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!

Ricoh GXR or Leica X1

C

CHICHORNIO

New Member
Hi kanzlr,
Just wondering... I was also thinking about a Leica camera, most precisely the X1 (I can´t afford the M8, and I want a fixed normal lens camera with a bigger sensor for my photo needs). What do you think about it? Have you seen one? Have you tried it? Thanks
Guillermo, from Argentina
Very proud owner of GRD2 and CX1, but not sure about going into the GXR line...
 
Re: Ricoh GXR + A12 50mm

Well, DM, I did my homework. Let me explain what I need for my photo proyect... (and I will be pleased to have your detailed analysisas you always do).
1- A digital pocketeable camera with a fixed lens about 50mm film-type (may be in the range of 40-60mm)
2- I´m a Pro Printmaker, so ppi and so on are very important for me if you can have a 70x90cm high quality fine art print done in Hahnemuhle Photo Rag paper without pixel interpolation. I don´t even use Photoshop... I don´t need it.
3- None of the Ricoh´s cameras offer what I need, not even the GXR line. I need a medium pocket-size camera with a "real" IQ quality to make fine art prints with little work in NR.
4- Will the Leica X1 be that camera? Check this thread about "real" X1 users (http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-for ... ca-x1.html)
5- I don´t rely in dpreview threads or reviews. They are industry oriented, not user oriented. I don´t care about comparisions and so on. I just want a seriuos "real" photographer opinion.
Soon I´m getting a very important grant in my country to execute my own personal proyect, and the right Digi-camera it´s the key in this proyect, no matter if it cost 500 or 2.000 u$s dolars.
Thanks again.
Guillermo, from Argentina
 
Re: Ricoh GXR + A12 50mm

Guillermo,

I was looking at the specifications of the Panasonic DMC-GF1, and realized an error exists in my post relating reviews/test/opinions of the Leica X1. So I corrected and updated that post. For your convenience, that update (from my updated post) appears directly below:

(2) It has a large image sensor (23.6 x 15.8 mm) that is only about 22% larger (in pixel-size) than the DMC-LX3 - yet, for all that extra active sensor size, appears to have virtually the same "chroma-noise" as the Panasonic GF1 (with a smaller 17.3 x 13.0 mm image-sensor size, about 52% higher pixel-density, and a measured 20% higher actual measured ISO sensitivity in-camera):
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/LeicaX1/page17.asp
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/revie ... ield.shtml

Correction (May, 15, 2010):
Actually, from the following images within DP Review web-page linked below, the Leica X1 (compared to the Panasonic DMC-GF1) is:
> Better where it comes to "chroma" noise test results:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/LeicaX1 ... chroma.png
> Better where it comes to "grey" noise test results:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/LeicaX1 ... g-grey.png
> Worse (below around ISO =1100) where it comes to "black" noise test results:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/LeicaX1 ... -black.png
From:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/LeicaX1/page12.asp

CHICHORNIO":1yozhb0y said:
Well, DM, I did my homework. Let me explain what I need for my photo project... (and I will be pleased to have your detailed analysis you always do).
Click to expand...
Well, all of my cameras have been humble "point and shoots" (DMC-LZ5, DMC-TZ4) and (sometimes called) "pro-sumer"/"bridge" cameras (DMC-FZ30, DMC-FZ50, and DMC-LX3). I've been taking and post-processing pictures (entirely on a non-professional basis) for a mere four years time. The results I get are more the result of patience, tenacity and dedication than due to expensive hardware/software. I have not done more than read about Micro 4:3, dSLRs, etc. So, I don't feel at all qualified to comment as a "serious 'real' photographer" ... But I would say that the various information that I collected and quoted and linked-to in my Leica X1 related post certainly appear to (in total) characterize it as a low-noise, but very limited and problematic camera to actually use in practice. From what I have read about it's overall functionality (or lack thereof), I don't think that I (personally) would purchase a Leica LX1 at any price ... :p

