Best professional compact digital to go alongside an M?

[sparkie]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Have been reading several posts and have come to the conclusion that the Ricoh GR Digital is front runner at the moment. Thanks to the great images and info by Mitch Alland in particular, this camera looks like it is capable of producing some fabulous B&W images in the right hands with good PP skills.

I really like the design and look, simple, elegant, timeless in a way. the build quality with magnesium housing and f2.4 speed lens are great. reminds me of my minilux. the feedback that the lens is very good with almost no distortion is very appealing.

 

The reservations I have are really..

 

1. the RAW speed. seems too slow for reportage/fast moving work. This means jpeg, but I really like shooting in RAW so I have a "negative" for future reference and the flexibility RAW gives in processing

 

2. no built in VF, but at least has an external option. but means its bigger to pocket and risk of the VF snapping off in transport and off-road transport

 

Any thoughts?

 

The new Sigma DP1 looks interesting but it doesint have a built in VF either, and its f4.0 lens doesnt grab me. design looks awful, but thats only cosmetic i guess.

 

Any other camera options/choices?

 

For those who have the GR-D how do you rate it. Do you still have it. And if you were to buy it again would you or something else? For those who bought the creative set.. is it worth it in your opinion?

 

Any news of a GR-D2? The GR-D was released just over a year ago so I guess the chances are that it won't be updated till middle of next year at the earliest. The successor would be very very interesting I think.

 

I saw the D-LUX 3 the other day and it is a very sexy little number! but it had no built in VF or no opion for one as far as I know so that is a real pity. I just feel Leica hasn't got this Pro compact digital gap covered yet. A digital minilux would be very close to it. maybe its in the works?

 

Would appreciate your comments as I am sure there are many in the same boat.. thanks for your responses

[Guest stnami]

All compacts have a heap of drawbacks, don't even see them in the same light as their film counterparts, In the end you will have to try them, buy them and discard them until you say ... hey this one works for me!

 

The GRD well if you don't like the raw aspect and a external VF then it isn't for you. The associated drawbacks are there and there is no them wishing away.

GDR2 not for a while as it is not mass produced in the numbers of other P&S cameras, don't expect a yearly turnover from Ricoh. The creative set puts it in the $1000 plus league and is no longer compact in size

 

You discounted the Sigma and you are on a Leica forum and what there is is what there is, no minilux is going to pop up ....pop.... see none.

Save your money and buy a M8 or buy and live with what exists

[Guest malland]

Sparkie:

 

Thanks for the comment.

 

The slow RAW write-time can be a problem, but for my type of photography it's just an annoyance. I mainly shoot RAW, but the JPG files the GR-D produces are very good: they are neither over-sharpened not over-smoothed.

 

On the viewfinder, when I first bought the camera I thought that I would use my Leica 21mm and VC 28mm external viewfinders, but found that I like shooting using using the LCD display because it leads me to a "looser" shooting style. On a few days when I mounted an external viewfinder I found that I never used it, but continued to shoot using the LCD. For one picture I was walking past on open shop where someone was working at a desk: I just held the camera in my right hand and point it sideways at the shop, without either stopping or turning and pressed the shutter. If I used an an external viewfinder I would have had to stopped and turned and to put the camera on up to my face, which would have ruined the picture. Here it is:

 

 

Incidentally, as Ricoh explain it, they decided not to build on optical viewfinder into the camera like in their GR1 and GR21 film cameras because it would not be as good as their external viewfinder and would make the camera larger. I think they made the right decision.

 

B&W from the GR-D is very film-like. To get this type of film-like look with the M8, I gues I would have to shoot at ISO1250.

 

—Mitch/Bangkok

http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/

[Guest malland]

The creative set puts it in the $1000 plus league and is no longer compact in size.

 

The 21mm-equivalent adapter is very small and light and the quality is excellent. With the Ricoh film camera, the GR1, one had to get another camera, the GR21, if one wanted a 21mm lens and that was a lot bulkier and a lot more expensive.

