ricoh gxr adds m mount module: opinions sought

[caerwall]

I now have three GXR bodies and A12 mounts. I also have a scad of lenses from creaking Russian M42 mount, via FD, PK, LTM to LM lenses. They are a barrel of fun and the only thing stopping them being used more professionally is the capture burst rate imho.

But then I have come to like manual focus, Ricoh's implementation of contrast peaking focus assist, and the way it all hangs together.

But then I only read the label nonsense on bottles of red wine after the bottle is empty when wondering who bottled that last nice drop.

So I can't talk technical detail on here on whether this camera performs to the nth degree, but I sure can have some fun before check the labels. Isn't enjoying the gear you have in your hand most of the fun of photography?

Tom

[ludoo]

[rbelyell]

yes i am also very seriously thinking about buying one as well, if i can find a good priced used kit. i'm happy with my OMD, but i think i should be happier. i am unnaturally focused on a camera optimized for my new RF lens collection that has no AA filter...i just think the images will be crisper throughout.
tony
_________________
Ricoh GXR M mount; Fuji X100; Fuji X20; Hasselblad XPan/45 & 90mm lenses; Bessa T Blue 101 Anniversary Ed./Rokkor 20/2.8, Canon 28/3.5, Nikkor 3.5/2.5; Summarit 50/1.5, CV Heliar 75/2.5, Elmar 90/4, Sankyo Komura 135/2.8, Hektor 135/4.5; Contax T*; Kodak Retina IV/S-K lenses 28, 35, 50, 85, 135 & 200mm; Konica TC-X/57/1.4; Zeiss Ikon 6x9; Mamiya 6; Braun Paxina 29 6x6; Photax Boyer Paris 6x6; Mercury 2 35mm; Holga 120 Pano

FOR SALE:
ZEISS BIOTAR 75/1.5 Exakta mount w Konica AR mount adapter
ZEISS BIOGON 28/2.8 contax G conversion to M mount
ZEISS SONNAR T 135/4 nikon rf mount w M adapter
KONICA AR 24/2.8 & 100/2.8
KODAK RETINA REFLEX IV CAM like new with full set of 7 schneider kruezach lenses, extras
M42: Mir 35/2
Adaptall: Tamron SP 28-85 macro
Cameras: Canon IX
PM for more complete descriptions/pix. All in great shape!
_________________________
'buy me a drink, sing me a song,
take me as i come 'cause i can't stay long'

[ramcewan]

as an enthusiast camera it has a place.

as a competitor to the NEX, Nikon, Samsung and the m43 cameras it isn't even close....

you mean I have to buy a new sensor/lens combo every time I want to change lenses? my camera bag is getting heavy with all these "units" compared to a body and some lenses...


not saying it wouldn't make an excellent dedicated mirrorless camera for manual focus legacy lenses, just saying most people buy mirror-less cameras to use with autofocus lenses and a few manual focus lenses they may already have.

I'd also say that a NEX body makes an excellent dedicated mirrorless camera for manual focus legacy lenses and people will be hard pressed to justify going to the ricoh for more money and less MP. Yes I know the AA filter is a big deal for purist but most people will have already bought a camera before they understand the AA filter.
_________________
Olympus e-pl2 with VF-2
---------------------
Mflenses: Hexanon 50mm f1.8 AR, Hexanon 40mm f1.8 AR, Hoya 80-200mm f4 in AR, Sigma Super-Wide 24mm f2.8 AR, Jupiter-8 50mm f2, Tair 3 300mm f4.5 Brussels Grand Prix
---------------------
MFT Digital lenses: Panasonic 45-200mm f4 OIS, Panasonic 14mm f2.5, Olympus 14-42mm II f3.5, Olympus Zuiko 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 ED (FT with MFT adapter)

[rbelyell]

no you are mistaken you dont have to change sensors with each lens. there are now many adapters that fit m42, c/y, eos, dkl, konica ar etc to M mount. so all you need is the base camera plus the M mount sensor, and the correct adapter. works like any other mirrorless does with the M sensor on board.

