Ricoh My Wishlist for the Next GR

agentlossing

Veteran
Mar 23, 2015
Andrew Lossing
I already have. See above.
Oh, so "The compromises, crop factor and proportions drove me nuts; ymmv." is what counts as an explanation? So what are the compromises? Crop factor is already refuted because it means nothing on a fixed lens camera. Proportions? What does that mean? See, if you could provide a decent conversation instead of being cryptic and arrogant, it would be a lot more of what I intended when I started this thread, which was to discuss potential changes and their strengths/weaknesses.
 

Lightmancer

Super Moderator
Aug 13, 2011
Sunny Frimley
Bill Palmer
Right.

There is absolutely no need to be rude. I do not tend to the verbose. My previous explanation was to the point, and economical.

For your benefit, I was referring to my past experiences with a number of 4/3 and m4/3 cameras, all of which had interchangeable lenses. I used a number of legacy lenses thus, hence crop factor was a major issue to me.

Proportions refers to the sensor ratio. I dislike the fat rectangle/not quite square proportions of the 4/3 format for compositional purposes. It wastes a huge amount at most common print sizes and is simply not pleasing to my eye from an aesthetic viewpoint. APS-C is a far more sensible proportion.

Finally, Ricoh is not a member of the 4/3 open standard. I cannot under any circumstances see them going down that rabbit hole at this stage, so your entire proposition is moot.

Now, try to contribute in a more civil manner in future.
 

agentlossing

Veteran
Mar 23, 2015
Andrew Lossing
I am being civil, apparently you haven't paid attention to how your correspondence has been coming off. No matter, I'm not worried about it.

So aspect ratio is what you don't care for, I take it? That's a legitimate reason, however the advantage to 4/3 sensors is that optics can be made more compact than with APS-C sensors, frequently allowing for things like optical stabilization, fast focus motors and larger maximum apertures without a corresponding increase in size. Size being a key factor in the lens for a future GR.

I could take or leave all that, however, just on the basis of how good the lens already is on the GR. I would only want them to rework their formula if they didn't sacrifice any of the performance of the current lens. It makes the camera, just as much as the controls or overall size make it.

As is, the sensor in the current GR is outresolved by the newest 4/3 sensors: just look at the studio scene test on dpreview for the Panasonic G9 and GR II. The G9 sensor is clearly better, though I suspect the GR lens is a little better. I know @Lightmancer wants megapixels and more megapixels, so the 20MP sensor on the G9 isn't good enough, but I think only a small percentage of GR users are that concerned about megapixels.
 

Luke

Super Moderator
Nov 11, 2011
Milwaukee, WI USA
Luke
well if m43 sensors have somehow figured out how to outperform APS-C sensors, somebody had better send a memo to every camera maker that isn't Olympus or Panasonic.

and btw, my user icon (or whatever they're called) shows me shooting an Olympus....so I'm not anti-m43. I'm just willing to accept some of the trade-offs for a system camera. For me, none of those limitations are acceptable for a compact fixed-lens camera like the GR.
 

Archiver

Top Veteran
Jul 11, 2010
Melbourne, Australia
Thing is, people who buy a GR want a GR. I would not in a million years buy a Sony or Canon camera because they do not offer what I want.

I bought my first GR, A GR1, in 1996. That's two whole wives ago.
Two wifetimes ago? :biggrin:

My wife flashed before me - I thought I was going to die!

It's not just for Christmas, it's for wife!

Okay, I'm gonna stop now.
 

Archiver

Top Veteran
Jul 11, 2010
Melbourne, Australia
As for the next GR: my desire is for a new 24mp aps-c sensor, BUT use it as a multi-aspect ratio sensor a la Panasonic, and make the image circle smaller and get a wider aperture. At 3:2, the focal length would be 28mm. But at 16:9, it would be wider, due to the multi-aspect ratio usage.

Use the battery of the GXR, which is also the battery in the Fuji X100/S/T and F30/31fd. Spares and aftermarket versions of this battery are plentiful. This would give longer battery life. Flipscreen might be nice, but is unnecessary.

Having experienced the image quality of the Panasonic LX10 as well as numerous m43 cameras and aps-c cameras, I can pretty safely say that an aps-c sensor still does a better job, particularly in high contrast and low light situations.
 

agentlossing

Veteran
Mar 23, 2015
Andrew Lossing
They can outperform the outdated one in the GR II, that was my only point. The other advantage is a smaller image area means smaller lenses and larger maximum apertures (as I'm sure you've noticed with Olympus gear), which are the things that could work in the GR's favor. Also, the LX10 doesn't have a 4/3 sensor. But, there's no disputing that the best APS-C sensors have a lead on the current best 4/3 sensors. That's just physics. Every choice is a compromise that works off of other choices in a camera this small. i.e. you can't have everything you want, or this would be a full frame f1.7 lens camera like the Leica Q but somehow still inside the tiny body we have now.

The 4/3 sensor thing was just a thought experiment on my part, however - I don't honestly expect Ricoh/Pentax to adopt a sensor format and tech they don't use in any of their other lineup.
 