 

—Mitch/Bangkok

[scott kirkpatrick]

I can't speak for the 21, because it is too wide for me to want to shoot often with it, and results in a camera that I can't put in a shirt pocket. But I carry the GR-D around with me almost every day, shooting JPEG unless I decide to concentrate on a shot in which serious postprocessing will be needed (example -- aerials from an airliner). The lens and dynamic range is as good as claimed by others, the viewfinder is easy to use with glasses, and I use it except when I am trying to be extremely discreet or working on a macro. The gritty look at ISO 400 and up is OK with me, and I sometimes process into B/W when the subject fits. I do put some effort into exposure correction, as the very contrasty lens will blow highlights easily in aperture priority mode. It's not so different from shooting slide film.

 

scott

 

edit: My pbase account has a wedding (in GR-D's b/w) and a GR-D examples gallery.

[peterb]

You could get either the former D-Lux 2/Lumix LX1 (both preferred) or, the current D-Lux 3/Lumix LX-2 (not as preferred) and attach a Voigtlander accessory holder (which amazingly clears BOTH the mode dial and the pop-up flash) with either epoxy or 3M double sided foam adhesive cut to the contours of the base (as I did) and create a nifty camera with a means of attaching any number of VFs to it.

 

Then you'd have a reasonably good (noise-wise at low ISOs of 80 or 100), 16:9 formatted camera that shoots RAW rather efficiently with a very sharp lens you can attach with a very good optical VF (28mm to match the wide angle at least of the widest focal length).

 

Attached are some photos that explain what I did in far better detail than my words.

 

Regards,

 

Peter

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[marknorton]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Seems to me the M8 with the 28mm f2.8 ASPH makes the perfect compact professional camera...

[peterb]

Regarding the GR digital. I had that. It's an incredibly well-built and well-thought out camera. The images are a little harsh but okay. Higher ISOs are, however, amazingly, film like. I LOVED the accessory holder which I could attach a VF and the fact that you could turn OFF the LCD. Feel and grip were nothing short of superb.

 

Ultimately, I did agree with dpreview's assessment that the images produced had some issues I was not happy with. RAW was simply not a consideration. The write times were waaaaaaaay too long. And while I loved the 28mm FOV (with its ability to go even wider with the 21mm attachment) I often felt myself wanting focal lengths that brought me in closer.

 

Ultimately I got the Lumix LX-1 (which I show how to add an accessory holder to allow an optical VF to be attached) and learned how to shoot and process RAW. (Our intrepid Sean Reid who got me onto this whole concept even provided excellent settings to start with in order to process and produce jaw dropping images out of the thing. Thanks again, Sean!) As well is plant the seed for the idea of adding a VF to it (as provided by another subscriber to his phenomonal site).

 

Since then I've been VERY happy with this arrangement. I have an optical finder on a camera that takes great pictures quickly enough for my purposes which I now produce from RAW negatives to my satsifaction using Photoshop Elements (someday I'll get the Capture One software that everyone is raving about when I get the M8).

 

Regards,

 

P

[peterb]

Mark,

 

As ironic as it sounds, from the images I've seen from other posts, you are 100% correct.

 

But this little guy with this arrangement, in my opinion is a reasonably good, far less expensive stop gap measure until one saves up enough boxtops to get an M8.

 

Regards,

 

P

[marknorton]

Ah yes, if the M8 is some way off, I agree. If you have an M8 with a compact lens, it will be rare to want to use anything else.

[sean_reid]

Sparkie:.

 

B&W from the GR-D is very film-like. To get this type of film-like look with the M8, I gues I would have to shoot at ISO1250.

 

—Mitch/Bangkok

Flickr: Photos from Mitch Alland

 

Hi Mitch,

 

ISO 2500 probably but by 1250 you'd have a fine grain to the pictures.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[Guest malland]

ISO 2500 probably but by 1250 you'd have a fine grain to the pictures.

 

Hmmm. Maybe I should stay with my GR-D and shoot film with my M6s for the look I want rather than getting an M8 after all. I really don't like the idea of adding grain digitally to photos — not that I'm against post-processing; it's just that I want the immediacy of reacting to, or resonating with, the grain as I deal with a picture.

 

—Mitch/Bangkok

[sean_reid]

Hmmm. Maybe I should stay with my GR-D and shoot film with my M6s for the look I want rather than getting an M8 after all. I really don't like the idea of adding grain digitally to photos — not that I'm against post-processing; it's just that I want the immediacy of reacting to, or resonating with, the grain as I deal with a picture.