... I need a medium pocket-size camera with a "real" IQ quality to make fine art prints with little work in NR.
... Will the Leica X1 be that camera? Check this thread about "real" X1 users (http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-for ... ca-x1.html)
Click to expand...
I read most of the pages of the thread. The thread looks like an unmitigated "fan-boy" festival, full of short emotive snorts. I looked at the linked "actual LX1" photos (that did not require registering as a member of the Leica Forum in order to view them), and while it does appear that the Sony image-sensor does have a very good dynamic-range, only a few of the images that I viewed looked interesting, many appeared mediocre and limited (perhaps as much by the camera-persons as the camera itself). Anybody can join the Leica Forum and say positive things - but I find myself not putting a lot weight in the words of folks who do not produce "real" images that truly impress me personally. (For me) such "home-team" forums are the least reliable sources of all.

... I don´t rely in dpreview threads or reviews. They are industry oriented, not user oriented. I don´t care about comparisons and so on. I just want a serious "real" photographer opinion.
Soon I´m getting a very important grant in my country to execute my own personal project, and the right Digi-camera it´s the key in this project, no matter if it cost 500 or 2,000 US dollars.
Click to expand...

Sounds like the best serious "real photographer" for you to rely upon is you!
Perhaps borrowing/renting a Leica X1 and seeing what you really get from it is the only way to know for yourself!

There are 15 Leica X1 "raw" image-files at this Photography Blog web-page that you could download:
http://www.photographyblog.com/previews ... x1_photos/
Some of them look like they might help to give you a good idea of what you can expect from the Leica X1.

There are 9 Panasonic DMC-GF1 "raw" images-files at this Photography Blog web-page that you could download:
http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/ ... le_images/

The DMC-GF1 features user-implementable "pixel-mapping". It is likely (but not certain from my research) that
the results of the pixel-mapping are used to (also) correct the "raw" image-files (similar to certain Pentax
camera models, as well as the Adobe 2008 DNG file-format standards for DNG-recording camera nodels).

The Panasonic Lumix DMC-GF1 12.1MP Micro Four-Thirds Interchangeable Lens Digital Camera is $749 USD at:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/6 ... html#48342
but this is with the 14-45mm f/3.5-5.6 Lens (which has lens-based optical image stabilization, but is fairly large and bit heavy).

Adorama (through Amazon.com) has the DMC-GF1 NEW with the 20mm "pancake" lens for $865 USD at:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002MU ... C6HOH9AVE6

The LUMIX G 20mm f/1.7 Aspherical Lens is $399 USD at:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Nt ... Search=yes
and may well fill your expressed desire for a small, light, pocket-able item.
However the 20mm "pancake" lens does not have any optical image stabilization
(on the other hand either does the Leica X1, according to):
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/revie ... ield.shtml

From the looks of the side-by-side JPG comparisons at the Luminous Landscape link (above), it looks like the Leica X1 and DMC-GF1 both look pretty good up to ISO=800, whereas the Leica X1 is clearly better than the DMC-GF1 at ISO=1600 and above.

For photographing artwork, ISO=800, the maximum aperture of F=1.7 of the Panasonic "G-series" 20mm "pancake lens", and a Shutter-Time of 1/100 Second take you down to an Exposure Value (ref. ISO 100) of 5.18. That's a rather low level of (even indoor) lighting (which is good). Without image stabilization you might (unfortunately) want a Shutter Speed of => 100 for hand-held.

If the "artwork" that you refer to is not (just) 2-dimensional, bear in mind that Depth of Field is significantly lower with these larger image-sensors.
Setting the F-Number at 2.8 (X1) or 1.7 (GF1 with pancake lens) and shooting at close ranges is certainly is not going to help the Depth of Field situation ...

