Douglas, I do miss the tilt rear panel of the 5N but my solution is to wear pants I don't care about or shorts so getting down low isn't a big problem with me, and the VF-2 viewfinder does tilt to 90 degrees. If moving from the NEX-7 which has an up-down tilt articulated rear panel that'd be a harder transition. While there is no denying how useful a tilt panel is, I don't find that I'm pining for the NEX in that regard.
What I have given up in moving to the GXR, in decreasing order of importance:
- close up functionality, as I don't have the 28 or 50mm EFOV lensor modules
- working in low light advantage, definitely Sony's
- tilt rear panel
- use any manual glass on the planet
- some megapixels here and there
What I have gained, most important first:
- for me, far more reliable (and faster to achieve) focus of manual focus lenses
- performance of ZM Biogons markedly better
Those two points really say it all for me. I'm struck by how much better focus I can achieve and more quickly despite potentially being handicapped by an inferior viewfinder (tongue in cheek that last). In fact I've been able to grab focus without the viewfinder, or my glasses, using only the rear panel in situations that regularly stumped me with the NEX-5N. Since focus is everything, I didn't even need point two to seal the deal but if I were to stick with manual focus rangefinder lenses as is my desire, getting much better performance out of them right to the corners certainly confirms for me that this camera is a keeper.
I do appreciate the build and convenience of the GXR and am glad to get a hot shoe back as part of the deal too. Had the NEX-7 performed better with lenses like mine I would have quite possibly stayed with Sony.
Certainly it has occurred to me that the GXR might be a product line with a limited life span but I'm hoping it has enough appeal in the home market in Japan to keep them moving it forward. I'd buy another one if they refresh the body / viewfinder and bring out a full frame module for M lenses or perhaps better still (from a corporate unity perspective), a module adaptable for M mount or Pentax mount with optional adapters made by Ricoh themselves.
Howdy, Michael. Interesting about the manual focus. Did you have a 5N EVF? You're the first person I've seen that prefers the GXR manual focusing, when comparing the two.
I'm not sure what you mean about the 7's tilt lcd. The 5N has an up/down tilt LCD, too. The mechanisms are a little different, but they both tilt up and down for low and high shots.
p.s. disclaimer, I don't want anyone to think I'm being overly negative about the GXR. I think it looks really cool, and, as a 5N owner, I have questions, since Ive yet to handle a GXR.
douglasf13 wrote:
Howdy, Michael. Interesting about the manual focus. Did you have a 5N EVF? You're the first person I've seen that prefers the GXR manual focusing, when comparing the two.
I think Henrik likes/prefers it too but I don't have a handy quote so he should speak for himself.
Yes - I bought the 5N and EVF together.
I found manual focus was enhanced with the EVF but I still had problems achieving reliable focus using it or the rear panel and I did use the EVF most of the time. This might just be me.
Or it could be the focus aid implementations have substantive differences. Focus peaking on the Sony is a little more visible than "mode 1" on the GXR but I'm not convinced that it is more usable.
While I do use a tripod often for certain work and found that achieving focus in those working conditions wasn't a barrier to using the NEX, across all that I do I shoot handheld much more often and there I was having problems often enough to be frustrating.
On the GXR so far I've mostly been using "mode 2" focus peaking, which really should be called Predator Focus Assist. Tried it, liked it, haven't much used the other. It isn't that distracting given normal view is a half-shutter press away. Alone or in combo with what to my eyes looks like a smoother more usable magnify mode, it seems to be a winner.
To be fair I should use the camera for a couple of weeks and then see if I still feel the same way but my first blush experience has been decidedly positive in this regard.
I'm not sure what you mean about the 7's tilt lcd. The 5N has an up/down tilt LCD, too. The mechanisms are a little different, but they both tilt up and down for low and high shots.
Embarrassingly, after several weeks of near very active use I'd never tilted my 5N's screen down but I do remember seeing this done elsewhere and forgot. I guess I crawl on my knees more than soar with eagles or compete with crowds and fences.
p.s. disclaimer, I don't want anyone to think I'm being overly negative about the GXR. I think it looks really cool, and, as a 5N owner, I have questions, since Ive yet to handle a GXR.
Nor am I overly negative about the 5N. I recall finding focusing some MF SLR glass easier, for some reason, although those were mostly longer focal lengths now that I think about it which would explain a lot. My issue with focus on the NEX was most definitely concentrated on the wider end of the focal length scale but it is the end I use more than half the time.
