday, as other cameras come and go. Is it for everyone? Probably not. I shoot mostly street and it's perfect for that.

We'll see if my mind will change when Fuji does their X70S/X80 and Ricoh their GRIII. I'll still probably use my GR until it falls apart though.

>>3052156
I feel like I've seen a lot of decent shots come out of that camera, and by that I mean there's fairly competent photographers who own it. Obviously this doesn't imply that the camera is responsible for the work, but seeing good images come from one camera could be inspiring to someone and make them want to buy that particular model.

Of course, it could also be because Ricoh/Pentax is the underdog and /p/ loves them for that.

>>3052456
you must be talking about x100

>>3052756
And the RX1R II

>>3052583

There is no escape from gearfaggotry. Where else would the autism go?

>>3052510
meighty8, I have a fool frame digi.
And I have literally dozens of 35mm film cameras, and 2 6x6, and 2 6x7, and 4 6x9's.
And there is nothing about the full frame digi that makes it special for me, other than that it's the only digital camera I own. And the 14/2.8 I have doesn't take nearly as nice pictures as the Canon 10-22mm did on my old Rabal, even if it is fractionally wider.
It did, however, cost more, weighs more, and can't take filters.
>wew
I can take "print-worthy" photos with an Instamatic, let alone a phone camera, let alone an APS-C sensor interchangeable lense camera.
Pls read >>3052506 , it was intended to further mock people just like yourself.

>>3052391
They aren't all that compact tho
I mean technically maybe, but they won't slip in your pants pocket very easily

File: 1441868555518.jpg (58KB, 450x443px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 450x443px

>>3052386

>>3052168
X100 can be found for about threefiddy these days

File: .jpg (43KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 1000x667px

>>3052378
>>3052395
>>3052849
>his camera can't even stand up straight
kek

>>3052845

What is this faggotry?

This whole thread is faggotry. The whole first page is faggotry thanks to Anons.

MFW tripfags keep this place relevant...

>>3052870
>tripfags keep this place relevant
>...
reddit pls go

>>3052871

Keep posting pics of your ginger face, cringelord.

>>3052454
You are a very stupid person, aren't you? Very, very stupid. I mean really very stupid.

>>3052859
>slow as mollusk AF
>inb4 manual focus
>720pee shit video
>inb4 it's a stills camera

File: 1483658938495.jpg (12KB, 439x222px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 439x222px

>>3052870
>current year
>/p/
>relevant

>>3052845
You mean please do go on /p/?
The right is much better: no blown highlights, a more interesting composition showing more of the surroundings, no more wide angle distorting everything, etc.

Thinking about grabbing an RX100 III to supplement my medium format whilst traveling. Thoughts? How's the high iso performance in particular, since that will be when I'm unable to use medium format?

>>3052533

>2012
>Me a wee lad with loads of money from me nan dying.
>Buy Leica M9
>Buy Voigtlander 12mm because why not?
>SO FUCKING WIDE
>COULDN't HANDLE HOW WIDE AND RECTILINEAR IT WAS
>CRIED MYSELF TO SLEEP AT NIGHT
>SO WIDE

File: uwa_fov.jpg (997KB, 1450x967px) Image search: [Google]

997KB, 1450x967px

>>3054120

They make a 10mm now.

It is nuts.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7M2
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6.6 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.6
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	10 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	240 dpi
Vertical Resolution	240 dpi
Image Created	2016-06-28T09:23:54-04:00
Exposure Time	1/3 sec
F-Number	f/8.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/8.0
Brightness	2.9 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	10.00 mm
Image Width	1450
Image Height	967
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>3054124
Show me a good street photograph taken with a lens wider than 21mm.

>>3052150
>Is the GR still the best digital point and shoot?

Yes.

But...

(Don't mention dust)

>>3054081
That's the joke man. just look at the facial expression change.

