Best professional compact digital to go alongside an M?

[johnll]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

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

I'd choose this in an instant to replace my G5, except that it doesn't offer RAW.

[sparkie]

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.

 

> good to hear! thanks Mitch for your information and valuable insights and of course sharing your great images

 

 

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.

 

> I very much like looking through a view finder. i still have to get used to shooting by "LCD preview". when shooting people it could be advantageous as the people will sort of see your face more (moving around) and interact with you better than perhaps with your face hidden behind the camera. much like the rollie cameras where you are inteacting with the subject and they can see you. never thought about using the LCD this way. of course on a pro shoot, the client and subject may think you are a complete amateur! lol

 

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:

 

 

> very cool

 

 

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.

 

> its a tough one. but i think i would have preferred the VF to be built-in as long as it didn't add more than 1 to 2cm height wise and, not more than 1 cm extra depth wise, otherwise it would negate the "pocketability" of this very nice and compact camera.

 

B&W from the GR-D is very film-like.

 

> great, very tri-X 'pushed' as in your photos. could you share your technique & PP for acheiving the grainy high contrast look in your photos?

 

To get this type of film-like look with the M8, I gues I would have to shoot at ISO1250.

 

> having seen DNG files first hand from an M8 i tested i agree with sean that an ISO 2500 would better achieve your type of grainy film look

 

—Mitch/Bangkok

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

[sparkie]

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

 

I couldn't agree more. I mean where can you get a decent fixed 21mm f2.8 lens for this money with a sensor in a small package? usually a 21mm f2.8 lens alone would be more than the cost of this camera. having the option and flexibilty to switch between 21 and 28 is very clever and in a way generous of Ricoh. They could have actually sold a separate "GR1-21" and forced people into buying it instead if they wanted that focal lenght.

[sparkie]

thanks for the pics Peter. nice brassing on your VF!

[sparkie]

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

 

as compact as an M8+28/2.8 is, esp compared to a canon 1 series kit, I sometimes prefer something more compact like my miniluxs sometimes. you can't really put a M8+28 in your pocket. unless you have really BIG pockets lol

[sparkie]

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.

 

> Good to hear

 

 

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.

 

> did you try fine jpeg? -- well sounds like a zoom was more what you needed, rather than a fixed lens

 

 

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).

 

> use what works for you and achieves the results you want =0)

 

 

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

[sparkie]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

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?

 

> I thought this was leica related as I use almost exclusively leica M equpiment on travel shoots & i am looking for a digital compact companion on the next one, as my miniluxs are on sabbatical.

 

 

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

 

> possibly, but with a digital P&S i'm not so sure anymore. the M8 is a diff story

 

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

 

> very true on the pano point

 

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.

 

> i think noise can be good thing if that is the 'look' you like. just like pushing film

 

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)

 

> actually i like the utilitarian looks of the GRD. it just says pro without having to say it. dont get me wrong about the D Lux 3, first time i saw it in the flesh i was really smitten by it. its very sexy. but the GRD is just pro-grade design and finishing IMHO.

 

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

 

> i have to agree with you on this one. i have both a minilux and a minilux zoom. and the zoom will get you that extra bit when youre behind a locked gate or on the edge of a cliff and cant get any closer. but i hope the 28mm fixed will do the job 90% of the time

 

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!

 

> my understanding is that the D Lux 3 is made by Panasonic to leica standards. so it should be very good. f2.8 is good, thats my cut off f-stop. i dont get lenses slower than this

 

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?

 

> yes, the engine is much newer in the D Lux 3

 

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

 

> true. from experience with my canon 70-200/2.8 IS lens, stabilization tech works and it is incredible

 

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.

 

> ok

 

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.

 

> I have already seen the D Lux 3, saw it last thursday even before I posted this. it is a nice little package with bells and whistles all over. i was there to primarily check out the M8 though. i will check out the GR-D first.

 

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!

 

> hey dont get me wrong, i am a fan of leica also, have been using leicas for quite a few years, with M2, M2-R, M4, M6TTLs, MP6, MP3, minilux and minilux zoom. but i believe that there are other great tools made by other companies other than leica also

[sparkie]

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.)

 

> interesting. i have checked both these cameras out. the consensus is that the fuji f30 is superb at noise. it looks a very capable camera of excellent image quality. i never heard of the x530, but its only 4.5mp.i draw the line at 8mb for minimum res as i want A3 enlargements to print as minimum. i think 4.5 is just a little short

 

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.