The focus advantage, if real and tangible for more than just me, is one that Sony could wipe out with more software development funds being allocated the needs of enthusiast manual focus lens users. In addition to potentially refining the focus peaking / adding predator mode / smoothing magnification Sony should do the no-brainer improvement: Half-press of the shutter bringing you back to the normal composition view really is natural feature for this type of operation and is one feature NEX manual focus users should clamor for.
In addition, having the shutter toggle back to normal view is something I longed for on the NEX as well - hopefully Sony will implement that seemingly obvious feature which must be longed for by winter walkers of deciduous forests everywhere.
A half-press of the shutter will get you out of magnified view and back to normal view on the NEX.
ken.vs.ryu wrote:
[A half-press of the shutter will get you out of magnified view and back to normal view on the NEX.
True, but the half press does not pull you out of focus peaking, which can with some subjects be so cluttered with edge outline highlights to be distracting from composition.
Ricoh's half-press acts as a toggle, letting you go back and forth until you are satisfied with focus and can /focus/ on composition before activating the shutter. It's very natural.
Douglas; I am the "other guy". I still have both cameras but the NEX5N will be shipped out to the next person on monday.
I can't run two similar cameras that operate so differently. The more I use both the more I realize I prefer the Ricoh in nearly every way when it comes to sheer handling and shooting pleasure. Image quality is slightly better on the NEX5N (possible exception being Michaels findings with ZM/RF lenses on the M module) and Sony does high ISO better.
I am with Michael all the way on this, pros and cons, we seem to see it the same way and have come to the same conclusion on the way we prefer it. I also find that the Ricoh GXR is easier to focus than the NEX5N is, even without the focus aid I nail it easier on the GXR.
I have yet to put the ZM's to hard work on the M module but I find Michaels finding the M module performing better than the NEX5N sensor interesting. It would explain a few things I have seen when I've shot the ZM18 on NEX5N.
The GXR hasn't the best add ons, and is perhaps not the best bang for the buck out there. But for a small outfit with a few specialized lenses I find it hard to beat. I hope they will not stop developing the GXR system as there are a few really easy to adapt solutions that would make a great little camera class leading:
Articulated LCD
Better EVF
Better battery life (batt's are cheap though as they are same as other cameras)
Better/faster image buffer and slightly faster frame rate
More modules, perhaps one with an "open mount", or one that is a more versatile platform than the M module.
A new GXRII body would only need a minor facelift: articulated LCD and faster buffer/frame rate. A better EVF can be sourced from Sony, they already get their A12 sensors from them. Since Sony are phasing out the 12MP sensors I predict that all modules to come will be at least 16MP - the current Sony sensor which is already in the zoom module due to arrive in spring.
The interesting thing is that the Leica M module might very well get the 16MP sensor as well, if Sony has phased out the 12MP. I don't know if I would upgrade, I might, since the body is still the same and only the sensor/mount replaced. This is a pipe dream come true for many I think: a good body and swapping the sensor/mount as technology moves along.
If they will re-release the A12/28 with an A16/28 I am not sure what I would do. The A12/50 macro module is an awesome lens and that might be upgraded over time as well.
What I am REALLY hoping for is a A16/21mm lens... ...I think they have it in a sketch book somewhere already - it's been a classic Ricoh wide angle lens.
Ricoh doesn't move as rapidly as Sony but when the products arrive they seem well thought out. I've decided to keep mine until it falls apart. If Ricoh makes a GXRII I will keep the GXR as backup/work camera.
If FUJI, the dark horse, hits a home run next year with their new mirrorless I might bite, but I'll still keep my GXR for work and active stuff, like climbing and such. I was an early adopter for the GXR and bought it with the A12/50 and on the promise that they would release a 28mm within a year or two - and perhaps a Leica M module. The fulfilled both promises and that is enough for me to think my investment was a solid one. If I had gotten screwed over you would have heard it - I can assure you that. They would have heard it all the way to Ricoh HQ.
Douglas, I am quite sure you would appreciate the build and handling of the GXR. It ain't the prettiest camera but it sure handles well. I am not sure what you would think of the drawbacks. Image quality is resembling NEX5N, which hardly is a surprise since Sony makes all sensors for the APS-C Ricoh modules.
I have seen it written a few times: that Ricoh is a photographer's camera. I can vouch for that. Most other digital camera makers can definitely learn from them, very few do.
If Ricoh ever made a full frame GXR with the aforementioned upgrades and my preferred focal lengths I'd be in digital heaven. They might get around to it by the time I retire, or shortly thereafter.
