Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Ricoh

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 25, 2006, 10:41 AM   #11
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 17
Default

heros29 wrote:
Quote:
Hello,

Caplio R4 is a very nice Cam. The R4 have one problem in very strong back light.

In picture are develop strips.

Show here: http://s9.simpleupload.de/fa17ebccb/streifen1.JPG.html

or http://s9.simpleupload.de/f01188ba4/streifen2.JPG.html
Wow, that first shot is awful! The second is just bad. I'm surprised at how much the camera is affected far away from the hard lighting. The sample I'd seen before was in a very dark area directly adjacent to the light area, and was acceptable, but this would preclude a lot of walking-around-snapshots and family photos where I don't have control of the light. Is the effect mitigated if you use fill flash (I'm thinking of backlit scenes with people in the foreground)?
Overzeetop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 25, 2006, 12:05 PM   #12
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5
Default

Overzeetop wrote:
Quote:
Wow, that first shot is awful! The second is just bad. I'm surprised at how much the camera is affected far away from the hard lighting. The sample I'd seen before was in a very dark area directly adjacent to the light area, and was acceptable, but this would preclude a lot of walking-around-snapshots and family photos where I don't have control of the light. Is the effect mitigated if you use fill flash (I'm thinking of backlit scenes with people in the foreground)?

This effect develops only with very strong back light and 200mm focal length. In the everyday life one notices normally nothing from this problem. Backlit scenes with people into the foreground are not a problem.
heros29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 28, 2006, 4:35 AM   #13
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1
Default

Hi, I have bought both, the Ricoh R4 for me and the Pana FX01 for my best friend. R4 quality pictures is a little bit betterbut the difference is not huge. Have a look here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/
mismooo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 29, 2006, 8:27 AM   #14
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 17
Default

First of all - thanks to eveyone for keeping this thread alive and posting your experiences and photos. It has been extremely informative.

mismooo - thanks for the link to your pictures, that's a beautiful place you live - where is it?

I noticed that there was a lot of "spotting" (for lack of the proper term - I'm a silver halide guy), especially in the blue sky areas, but also noticable in the NIZZA MIX 050 photo in the stone (magenta speckles).

Although I know it might not be fair to compare this camera to the Canon G6, it's my current reference point for digital photography, as that's what I use at work. Below are two pictures which show some blue sky which is fairly smooth, and a fairly high dynamic range photo with a bit of sky (and bluish fringing at the leaf edges) and a cellar (bottom left) which is a little noisy, but no chromatic variation in the noise.

Am I simply asking too much of a small compact to get this kind of result?

(these are about 4M each, and may take a bit to load)

http://www.cloverhollow.com/images/IMG_0001.JPG
http://www.cloverhollow.com/images/IMG_0007.JPG
Overzeetop is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 3, 2006, 8:21 AM   #15
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 20
Default

EDIT Never mind, rehash of digital lifestyles review:*http://www.urban75.org/photos/ricoh-...r4-review.html
Over Achiever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 3, 2006, 9:40 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Justinian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 249
Default

Overzeetop,
I have the same dilemma as you. I currently own the Canon SD550 and I love it, except that it does not have the wide angle lens I need. I hate to part w/ it and wish Canon would make an ultracompact w/ a wide angle, but in the meantime, I am looking at the Ricoh R4 or the Panasonic FX-01. It seems like a toss up to me at this point, since the R4 doesn't do much better in low light situations than the FX-01. Someone, please correct me if I am wrong about that. The R4 has the advantage of a wide angle, plus 7x zoom. Price-wise it is just a little more expensive than the FX-01.
How r u leaning at this point? Thanks everyone for their threads.
Justinian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 3, 2006, 9:53 PM   #17
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 20
Default

I just received my R4 today and I currently have one day to decide to keep it or return it. If there's anything you want me to look at please let me know. I currently have a Panasonic FX9, which is the predecessor to the FX01, without the wide angle lens. Currently I love the wider lens I have with the R4 as opposed to the FX9, 28 mm is nice. The zoom is very nice, very fast. There are over 30 steps to the zoom but it's not as smooth as I'm used to with the FX9. Also I don't know where I am on the zoom unless I set it to step zoom, then it shows 28, 35, 50, 85, 105, 135, 200mm. There is a few other things I don't like about the camera. First thing I noticed when I turned it on is how LOUD the thing is. The zooming is very noisy, as well as the focusing. One thing about focusing I did like was the option for manual focus. Another thing I don't like so far is the plasticky build of the camera, it felt relatively cheap, like a disposable. The FX9 has an all metal body, it feels solid, and smaller than it actually is. Well that's all I have for now, again questions let me know and I will take sample photos for that situation. Currently I have a few photos up between my FX9 and R4 here.
Over Achiever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 3, 2006, 10:54 PM   #18
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 20
Default

I posted a short video showing how fast the camera turns on, and how fast the zoom is, and how fast it turns off. One thing I have noticed so far while using the camera is the "writing to disk" is more prelavent than with my FX9, perhaps due to a slower processor? Also the autofocus can miss sometimes, requiring me to depress the shutter button halfway twice. Again, a noisy focus as well =(
Over Achiever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 4, 2006, 11:46 AM   #19
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 20
Default

I hate to keep making multiple posts, but for some reason line breaks will not show when I type them up. Anyway a few more thoughts on the camera: the macro shot is very good, however it does take a second to focus. By hitting the ADJ button, one can even shift the focus of the image off center and move it around the screen, very nice. Noise in the images is noticable, but it looks much better than the FX9. The main reason is that the majority of the noise appears to be luminance noise, as opposed to color noise. This makes the image look grainy, but film-like natural. There does appear to be less noise than the FX9, but it remains to be seen how it compares to the FX01 which claims to have lower noise. Finally an annoyance: the camera does not automatically rotate images if one shoots as portrait. The FX9 does it automatically, and displays on playback with the correct orientation as well. Another oddity is the strange automatic ISO and shutter settings, I've seen 1/15, 1/14, 1/13 s, as well as random ISOs such as 176 and 191.
Over Achiever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 4, 2006, 12:05 PM   #20
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5
Default

Yes, the ISO value is very variable with Ricoh, that is normal. The camera does not turn pictures automatically, it has no situation sensor. But it makes good photos expressed. - translation by google
heros29 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:54 AM.