Ricoh Surprise! Ricoh GRIIIx

Location
S. Oregon Coast
Real Name
Andrew L

Also a 1.5x teleconverter. Unclear whether it would work with the GRIII. It's listed as providing a 75mm equivalent FoV but that's with the GRIIIx set to the middle crop (50mm equivalent). I'm wondering whether it might create so much vignetting that it wouldn't work without the crop mode enabled.

Either way, this camera will provide a 40mm equiv lens at 24mp, and a 50mm equiv at about 17mp as long as the crop feature holds from GRIII. The crop also extends to 71mm equiv at (probably) 8mp, or with the converter, 75mm equiv at 17mp. Assuming you could even use the 71mm crop with the converter for 106.5mm at 8mp.

(edit) 50mm is stated to be 15mp, 71mm is 7mp, maximum effective focal length is stated as 105mm with the adapter at 7mp crop.
 
Last edited:
Location
S. Oregon Coast
Real Name
Andrew L

Short article by Ricoh "product planner." Sounds like the 40mm lens was designed to minimize distortion without relying on software correction, which is interesting since it's such a compact lens.

For the GR lens, the first priority is to maximize imaging forming performance of light with minimal post image processing. Therefore, we have designed a lens that does not depend on software distortion correction, which has been often applied in recent years, and have minimized the distortion in the optical design itself. In addition, it has little chromatic aberration and minimal color fringe in borders with contrasting lights as well as blurred edges. It is a sharp, high-contrast lens that provides high resolution from the center to the edge, little flare and clear depiction. The GR IIIx lens is based upon the design policy of the GR lens, and although the focal length has become longer and the design tougher, we have designed it so as to be mounted in this compact body.
 
Location
S. Oregon Coast
Real Name
Andrew L
Interesting, a GR III + GR IIIx or a Pen F and 14mm + 20mm?

The pair of Ricohs would be smaller.

But it's nice to see some variations.
I can't say whether I would take to carrying 2 GRs. At first blush it sounds a little silly to me, but I don't know why - I've carried two cameras with different lenses before. I think it's because, deep down, I realize that I would mix them up. I mean, they look identical! Was that the best choice, Ricoh? I guess I can use different color rings... until I lose them...
 

JensM

Veteran
I can't say whether I would take to carrying 2 GRs. At first blush it sounds a little silly to me, but I don't know why - I've carried two cameras with different lenses before. I think it's because, deep down, I realize that I would mix them up. I mean, they look identical! Was that the best choice, Ricoh? I guess I can use different color rings... until I lose them...
According to the above video, the GRx is a bit fatter, so the cameras would probably be feeling different when gripped. I am somewhat stoked over this one, I have been shuffling to and from the GRIII, yearning for a fixed 35mm option, but I could probably live quite well with the 40mm. The question is if I am not "better" served with the Panasonic GM1 or GX880 and the 20mm if I want a "fixed" lens camera.

At the very least, it is the economical version, as I have that gear already, then again, I am pulling mission money for the time being and have decided that parts of that is going towards something nice when I am done in round 1 with 42 concecutive days of 12-16 hours work days, trotting 15-20K steps a day... :D
 
Location
Finland
I gather that Ricoh GR's most redeeming quality is the masterpiece of a lens, the 18.3mm f/2.8.

The new 26mm has to be pretty good also.

The M4/3 killer is the Panasonic 20mm no doubt but without snap focus and slow autofocus perf overall, this new GR IIIx might be a real hoot. Especially combine the fact that stabilized M4/3 cameras tend to be way larger than the GR3 with its stabilization...
 
Last edited:
Location
S. Oregon Coast
Real Name
Andrew L
According to the above video, the GRx is a bit fatter, so the cameras would probably be feeling different when gripped. I am somewhat stoked over this one, I have been shuffling to and from the GRIII, yearning for a fixed 35mm option, but I could probably live quite well with the 40mm. The question is if I am not "better" served with the Panasonic GM1 or GX880 and the 20mm if I want a "fixed" lens camera.

At the very least, it is the economical version, as I have that gear already, then again, I am pulling mission money for the time being and have decided that parts of that is going towards something nice when I am done in round 1 with 42 concecutive days of 12-16 hours work days, trotting 15-20K steps a day... :D
Yes, comparing the exterior photos on the Ricoh Imaging (Japan, English version) website, there's a tiny bit more depth to the back of the body, and the front ring sticks out noticeably more.

Sounds like you're going to need a nice treat as a reward for all that work! ;)
 
Location
S. Oregon Coast
Real Name
Andrew L
I gather that Ricoh GR's most redeeming quality is the masterpiece of a lens, the 18.3mm f/2.8.

The new 26mm has to be pretty good also.

The M4/3 killer is the Panasonic 20mm no doubt but without snap focus and slow autofocus perf overall, this new GR IIIx might be a real hoot. Especially combine the fact that stabilized M4/3 cameras tend to be way larger than the GR3 with its stabilization...
If it compares even a little bit to the 20/1.7 I'll be happy, but of course with a smaller max aperture (depth of field will be close, and the Ricoh's sensor will more than compensate at higher ISO for the smaller aperture). I will be surprised, but happy, if the 26.1mm GR lens turns out to have as much character as the others, early galleries are quite decent, but not high-res enough to really judge the character of the lens: Gallery - YOSHIHIKO UEDA / RICOH GR III/GR IIIx | RICOH IMAGING
 

Derek

Rookie
Location
Minneapolis
Specifications on the downloadable information sheet include info for 4:3 and 16:9 aspect ratios, as well as adjustable image roation in 0.1-degree increments, as well as "enhanced RAW development function" though not mentioned what those are.
Oh, my, the GR I’ve always wished for: 40mm, 4:3, pocketable, APS-C. I‘m tempted to preorder a camera for the first time in my life…
 
Location
S. Oregon Coast
Real Name
Andrew L
Oh, my, the GR I’ve always wished for: 40mm, 4:3, pocketable, APS-C. I‘m tempted to preorder a camera for the first time in my life…
From the Euro price I'm guessing it'll be $1K here in the US, a $100 premium over the GRIII. Still, I might preorder (only other time I've done so was for the GRIII) to get it in my hands as quickly as possible and make a decision. I'll have to sell something if I get it.
 

mumu

Regular
From the other responses, it sounds like it was a good move for Ricoh to release this camera. For ME, though, it's a disappointment because it means Ricoh is unlikely, in the near future, to release a model with a flip-up rear screen and weather sealing (to reduce the risk of dust on the sensor). The 40-equiv lens isn't particularly appealing to me since one of my favourite features of that camera is Snap Focus and with a 40-equiv lens, that means DoF at a given aperture will now be narrower. But congratulations to everyone who just wanted a 40-equiv GR.
 

dermaus

Regular
Location
Pacific Northwest
Real Name
Jeff
I wonder if perhaps Ricoh decided to slap the newly developed 40mm equivalent on (nearly) the same body to squeeze out as many sales as possible before moving on to a 28mm equivalent GR IV with tilting screen, then later the 40mm equivalent GR IVx also with tilting screen.
 
Top