KenvsRyu: as Michael said it: the shutter button toggles both peaking and magnification on Ricoh. And you can cancel/activate either one out with pressing just one dedicated hard button. One for each function, in my case left/right on the menu cluster. Makes for really fast switching.
If I can focus right away with just the LCD, then I press nothing but the shutter button.
Depending on subject I can activate Peaking directly with the left button or magnification with the right button - or both. And then toggle with shutter button. And at any time cancel either one out. If I need a partial enlargement I hit "ADJ" and move the cursor to any place on the whole image and hit "OK". And then I can toggle all three. Brilliant.
On the NEX5N I would try to do something similar but end up somewhere else on the menu when trying to magnify, ending up somewhere else and not be able to toggle but have to abort and retry - very frustrating and not user friendly at all.
Hi. My needs are very simple, so I'm not really sure how much the better interface of the GXR (or even the NEX-7) would affect me. I basically shoot digital cameras of today just like manual cameras from my childhood. Just give me a shutter button, focus ring, aperture ring and shutter dial, and I'm good, so my daily operation of the NEX-5N, GXR or NEX-7 wouldn't be all that different between them. Of course, the focusing aids of these digital cameras is a new wrinkle in the equation, and I would be curious to try the GXR's, although I'm pretty happy with the 5N's implementation.
Ideally, I'd like the GXR's lack of AA filter/sensor toppings in the NEX-7 body with a way to tilt the EVF like the 5N and GXR...heck, go ahead and throw a 135 sensor in there, too.
Hilariously, the thing that I'd like most from the GXR would be an easy firmware fix from Sony. I'd like to shoot at 1:1 ratio and see a square image in the viewfinder with the 5N. The 5N has a square grid that works okay, but I'd rather see the image masked off like in the GXR.
Ah, what you see as opportunity (the 1:1 image ratio) I see as the damnation of choice. Do I put the camera in 4:3 mode as it was when shipped to me? Or grab just a few extra pixels in both directions with 3:2 only to crop it later back to 4:3 or 1:1? Or throw away a whole bunch but get a nice square 1:1 that I'm oh so used to composing with? Plagued with such choices I might spend the entire day gnawing on the decision of what aspect ratio to venture out into the world with, while all the light quietly slips away...
In the end, I'm just glad I can focus this camera reliably and that my wider angle lenses aren't messed up in the corners and edges. Those were my principal wanna-gets so if the camera didn't deliver on those I wouldn't be able to appreciate the feel of it or how it handles.
kosmoskatten wrote:
..Also I have been rediscovering the A12 50 macro, and I like it more and more...
A week after I bought the GXR M-Module I liked the results I was getting with the Elmarit-21 ASPH so much that I sold both the A12/28 and A12/50. Between the Leica lens and the GXR-M sensor not having the AA filter, I felt that the GXR-M simply blew away the the A12/28 and A12/50 camera units in terms of color accuracy and rendition, resolution, gradation and dynamic range. Between the two camera units, I much preferred the quality of the A12/50, and would perhaps have kept it if I was interested in macro, of which here is one shot:
In several of the posts above there's the wish that the GXR would have an articulated LCD, but that is something I don't have a need for at all. I've been shooting with the electronic viewfinder and it would be great to have the type of resolution of the NEX-7 viewfinder; but ultimately I feel it's more important to look at the subject directly and just use the EVF for framing. I haven't yet started shooting just using the LCD, which is what I used to do with the GRD3. Actually, for street photography, I prefer using the LCD, which I use only for establishing roughly the edges of the frame but look directly at the subject when pressing the shutter. I've yet to to that with the GXR-M. Here are a couple of shots with the Elmarit-21 ASPH.
Are there any macro alternatives for M lenses? Given where they came from I'd think not, or very few. A M to M mount, very thin (an extension tube in other words) would be nice to have in the bag... maybe Hawk's factory could make some.
michaelwatkins wrote:
Ah, what you see as opportunity (the 1:1 image ratio) I see as the damnation of choice. Do I put the camera in 4:3 mode as it was when shipped to me? Or grab just a few extra pixels in both directions with 3:2 only to crop it later back to 4:3 or 1:1? Or throw away a whole bunch but get a nice square 1:1 that I'm oh so used to composing with? Plagued with such choices I might spend the entire day gnawing on the decision of what aspect ratio to venture out into the world with, while all the light quietly slips away...
