david-w Posted July 16, 2006 Share Posted July 16, 2006 Great stuff Kei. I have been considering whether to jump in and buy one of these, and your shots are pushing me closer to the edge! I currently use a digital SLR and I'm finding it difficult to work around the bulk and mirror slap when it comes to street or candids in quiet places. I would also like something to fit in a pocket and take places where the DSLR is a chore to carry. The problem I have with current compact cameras is that while they may have less noise than the GRD, it is obvious that the noise has only been processed away and replaced with a smeary, painterly mess. I find that noise looks better in prints than the horrible effects of noise reduction. I have looked at some of the ISO 1600 samples and while they're quite noisy, the grain is quite uniform and seems to be spread equally over the colour channels. When converted to black and white, it actually looks very much like film grain. This is a much better effect than the blotchy low-frequency smeary images that even some DSLRs make. Does anyone know where I might find some RAW files taken at high ISO? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david-w Posted July 16, 2006 Share Posted July 16, 2006 Kei, I would also be very interested to know how the prints at A4 turn out. This is my normal print size, and if it can handle it ok, I think my mind may be made up :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nkag Posted July 16, 2006 Share Posted July 16, 2006 Thanks guys. D White - at high ISO's, you can turn off the noise reduction. BTW, the A4 prints came out fine. I don't see why you shouldn't be able to print beyond this either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nowhereman Posted July 16, 2006 Author Share Posted July 16, 2006 >>>I don't see why you shouldn't be able to print beyond this either.<<< In my experience, if A4 prints are okay, one can go much, much larger because the viewing distance is also larger: the normal viewing distance is twice the pciture's diagonal. Incidentally, a little over a week ago, on my way to Africa, I saw the Moriyma exhibition at the Sydney Biennale (Gallery of NSW): the prints are magnficint -- 100x150 cm (40x60 inches) and most or all were taken with the Ricoh GR-1. --Mitch/Lubumbashi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonas_yip1 Posted July 16, 2006 Share Posted July 16, 2006 great pics kei. Can someone with the camera describe the " snapshot focus mode" that Toke mentions using? I wasn't able to discern from the specs what that setting did exactly. I presume it is some fixed-focus mode... but does that also mean it forces a small aperture to maximize depth-of-field? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark r tomlinson Posted July 16, 2006 Share Posted July 16, 2006 I have been experimenting with grain in GRD monochrome images. I published an entry on this to my blog: http://alt-digital.blogspot.com/2006/07/controlling-grain-on-ricoh-gr-digital.html My conclusion is that RAW is not better than jpeg unless you spend a lot of time and effort and even then probably not noticeable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jongraham1 Posted July 16, 2006 Share Posted July 16, 2006 I just got my GRD as a replacement for my clux-1. As far as I can determine, the 'snap' setting fixes the focus at one specific distance from the lens (I think it is 8 feet). But in reality, because of the extreme DOF, anything 4 feet away will be 'in focus'. This is if you set the aperature at f2.4, of course the smaller the f stop the greater the DOF. It is GREAT small digital and at ISO 1600 jpeg in BW mode, it is very 'flm noir' and more than acceptable because it just looks like high speed film grain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john.l Posted July 16, 2006 Share Posted July 16, 2006 great stuff Mitch! they look like real pictures! lol still got my GR1 although I hardly use it now - would love the GRD keep posting the pics, I have also bookmarked your page to keep track regards JohnL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert x Posted July 16, 2006 Share Posted July 16, 2006 this thread is now officially famous....... http://theonlinephotographer.blogspot.com/ robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray g. Posted July 16, 2006 Share Posted July 16, 2006 Some more excellent examples: <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/johncarolan/sets/72057594056344136/">Ricoh GR-D</a> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david cunningham Posted July 16, 2006 Share Posted July 16, 2006 kei... how do you turn off the noise reduction when using high iso. i can't find that one in the manual. thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
albano Posted July 16, 2006 Share Posted July 16, 2006 Hi guys, I tried to post this in T.O.P., but I was "moderated" (censored). Sincerely, I find this thread funny. It's a tipical case of what's called "reduction of distortion" (or something like that) in marketing terms. It's when a customer needs to feel good with the money he spent on something so he invents justifications to it. In this case, the supposed "grain like" quality of GR-D high iso noise. Come ooooon!!!! It's simply noise!! Of course in b&w has more appeal, but it's noise. Based on the several examples here (including the amazing pictures from Kei), I can't see any magic in the quality of the noise, it looks like noise. I don't think Ricoh got the grial of diminutive sensor technology. But this camera is clearly targeted (please, no offense) to the photo snob. Yes, you pay 2, 3 or 4 times more to get less. You get a fixed 5mm lens, with a not so fast 2.4 aperture (but you know, it's "magic" it's tack