 

> agree. thanks for your 2 cents

[sparkie]

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.

 

 

agree 100%

[sparkie]

I'd choose this in an instant to replace my G5, except that it doesn't offer RAW.

 

also the G7 is very chunky, 72mm thick vs (GR-D) of only 25mm!, weight wise the GR-D is almost half the weight, 380g vs 200g respectively. thats quite a significant difference IMO. and the bulk and weight of the G7 would deter me from carrying it 'everywhere'. just my take on it

[Kirk]

First, I think this is a good discussion to have on a Leica forum. I also think that you have narrowed it down to the best two candidates in the GRD and the D-Lux 3 (LX2).

 

My vote goes to the Leica. If you only want to shoot at 28mm, you can do this with the D-Lux 3. It also gives you the 19:6 wide format, 28-112 zoom, image stabilization, and 2 second RAW write times as apposed to 12 seconds on the GRD. I would also think that the Leica lens is little better, but that is just an educated guess.

 

The GRD has the advantage of a fully retractable lens, and no fiddling with a lens cap. Plus, it has nice accessories.

 

Overall, I think the Leica wins.

[DTD]

I have the film GR1s and a Leica M6. At the moment I would not buy a GRD myself, but if the RAW issues were sorted out and especially if the rumors of a larger sensor were true, I'd seriously consider one.

 

Whilst I appreciate this is a Leica forum, I don't think in this case the original poster is at all 'out of order'.

 

It's silly to suggest the Ricoh GR-D is built like an East German camera. You may remember the GR1's lens was also available in a Leica mount. It's quality was exceptional. I would think that the zoom on the Leicasonic would have a hard time beating a fixed focal length lens such as this.

 

Personally I find a fixed focal length lens liberating in a strange way, just as using a mechanical, manual rangefinder can be.

 

Being a 'newbie' here I certainly don't want to offend anyone, but I do find some people a bit too partisan.

[MSmelik]

I have the GRD and the DLux-3 and the Fuji F30.

 

All 3 have different flavors and characters.

 

F30 is really excellent in low light, very good shots at 1600, but less so as POS camera

 

GRD is a cult thing, very solid and very very slow. With thi camera I have taken more shots of my feet than any other camera I have owned. But once you get a shot together it is of great quality. Shooting RAW is preferable with the GRD, but is terribly slow, and I mean terribly slow. The finder is a great option though, as is the 21mm extension, but it adds to the bulk.

 

The Dlux a good looking camera.... It's not better at anything than the F30 or GRD, it just looks better, it performs faster in Raw than the GRD, but the results are not better. The GRD can shoot JPEG at 200 and they will look good, The dlux at 80 or higher will look stained, and not only if you magnify them to 300%

 

I have a thing for portable POS digital cameras, the most important thing for me is that they slip into any coat pocket without being obvious that you're carrying a camera. I am no techie, I dont know one from the other and all I can contribute is my own experience. Butting having to choose just one out of the above stated three, the choice would be very difficult, thats why I use all three, they all have their function.

If you take 70+ shots in low light go for the F30, this is a great under appreciated little camera, doesn't do raw, but the JPEGS are pretty ok

Between the Leica and GRD, the GRD is sbetter in overall image quality, but only 28mm and slow, also pretty bad grain at 200+ but just like I said grain, not noise so when shooting BW the grd is the best.

The dlux-3 .... well If your prepared to pre-process every good shot you make this is an ok camera, I'm not crazy about, it doesn't have any outstanding featured like the other two, unless you like the 16:9 28mm which does perform nicely at 80 or 100 max, and it does RAW but don't expect any low light shooting from this camera at all, even neat imaged the images at 400 or more are useless.

[Guest stnami]

Sparkie was this an exercise in showing us what you know? Or do you like rewriting others' posts?

[peterb]

Sparkie,

 

I did try the fine. Maybe it was my particular camera but I was still not wowed by the images (and I sooooo wanted to be). But again, as much as I totally ADORED the GR-D, my heart went out for the 16:9 format and quick writing RAW of the LX2(D Lux 2). And with it's 28mm wide (at 16:9 format no less) I am a pretty content camper.

 

But, as you wrote, to each his/her own.

 

Regards,

 

P

 

P.S. I think it's great that other cameras are talked about in comparison with our beloved Leicas or Leica likes.