as for AA filter, i dont consider myself a purist. if i was i'd still be shooting my FF 5d. what i consider myself is someone who likes sharp, crisp, deep images. now i cannot speak fully from personal experience, but when i compare my very nice m4/3 photos, and even my better than very nice x100 photos, to those taken with the ricoh or other AA-less cams, they do not measure up, something is lacking in the micro resolution that is apparent in the photo as a whole and extremely visible when pixel peeping, which i do unapologetically. again, i would have to verify these conclusions personally before being definitive about them, but what ive seen second hand compared to my first hand results are frankly startling.
tony
_________________
Ricoh GXR M mount; Fuji X100; Fuji X20; Hasselblad XPan/45 & 90mm lenses; Bessa T Blue 101 Anniversary Ed./Rokkor 20/2.8, Canon 28/3.5, Nikkor 3.5/2.5; Summarit 50/1.5, CV Heliar 75/2.5, Elmar 90/4, Sankyo Komura 135/2.8, Hektor 135/4.5; Contax T*; Kodak Retina IV/S-K lenses 28, 35, 50, 85, 135 & 200mm; Konica TC-X/57/1.4; Zeiss Ikon 6x9; Mamiya 6; Braun Paxina 29 6x6; Photax Boyer Paris 6x6; Mercury 2 35mm; Holga 120 Pano

FOR SALE:
ZEISS BIOTAR 75/1.5 Exakta mount w Konica AR mount adapter
ZEISS BIOGON 28/2.8 contax G conversion to M mount
ZEISS SONNAR T 135/4 nikon rf mount w M adapter
KONICA AR 24/2.8 & 100/2.8
KODAK RETINA REFLEX IV CAM like new with full set of 7 schneider kruezach lenses, extras
M42: Mir 35/2
Adaptall: Tamron SP 28-85 macro
Cameras: Canon IX
PM for more complete descriptions/pix. All in great shape!
_________________________
'buy me a drink, sing me a song,
take me as i come 'cause i can't stay long'

[ramcewan]

[rbelyell]

yeah, as an AF camera system i dont think i would consider ricoh, though i am given to understand their primes are pretty good. truth is i typically have only 1-2 af lenses for any system ive used anyway.
tony
_________________
Ricoh GXR M mount; Fuji X100; Fuji X20; Hasselblad XPan/45 & 90mm lenses; Bessa T Blue 101 Anniversary Ed./Rokkor 20/2.8, Canon 28/3.5, Nikkor 3.5/2.5; Summarit 50/1.5, CV Heliar 75/2.5, Elmar 90/4, Sankyo Komura 135/2.8, Hektor 135/4.5; Contax T*; Kodak Retina IV/S-K lenses 28, 35, 50, 85, 135 & 200mm; Konica TC-X/57/1.4; Zeiss Ikon 6x9; Mamiya 6; Braun Paxina 29 6x6; Photax Boyer Paris 6x6; Mercury 2 35mm; Holga 120 Pano

FOR SALE:
ZEISS BIOTAR 75/1.5 Exakta mount w Konica AR mount adapter
ZEISS BIOGON 28/2.8 contax G conversion to M mount
ZEISS SONNAR T 135/4 nikon rf mount w M adapter
KONICA AR 24/2.8 & 100/2.8
KODAK RETINA REFLEX IV CAM like new with full set of 7 schneider kruezach lenses, extras
M42: Mir 35/2
Adaptall: Tamron SP 28-85 macro
Cameras: Canon IX
PM for more complete descriptions/pix. All in great shape!
_________________________
'buy me a drink, sing me a song,
take me as i come 'cause i can't stay long'

[caerwall]

Every camera system has its own adherents otherwise the system would not continue to exist.

For those that see the Ricoh GXR system as something "odd" than I must agree. However there is some sort of sense in it's oddness. I am not into the GXR lens/modules but those that have their 28mm and 50mm effective primes seem pretty happy with the results. Swapping modules is not a big deal and they do not take up much space. Moreover the GXR camera back behaves the same way no matter what module is mounted. Therefore it is best seen as "separate cameras" rather than "body plus lens". But the true claim to fame is the A12 LM mount whch is a dedicated manual only mount for LM lenses and a "separate camera that takes manual lenses only". It has a sensor optimised for these lenses. So here we have a modern digital "camera" that is set to provide everything you might need specifically for RF lenses and not something that is an afterthought to keep the punters amused much like you can do with the NEX, M4/3 and even the NX.

But of course it is every man to his own brand of poison really.

And of course adapters from other mounts to LM, whilst always possible were not of a great deal of use on Leica bodies and therefore rare. With the GXR A12 mount about they have become commonplace and very effective.