The little that I have read about the Olympus E-PL1 looks (to me) to be somewhat troubling:
viewtopic.php?f=36&t=4267&p=18979&hilit=+Olympus+PEN#p18973
Marana had a "hands-on" look at one, her impressions are at:
viewtopic.php?f=36&t=4267&p=18979&hilit=+Olympus+PEN#p18976

(For close-range work, and where more than 1.5x Zoom is not necessary) the Panasonic DMC-LX3 ($399 USD)
combined with DxO Optics Pro 6.2 Standard Edition (offered at a mere $99 until June 15, 2010) is small, light,
pocket-able, has a F=2.0 lens-system, and has highly effective Optical Image Stabilization on-board. It can do
a good job shooting up to and including ISO=400, requiring only very small amounts of DxO Noise Reduction.
The Depth of Field with the 1/1.63 Inch image sensor is excellent (about the same as the Ricoh GRD II and GRD III).
DxO's unique "Lens Softness" corrections with their "raw"-mode Optical Correction Module are outstanding! ... :p

(Though a larger, heavier, and more expensive camera option), DxO OP 6.2 Standard Edition also supports the DMC-GH1.

As I indicated, I have just read things here and there about all of these cameras (other than the DMC-LX3) - and I do not have an "objective" overview about all of the possible options that you might find available in your search for this particular type of camera model. But perhaps some of this information may be helpful to you, nevertheless ...

Your reported favorite "raw" processor (Silkypix Pro) appears to support the Leica X1 as well as the DMC-GF1. See:
http://silkypix.shortcutinc.com/silkypixpro/cameras.php
So, do let us know what you think after you have taken your hand to some investigatory "raw" processing and development! ... :p
 
Re: Ricoh GXR + A12 50mm

CHICHORNIO":v4bddgjy said:
Well, DM, I did my homework. Let me explain what I need for my photo proyect... (and I will be pleased to have your detailed analysisas you always do).
1- A digital pocketeable camera with a fixed lens about 50mm film-type (may be in the range of 40-60mm)
2- I´m a Pro Printmaker, so ppi and so on are very important for me if you can have a 70x90cm high quality fine art print done in Hahnemuhle Photo Rag paper without pixel interpolation. I don´t even use Photoshop... I don´t need it.
3- None of the Ricoh´s cameras offer what I need, not even the GXR line. I need a medium pocket-size camera with a "real" IQ quality to make fine art prints with little work in NR.
4- Will the Leica X1 be that camera? Check this thread about "real" X1 users (http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-for ... ca-x1.html)
5- I don´t rely in dpreview threads or reviews. They are industry oriented, not user oriented. I don´t care about comparisions and so on. I just want a seriuos "real" photographer opinion.
Soon I´m getting a very important grant in my country to execute my own personal proyect, and the right Digi-camera it´s the key in this proyect, no matter if it cost 500 or 2.000 u$s dolars.
Thanks again.
Guillermo, from Argentina
Click to expand...

Guillermo,

can you elaborate more on what kind of lighting you will encounter for your project?
Is IQ paramount so low ISO or do you expect to need higher ISO?
Will your project involve moving subjects or static?

I have examined some Leica X1 images and for me many were tack sharp, with little CA but these tended to be under ideal conditions I felt. I also own a Sigma DP2 and for me it can deliver wonderful awesome results but it only seems to when used carefully and conditions are just right. The major problem for me is the cost of the X1 for what you get, some may find it acceptable but its a little too high for me personally.

How about the GF1/G1 with the 20mm f1.7 lens? if the GXR does not suit. I would however recommend to have another look at some of Pavel's GXR samples - http://www.flickr.com/photos/odklizec/s ... 975956968/
 
Re: Ricoh GXR + A12 50mm

Guillermo, If you re deciding between X1 and GXR A12, then here are couple of things you should consider...

X1 pros:
- better pocketable camera.
- 35mm is good compromise between the wide and medium tele lens. 50mm can be limiting in many cases.

X1 cons:
- speed of AF (RAW shot to shot speed) is bad.
- JPEG is not great.
- price.

A12 pros:
- 50mm is probably exactly what you want.
- noticeably higher dynamic range (less highlight/shadow clipping).
- better LCD and EVF is much better option for manual focusing.
- more customizable and higher number of image settings. JPEG is actually very good, even at high ISO, despite some faint traces of banding in shadows (at ISO1600/3200). There is no need of additional NR up to ISO800/1600 and images are not smeared.
- expandability (not only future lens/non-lens modules, but you can attach something onto the existing lenses).