[brunom]

Sparkie

 

The information I've seen about the G7 states that it's 43mm thick and weighs 320grms, nevertheless that's considerably more than the GRD, although the original question didn't say it had to be very small and light just compact, and the G7 is not that big.

 

But is any compact digital 'professional' I suppose it depends on what you mean by professional?

 

Bruno

[erozsolt]

How good I found that thread! I used both the LC1 and the LX1 extensively (borrowed), but now it's time to buy my own camera.

 

I am absolutely thinking about those 2 (Fuji is out, since I mostly use 28mm) cameras (it's funny, from over 1000 digicams there is only 3 we can choose from). I am really puzzled, I used a Panasonic LC1 what with I'm absolutely in love both taking pictures and viewing photos made by this camera. Sometimes I still use this machine (although it's not mine) and every minute is joy using it. Speaking about high iso's, i did make some photos with iso400 -2 EV RAW and although they are grainy and noisy, they are not SO bad, as the lx1/d-lux 2 at iso 400 jpeg.

So, I use sometimes the lx1 and what I like in that camera is it's shape, weight, functionality. I could walk on the streets in Turkey and take photographs without so many people looking weird. I admit for that use viewing LCD really helps sometimes - you can easily notice someone with a big black box in his face, much more than someone holding something in his hand, but I found my picture taken with EVF to have a better composition. I was really in love with using the little pana, but looking at pictures it made, for my eye used to lc1's pictures, they are a bit disappointing. I know, by huge margin, lx1 makes better pictures then every other PS capable of 28mm, it's even better than every dslr's with kit objective, but I just miss the COLORS and the warm feeling of the images. Just look at the sky, and at the warm yellows, reds. I know only one camera capable of colors/images like lc1, it's the sony r1, with it's Zeiss 24-120/2.8-4.8 objective, I admint it makes the best pictures in it's price range (and over it by a huge margin), but every time I go to a shop and try that Sony, it feel so big and heavy, like 2x as the lc1 and 10x the lx1, that I cannot image myself walking on the streets with that monster, although that top-looking viewfinder might be a good idea. I don't know why but I feel all the compact digicams has the same color world. It's difficult to explain, but those tiny ccd's or small lens really can't render the colors of even a cheap film compact. And I feel that lx1 is half-way between compacts and d2-lc1 / sony r1 / dslr world, but I don't know anything about grd.

 

Can you describe the photos and the feeling of the grd? It's a camera I was always looking at, but it's very expensive (for me it's 15% more than the lx2), almost as expensive as sony r1, and I know nobody owning one and only one shop where I can see one but it is far from where I live and it's not an option to take it home and bring it back if I don't like it. I found some very interesting photos made by gd-r on flickr, I like them much but I found that the best photos made with this camera are really the BW's - actually I feel it has the best unprocessed BW images I saw from a digital. And one more question, is this camera a 3:2 or 4:3 ratio camera? With lx1 I think it's not really 28 mm wide, it's just 28mm in 16:9, it's like 32 mm in 3:2, but I am not sure. Any info on that subject?

 

peterb, could you show some photos you made using that viewfinder thing? I am really interested how useful it is, since I always miss the viewfinder when I have to use a PS camera.

mitch, I really like your photos! Are you an old time BW guy, or it's just because you don't like the color images this camera produces?

 

I still havn't uploaded any of my photos with LC1, but just have a look at LC1/D2 flickr pool here:

Flickr: The DMC-LC1 / Digilux 2 Pool

Just for an example of that warm colors D2/LC1 has:

Flickr Photo Download: morning gum tree

And the biggest reason I'm interested in GRD:

GR-D - a photoset on Flickr

[Woody Campbell]

I'm a happy GRD user. Low ISO images are "Leica-like". On my website the first seven images in the Mexico gallery are taken with it (for example).

 

My home page

[smokysun]

if you want to make sure you have the camera with you and want to get the shot, i recommend the fuji f30:

 

fuji f30 cdt critique 2 06 b&w Photo Gallery by wayne pease at pbase.com

 

not the greatest color, perhaps:

fuji f30 the first walkabout Photo Gallery by wayne pease at pbase.com

 

though faults due to me and not the camera. and it's jpeg only, but smaller than the d-lux 3 and less than half the price. faster operation. incredible battery life. rated the best for lowlight. i've wanted a compact for dance pictures and now i have it.

 

wayne

 

but i have loved shooting with the d-lux 2, despite it's drawbacks.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear