The ricoh rival

[barjohn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well it is certainly a lot better on the 2.5 lens on an equally small camera, so yes, I did expect much better, especially considering it is Leica glass.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[khanosu]

What you say is correct; however, most of the high ISO 1600 were ACR conversions and therefore comparable where the GXR wins and the poor bokeh of the X1 images is not something the JPEG engine or ACR can fix.

 

Even the GXR pictures that went through ACR used a different profile than the one used for X1, and this makes it a bit more complicated to compare the two galleries. I wonder if the choice of a profile can also effect to some degree how the transition to out of focus regions is rendered? Choice of a profile does effect the smoothness of graduations of shades and colors and some of this is going around the region where the picture in entering out of focus regions. We need a profile expert to educate us on this does the choice of a profile effect the smoothness of transitions to out of focus regions?

 

Another thing I noticed is that the lens in the X1 seems to be more optimized to control flare for example when shooting directly into light sources. The GXR night picture of the lights, shot at ISO 1600, shows a lot of flare related artifacts, whereas the comparable picture made by the X1 of the night lights at ISO 3200 has flare under good control.

 

Take care!

 

Furrukh

[coup de foudre]

Another thing I noticed is that the lens in the X1 seems to be more optimized to control flare for example when shooting directly into light sources. The GXR night picture of the lights, shot at ISO 1600, shows a lot of flare related artifacts, whereas the comparable picture made by the X1 of the night lights at ISO 3200 has flare under good control.

 

i will take good bokeh over flare control any day!

 

 

i've got older Leica lenses that flare beyond belief, but you know what? i love them! they have character! which is more than i can say about the Elmarit they put on the X1... trust me, i wanted to like it. i can't.

[khanosu]

i will take good bokeh over flare control any day!

 

 

i've got older Leica lenses that flare beyond belief, but you know what? i love them! they have character! which is more than i can say about the Elmarit they put on the X1... trust me, i wanted to like it. i can't.

 

I agree; flare can add character while a bad bokeh never does Let us wait a few more days for the two X1 reviews to come on-line, until then I think that possible ACR profile issues make it difficult to come to any firm conclusion.

 

Take care!

 

Furrukh

[barjohn]

I am not sure of this, but I think they were just using ACR to convert to JPG. Since ACR is just doing a DNG to JPG conversion and does not have profiles for either camera it should be comparable. I don't think this kind of conversion impacts very many parameters and in any case lacking profiles for either camera should do the same damage to each.

[jsrockit]

I just don't see the Ricoh or the X1 being someone's only camera. Also, there is more to photography than bokeh. If I see another flower picture or a close-up of something uninteresting just show a lens' bokeh, I think I might croke.

[barjohn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

jsrockit, it's clear you would buy anything with a red dot and two dials no matter what the image IQ. That's OK it's your money. Having said that go here http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-x1-forum/98132-leica-x1-panasonic-gf1-m-glass.html#post1116158 post 12 to be put out of your missery. :D

[coup de foudre]

I just don't see the Ricoh or the X1 being someone's only camera. Also, there is more to photography than bokeh. If I see another flower picture or a close-up of something uninteresting just show a lens' bokeh, I think I might croke.

it's not my only camera, but that doesn't mean i want to vastly change my style because of a very expensive camera's short-comings.

 

i tend to shoot wide open most of the time because i like the separation it gives to an image. i don't do flowers; i do people.

 

do i thrill to good bokeh? of course. and, honestly, the Ricoh can't touch my old Noctilux or 75 Lux in that regard. but it does give me that definition i want, shooting wide open, without the OOF areas looking harsh.

 

the same cannot be said about the X1.

 

perhaps if i was primarily an f/5.6 to f/8, i wouldn't feel quite as strongly about this issue, but i'm not... i also shoot in many low light situations where i'd like to keep the ISO as low as i can (no matter how good the high ISO may be), so i shoot wide open for speed as well. we do not all have the same needs.

 

is it so hard to understand that bokeh is sometimes a necessity and is most important when it distracts the image?