A12 cons:
- size is far from pocketable, but there is a promise of future modules with panckake design (there is 28/2.5 pancake on the way and I hope for fast 40mm pancake).
- RAW continuous mode is hardly 2fps and only 4 frames can be captured in a row.
- AF is not a speed daemon and sometimes miss the focus in quick AF mode. The AF reliability can be improved using the slow speed AF mode. In any case, A12 AF is way faster than X1 AF.
- GXR+A12 price is not great, but half of X1 ;)

If you need pocketable camera and you need it right now, X1 is better option for you. But in my humble opinion, GXR A12 wins in almost everything else.
 
Re: Ricoh GXR + A12 50mm

while I appreciate the discussion, this is still a for sale thread ;)

anybody interested? the price is superb I think! and i am open to offers (can include an M lens too *g*)
 
Re: Ricoh GXR + A12 50mm

kanzlr":2a32ngqj said:
while I appreciate the discussion, this is still a for sale thread ;)

anybody interested? the price is superb I think! and i am open to offers (can include an M lens too *g*)
Click to expand...
Sorry for hijacking your sale thread! ;) Feel free to let me know if you wish to move the X1 vs. A12 discussion somewhere else. I can split the post into two.
 
Re: Ricoh GXR + A12 50mm

As DM suggested, the ideal will be to get a rented X1 and a Ricoh GXR and try them... But that´s impossible in South America. There is no Ricoh seller and just one reliable Leica store in Argentina. They are not bringing the X1 until the end of this year. So I have to decide wich camera to buy reading your post or others.
I think my photo proyect needs a camera with the following specs:
1- I work in Low Iso (200 at the highest), RAW and color, day and night shots
2- All my shots should be frontal views, that´s why I need a 40-60mm lens range. I don´t crop or even correct the perspective of my shots.
3- The raw file developed should allowed me to get a high quality museum print in fine art matte paper (Hahnemuhle or Crane) of about 70x90cm size or higher. My workflow is developing the Raw file in Silkypix and print the Tif file using Lightroom.
4- The camera should be pockeatable because I will work in some complicated areas of Buenos Aires and I don´t want to get any special attencion. I must look almost invisible.
Well thanks for all your help. Reading all the detailed links that DM gave me, I think that I´m closer to the GXR-A12 combination (or maybe I should wait for another 40-60 mm range fixed lens from Ricoh)
 
Re: Ricoh GXR + A12 50mm

Guillermo,

Some thoughts. I have been reading this in-depth review which compares the GXR + A12 to the Leica LX1 and the DMC-GF1. I must say, the GXR + A12 looks very impressive. (To me) far better (and less costly) than the Leica X1 where it comes to both functionality and performance. The Ricoh GXR + A12 appears (to me) to be far preferable to the Leica X1.
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/ricohgxra12/
Check out the noise performances at:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/ricohgxra12/page15.asp
The GXR + A12 outperforms the Leica X1 in every one of the three RAW Noise test results (Chroma, Black, and Grey targets).

CHICHORNIO":28kutu11 said:
I think my photo proyect needs a camera with the following specs:
1- I work in Low Iso (200 at the highest), RAW and color, day and night shots
Click to expand...
I am conditioned to work at ISO=200 (pushing things to 400 maximum), too - but that is when shooting with a DMC-LX3 having a 1/1.63 Inch image-sensor.
There is no doubt that you will absolutely need either higher ISO performance, or image stabilization functionality to do what you want to do.
All the models discussed (Ricoh GXR-A12, Leica X1, and Panasonic GF1) will allow you to shoot at ISO=800 in "raw" (you are going to need that).
Only the DMC-GF1 has a lens option (the 14-45mm f/3.5-5.6 Lens) that features lens-based automated image stabilization of any sort (reported by one user to not be as effective as Panasonic in-camera Mega OIS) - and it probably needs that OIS to compete with the GXR + A12 and the Leica X1 better high ISO performance. (But) this lens is large in size (similar to the A12 module) - and the (more pocket-able) 20mm "pancake" lens option has no image stabilization at all ...