Therefore in the Ricoh GXR those with any manual lenses, be they RF or slr derived, have the opportunity to seriously use them on a digital camera dedicated specially built and optimised to take replaceable manual lenses. Tell me if I am wrong but surely this must stand in the place of the now revered RD1? Another revered camera regarded odd in its day.

Therefore I urge you not to investigate what the Ricoh GXR in A12 mount is all about unless you are the adventurous type who wishes to investigate something designed to become a classic. I do hope that the GXR will not be discontinued like the RD1.

Ricoh also takes the Sony contrast peaking focus detect to new heights. Not only does it have a similar style to Sony's without the colour but also it has another "mode 2" which it a "whole outline" style - a sort of "stick figures". This makes manual focusing very quick indeed and by use of screen magnification as precise as you wish to make it. It also can show precise dof achieved. Mode 2 seems to be the general preference but I also like "mode 1" which is more delicate and perhaps slower in use. For those that have not used focus peaking I note that you can see the point of focus right down to eyelashes and eye-iris'.

Very revolutionary and only on NEX and Ricoh (and lately and unsurprisingly the Pentax K-01). Just as much as we did not need IS on our cameras until every make offered it as "a standard fitting" then contrast peaking is just some odd facility until you have used it and realise just how good it is for manual focus assistance. However for those on auto-focus it might just be another odd piece of technology to be seriously considered from afar via a barge pole.

But this is MF Lenses Forum and we are all real photographers and hardly need such wimpy trivia of focus assistance ...

(grin)

To not get enthusiastic about the GXR-M and to compare it less favourably to the other EVIL-type cameras on offer is to have dismissed the concept without a real lot of thought and investigation.


Tom

[caerwall]

Tony

The GXR is more a keeper type system. It is easier to tell you what might be improved than what I like. What can be improved is having a built in evf back or another evf plug in unit that can be left on semi permanently if desired. It also needs a bigger shot to shot buffer for more professional use.

Other than that I am pretty happy. The present evf is quite good and is articulated 90 degrees upwards which means that you can peer downwards into it if desired. However even in its "at rest" position it still sits up precariously on top of the camera when fitted and my common sense tells me that it is disaster waiting to happen if left fitted when packed (anywhere). Of course bright light means the lcd becomes useless and you can't even guess framing other than zone-focus then point and hope without any means of effective framing.

The GXR body has been with us for some time now and has never been upgraded. However with the exception of my first groans I don't think that here is much really needed. This is the benefit of Ricoh, things that you buy are more long haul keepers.

So I have had a few dslr bodies and still use three, but they are all a bit different as Canon tends to shift the interface, buttons and firmware around as models evolve. They have a family style but I still have to check settings camera by camera and also ensure that I press the right buttons as they tend to "move". If I change settings on one then each has to be individually made the same. After a session with all of them in a particular light situation I have to remember to re-set them all to "neutral".

The GXR has a system not well described in the manual but which I have worked out that allows you to keep multiple cameras set up identically. So if you make some changes to your regular set up then in a matter of a minute you can set any other units you have to operate identically. So basically you have a photographers dream set. More than one camera unit and all set up exactly the same and also with buttons in identical positions. And the interface is good and very well thought out. I don't need to know which GXR body I am currently using as they are all identical.

So I accidentally became a lens collector and now have quite a number of legacy manual lenses in various mount formats - these include LTM/LM and also FD, PK and M42.

Therefore I find it very handy to have multiple camera units to save changing lens and adapter. I am happy with my GXR backs they aback alone. However the M mount module alone is not overly cheap - I think that Ricoh can sell all they make - it is quietly popular, it is also most economically bought in kit form but not such a bargain as the *10 module kits..

There is a rarely used but known concept of treating each GXR and mount module as a "separate camera" and not "camera body plus lenses". As the body/mount combinations are quite compact this is quite feasible compared to similar dslr kit.