In the end, I'm just glad I can focus this camera reliably and that my wider angle lenses aren't messed up in the corners and edges. Those were my principal wanna-gets so if the camera didn't deliver on those I wouldn't be able to appreciate the feel of it or how it handles. ...Show more →
I'm not sure about with the GXR, but with the Sony cameras, shooting in other ratios still saves the entire raw, so you wouldn't be stuck in the chosen ratio. Of course, LR3 reads a tag in the raw, so, if you want to use the original ratio in that converter, you'd need to convert to dng first. Or, you could use something like RPP.
There are M macro tubes out there, but they're usually hard to find.
Mitch, I think it comes down to whether you're a rangefinder guy or a Hasselblad/TLR guy. I pretty much shoot the 5N at waistlevel just like my Hasselblads.
douglasf13 wrote:
I'm not sure about with the GXR, but with the Sony cameras, shooting in other ratios still saves the entire raw, so you wouldn't be stuck in the chosen ratio.
LR3 reports the dimensions of the raw files as follows:
3:2 - 4288 x 2848
4:3 - 3776 x 2832
1:1 - 2848 x 2848
SOOC JPGs are the same size. Unfortunately there isn't an output choice for raw alone, you get raw and JPG. One one hand this makes initial viewing in LR faster but given a choice I would disable this. I think I've turned the resolution of the JPG down so at least they aren't using up as much space but ultimately I'll be automating the deletion of these. I think.
PS: GXR raw files are in DNG format straight out of the camera.
kosmoskatten wrote:
Size comparison; ZM18/4 on GXR M mount vs A12/18.3mm (28mm equiv). Got home late and just snapped a few Jpegs for a quick and dirty upload:
Now I'm debating... pick up the ZM 18, assuming I can find one, and know it'll be useful going forward? Or spend less on the faster 28mm lensor and have a much smaller cam for those times when small would be nice and when tired eyes don't mind an AF assist?
Or the A12 50mm, although I have a ZM35/2 doing EFOV 50mm right now and I like that lens just fine... but some close up capability would be nice.
I have also coveted a ZM 50/1.5 Sonnar but they seem hard to come by right now. LTM 50/1.5 ASPH Nokton Voigtlander can still be found, for less.
Ricoh doesn't currently have anything at the short tele end. Perhaps I should hang tight and see what the new zoom looks like.
michaelwatkins wrote:
I have also coveted a ZM 50/1.5 Sonnar but they seem hard to come by right now. LTM 50/1.5 ASPH Nokton Voigtlander can still be found, for less.
FWIW, I have both of these lenses on the 5N, and my impressions are:
-- The center of the Nokton is sharper at larger apertures
-- The edges of the Sonnar are sharper at medium apertures
-- There's just a special "something" about the Sonnar. I never really warmed up to the Nokton.
-- The Sonnar's size is better.
As for the ratio thing, you should try loading a 1:1 raw into another raw program, like Raw Therapee or RPP, and see if the raw is still cropped. I have a feeling that Adobe is just reading a tag and cropping in the converter.
Mitch; I was a bit hesitant towards the A12 50 at first, but after using it a while I think it is a great lens, it does everything well. I am now glad I have it. It does macro well enough for me to think I don't need an alt option for it.
Douglas; I am an SWC shooter too, albeit not the 903, I have the SWC/M and had an even older SWC. Thanks for your input on the 50mm lenses.
Michael: I am not too sure on the coming Ricoh lensor, it is not a GR lens. It will be quite slow but comes in a great sensor package. Will have to see user reports first.
Mitch ditched the A12 28 but I find it definitely has it's place for me. The camera turns into a true compact with it mounted. AF is pretty good, it focuses close and the lens is plenty sharp and draws nicely, very versatile. If there is ever a used one on the market you should grab it, I could help you look for one. Or, you can await some ZM18 to A12 28 comparisons and decide.
Douglas: I will have a closer look at those raw files... edit .... done. Given the 3:2 DNG file is 17.7 MB in size while the 4:3 is 15.5 MB and the 1:1 is 11.8 MB I think we can safely assume the camera is outputting the same aspect ratio crop shown in the finder.
Thanks also for reconfirming my desire for a 50mm Sonnar. I'm just going to have to be patient.
kosmoskatten: I wish my dog had stunning eyes like your cat's.
If you ever learn of a used A12 28mm, I am already interested Henrik. In this case even if there is a danger (!) of owning both, having a walk about AF lens in a compact package is something I do need and want.
