"Fast" compact

[strange biscuits]

I am intending to replace my Ricoh GR1v 35mm with a digital

alternative. I need a fast response (ie minimal shutter lag), a lens

that starts at 28mm rather than the usual 38mm, and it needs to fit in

my pocket.

So far I seem to be looking at the Canon S60 and the Ricoh Caplio GX.

Has anyone any experience with either or both of these cameras or

intend any other that might meet my requirements.

The GX is supposedly fast-acting but is quite difficult to get hold of

(in the UK) but I have heard very little of the Canon's speed although

the spec is similar.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

[mtwhite]

Fuji just came out with a line of 28mm-equivalent compact cameras

(E500, E510, and E550 at 4,5 and 6 megapixels respectively), but I've

never tried them myself so I can't comment on what the shutter lag is

like. On paper, they're pretty good, but I have no idea if they live

up to the specs in real life.

[godfrey]

The Panasonic FZ20 is one of the more responsive small sensor cameras on the market

too.

 

Godfrey

[dean_g]

I've got the GX and for me it works great. Has many of the features of the GR1 like the snap mode, manual exposure, or aperture priority etc. And the lens is sharp, allowing for it being a compact zoom (not quite a GR1 lens of course, but darn good). I chose the GX over the Canon s60 for its speed, somewhat smaller size, and because it's a Ricoh and I like Ricoh products. The design of the interface is excellent, and overall I think Ricoh was trying to accomodate the avid photographer. Overall they succeeded quite well IMO.

[jamiew]

I second the consideration of the fuji E550 (it actually starts at 32mm but is super fast). Do not consider the E500 or E510 from Fuji as they do not have the high speed engine of the E550. Also look at the Fuji 800 since it shars the lens/sensor/processing with the E550 but in a metal case and adds an AF assist light (you will pay about $150 more however).

 

While I think Canons take the best photos they are slow slow slow (I own only Canon digital cameras)

 

The Ricoh's claim to fame is it's quick shutter lag. From what I have heard it's startup time and shot to shot times are nothing to write home about (better than most but not the best). I also have read bad things about it's image quality (see link). That being said I really want to like this camera since it offers me everything I want in a small digital camera (AA batteries, hotshoe, fast shutter release, etc..)

 

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_reviews/caplio_gx_pg5.html

 

Two other camera that are very fast are the Sony W1 and Sony P-150. Unfortunatly they only start at 38mm. If they were 28mm they would be perfect.

 

It sounds like you narrowed the field down well, but you should also check out the Fujis since they are also fast and have excellent image qualtiy.

[leslie_cheung]

My mini review of gx:

 

Great:

 

quick lag (including AF)

28mm 2.5

compact and well made

price

ergonomics

 

 

Bad:

 

TiFF mode is sloooow (I don't use it)

Flash is funky (I hardly use it) and long recharge

 

Everything else is so so.

hope this helps.

[christopher.]

I agree about canon being SLOW. Keep in mind that although the Sony P100,P120,P150 type cameras are very very fast, they take the pic even if the subject is not in focus. If you don't wait for it to finish focusing is will still fire. That can be good or bad. I would recomend the sony if you want "fast." As far as that Fuji 550 goes, I played with it yesterday, and it is nice but the menu system is pretty weak ( I could look past this ) and if you use ISO 800 it will not let you shoot over 3 mega pixels, and it is far from what I would call pocketable ( which I can't look past). I think Ricoh is the only inexpensive option from 28 that I can think of, but the image quality is not very good, and they lie about the ISO 800 - if you compare it to another camera's exposure settings it's more like 200-400. Taking that into consideration, it's noise levels are really bad.

 

Sound's like we are looking for the same camera. I've been on this "quest" for a while now. I have been willing to give up on the quality a bit for speed because I already have film and Dslr cams for quality, but every camera I look at seems to have some achile's heel. Example: the canon S60 is just too slow. If it were as fast as the Sony, I could look past the size. I was dead set on the black Sony P120, but then when you add up the cost of thier special memory stick and battery, I just can't justify the cost because the image quality to $ ratio becomes way too high.