 

—Mitch/Bangkok

 

Hi Mitch,

 

If you have a dealer who will let you return the camera within a few days then maybe you should just grab one and go out and shoot. You'll know in one day and can return it if it doesn't suit.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[Guest stnami]

OZ dealers put them in a vault or take them home tailed by ASIO. Chances here of a couple of day with a Leica are...... well the Melbourne Cup is on soon .... who is going to win??

[cobbslane]

I don't wish to offend anyone here but I thought this was a Leica forum! What the hell are we doing trying to justify the purchase of some third party gizmo?

 

In answer to the question posed however, I have just been through exactly the same dilemma - GRD or D Lux 3. I plumped for the latter for a number of reasons as follows:

1. Its Leica and whatever you pay you will get more back after an inevitable trade than a GRD

2. It also is 28mm but with a 16:9 format it just sings 'wide angle' - and its a true 10Mp

3. Don't let the knockers put you off by arguing noise. If you view the images at 200 - 300% in Photoshop you begin to see it. If you dislike fringing at 300% stick with a 12 - 16Mp Canon. But if like me you want excellent A3 prints in colour or BW with minimal noise and no visible fringing then go for the D Lux 3.

4. Finish - smooth, sophisticated, Leica - and the classic leather case will make you a leather fetishist overnight. Solid and yet attractive. Unlike the GRD which looks like a GDR product. (GRD = German Democratic Republic or East Germany as it was known)

5. Zoom - you might not think you need one but when its there its there and you will use it at least occasionally

6. f2.8, yes a little slower than f2.4 but who cares. The images are pure Leica in tonality and smoothness and saturation on standard settings 100asa. And they do not have to be justified as 'grain-like' all the time!

7. Set it to B/W and shoot away in RAW which takes very little time to upload. (Unlike the eternity of the GDR as I prefer to call it!) The files retain all colour info, being RAW, until you convert them later to either colour or B/W as you please. Yet viewing on screen is in B/W - neat eh?

8. Stabilisation at two levels that works, unlike the GDR that has none

9. No it isn't a Panasonic as the threads elsewhere will testify from those of us who have actually bought/used one of each. Firmware different, quality tolerances tighter, finish better.

So, please head off on Monday to your local Leica specialist and try it and try it again. By the third time you try it you will be home. The proud owner of a true photographer's pocketable digital camera - which is a Leica.

In answer to the question you are just about to ask - no I am not an employee, shareholder or owner of Leica, just a fan and a user who is proud to be so after many years with M6, M7, R8 and now D Lux 3.

Good hunting!

[Guest stnami]

Pretty sad if this is a a important point as indicated coming in at number 1

Its Leica and whatever you pay you will get more back after an inevitable trade than a GRD

 

I am sure you will be most welcome after this comment

 

Finish - smooth, sophisticated, Leica - and the classic leather case will make you a leather fetishist overnight. Solid and yet attractive. Unlike the GRD which looks like a GDR product. (GRD = German Democratic Republic or East Germany as it was known)

 

 

 

 

.... horses for courses, cameras should be bought to fit requirements,

[smokysun]

hi sparkie,

 

i have to agree with imants. instead of the grd (i have the d-lux 2 and love it). i bought two cameras for experiments: the polaroid x530 and the fuji f30 over the grd and saved money.

 

the fuji shoots at 800 and 1600 and is considered the best on the market for high iso (jpeg only). the x530 is the only compact camera with a foveon sensor and i got it for color experiments.

 

here are two examples. the b&w fuji shot at a dance rehearsal: 800, 160 shutter, and 2.8. i've cleaned it up a bit but no other compact would do this. the x530 a flash shot of a calender pic in raw (sigma photo pro free at their site. this camera uses the same.)

 

i haven't had much time to experiment with either, but different cameras for different purposes, especially in compacts, has to be the rule. both of these can be bought at a bargain. and carrying a couple of compacts in two shirt pockets a breeze.

 

just my two cents.

 

wayne

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Guest malland]

I don't wish to offend anyone here but I thought this was a Leica forum! What the hell are we doing trying to justify the purchase of some third party gizmo?

 

In answer to the question posed however, I have just been through exactly the same dilemma - GRD or D Lux 3. I plumped for the latter for a number of reasons as follows:

1. Its Leica and whatever you pay you will get more back after an inevitable trade than a GRD

2. It also is 28mm but with a 16:9 format it just sings 'wide angle' - and its a true 10Mp

3. Don't let the knockers put you off by arguing noise. If you view the images at 200 - 300% in Photoshop you begin to see it. If you dislike fringing at 300% stick with a 12 - 16Mp Canon. But if like me you want excellent A3 prints in colour or BW with minimal noise and no visible fringing then go for the D Lux 3.