BrianS

Super Moderator
Apr 3, 2013
I always found it interesting that the 4/3 format is the same proportion as the Japanese frame format for 35mm cameras, popular on their home market in the 1940s and early 1950s. Nikon and Minolta, I am sure others, used a 24mmx32mm frame for their early 35mm cameras. You got more shots on the roll and it was close to the 8"x10" print size.
 

Archiver

Top Veteran
Jul 11, 2010
Melbourne, Australia
The 4/3 sensor thing was just a thought experiment on my part, however - I don't honestly expect Ricoh/Pentax to adopt a sensor format and tech they don't use in any of their other lineup.
Actually, I'd really enjoy a Ricoh GR with a m43 sensor as long as it could be made as small as the earlier GRD cameras. The GR and GR II are a centimetre longer and a hair taller than the GRD III, which makes a difference in feel in the hand. The Panasonic GM1 is smaller than either the GRD or GR but still holds a m43 sensor and a bigger battery, so it might be possible to do. With a decent Ricoh lens like we know they can make, a GR with m43 sensor and smaller form factor would be really enjoyable.

I mentioned the Panasonic LX10 because a 1" sensor was also in my mind for pie in the sky GR successors.
 

agentlossing

Veteran
Mar 23, 2015
Andrew Lossing
Yeah, to be honest when I first brought up the idea of the GR with a 4/3 sensor I had the GM1 in mind. If I could only get something like that with a lens that collapsed into the body and a leaf shutter, I'd be so thrilled. I owned both the GM1 and GM5 and they were some of the best cameras Panasonic has ever made. Had the GM1 only had a hotshoe I would have kept it and never sold it. The 1/500 max mechanical shutter speed was a bummer though.
 

Archiver

Top Veteran
Jul 11, 2010
Melbourne, Australia
It comes back to the idea of a fixed lens compact with a m43 sensor, really. A few people in the Olympus forums have been talking about a digital Trip, or digital XA with a m43 sensor. I'd totally go for that, and I suspect there's a reasonable market for it. The m43 sensor in a Ricoh GR type body would be incredibly cool. This is really pie in the sky, but imagine a GR style compact with the Panasonic GH5S / Sony STARVIS sensor in it. Only 10mp, but with ridiculously high ISO capability, 10bit colour, and multi aspect ratio.
 

agentlossing

Veteran
Mar 23, 2015
Andrew Lossing
The more I think about it, the more I want a small EVF on the next GR, even if it's the tiny one from the Panasonic GM5. I'm just having a hard time figuring out where they'd put it without significantly changing the size and design scheme. I like how the old GRs have it in the central upper portion of the camera, but the LCD seems to present a problem with that. Perhaps an add-on EVF is the best solution.
 

rayvonn

Hall of Famer
Jan 19, 2015
I’ve actually conditioned myself to the thinking that this GRIII isn’t going to get released this year or at all. That’s ok though, as long as my current one keeps working it’s not the end of the world.
 

agentlossing

Veteran
Mar 23, 2015
Andrew Lossing
I've repeatedly said I doubt it will come out till 2019. I agree, though. As long as I can still use my GR II, all is well and my pocketbook will appreciate the breather.
 

NoSeconds

Top Veteran
Jan 1, 2017
Troy
The more I think about it, the more I want a small EVF on the next GR, even if it's the tiny one from the Panasonic GM5. I'm just having a hard time figuring out where they'd put it without significantly changing the size and design scheme. I like how the old GRs have it in the central upper portion of the camera, but the LCD seems to present a problem with that. Perhaps an add-on EVF is the best solution.

They could do a pop up VF like the Sony RX ones...?
 

agentlossing

Veteran
Mar 23, 2015
Andrew Lossing
They could do a pop up VF like the Sony RX ones...?
I've never seen a pop-up EVF in anything but a Sony camera, so I wonder what patents Sony retains on the designs. Also, it would still require space inside the camera body for it to sit when retracted, and I'm not sure where that would be. I'd be interested to see a pop-up combination of EVF and flash in one, however.
 

agentlossing

Veteran
Mar 23, 2015
Andrew Lossing
As time progresses I doubt more and more that Ricoh will make any radical changes to the GR. I think I'd be willing to settle for only three changes, all specifically quality-of-life changes that I think are definitely called for, given complaints with the GR II and the current market. Let's see if we agree on this:

1. 24MP sensor. Seems a given, barely worth mentioning. But I would appreciate the added resolution, especially in the case that cropping from the wide-angle lens is needed, or to give the 35mm/47mm crop modes some extra utility.

2. Weather sealing. Some sort, even just dust/water "resistance" as it seems a redesign to avoid the sensor dust Achilles heel of the camera design is needed. Alternatively Ricoh could incorporate an ultrasonic-vibration dust reduction system a la Panasonic/Olympus/etc.

3. Phase detect AF. The competition is putting it in their $499 cheapo camera, and it's necessary for companies like Ricoh who haven't surmounted the slowness of contrast AF in low-light situations. Panasonic I feel comfortable with never needing PDAF, but their DfD focusing is proprietary so unless Ricoh unveil some similar concept on their own, PDAF is needed.

I could be happy with all other things being equal, even though I still want some sort of EVF or even a sensor size change.
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Latest threads

Top Bottom