 

I think what it boils down to, is we need to wait a few more years to get what we want - An exact copy of a Ricoh GR1v, but digital that takes AA batteries and compact flash. I'm selfish and impatient so I will get the P120.

[leslie_cheung]

>>>if you compare it to another camera's exposure settings it's

more like 200-400. Taking that into consideration, it's noise

levels are really bad. <<<

 

I just check my gx with my film cams. It doesn't seem to "lie" as

you claimed. I consider the gx above iso 200 to be noisey but

that is similar to other digicam w/ same size sensor. No?

[jamiew]

Again as much as I want to like the GX EVERY review of it has said the image quality sucks compared to it's compitition and this has been consistant for ALL ricoh cameras. If this was not true then I would be shooting a GX right now.

 

Chris - If the Battery and memory stick were your big issues with the P120 look at the Sony W1. It has the exact same internals and lens as the P120, BUT cam accept an adaptor for filters and converters, and uses AA batteries. It is actually a bit faster too, but nothing noticable. As for memory stick in a camera like this. Now that Scandisk and Lexar are making them the prices are comming down.

[Sandeha Lynch]

JB, you didn't mention how you'll use your images, but if you're viewing them online the GX might be fine. And while I can't compare it to other digicams, it seems fast enough - I never get the feeling that it's slow. And I wonder if those reviews included shots taken at ISO64 ...

<p>

<a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/2499541">sample GX shot, converted to BW in PS</a>

<p>

<b>Jessops</b> UK now stock the Ricoh Caplio GX.

<p>

The plus side is ... it's black, you can set the white balance to your taste, and it has a hot shoe. I can't quote the tecchie specs but a basic test suggests that it's good for an IR filter as well. I've had mine 6 months; not used it a lot but it's always there when I need it!

[Sandeha Lynch]

I've just had a look at the review: http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_reviews/caplio_gx_samples.html. It claims that some of the sample shots were taken at ISO125 ... which doesn't exist on this camera. <p>ISO settings run: 64/100/200/400/800/1600 but as someone else noted, 400 is noisy. I use mine on ISO200 most of the time.

[franka t.l.]

Two seperate issue here. FOA, I kind of disagree with most here. I've used the Ricoh GX for quite some time and its Image quality, while not exactly the best, was not quite as lousy as most put it. I gather its the conservative image sharpening that takes its edge away. Its quite usable as a caasual carry around.

 

That being said, I am still trying long and hard to find a truly pocketable Fast Compact as JB do. I do not need zoom, a fast fix focals will serve me just fine. And I do not need wide Angle either. Even coverage like the 38mm equvilant is OK with me. Well the closets I 've got to is the Canon Ixus SD-10/SD20 and the Contax i4r. Close enough buit not quite. 2.8 is not fast enough for available light at low ISO. NO manual adjustment what so ever; and No RAW or Tiff.

 

I am still waiting for a decent one to come by ..... !!!

[leslie_cheung]

>>>>Again as much as I want to like the GX EVERY review of it

has said the image quality sucks compared to it's compitition

and this has been consistant for ALL ricoh cameras. If this was

not true then I would be shooting a GX right now. <<<<

 

What a load of shyt. This is the same guy who said the canon

G3 is as fast to use as any digicam out there. You also said the

GX is "average" just a few weeks ago. Which is it Jamie?? or

is average and sucks the same in your dictionary?

[jamiew]

Leslie.

 

Since you have made this personal then I will too. Learn to read.

 

I said in THIS thread and I quote "While I think Canons take the best photos they are slow slow slow (I own only Canon digital cameras)"

 

If you are looking at prior postings of mine then fine but the world moves on and so should you (Canon's did use to be rather fast compared to their competition).

 

I (emphisis on I) never said the GX takes average or sucky photos. I said I READ (emphisis on READ) that it takes bad photos.

 

Before you go making personal attacks take a moment and realize that I was not attacking the camera. I just was saying that based on what I have read I will not be buying the GX nore could i reccomend it.

