DPReview = Ricoh GXR/A12 50mm Review, March 2010

[deejjjaaaa]

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/ricohgxra12/

did somebody post that already here ?

 

[thelps]

I have not seen it, thanks for the link.

 

[odklizec]

Fair review I would say? They perfectly nailed the known GXR and A12 problems and confirmed the superior image quality, ergonomics and nearly distortion free lens construction. I somehow don't understand the new dpreview scores? After all nice words about A12 image quality it got only 9.5 marks (from 14) in RAW and slightly over 8 in JPEG? GF1 got similar marking in RAW and slightly over 7 in JPEG? I don't know, but I see clear advantage of A12 in RAW over the GF1?

 

[thelps]

To my eye the A12 is the winner in all ISOs over 800. The A12 is better than the Leica X1 -- http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/ricohgxra12/page29.asp
It edges it out in detail to 3200 for me!

 

[socket]

I know they did more complete, comprehensive testing, but the first half of the review sounded very much like a cut and paste from their preview. It didn't help that they said they would be reviewing just the A12 and then went on to use the S10 in their size comparisons (with pictures!).

I was also left wondering if they based their review on a production or the pre-production model, which they had been very harsh with in the preview. Overall, I thought it was very balanced and comprehensive. I'm not sure about the relative scores at the end - the "value" score is extremely low, yet the image quality is the best so far in a mirrorless camera? It's not that expensive! :?

Edit: I found this in the review: "Review based on a production Ricoh GXR body with firmware v1.05 and A12 50mm lens unit with firmware v1.05"

 

[barjohn]

They did a comprehensive review but...I don't understand using a RAW converter that clearly was not working with GXR files to do lens measurements and comparisons. Why not use a RAW converter that produced good sharp results? It is sort of like saying we had this old broken ruler in our drawer, not sure how much is broken off as we can't read the markings but when we measured the GXR with it, it came up a bit short.

I find it interesting that here is a camera that bests the X1 in every measurable parameter, lens performance, dynamic range, high ISO performance, JPG performance, resolution, speed to AF, better MF, better build quality (solid magnesium vs magnesium and aluminum + plastic), faster review, faster zoom review, faster write, faster shutter response, no lose dials, has EVF capability and better LCD and yet all the praise goes to the X1.

 

[thelps]

I find it interesting that here is a camera that bests the X1 in every measurable parameter, lens performance, dynamic range, high ISO performance, JPG performance, resolution, speed to AF, better MF, better build quality (solid magnesium vs magnesium and aluminum + plastic), faster review, faster zoom review, faster write, faster shutter response, no lose dials, has EVF capability and better LCD and yet all the praise goes to the X1.

I could just possibly be convinced that the X1 has a better lens than the A12, it does appear very sharp, but that is hard to judge with so many other imaging parameters involved but otherwise I agree with you on all the other aspects. I'm sure the X1 is a fine camera, it takes very nice images - the issue I have is the cost, the GXR/A12s (popflash) are close to half the cost of an X1 (popflash).