Ricoh GR1 V?

Discussion in 'Ricoh' started by Kevin Stephens, Aug 31, 2003.

  1. Anyone have any particularly good or bad comments before I get my wallet
    out?

    Thanks

    Kevin
     
    Kevin Stephens, Aug 31, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. It's excellent. I bought my wife a GR1-s a couple of years ago and I was
    so impressed I bought myself a 1-v last year (and we also got one for my
    daughter, also a keen photographer). So, I guess that's putting our
    money where our mouth is!

    I normally use an extensive EOS system so the Ricoh only gets taken out
    when I am really travelling light, but the optical quality and the
    degree of control (especially over exposure) is enough to satisfy me -
    within the limitation of a single fixed focal length lens, of course.
     
    David Littlewood, Aug 31, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Sounds like a good swap

    ;^)
     
    Tony Parkinson, Sep 1, 2003
    #3
  4. Had a GR1S for a day. I took a roll on Av, mixture of flash and available
    light. Results were sharp and what have you, but frankly I could've got a
    Nikon 28/2.8 for less money, more control, a better idea of focus point and
    so on.

    It's damn good for what it is; but remember, it's still a compact, and there
    are good quality compacts for less money (i'm sure I don't have to namju2
    names....)
     
    Martin Francis, Sep 1, 2003
    #4
  5. Kevin Stephens

    Nigel Guest

    I've found the Ricoh excellent - especially the clear control of flash,
    exposure adjustment and manual focus. Its also easy to carry - probably
    easier than an SLR 28mm without a body!

    The only point you may wish to review is the 28mm lens, and whether it is
    too wide for your normal photography. I bought a second compact with a 35mm
    lens.

    The fixed lens is excellent, producing sharp and contrasty slides.

    Nigel
    www.nigelatkinson.biz
     
    Nigel, Sep 1, 2003
    #5
  6. Kevin Stephens

    T P Guest


    The Rollei AFM35 and that "ridiculously expensive Minolta" (actually a
    jewel of a camera) were both made in one batch, never to be repeated
    in today's market.

    There are persistent rumours of the demise of the Nikon FM3A, which
    would be surprising given the warmth of its reception. I can now
    obtain FM3A bodies and 45mm f/2.8 AI-P lenses at ridiculously low
    (trade) prices if I order at least five of each ...

    The Leica point-and-shoot cameras *do* depend on volume production,
    and they sell surprisingly well. Maybe not in your shop!

    ;-)
     
    T P, Sep 4, 2003
    #6
  7. Funny you should mention that, there's a review of the FM3A in this
    weeks BJP. Not sure exactly why it's there, seems a bit out of place to
    me given the length of time it has been available. I can't remember if
    the camera has been covered by the magazine previously.

    It would be a shame to see its demise, but I fear the cost of precision
    film camera equipment is too high in today's market. Nikon's mount
    compatibility might also be getting too complex to maintain in its
    current state. You have 'AI' lenses that don't work with AF cameras, 'G'
    lenses that don't work with manual focus cameras and now 'DX' lenses
    that may not be ideal for film cameras.

    I use my MX more than any other camera at the moment, it will be a sad
    day when 'affordable' manual SLRs disappear for good.
     
    John Halliwell, Sep 4, 2003
    #7
  8. I didn't know that. However, i'm sure the Minolta WAS a stellar camera...
    but given the choice between a £300 Ricoh with a really good lens and a
    £1000 Minolta with a really REALLY good lens, i'm sure far more people found
    it more feasible wallet-wise to go with the Ricoh.
    Jessops Birmingham currently has three used (including my own), so
    perhaps people are trading them in for less expensive models? I'm certainly
    not seeing a lot of nearly-new Nikkors around the used market.
    It would be a true tragedy if Nikon discontinued the FM3a after around
    two years of service. For the brief period of ownership, I was very fond of
    mine... and if I weren't Zeiss-smitten i'd have happily kept it and put the
    root canal and holiday on a credit card. But I am Zeiss-smitten. And I shoot
    more digital than I shot 35mm. And I don't really believe in using credit
    cards when I can't pay them off instantly.
    Damn right! Someone ordered a Minilux, waited a couple of weeks for it
    to come it, then changed his mind and bought the Contax T3!
    However, although we don't sell them, I have seen a couple of Leica Z2Xs
    in the hands of people who probably didn't need to spend that much money on
    a compact.
     
    Martin Francis, Sep 4, 2003
    #8
  9. I bought my wife a GR-1 a couple of years back, because it has a wider
    lens than the Contax. It produces pin-sharp 'holiday snaps' every time
    even in her 'non techie' paws.
     
    Stewart Pinkerton, Sep 4, 2003
    #9
  10. I differ; the 35mm lens of the Contax (and the one on the Rollei and the
    Olympus Mju II) would be more appealing. 28mm is too much of a compromise;
    just wide enough to distort things, yet not enough to give an interesting
    field of view. Hence why I plan one day to get a 35mm f1.4 for Contax.
     
    Martin Francis, Sep 4, 2003
    #10
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.