>>3052425
too expensive for most

File: no.jpg (70KB, 1420x946px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 1420x946px

>>3052425
>buying anything with a smaller sensor size than micro four thirds

Enjoy your mushy photos.

I like the GR but the lack of image stabilization on a device that spends 95% of its life away from a tripod is an instant deal breaker.

My hands are that of a crack addict and I want as much of a chance to capture the picture I want on the first try. IS is necessary.

>>3054532
Just turn up the damn ISO or something, do you know how exposure works?

>>3054533
I want every tool at my disposal. High ISO is nice. So is IS. Don't act like one entirely negates or excuses the other especially when cellphones have IS. If a phone can support high ISOs and IS then a dedicated camera should have both as well. No excuse.

>>3054535
The GR is made for things that move around, you know.

>>3052942
The lens IQ, sensor characteristics (but not raw resolution) and experience is competitive, no dust in the sensor, faster aperture, better focal length, You can find them for 300 which is a great price. If I didn't already have the only better fixed lens compact I'd get an original X100. Want something like my old X-pro 1 but without X-shite

>>3054535
The GR is a relatively old camera. Obviously its high-ISO capabilities won't be up to par with newer cameras.

>>3056422
High ISO noise stopped being a major limitation for large sensors like 10 years ago. Since then ISOs have just gotten more and more ridiculous, it's the new megapixel war. The GR is not an old camera, it does perfectly fine up to like 6400 and it maxes out at 25600. People shooting film would have shit themselves to be able to get any grainy image at all past like 1600. There are no good photos taken at ISO 1 million, it's a useless feature to add to a camera's spec sheet to make people want to throw away their perfectly good cameras to get a new one. Show me one damn good photo taken with a brand new cutting edge camera that would have been technically impossible 10 years ago.

>>3054535
Larger sensors are harder to do mechanical IS for. Wide-angle lenses are harder to do meaningful IS for, given the depth of field. I'm guessing that at the time the GR was specced out, IS would've been more expensive than a sensor where non-awful quality goes a stop and a third of ISO higher (or some such).

I mean, I'd love to have in-body IS on my xpro2. I'd love it to fucking bits. But, such is the high-ISO life; higher shutter speed is nearly always preferable to stabilization (macro being the exception because of DoF).

>>3054124
>f/8
>vignettes as fuck

>>3056427

While pro photographers have always made due with the technology available to them, current camera tech makes their jobs easier.

File: DSC01661.jpg (1MB, 2048x1365px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2048x1365px

>>3054515
They're ok in good light

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	DSC-RX100M2
Camera Software	Capture One 9 Macintosh
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.8
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	28 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
Exposure Program	Normal Program
ISO Speed Rating	160
Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Brightness	7.2 EV
Exposure Bias	0.3 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	10.40 mm
Image Width	2048
Image Height	1365
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Soft
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>3052597
Like all Sony cameras: poorly.

>>3052597

Supposed to be an all around awesome camera from what I hear.

The price is a fucking joke, though.

>>3052422
Bought this over the GR. Haven't had a GR so can't say which is better but the X70 is fantastic.

>>3052456 it fits in my enough of my pockets

Is there a big difference between the GR and the GR 2? Looking to pick one up for digital shooting.

>>3060293
No not really. GR 2 has wifi. And is very slightly faster at autofocus (neither model is great at it).

It was a pretty lame upgrade honestly.

The only reason I'd upgrade from a GR is if they put out a model with sensor stabilization, but that will likely never happen.

>>3060312
I'm finding the different models of gr to be a bit confusing. Which should I aim for just the basics? The used prices are all over the place so I don't know where to start.

File: evolution1.png (150KB, 660x283px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 660x283px

>>3060314
This shows all GR's except for the latest two APSC sensor cameras (GR and GR ii).

Notable releases:
>Ricoh GRD I (released 2005)
No other GRD/GR processes black and white photos like this camera, which is why is a cult classic.