[leslie_cheung]

>>>Again as much as I want to like the GX EVERY review of it

has said the image quality sucks compared to it's

compitition<<<

 

You also said the GX image is average *a few weeks* ago in

another thread. Now "average" and "sucks compared to its

competition" are abit different don't you think? Anyway, you are

entitled to your take on the gx but atleast be fair and *consistent*

about it for the sake of the original poster.

[jamiew]

actually all the latest reviews do say the image quality is bad. I update my arguements with the newest information. And I still maintain that if Ricoh can get the image quality up this is the perfect compact. But the truth of the matter is it is not.

[strange biscuits]

Thanks for the replies - I didn't realise how "passionate" some of us were.

 

The Caplio spec seems closest to what I want but the reservations about image quality are creeping in now. I'd want at least a good 10x8 print out of it but many reviews seem to really question its ability. Plus in the UK Jessops are quoting 6 weeks delivery on their web-site - a long time in the digital camera world.

I suppose if I ditch the 28mm bit I'd have more scope. Any suggestions here?

 

As it stands the Fuji E550 of F810 are probably the favourites now. The Canon S60 sounds too slow for street shooting etc. I have a DSLR which obviously address many of these issues but they are just too big and attract too much attention for some purposes.

 

I think there is still a problem with digicams in that we are arguing as to whether we can get a decent shot out of a ?300 camera - at that price point quality should be a given - or perhaps I'm just old-fashioned.

[leslie_cheung]

Just for my information...where are all these bad reviews. I

would like to see them. Some URL besides Steve-digicams

please.

[pbizarro]

Me too. I am tired of reading that my Powershot Pro 1 is not capable of good results with ISOs above 50. And that at ISO 400 the noise is unacceptable. Do people actually go out and take pictures these days???

 

I also have a Leica CM that contrary to "net reviewers" is not capable of taking pictures and is riddled with bugs. Surprisingly, it delivers the goods!

 

Sorry about the rant... Bottom line is, read the reviews with a grain, or two, of salt. If possible, go to a dealer and try things out.

[jamiew]

Leslie (From a randon google search forRicoh GX):

 

http://www.pyroport.com/reviews/32_5.asp

"Overall, I have to say that I am very disappointed with this offering from Ricoh. Perhaps if I had been able to use it a lot more and get to grips with its finer points I may have had a different opinion, but the poor lens quality, slow storage times, no data in the viewfinder, strange effects on angular lines, very high noise levels etc. make me think that even at sub ?300 for an auto point and shoot, it is not such a good deal. These bad points by far outweigh the good, in my opinion."

 

http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews_ricoh_caplio_gx.php#Conclusion

"The second and most disappointing aspect of the Capilo GX is once again image-quality, which has proved to be a thorn in the side of all the Ricoh models that I have reviewed. Whilst the camera is a joy to operate, the actual images themselves are only just about adequate, being very similar to those from the Caplio RX. Large amounts of chromatic aberrations are present in high-contrast situations, the colours are a little on the dull side and noise is very apparent at ISO 400 and faster. If only Ricoh could have improved the image quality, they would have had a winner on their hands, but sadly I can't quite recommend the Caplio GX because of this major stumbling block. Ricoh have improved the handling of their Caplio series by adding aperture/manual control - next time they need to concentrate on what the camera is actually recording."

 

http://new.dpnow.com/908c.html

"Alas, the Caplio GX is a frustrating disappointment. The camera is nice to use and to hold. OK, there are some irritations, like the flash system charging lock-out and the occasional reticence to shoot when ordered, but overall ? the Caplio GX is a camera that looks and feels like it should take great pictures, but it doesn't."

 

http://www.dcviews.com/_Ricoh/gx.htm

(no text)

 

http://www.shuttertalk.com/reviews/ricohgx/index.php#summary

Chromatic aberration, which was a concern with the RX, is still present; however, they only appear in a fraction of the shots. Ultimately, the image quality produced by the GX is good ? with sufficiently detailed, noise free images that have pleasing colour representation and balance. Finally, I must give credit to Ricoh for squeezing some great features into an elegantly shaped body that handles ergonomics well.

 

http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/camera/review/20/page_6.html

The overall conclusion is that the camera definitely leaves behind a good impression and that it certainly is worthwhile to have a closer look at this camera in your local photo shop!

