I might also add that the lens of the GR Digital is a little bit hard to clean since the front element lies a little bit recessed and is quite small. Ok, the front element of the GXR A12 module does not seem to be significantly bigger, but there is less to block access to it.
And I have not found the general image quality a big problem even at ISO 400 with the GR Digital. Yes, it does not produce images as clean as an APS-C sensor, but then again, I am doing a lot of B/W photography so that chroma noise is rather negligible. Luminance noise is quite ok I think. I could print images out as big as A4 without noticing noise destroying the print. ISO 800 is also quite usable in a pinch (for me), but then again, with an f/1.9 lens, there are few situations in which you will have to resort to high ISOs (ok, well depends on what you do).
Dynamic range which review sites seem to put a lot of emphasis on did not bother me so far. Before I bought the camera, I was rather obsessed with high dynamic range, but eventually, I stopped caring that much about it. If you shoot raw, even a completely blown sky can turn out rather nice after some recovery adjustments. I wonder how much better the APS-C sensors are if such a small sensor already delivers that much.
If you occasionally use Macro mode, the GRD seems to be the better choice. I could not find any information about the A12 28mm sporting macro.
However, long exposures are better with the bigger sensor. When I want to make a 3 minute exposure with the GRD for example, it automatically takes a dark frame after the exposure to make a dark frame subtraction (which really is necessary with this sensor). The GXR however does not seem to do that automatically with the A12 modules (and may also not need to do so), but I may be mistaken.
I guess it all boils down to better lens vs. better sensor here.
And I have not found the general image quality a big problem even at ISO 400 with the GR Digital. Yes, it does not produce images as clean as an APS-C sensor, but then again, I am doing a lot of B/W photography so that chroma noise is rather negligible. Luminance noise is quite ok I think. I could print images out as big as A4 without noticing noise destroying the print. ISO 800 is also quite usable in a pinch (for me), but then again, with an f/1.9 lens, there are few situations in which you will have to resort to high ISOs (ok, well depends on what you do).
Dynamic range which review sites seem to put a lot of emphasis on did not bother me so far. Before I bought the camera, I was rather obsessed with high dynamic range, but eventually, I stopped caring that much about it. If you shoot raw, even a completely blown sky can turn out rather nice after some recovery adjustments. I wonder how much better the APS-C sensors are if such a small sensor already delivers that much.
If you occasionally use Macro mode, the GRD seems to be the better choice. I could not find any information about the A12 28mm sporting macro.
However, long exposures are better with the bigger sensor. When I want to make a 3 minute exposure with the GRD for example, it automatically takes a dark frame after the exposure to make a dark frame subtraction (which really is necessary with this sensor). The GXR however does not seem to do that automatically with the A12 modules (and may also not need to do so), but I may be mistaken.
I guess it all boils down to better lens vs. better sensor here.
but I think you'll be very happy with the A12 28. The A12 50 is no dog, either. It's incredible! Ken