sharp, and it's a prime, of course, serious photographers don't use zooms, you amateur). There's a lot of zoom digicams with an aperture of 2.8 in the wide end for less money, but since they are consumer cheap digicams, they're not worth it. Just pay three times more and get the same sensor but less versatility to feel a serious photographer. Now you're a digital HCB!!! I mean, I'm plenty sure you guys on this thread would discarded a cheaper camera with the exact amount and class of noise as "unacceptable noise", "unusable above 400 iso", but since you paid simply too much, you need to romantisize it, make it "pro" and special. Maybe being in the red dot forum has to do with it. I love Moriyama, and own books with his work, but he uses the film version of the camera. Obviously, he talked well about the digital version, but he uses film. So, don't feel "I'm like Daido". Well, sorry, just needed to say that. By the way, I would like to own one, but with at least a 3x zoom and a $300 price (that's what it's worth imho). And I don't have nothing against primes. I shot exclusively with them for 6 years, got my first zoom with my digicam, so I'm not an anti-prime guy, I'm just anti-snob. Regards, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travis1 Posted July 16, 2006 Share Posted July 16, 2006 If if I buy the grd, im a snob? lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travis1 Posted July 16, 2006 Share Posted July 16, 2006 with regards to "digital film grain", im no expert. But i don't see anything wrong with trying to reproduce film-like grains in digital modules, since to me, that's where the grail is. I think the degree of success of such mimicking(sp)is dependent on how you convert from colour to b/w in PS. I have some actions in PS for converting colour jpeg to b/w for my Ricoh GX 5mp. Not perfect, but pretty decent. What do you expect? film exactly?! Here's a attached file. If anyone is keen on the action, please email me. ;) <img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/4691244-lg.jpg"></a> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nowhereman Posted July 17, 2006 Author Share Posted July 17, 2006 >>>It's simply noise!! Of course in b&w has more appeal, but it's noise.<<< You may say what you wish, and I've no problem with you calling it noise: what I'm interested in is how it looks; and to me it looks very much like film grain. You can look at my shot above at ISO1600, which does look like film at 1600. And Kei's shots above at 800 also look like film grain. Pretty good for "noise." In my, admittedly, limited experience with digital cameras I haven't seen other ones that produces such grain-like noise. --Mitch/Lubumbashi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nowhereman Posted July 17, 2006 Author Share Posted July 17, 2006 Here is an interesting posting on the type of "grain" the GR-D produces at ISO800 in RAW versus JPG mode. The conclusion is that the GR-D's RAW to JPG conversion engine does a better job at producing attractive pictures than working with the RAW files. http://alt-digital.blogspot.com/2006/07/controlling-grain-on-ricoh-gr-digital.html --Mitch/Lubumbashi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nowhereman Posted July 17, 2006 Author Share Posted July 17, 2006 For those interested in seeing the quality possible with the GR-D, have a look at John Carolan's slideshow at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/johncarolan/sets/72057594056344136/ --Mitch/Lubumbashi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike_guthman Posted July 17, 2006 Share Posted July 17, 2006 I've been following this thread with great interest. I've been looking for a compact that would just serve as an always have along when carrying the DSLR was inconvient. The comments on the Ricoh seem that it is that and much more. My question is... Did you buy the optional optical view finder? If not, how is using the LCD to compose? Thanks for responding Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nowhereman Posted July 17, 2006 Author Share Posted July 17, 2006 Mike: I didn't buy it because I have the Voigtlander 28VF back in Bangkok, which I'll try when I get back at the end of the week. I sort of like using the LCD but it's not ideal if you use reading glasses as I do. --Mitch/Lubumbashi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david cunningham Posted July 17, 2006 Share Posted July 17, 2006 i bought the optical viewfinder and i must say i love it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark r tomlinson Posted July 17, 2006 Share Posted July 17, 2006 I also have the viewfinder. It is pretty nice, but expensive. There are cheaper alternatives so I hear. I also like using the screen which is a surprise to me. If you use the viewfinder you can turn off the screen to save on batteries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Herbert Posted July 17, 2006 Share Posted July 17, 2006 Glorious Grain? Why? digital,film are both very nice choices in their own way. Why are you all seeking the sameness from both. Sort of like lemmings doing the same thing over and over again to the end of time. Boring.<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cosina_snap Posted July 17, 2006 Share Posted July 17, 2006 digital "grain?" kinda like "tofurkey." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spearhead Posted July 17, 2006 Share Posted July 17, 2006 How many shots per charge are you getting on the standard battery pack? Music and Portraits Blog: Life in Portugal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roger_smith4 Posted July 17, 2006 Share Posted July 17, 2006 I love Tofurkey, especially with melted cheese. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now