[Guest stnami]

f/5.6 to f/8,..........luvit!

[coup de foudre]

f/5.6 to f/8,..........luvit!

 

i was thinking of you, darling... i believe you said you shot that way...

Edited November 11, 2009 by coup de foudre

[jsrockit]

jsrockit, it's clear you would buy anything with a red dot and two dials no matter what the image IQ. That's OK it's your money. Having said that go here http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-x1-forum/98132-leica-x1-panasonic-gf1-m-glass.html#post1116158 post 12 to be put out of your missery. :D

 

Actually, I only have one camera at the moment and there is no red dot to be found... M2. That said, I just don't find the X1's images to be that offensive. All cameras, especially digital, have their faults. We are still in the golden age of this technology. So as long as image quality is ok, I'm concentrating on a camera that I deem comfortable to use on a daily basis. I haven't even made up my mind that the X1 is for me either... it's just the lesser of all evils as far as digitals. I may just have to go for an M8 instead though. I'm a rangefinder / compact type of guy.

 

I've already seen that thread and find the bokeh in that picture to be very appealing, but the flowers to be a little weird... I can't put a finger on it, but they don't look right to me. I wouldn't have said anything, but you pointed the photo out. I'm a wide angle (prime) type as well, so that is another reason this Ricoh doesn't do it for me.

 

CDF... I understand the uses of bokeh and agree that for portraits, it can be useful and may render the X1 useless for your needs. However, it will still have many uses and wideangles aren't the best portrait lenses anyway. I guess my opinion is that most of the people who are stating that it is useless to them because of the bokeh have more than one camera and that the X1 would not be their only camera.

[Guest stnami]

f5.5 f8 yup I am basically lazy with my settings there are far more important things to consider ...................... I do have a nikon 85m(127mm on the D90) that sits on f1.8 mainly used for people stuff .........weddings, parties, funerals when friends want some photos.

 

.... the X1 or the ricoh 50mm version it's about one's fine tuned needs or wants either way dussuntmatta.

[coup de foudre]

CDF... I understand the uses of bokeh and agree that for portraits, it can be useful and may render the X1 useless for your needs. However, it will still have many uses and wideangles aren't the best portrait lenses anyway. I guess my opinion is that most of the people who are stating that it is useless to them because of the bokeh have more than one camera and that the X1 would not be their only camera.

 

i don't actually do that many portraits... i take street, metro, pétanque matches in the rain, whatever catches my fancy. i used small sensor, wide angle (the old Ricoh GRD -- 28mm) for quite some time and still do... with rangefinders, i found the lenses that suited me best (and i could afford) were fast 35's so i've gotten very used the 50mm FOV...

 

but i've made mistakes in the past, buying cameras that i shouldn't have, that bothered me for some reason or another. thing is, i never got over it and could never fully enjoy the camera. i will not buy the X1 because i could never live with the limitations the bad OOF areas would make me do... that's not how i like to shoot.

 

i actually look at each new purchase as if it was my only camera. i can live with a 50 (though i would much prefer a 35/40), if it gives me the images i want. and i have hopes that Ricoh will come out with a larger sensor 28mm in the future.

 

as for you, although the X1 is very cute and all, i would go for the R-D1 -- or, if you can't stomach that -- the M8 (not nearly as fun to use but beautiful images). there's an old Canon available, a beautiful Zeiss 25/2.5, and the Leica 24/2.8 or 24/3.8. there's also a CV in that range, but i can't remember the speed. you might even find you like the CV you already have -- the point is, you won't be limited like you would with the X1.

[Guest stnami]

EPSON R-D1 first impressions and samples - ISO 1600 - ISO 6400: Leica Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

 

Flickr: The EPSON R-D1 Pool

[Guest malland]

Thanks, Imants: impressive stuff in the first link

 

—Mitch/Bangkok

Walks in Bangkok (GRD3)

[Guest stnami]

yea I was quite impressed with that first link, the second was just info. The thing about epson users , they are fewer in number and more about photography than cameras as all that is to be said has been said about the camera. The m8 will head that way as only the "I really need a m8 for my images" are the primary users...thus we will end up with a higher standard of images

Edited November 12, 2009 by stnami

[kivis]

You got to hand to Ricoh for doing something totally different. I have a Ricoh GX200 for backup so I can tell you the controls are really awesome.