Tom

[ramcewan]

[iangreenhalgh1]

Be much nicer if they came up with an APS-C module for it.
_________________
'The question I would really consider (especially if an amateur and on a budget) is whether or not anyone (including yourself, of course) can tell the difference in any situation for which you will use the lens...and if they can, why are they burying their noses in your prints hard enough to tell the difference instead of responding to the prints emotionally and thinking about what they might mean?' - 2F/2F on apug.org

Digital: Sony NEX-3, Samsung NX100, Canon EOS 450d
35mm SLR: Konica FT-1, Konica FC-1, Konica Autoreflex T, Carena SRH760, Exakta RTL1000, Canon EOS 10qd
35mm VF: Olympus Stylus, Konica C35, Konica A4, Konica MG, Konica MT-9, Ricoh FF-9, Ricoh AF-80
35mm RF: Zorki 6, Kiev II, Kiev IV, Contax IIIa, CZJ Werra III,
Medium format: Franka Rolfix, Mess Ikonta 524/16, Voigtlander Bessa with Skopar 3.5/105, Voigtlander Bessa with Voigtar 3.5/105, Kiev 6C, Century Graphic 23, Ensign Selfix 820, Kershaw 450
MF lenses: Schneider Angulon 6.5/68, Componon-S 5.6/100, C-Claron 4.5/135, Xenar 3.5/105, Mamiya C 2.8/45, Mamiya 2.8/80, CZJ Flektogon 4/50, Biometar 2.8/80, Zodiac 3.5/30, Tominon 4.5/135, Pullin Pulnar 2.8/100
Large Format: Ernemann HEAG Series VII version II 9x12 with Kodak Anastigmat 6.3/170
Konica Hexanons 4/21, 2.8/24, 3.5/28, 2.8/35, 1.8/40, 1.4/50, 1.7/50, 1.8/50, 3.2/135, 3.5/135, 3.5/200, 4.5/300, 3.5-4.5/35-70, 4-4.6/28-135, 3.5/35-70, UC 3.5/45-100, 4/70-150, 4/65-135, UC 4/80-200. Hexars 3.5/28, 3.5/135, Konishiroku 2.8/35
Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.8/35, Skoparex 3.4/35, Tessar 2.8/50, Sonnar 1.5/50, Biotar 2/58, Pancolar 1.8/50, Cardinar 4/100, Zeiss-Opton Biogon 2.8/35
Meyer/Pentacons 2.8/28, Primagon 4.5/35, Trioplan 2.9/50, 1.8/50, 2.4/50, Primotar 3.5/50, Primotar 3.5/135
Topcon RE Auto Topcors 1.8/58, 3.5/135, 5.6/200
Russians: OKC1-18-1 2.8/18, OKC1-28-1 2.8/28, Jupiter-12 2.8/35, Jupiter-8 2/50, Industar-50 3.5/50, Industar-26M 2.8/50, Industar-22 3.5/50, Zenitar M2S 2/50, Helios-44-2, Jupiter-9 2/85, Jupiter-11 4/135, Tair-3C 4.5/300
Tokina 3.5/17, Nikon Auto Nikkor-N 2.8/24, Nikon Micro-Nikkor-P 3.5/55, Ross Xpress 3.5/4in, Ross Xpress 4/5in, Ross Xpress 4.5/8.5in, Wollensak APO-Raptar 10/541

[ramcewan]

[iangreenhalgh1]

Isn't the A12 M-mount? I'd rather have a different mount, one that is more suitable for a wider range of lenses as M mount lenses are very expensive. As far as I know, there's only M39-M adapters available.

I don't agree that M4/3 is suitable for legacy glass, not at all, APS-C isn't ideal either but it's a better compromise.
_________________
'The question I would really consider (especially if an amateur and on a budget) is whether or not anyone (including yourself, of course) can tell the difference in any situation for which you will use the lens...and if they can, why are they burying their noses in your prints hard enough to tell the difference instead of responding to the prints emotionally and thinking about what they might mean?' - 2F/2F on apug.org

