What's new
GR User Forum

The spot for all Ricoh GR camera users

Register for free, meet other Ricoh GR users, share your images, help others, have fun!

Tell your friends about us!

CX1 OR GX

G

grispie

New Member
Hi everyone,

I just registered.
I am an owner of a dlsr (among other stuff)
Now I am looking to buy a ricoh for the reasons why everbody seems to have them.

But it is quite difficult to make a choice between the models. I saw in some other posts there are more people like me with this problem.
I didn't see the question I have though. I can get my hands on a gx100 for the same price as a CX1. I know the differences between the models, and yes, i'd prefer to have raw, i'd prefer the 24mm (although 28 is not bad either) but I come from a dlsr. And I like dynamic range. the cx dr mode seems to deliver. and for that reason only, I'd might prefer the cx, plus that i do like the in camera options it offers. In the end, a compact is not for skyhigh quality but more about fun factor of making photograps.

Don't know, maybe someone has some hands on experience on the DR of the gx or the cx, or both. Or maybe you have other advice for me.
I'd appreciate it! I need to decide soon, the gx won't wait forever...
cheers
christophe
 
CX1 definitely is a very fun point&shoot camera. In some aspects I think it's more fun than my GRD3, e.g. zoom reach, very easy menu navigation and picture inspection with the adj. joystick, smaller size. But for "making pictures" I enjoy the manual controls of GRD3 more.

I haven't used DR mode very much, but I know with CX1 it's often possible to use hand-held even with slowly moving targets. It all depends on shutter speed of course, but there is almost no delay between the two exposures with CX1. With GRD3 on the other hand there is always a delay between the exposures even if the shutter speed is short. I just made some test shots, and i see now I have to try out DR mode some more. I've never got the hang of when to use it, and what strength setting to use, but I just found out DR mode is a very good way to rescue the pattern on the screen of a lamp in a darkish room, with the rest of the picture being mostly the same. :)

I have never used a GX100, so I can't make any comparisons with that.
 
I own a GRD2 and a CX1. I love them both. The CX1 its very easy to use with full of features... but, it only shot in jpeg. I miss that very much. GRD2 it´s for serious shotting. RAW should very the starting point for every camera, like film in the old days. Good luck with the decision.
 
My wife is quite content with her CX1, but she does not use advanced features, such as multiple images for macros. She does use the DR feature, and we set ISO 400 and 800 on the MY1/2 settings, which is quite convenient for her.
All in all, she likes the CX1 and does not look for a CX2 or CX3...
Best regards,
Gerd
 
thks for the comments sofar. I've been looking around on the forum for pictures. I must say the decision maker seems to be the 24mm. I find it liberating.
Found some awesome shots on this site.

I think I should go for with my feeling. Or I will end up buying nothing ;)
The price is too good & if i don't like it after all, i can resell.
chr
 
Christophe,

I asked a similar question here, as I approached the question from cameras worth very similar money. Have a look at this thread viewtopic.php?f=47&t=3759

I do tend to agree that the 24mm makes the GX hard to pass up on.
 
All I can say is that I like my GX100. :)

I've considered the CXs for more telephoto shots, but I'm not convinced that the shots I'd get would be of sufficient quality. The idea of a 200/300mm lens in such a small package may seem great on paper, but I'm not sure of the reality. I realize that all camera design is driven by competitive pressures, but it seems to me that the CX series, being the most mainstream Ricoh camera, would be the most driven, and most compromised as a result.

I've caught the camera bug and I'm trying to decide what will be my next Ricoh. I'm thinking either a GRD I (for it's character) or maybe the GXR (the A12 for it's IQ). I haven't decided. I'm wary of buying another small sensor camera, because I don't want it to overlap with my GX100. On the other hand, there is a much higher risk and investment involved in buying a GXR/A12.

At the end of the day, I'll probably go with what I think is the most appealing toy. That's what photography is about for me.
 
I recently wnt through the same decision making process and eventually bought a CX1, mainly due to it's small size and great handling in comparison with my previous P&S (a Pentax P70), but after two faulty units and oversharpened and smeared images at anything past the base ISO, I returned to my dealer, who was happy to refund me, and I decided to look for another model. I did have a Panasonic LX1 at one time, but I don't like the handling, controls or menu system on Panasonics.

Anyway, after trying several different JPEG only P&S units, I quickly came to the conclusion that Raw in a small sensor camera is even more important than with a DSLR and I (fairly quickly!) decided to buy a GX200. What a difference! It's chalk and cheese as far as I'm concerned, the lens is superb and the focal range covers all that I would ever need in a pocket unit, and in Raw I easily achieve excellent quality within the Auto ISO range (up to ISO 154) and very acceptable results up to ISO 400, which is as far as I would ever go with any compact unit.

So my short answer is, don't bother with the CX get a GX! :D
 
They are different.

The GX100/200 have slightly larger sensors (1/1.8 compared to 1/2.5)

GX100/200 has a wider lens, but shorter zoom (24-72mm compared to 28-200 (or 300mm)

GX100/200 has manual controls, RAW, is built solid and feels better, but is larger. Also lets you add on a flash and electronic viewfinder.

The CX/R series is a PnS camera, the GX100/200 are definitely more pro and allows you to configure more things.

I'd go for the GX100/200 myself. Its just better, but thats not saying the cx/r series are bad, the are all built solid. I just don't need massive zooms, I'd rather prefer more wider angles.
 
If you won't miss a long zoom I would advise that you try out the GX. I still manage to squeeze some very acceptable images out of my now slightly dated GX100... :)
 
Well, I am happy to see the responses I got.
Probably I will dissapoint all of you now ;)

I purchased a samsung wb1000
reason: range is 24 to 120. It's fully manual, you can adjust white balance and other, different ratio's (incl square), a "user" setting, very compact, solid and a very good screen. Performs very well in low light also.
It has no raw though. Although I am used to raw, for a compact, I feel it does not really matter. I am not planning to do pp on pictures from it. No compact can compete to dslr quality. It is not intended for it either. just received it & sofar I am very happy.

As far as I can see, it beats the cx for the price. On the GX, don't know. But to be honest, with the ricoh's, I feel like I want to wait & see what modules they bring out for the gxr. If only they'd come up with a small but decent wide angle with large sensor :D
I will keep an eye on it...
tnx for all replies
chr
 
grispie":1hbkxsnj said:
Well, I am happy to see the responses I got.
Probably I will dissapoint all of you now ;)

I purchased a samsung wb1000
Click to expand...

not disappointed at all, hope it works out well for you. Remember there is an open forum where you can post images from other cameras here. I'm sure we'd all like to see some from the WB1000. I checked it out on Samsungs site, the little meters on the top deck look cool!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top