2- All my shots should be frontal views, that´s why I need a 40-60mm lens range. I don´t crop or even correct the perspective of my shots.
Click to expand...
Lucky you! I take it that these are 2-dimensional surfaces, so you do not have to worry about the more limited DoF that all 3 cameras will have due to their larger image-sensors.

3- The raw file developed should allowed me to get a high quality museum print in fine art matte paper (Hahnemuhle or Crane) of about 70x90cm size or higher. My workflow is developing the Raw file in Silkypix and print the Tif file using Lightroom.
Click to expand...
Realistically, it sounds like you would need astronomical pixel counts to come even close to that printing size (far beyond any of these camera models discussed). But one can dream ... :p

4- The camera should be pockeatable because I will work in some complicated areas of Buenos Aires and I don´t want to get any special attencion. I must look almost invisible.
Well thanks for all your help. Reading all the detailed links that DM gave me, I think that I´m closer to the GXR-A12 combination (or maybe I should wait for another 40-60 mm range fixed lens from Ricoh)
Click to expand...
It's too bad that the Leica X1 is reported by so many reviewers as being as clunkish as it is where it comes to AF (2-3 Seconds sounds like an eternity,indeed), as well as a non-useful "Live Histogram", in addition to not having image stabilization.

The less costly GXR with A12 module might well be my choice. Or, the AF sounds like it is faster in the least costly Panasonic DMC-GF1 (at the price of higher noise at the same ISO Sensitivity, and no image stabilization with the "pocket-able" 20mm "pancake" lens option that would help to reduce the necessary ISO Sensitivities).

(Perhaps) if you want (all of your wishes, especially the 70x90 mm print-size) in a somehow truly "pocket-able" size, you may have to employ that "Q" fellow on the "Her Majesty's Secret Service" - or manage to somehow live with the smaller-sized less-protruding lens-assemblies of cameras (or modules) having 1/1.7 Inch image-sensors inside (GXR, GRD, DMC-LX3, etc.)
 
Re: Ricoh GXR + A12 50mm

Realistically, it sounds like you would need astronomical pixel counts to come even close to that printing size (far beyond any of these camera models discussed). But one can dream ... :p
Click to expand...
Thanks Jeremy for your help. But sometimes it´s not only about megapixels. The quality of the lens is also very important in getting a HQ print. That´s why it´s so hard for me to choose between the GXR-A12 and the X1. Take a look a this pics (http://gallery.lfi-online.de/gallery/th ... lbum=18150). They look amazing.
 
Re: Ricoh GXR + A12 50mm

I´ve just opened two Raw sample files in Silkypix 4.0 (one of the GXR-A12, one of the Leica X1) both at 100 ISO, that there is no more doubts for me. The Leica´s shot is "much" better than the Ricoh´s: no noise, more natural, crispier, natural... I think the "key" or hidden secret here is the Leica lens, for sure. I´ll start saving money then...
 
Re: Ricoh GXR + A12 50mm

CHICHORNIO, don't forget that A12 ISO range starts at ISO200! So there may be more visible noise if you are comparing X1 at ISO100 and A12 at ISO200! On the other hand, A12 may be noisier at ISO200 than X1 at ISO100, but A12 dynamic range is much wider!

BTW, I'm curious, what images did you examine? Could you please post a link?
 
I did a very simple test. I open two RAW files from the links Jeremy suggested, I cropped them in Silkypix at 100% and for my eyes the difference it´s very clear, as I posted above. Of course I would like to have both cameras with me and do my own hands-on test, but I can´t. I´ve read about all the negative threads about the Leica X1 (many of them looks to be true), but just a very few "real" owners had complain about the IQ, which is what I care most. As I´ve said before, I want to believe that the difference in quality is on the Leica lens. My first point and shot camera was a Lumix with a Leica lens of just 6 mp, and I still love the quality of the pictures it´s delivers. Now it´s my 8 years old´s son first camera. So, I will keep reading more about the 2 of them (GXR and X1) before I take a decision. But I think I will turn over the X1 because it´s has many of the advantages I want for my photo proyect: size, easy to use, fixed "normal" lens and IQ. And it´s still a Leica!
Guillermo
pd: The links are here (both 100 ISO)
1-For Leica X1 (the first DNG in the sample list) http://www.photographyblog.com/previews ... x1_photos/
1/60 sec
f/5.6 | 35mm | ISO 100
2-For GXR (the second DNG in the sample list) http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/ ... le_images/
1/60 sec
f/2.5 | ISO 100
 
MegaPixels and print size. Dividing 70 cm by the Leica maximum pixel height (2856 Pixels) yields about 4 pixels per Millimeter on the printed page. Good enough?