4. Finish - smooth, sophisticated, Leica - and the classic leather case will make you a leather fetishist overnight. Solid and yet attractive. Unlike the GRD which looks like a GDR product. (GRD = German Democratic Republic or East Germany as it was known)

5. Zoom - you might not think you need one but when its there its there and you will use it at least occasionally

6. f2.8, yes a little slower than f2.4 but who cares. The images are pure Leica in tonality and smoothness and saturation on standard settings 100asa. And they do not have to be justified as 'grain-like' all the time!

7. Set it to B/W and shoot away in RAW which takes very little time to upload. (Unlike the eternity of the GDR as I prefer to call it!) The files retain all colour info, being RAW, until you convert them later to either colour or B/W as you please. Yet viewing on screen is in B/W - neat eh?

8. Stabilisation at two levels that works, unlike the GDR that has none

9. No it isn't a Panasonic as the threads elsewhere will testify from those of us who have actually bought/used one of each. Firmware different, quality tolerances tighter, finish better.

So, please head off on Monday to your local Leica specialist and try it and try it again. By the third time you try it you will be home. The proud owner of a true photographer's pocketable digital camera - which is a Leica.

In answer to the question you are just about to ask - no I am not an employee, shareholder or owner of Leica, just a fan and a user who is proud to be so after many years with M6, M7, R8 and now D Lux 3.

Good hunting!

 

Well, first, I don't think discussing non-Leica brand cameras on this forum verboten is; and the title of the thread indicates that the original poster is looking for a small camera to complement a Leica-M. Then, I have the tendency to think the important thing is the aesthetic result — and for that I don't want to be stuck at low ISO speeds, although I use them sometimes. But, then, I have neither a brand nor leather fetish. For me, the GR-D works very well, and so do my two M6s.

 

—Mitch/Bangkok

http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/sets/72157594271568487/

[brunom]

Athough the Ricoh sounds, and seems very tempting, my vote would be to have a close look at the new Canon G7,which seems to offer a good package at a competitive price - and it has direct ISO input !

 

Bruno

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[tom0511]

I don't wish to offend anyone here but I thought this was a Leica forum! What the hell are we doing trying to justify the purchase of some third party gizmo?

 

In answer to the question posed however, I have just been through exactly the same dilemma - GRD or D Lux 3. I plumped for the latter for a number of reasons as follows:

1. Its Leica and whatever you pay you will get more back after an inevitable trade than a GRD

2. It also is 28mm but with a 16:9 format it just sings 'wide angle' - and its a true 10Mp

3. Don't let the knockers put you off by arguing noise. If you view the images at 200 - 300% in Photoshop you begin to see it. If you dislike fringing at 300% stick with a 12 - 16Mp Canon. But if like me you want excellent A3 prints in colour or BW with minimal noise and no visible fringing then go for the D Lux 3.

4. Finish - smooth, sophisticated, Leica - and the classic leather case will make you a leather fetishist overnight. Solid and yet attractive. Unlike the GRD which looks like a GDR product. (GRD = German Democratic Republic or East Germany as it was known)

5. Zoom - you might not think you need one but when its there its there and you will use it at least occasionally

6. f2.8, yes a little slower than f2.4 but who cares. The images are pure Leica in tonality and smoothness and saturation on standard settings 100asa. And they do not have to be justified as 'grain-like' all the time!

7. Set it to B/W and shoot away in RAW which takes very little time to upload. (Unlike the eternity of the GDR as I prefer to call it!) The files retain all colour info, being RAW, until you convert them later to either colour or B/W as you please. Yet viewing on screen is in B/W - neat eh?

8. Stabilisation at two levels that works, unlike the GDR that has none

9. No it isn't a Panasonic as the threads elsewhere will testify from those of us who have actually bought/used one of each. Firmware different, quality tolerances tighter, finish better.

 

The GRD is more robust build than a Digilux, it also feels much more camera, it has a great user interface, the lens has ver low distorsion.

 

Just the name Leica doesnt automaticly say that a camera is better than another.

 

Nothing against the digilux, but Leica does not offer something like the GRD.

different cameras.