Ricoh GR Digital III hits the review bench, collects plaudits
By Vlad Savov 
posted August 21st 2009 9:27AM
posted August 21st 2009 9:27AM
posted August 21st 2009 9:27AM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
For a $700 camera it sure LOOKS cheap.
Yeah, it looks like one of those toys that squirt you with water when you press the shutter button.
For the price being
I would rather take a PEN, it's more fun.
Shit you can't get one......
But anyway this camera is not overpriced but terribly designed.
Fixed focal-length, not fixed focus. Big difference!
Yeah, I was a little confused there.
What if it's both?
Landscapes only?
Dissapointing news on the noise - there's a definite market for real quality prosumer compacts, but not if they have to put up with shoddy image quality. At least back in the days of 35mm, the smallest compacts and the biggest SLRs all shot on the same size frame of whatever quality film you chose, so there was no reason why a good compact (and a good photographer) couldn't match the output of an SLR.
With digital that just doesn't seem to be the case - if it's a compact camera it must use a smaller sensor and have worse quality. I'm not sure why that's the case to be honest.
Hm, maybe because it's not easily pulled off in a way that puts out a mass-compatible product at mass-compatible prices. The Sigma DP Series comes at a bearable price, but it is not really mass-compatible in any way — and I guess if Sigma changed it (speed, screen, better low light performance with short exposures, whatever YOU dislike about it), it would be two or three times its price. And how many $2000 compacts will you sell?
Ok, why does the scary Palm Pre actress have to be in Engadget's advertising? My PTSD is already bad enough from the one time I saw a vagina. Diazepam ASAP!
Still doesn't compare to the LX3. :)
Word.
You have to understand, GRD is a cult digital point and shoot. With the fix 28mm (and now f/1.9!) it's perfect for street snap and lomo style pics. I call it the "designer point n shoot"....
The black body is full meta btw. You call it cheap looking, I call it under-state and low profile design - which btw hasn't change for 3 generations. Just look up GRD I II, and III. They all look identical which I think is brilliant.
Yes I am a GRD fan. :)
Can't you do that with any old crappy point and shoot?
What's the perfect walk-around street camera? The one you have with you, which for me the Motorola Q. God help me. Maybe I can start my own Motorola Q cult. Did you know it can shoot movies?
"The sole blemishes found were the price (£529 / $699) and noise issues beyond ISO 800"
...oh, and having a fixed focal length...
And for the record, "sole" is used in place of "single." You can't have more than one sole blemish.
The nice! I was spoiled by Sigma, so small sensor compacts usually only get a "meh" out of me. Yet if I was sure that the DP Series was not for me (they are demanding), I'd pick this up. I really like Ricoh's designs. They are pure and focus on the essentials. They don't look or feel like toys and are also not made extra heavy to lure you into thinking they were hewn from a solid piece of metal — like certain other makers' products.
Should have been 24mm equivalent for the price.
Very fast prime lens = low light shots without the flash
Because when I think "thorough" I imagine a subjective review of a camera with no comparison between competing models.
I used to have a GRD (mk I) and they are nice cameras, although that early model was slow as hell for saving RAW files! The fixed focal length should give better IQ than it does but the buttons are great and it's zero shutter lag for street photos is awesome! They seem to have improved a few things on the newer models but... After seeing the images from the Panasonic LX3 the new Ricoh seems a bit boring and inferior.
The LX3 has better high ISO performance, a wider lens, a bit of an optical zoom, actually has exposure bracketing (although still a bit crap). The f/2.0 lens is not vastly different from the f/1.9 of the Ricoh. The LCD is not as high res and it doesn't quite have the Ricoh's 180 second long exposure mode but it's a much nicer looking camera that costs a bit over half the price of the Ricoh. For me the Ricoh fails in too many areas to justify that massive price, if I can find one, my next purchase will be the LX3.
Most of the commenters here might as well be waving a placard that says "You should probably ignore my input, mainly because I have almost certainly never taken a great photo in my life and have no intention of ever learning to do so."
The GR series is not without its flaws, and a very specific sweet spot - but if you think it looks cheap (read: should be shiny, and have stickers on it) and wish it had a zoom lens, there are certainly cameras out there that will suit your needs better. This camera is for photographers, not gadget hounds.
Looks great but expensive, unfortunatly, I had a very bad experience with Ricoh when I brought back my camera covered by the waranty to fix the zoom: Ricoh didn't want to cover this repair and asked me 50% of the price of the new cam! So not only Ricoh sales expensive cameras, but if you have any problem with it even during the waranty period, forget it! I advise to buy other brands such as Panasonic or Canon, where you should not face this kind of issue.
Stay away from Ricoh !
These features seem interesting, unfortunatly, Ricoh is a very bad company if you have any problem during the warranty period; they refused to cover the fixing of the zoom that didn't work. Not only it ruined my vacations because I could'nt take pictures, but Ricoh asked me 50% of the price of the new cam! So I advise to buy other brands such as Panasonic or Canon, where you should not face this kind of issue.