The Leica X1 gallery at:
http://gallery.lfi-online.de/gallery/th ... lbum=18150
presents the images in such a small pixel-size (a few hundred) that I am not able to determine anything about the lens modulation transfer function (MTF) by viewing them.

Using the tools at:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/LeicaX1/page15.asp
and
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/ricohgxra12/page18.asp
and setting F equal to 2.8 for both lens-systems, this comparison emerges:
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/wid ... on.xml%3F4

The Leica lens-system specs better at center of frame out to about 50% of frame, but has considerably more (monotonic, decreasing) variation in MTF(50) over the entire measured range (from center to edge areas), whereas the Ricoh maintains a much more constant MTF(50) over the entire measured range.

The Ricoh specs better in terms of Chromatic Aberration (Red, in particular) - around 2.7 times better at the 50% (from center to edge) location.

It sounds like the AF in the (lower cost, lower image quality) Panasonic DMC-GF1 might work faster/better than either of the other two cameras ... Sigh ... :p

While attractive to some:
http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/Leica ... ntpage.jpg
and arguably small and stealthy ... :p

... These comments/notations about the Leica X1 "blind-date" speak (red-flags) directly to important use-ability issues for such applications:

The previous "champ" for ultra-slow autofocus, at least in my testing, was the Olympus EP-1 which is one of the worst cameras for candid photography I've ever tried. Didn't think it was possible, but the Leica X1 trumps that model, taking at least two to three seconds to lock in. That's a lifetime in street photography.
http://www.pdngearguide.com/gearguide/c ... 80ab5?pn=2

"... the X1's implementation of manual focus has a couple of problems. Most importantly, in anything other than dim light the lens stops down uncontrollably, and doesn't open up again to F2.8 for focusing. This makes really accurate manual focus impossible, especially if you're aiming for selective focus at F2.8."
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/LeicaX1/page7.asp

The minimum focusing distance (in manual/macro focus modes) is a full 30 cm - that's about One Foot ...
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/LeicaX1/page3.asp

The LCD display is only 2.7 Inches diagonal with 230,000 pixels:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/LeicaX1/page3.asp
as opposed to the Ricoh GXR having a 3.0 Inch with 920,000 pixels:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/ricohgxra12/page3.asp

The big problem with the X1's histogram is that it is quite clearly based on the screen display. And after a while, you come to realize that this doesn't necessarily reflect the final exposure. ... Unfortunately, the histogram also disappears when you press the exposure compensation button, so you can't tweak exposure while watching the effect on the histogram. Instead you have to guess, and see what you get." ... When you then half-press and hold the shutter button for focus / exposure lock, the display finally attempts to set its brightness to truly reflect the exposure. Bizarrely, though, the histogram also dismisses itself at this point, just when it might actually be accurate ...
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/LeicaX1/page7.asp
 
Pavel,
Yes, you are right. I did not read the exif. The comparision was not fair.
I´ve just opened two new files in Silkypix based on your link (a X1 Raw at ISO 100 and a GXR at ISO 200, real world shots, a harbor shot indeed), and although the IQ at 100% crop shows them head by head, I still like the X1 "look", based mainly in that the shot looks "less digital" for me (I don´t know how to explain it!!). The GXR file has a excellent resolution and sharpness (with some noise because it was shot at ISO 200) , but I don´t like it very much. It´s like the X1 file it´s more "warmer" (not just for the light) and even shows no visible noise to be concerned. Am I seeing wrong? Am I seeing the "famous" Leica look as users said? I would like to have your opinion about it. Thanks
Guillermo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top