Ricoh How do you like your Ricoh GXR?

I have found the Ricoh files much easier to use in LR3. The Fuji does great jpegs but I have had a difficult time with it's RAW files. Somehow they don't seem to easy to shape. I don't know how to post RAW files from either. If I export from LR they will be jpegs won't they?

Uploading to the photo hosting sites require jpg conversions. You'd have to upload to a personal file storing site and have a link to it for the real RAW file to download, not view online.
 
I have found the Ricoh files much easier to use in LR3. The Fuji does great jpegs but I have had a difficult time with it's RAW files. Somehow they don't seem to easy to shape. I don't know how to post RAW files from either. If I export from LR they will be jpegs won't they?

This may depend on PP app. I've found that different apps work differently with RAW files from the same camera. For example, I love to use RAW Developer for my Ricoh DNG files, but that app does not seem to work well with the RAW files from my Sony NEX camera, at least in color. For those I have to use Photoshop.
 
This past weekend the family and I went to the Russian River Valley in Northern California. It was a fantastic weekend. But it made me anxious for the GXR APS-C zoom unit. That's because I took my two GXR cameras with the 28mm and 50mm A12 units, and great as they both are in some cases a zoom would be more convenient. I considered taking my Sony NEX with kit zoom, but I just don't feel that much love for the camera, good as the sensor is. Ricoh is rumored to be releasing the APS-C zoom this year and I really hope that is true.
 
Believe me all of you with your Ricohs generate plenty of interest here. It's just that I am trying to be true to myself over on Vince's thread about getting over our addictions.

(RE RAW files on Lightroom, just FYI Christina, I have not one single quibble with the Fuji's however I do convert to DNG.)
 
Yes, you just choose to convert to DNG upon import. If you get stuck, start a thread in the Image Processing forum. I'm not sure if that will make a difference for you or not, but you can see what you think.
 
Andrewteee, it sounds like you are from my home state, California. I can't say that I miss it much, however. Though northern Calif. is nicer, in my opinion, than southern where I lived. I'm with you on hopes for an APC-zoom censor unit. When that shows up I believe I will sell the NEX.
All of my RAW files go through Adobe camera RAW on the way to Photoshop. I have not noticed any difference between the different types of RAW that way, but maybe I am just dull about it and can't see the difference. Nevertheless, I agree with all those who have admired the jpegs from the X100. That may be the way to go with that camera. However, if one does use the jpegs they will need to be converted to something else reasonably soon given the well-known deterioration of jpegs after repeated saves. That being the case do we then lose the advantage of those nice X100 jpegs?
 
Andrewteee, it sounds like you are from my home state, California. I can't say that I miss it much, however. Though northern Calif. is nicer, in my opinion, than southern where I lived.?

I can't stand Southern California. My home state is Texas and I don't miss it much either (except for the food). Northern California feels like home.
 
I hear you on that, Andrewteee.
Have you folks who use both the X100 and the GXR noticed that they seem to use the same battery. I have confirmed that the GXR battery charges in the charger supplied with the X100 though I have not tried to interchange the batteries in camera, but they look the same and list the same figures on the case (i.e. 3.6v, 1800mAh, 6.2 Wh).
 
Hmmm, I have not signed on to the getting over GAS thread. :sorry: I'm enjoying both the X100 and the GXR, and hope that both will serve me well when I head south this Saturday. It would be convenient to exchange batteries in the field with these two if indeed they are interchangeable, as I suspect they are. Perhaps we could paraphrase an old quotation and say: To rationalize is human, and to see clearly is divine, or something like that. ;)
 
TOP (The Online Photographer) has a post about the "cost/benefit value" of the GXR system, comparing it to a hybrid car (good idea, not a great value).

There are some very favorable remarks in the comments, all by people who have actually used it. But what gets me is people who comment about a camera that they have never used. It would not occur to me to do that. Can I judge the X100 having never used it or even seen it? But I suppose the idea of the GXR systems easily lends itself to arm chair critiques. In this case many commenters in the post seem to think the GXR concept is a really bad idea. Most if not all of these commenters seem to have never actually used one.

Regarding the value proposition, the GXR is not a good value. But is the Fuji X100 or the Leica X1 or the Sigma SD1??? None of these are but for those who use them and really like working with them "value" is a relative term. If I wanted a "good value" in a camera I'd probably buy a $79 P&S or just use my iPhone. For that matter is the iPhone a good value? No, but I love mine!
 
I have say I love So Cal, I love the weather the diversity, the work, the access to beach, ocean, rivers, deserts, mountains, snow, salt and dry lakes.
I travel a lot and I am always happy when I come back home. if I am living in the US it will have to be in So Cal to maybe central Cal but that is it.
 
On the subject of Ricoh and X100 batteries. I have used them interchangeably now and have found that the same battery works in both cameras. I cannot find any difference except for the labels on the surface. If anyone knows otherwise let me know, but this was very handy in Costa Rica where I could interchange batteries between these two cameras. How often does that happen? :)
 
Back
Top