>Ricoh GRD IV (the best of the pre-apsc GR)

>Ricoh GR (APS-C sensor)
1st APS-C GR. Fucking awesome but loves to suck in DUST.

The last release (GR ii) has small upgrades (WiFi, some extra scene modes) and isn't worth the upgrade over the GR unless your sensor was dusty as shit or your really needed WiFi.

>>3060385
>No other GRD/GR processes black and white photos like this camera
post examples

>>3060650
http://www.ricohforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=3245

The camera on my phone sucks but I want to get a nice camera other than film, would a first gen Ricoh be a good choice? I love how the b&w looks but how is color photography and low light? There's a first gen for 110 dollars on Craigslist in mint condition, is it worth picking up or should I talked the seller down? Thanks.

>>3061246
color is good, low light is pretty trash, and autofocus is also similarly pretty trash.

>>3062517
Thanks! I'd be down to buy a newer GR digital maybe a gen 2 or 3 but I don't really wanna spend more than 350 dollars. Am I better off getting a a Sony rx 100 gen 2 or 3?

>>3062520
image quality isnt as good but it has a little more utility, not as portable though

>>3052414
Honestly, you shouldn't. If you want a point and shoot you can find older 10mp GR ii's on ebay for less than 200. Megapixels aren't everything, and GR cameras are solid little cameras with decent sensors that you can get on the cheap and throw in your pocket. There might be better alternatives, but if you're agonizing about which point and shoot to buy you've already fucked up.

>>3052168
does the RX1 have an evf? if you prefer optical, whatever the latest variant of the x100 will do

When is the new GR3 coming out? Should i wait?

>>3061213
I'm very underwhelmed.

>>3065711
ricoh is bankrupt

>>3065711
What would they add though? I can only imagine a newer sensor and maybe tilting screen, unless they went all out and added one of those pop up EVFs that Sony uses.

>>3052583
>Where do people go for a neverending famous inspo thread? those are the only ones i like.
You mean ones that are literally against board rules?

I suspect that you might want to go somewhere where posting other people's pictures aren't against board rules.

>>3052168
Get an X100S for 400-500. Better than the GR in every way desu. Much better lens, 35mm is a more versatile focal length because it doesn't make people look like monsters when you get pretty close up, the af especially on single point is reasonably good on the S, the F is so far beyond the S but at least the S isn't awful like the original's AF

>>3065860

GR has a better lens, and is a lot more pocketable. It's down to what you value.

>>3065860
>Much better lens
This is so wrong it hurts.
>35mm is a more versatile focal length because it doesn't make people look like monsters when you get pretty close up,
Subjective opinion.jpg. 35 mm also mostly sucks for landscapes. so pick what's important to you, it's a pretty easy concept.
>better autofocus on the X100F than the Ricoh GR
finally something factual.

Anyway, I much prefer the GR for being smaller and lighter, and more importantly I rely like the controls on the GR. It's a pleasure to use, except for the subpar autofocus, but I don't shoot anything fast moving anyway. I use it for landscapes, and general tourist camera that is small enough to fit in a pocket. I've gotten some pretty amazing photos with it, and the lens sharpness all the way to the edges, and lack of chromab, even wide open at 2.8 is truly awesome

>>3065750
All the Ricoh GR needs is better autofocus, and I'd really love IBIS. But that second point will never happen.

Partly because it would make the camera a little bigger, but mostly because:
>>3065729
>ricoh is bankrupt

>>3065885
>But that second point will never happen.
Because it's dumb and you're dumb for wanting it.

The GR + weather sealing is all I want. Rest can stay as is.
AF doesn't matter to me. Full press snap focus makes it almost obsolete for most of what I tend to use the camera for.

>>3065883
>35 mm also mostly sucks for landscapes.
No you just suck at landscapes. 28 vs 35 is negligible

>>3065885
Ibis on a fixed lens camera...
Gearfaggot