[Guest malland]

yea I was quite impressed with that first link, the second was just info. The thing about epson users , they are fewer in number and more about photography than cameras as all that is to be said has been said about the camera. The m8 will head that way as only the "I really need a m8 for my images" are the primary users...thus we will end up with a higher standard of images

Absolutely, Imants. The RD-1 high-ISO night pictures are impressive for their aesthetics, and, only incidentally, are also very much "film-like". The latter term is bandied about a lot and people who end up with film-like digital photographs are often criticized for simulating or imitating the look of film when, according to these critics, they should "embrace" what comes out of the digital camera. The latter type of critics also tend to feel there is more "purity" the less processed a photo is, which ignores the whole history of photography.

 

But there has been a long history of B&W film photography and processing; and a variety of film looks have developed, ranging from high resolution, smooth gradation, large format photography to the rougher, sketchier and grainer "35mm aesthetic". Various of these many photographic looks are appropriate for what the photographer wants to express — I tend often to like "expressionist" photography, for example.

 

Now, processing a photograph to get it to say what you want it to say may involve adding grain or roughing up the file in other ways, and need not, or should not, be considered trying to imitate film. Just because a camera like the Leica M8 or M9 can produce the look of medium format scanned film doesn't mean that one must always go for that look, or that one is violating the honesty of what comes out of the camera if one doesn't want a digital look. Here are two Leica M8 pictures that I like — I would post GRD3 pictures but they are not accepted in this forum:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

—Mitch/Bangkok

Scratching the Surface©

Edited November 12, 2009 by malland

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[coup de foudre]

yea I was quite impressed with that first link, the second was just info. The thing about epson users , they are fewer in number and more about photography than cameras as all that is to be said has been said about the camera. The m8 will head that way as only the "I really need a m8 for my images" are the primary users...thus we will end up with a higher standard of images

i am always thrilled when somebody new "discovers" the R-D1. to a certain extent, it spoiled me -- it was/is a joy to use every time i pick it up. and, yes, it is a camera that is more about photography...

 

with the M8, at least for me, i can get to obsessed about the image quality. i can't trash the camera, though, and wonder if i might not have enjoyed it more if i'd never gotten a chance to use the R-D1 first?

 

unfortunately, as with jsrockit, i am used to people turning down their nose when i recommend the Epson... they don't realise it still commands a premium because of how good it still is.

 

my very best day with it was one photographing a protest march with it set at f/8 on my Summilux 35 pre-asph, only going to f/1.4 when the light got low. the Noctilux only came out after dark and then was tear-gassed

 

the joy of the Epson is that it is excellent across the ISO range, so i never get nervous if i need to bump it up (whereas the M8 is so much better at 160 that you do everything in your power to keep it low). and all the controls are right at the top so you never need look at the screen (separate dials and displays for anything you need).

 

my M8 will be sold when/if i ever have the funds for an M9/M10. the R-D1 will not.

 

but, Imants, could you not have at least linked to a page where a few of my pics were on it? Flickr Hive always makes me happy, especially as some of mine are with one of my favourites by Tommy Oshima (on the edge 1).

 

the negatives of the Epson (or the M8) over the X1 is size and sound of the shutter if you need stealth. the positives for jsrockit, since this is indeed his first digital, is the chance to expand.

[coup de foudre]

p.s.

 

for all those interested, Sean Reid (you must be subscriber -- well worth the money, IMO) has posted part two of his review on the X1. i'm reading it now so i can't comment but, as expected, the images do look a lot nicer.

 

interestingly enough, almost all shot at f/8... your name is on this one, Imants.

Edited November 12, 2009 by coup de foudre