Digital: Sony NEX-3, Samsung NX100, Canon EOS 450d
35mm SLR: Konica FT-1, Konica FC-1, Konica Autoreflex T, Carena SRH760, Exakta RTL1000, Canon EOS 10qd
35mm VF: Olympus Stylus, Konica C35, Konica A4, Konica MG, Konica MT-9, Ricoh FF-9, Ricoh AF-80
35mm RF: Zorki 6, Kiev II, Kiev IV, Contax IIIa, CZJ Werra III,
Medium format: Franka Rolfix, Mess Ikonta 524/16, Voigtlander Bessa with Skopar 3.5/105, Voigtlander Bessa with Voigtar 3.5/105, Kiev 6C, Century Graphic 23, Ensign Selfix 820, Kershaw 450
MF lenses: Schneider Angulon 6.5/68, Componon-S 5.6/100, C-Claron 4.5/135, Xenar 3.5/105, Mamiya C 2.8/45, Mamiya 2.8/80, CZJ Flektogon 4/50, Biometar 2.8/80, Zodiac 3.5/30, Tominon 4.5/135, Pullin Pulnar 2.8/100
Large Format: Ernemann HEAG Series VII version II 9x12 with Kodak Anastigmat 6.3/170
Konica Hexanons 4/21, 2.8/24, 3.5/28, 2.8/35, 1.8/40, 1.4/50, 1.7/50, 1.8/50, 3.2/135, 3.5/135, 3.5/200, 4.5/300, 3.5-4.5/35-70, 4-4.6/28-135, 3.5/35-70, UC 3.5/45-100, 4/70-150, 4/65-135, UC 4/80-200. Hexars 3.5/28, 3.5/135, Konishiroku 2.8/35
Carl Zeiss Jena Flektogon 2.8/35, Skoparex 3.4/35, Tessar 2.8/50, Sonnar 1.5/50, Biotar 2/58, Pancolar 1.8/50, Cardinar 4/100, Zeiss-Opton Biogon 2.8/35
Meyer/Pentacons 2.8/28, Primagon 4.5/35, Trioplan 2.9/50, 1.8/50, 2.4/50, Primotar 3.5/50, Primotar 3.5/135
Topcon RE Auto Topcors 1.8/58, 3.5/135, 5.6/200
Russians: OKC1-18-1 2.8/18, OKC1-28-1 2.8/28, Jupiter-12 2.8/35, Jupiter-8 2/50, Industar-50 3.5/50, Industar-26M 2.8/50, Industar-22 3.5/50, Zenitar M2S 2/50, Helios-44-2, Jupiter-9 2/85, Jupiter-11 4/135, Tair-3C 4.5/300
Tokina 3.5/17, Nikon Auto Nikkor-N 2.8/24, Nikon Micro-Nikkor-P 3.5/55, Ross Xpress 3.5/4in, Ross Xpress 4/5in, Ross Xpress 4.5/8.5in, Wollensak APO-Raptar 10/541

[caerwall]

I support ramcewan on this matter. The GXR A12 mount is an aps-c sensor. Not only that it is LM mount and manual only by specific design choice. The sensor has been optimised specifically for RF lenses and the firmware allows for fine tuning of any lens mounted and this can be stored for specific lenses.

Other EVIL-type cameras can wear adapters and they often do this well but they are specifically designed for their native oem mount lenses and any lenses that can be attached via an adapter are only as an afterthought to their true purpose. The essence of the differnce is in the Ricoh GXR A12 mount you have a special purpose mount designed and optimised for the job in hand which is simply to be used for ltm and LM lenses. Not only that but the camera carries significant firmware benefits to allow manual lenses to be used - amongst these is a very useful contrast detect focus peaking manual focus assist in two different forms - take your pick which you like the most. It is very effective, quick and precise to use.

When the GXR A12 mount was released there were actually few proprietary mount to LM adapters as few chose to adapt non-LM or ltm lenses on to Leica bodies. In fact RF type cameras were not at their best without coupling mechanisms. However as we all now well know all EVIL-type camera bodies make all non-coupled manual focus lenses very easy to use.

Therefore not long after Ricoh dared to make a specific LM camera there suddenly appeared a whole range of adapters for the LM mount. Now almost any popular manual mount system can be adapted to LM and I guess these are are still not going on Leica bodies.

As far as M4/3 - do you really want to put "automatic" lenses without direct aperture control on to a wholly MF body? Or did you simply want Ricoh to join the 4/3 consortium and directly compete for hearts and minds with Olympus and Panasonic?

There are hordes of ltm and LM lenses available that will fit and some of that glass is too exquisite to be affordable. But fear not, there is cheaper Russian glass and of course M42, PK, FD, as well and Nikon and Minolta mount lenses all fit and work very well in manual mode.

For those that like the ease of "automatic" then Ricoh is progessively releasing their own lenses in lens/modules. But again, this is the MFLenses forum and we all like to do things the hard way after rolling up our sleeves.

The GXR A12 mount for LM lenses and anything else you can adapt to it has been the greatest leap forward for manual lens owners for a long time. Worth a closer look as it is one of the worlds hidden little treasures.

Tom

[caerwall]