 

Since Ricoh is not avaliable in the US for me to test out I have no choice but to go by the reviews. and when a site like Steves-Digicams that is notorious for being positive about most everything they review says it has bad image qualtiy I really take notice. If it was avaliable locally I would go down to the camera store form my own opionion, but it is not so I look to others. I totally believe in the try before you buy principle and encourage everyone else to follow, but when someone asks for a reccomendation I will relate what I know/read and all I said was reviews were critical so I stand by my comments.

 

Actually this is all funny since the only real conclusion I had in my original post was that he should add the Fuji 550/800 to his short list.

[franka t.l.]

A Picture worth a thousand word, so without further ado,

 

Let's go to this Japanese News site on the Ricoh GX which the reviewer/reporter actually take series of image and post them unedited from the Camera. And judge for yourself. The Text is Japanese, but do click on the image sample to get that full size pic ..

 

http://arena.nikkeibp.co.jp/rev/camera/20040713/109053/index2.shtml

[leslie_cheung]

>>>High noise level above ISO 400<<<

 

 

Which small sensor digicam does not have high noise above

400 Jamie? It is a load of crap. Every digicam have high noise

at that iso not to mention most don't go higher than ISO400.

 

>>>Large amounts of chromatic aberrations are present in

high-contrast situations<<<

 

Again, which digicam does not have problem shooting a high

contrast scene? It is also a problem in $4000 dslr for that

matter.

 

>>>the colours are a little on the dull side<<<

 

I agree but there is PS to pump it up if desired. Not everyone like

loonytune disney color.

 

>>>no data in the viewfinder<<<

 

thanks god, some people actually prefer a nondistracting

viewfinder you know ala leica

 

>>>like the flash system charging lock-out<<<

 

I agree, it takes awhile to recharge but it's not a problem if you

are shooting street/candid where flash is often not popular.

Again, the 1k nikon d70 flash takes awhile to recharge as well.

 

>>>poor lens quality, slow storage times<<<

 

This is arbitrary. TIFF is painfully slow but jpeg in sequential

mode is more than adequate. How many fps can you shoot with

a leica? The lens is very good imo. There are darkcorners

sometimes at 28mm wideopen so does the my leica. Barrel

distortion at 28mm is present but not enough to kill the shot imo.

 

IMHO, the caplio gx with all its shortcoming (very few) is the most

leica like in digicamdom. With its compact size, short lag, 28mm

2.5 and great ergomoics all for $400, it's hard to beat else get a

contax T3 or hexar AF and shoot film.

[dean_g]

I couldn't find one to test in the US either, so I bought it. The GX is just a fine camera. I've read everyone of the reviews, they are generally full of inaccuracies regarding everything from operating the camera to how they are taking the shots. As far as I'm concerned, (and I've been USING this GX for 5 months, daily), the only thing the GX fails at is being a no-brainer idiot proof P&S.. and you can draw your own conclusions on how I think this reflects on the majority of the reviewers. The only bonafide and respected review site to have covered the GX is Steve's digicams, and while he didn't feel it quite lived up to Ricoh's claims to being a "professional" camera (whatever that is), he gave it a positive review overall, and felt it was very competitive in the compact 5 meg digicam class. Personally I think it's far better than that.

 

Startup time to first shot ready, btw, is 1sec. Shot to shot times for the first 3 are 1 sec with a fast SD card at full jpeg res, and then it slows. Not a problem for me. Shut down time is a little on the long side if it is finishing a write to the card. It's silent, it's very fast, and the image quality is excellent.<div></div>

[leslie_cheung]

:)<div></div>

[jamiew]

leslie.

 

It's amazing how much you look at individual words in people's arguements and miss the whole point. All I said was that based on the reviews on the web the GX's image quality is worse than it's competition and that the original poster should also look at the alternatives. Wheather or not it is good enough for you, or anyone, was not one of my arguements. . Man you argue like a Leica owner.. always feeling the need to justify your purchase to others by attacking their opinions. Why can't you just say.. The reviews may be critical, but it's good enought for me.