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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jul 15, 2006, 2:11 AM   #31
Senior Member
 
Justinian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 249
Default

Hi hokc77 and welcome! Thanks for posting on this thread. I am very satisfied with my FX-01 and have no regrets about choosing it over other models. It is a fun point and shoot camera that is able to produce some stunning images. Here are some samples from my limited photo gallery. As you can see the stained glass windows are amazing, and these were all shot in low light conditions since the lights were off in the chapel and it was also a cloudy day outdoors. The flower macros were taken during a sunny day.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/benedic...7594191320632/


I recently purchased a new Pentax *ist DL and several lenses for it because I am ready to delve into the world of SLR photography and the Pentax is on sale here at a bargain. But my little gem FX-01 has nothing to fear from its bigger, more capable brother. I plan to keep it as my "take anywhere" camera.
Where are you that the Ricoh is less expensive?

Cheers,
Justinian

Justinian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 26, 2006, 11:12 AM   #32
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7
Default

I've been reading this thread with interest, and decided to register on the forum and jump in. I also am seriously considering the R4 but concerned about the noise (although my impression is that with any point-and-shoot I'm probably not going to like how it looks at 100% magnification at anything above ISO100). But I'm wondering something. The noise issue is because the CCDs are so small that each photosite doesn't get much light. But personally, I don't need 6 megapixels - my current cameras (one of which just died) are 2.6 and 2.1 megapixels, and I have been perfectly satisfied. I keep wondering why number of megapixels is still the #1 spec listed for digital cameras - who cares anymore unless you're making posters? Anyway, I read on one review page (actually part of a review of the Panny FX-01, in a section about a "feature" they thought was useless and I agree, but that's beside the point - see http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicfx01/page6.asp, about half way down) that this year many manufacturers have started offering a "high sensitivity mode" for higher ISO settings that uses the light of a cluster of 4 (or more) photosites to produce each pixel for a photo at a lower resolution but without the noise. Does anyone know if the R4 can do that? There isn't a resolution setting that is exactly half of 2816x2112, but for a difficult shot in a low light or high motion situation, I would happily opt for 1280x960 if I could set it to ISO800 and get smooth colors. Or does the R4 just throw away 80% of the information if you set the resolution that low?
OsakaShutter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 6, 2006, 7:59 AM   #33
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2
Default

hi to all!

I'm thinking to buy the r4, but I would want to know if it is possible to carry out panoramic photos being taken advantage of the function that have some cameras to make to see thefinal partof the previous photo in order to join the photos better…

N.B.:i'm afraid my english is terrible...:?...sorry
frollo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 9, 2006, 1:22 PM   #34
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7
Default

I understand what you are talking about - a "panorama assist" mode that helps you line up a series of shots to stitch together in software later. But as far as I can tell from the manual and playing around with the menus and controls, the R4 does not have such a mode.

By the way, it might be obvious from the previous sentence, but yes, I decided to buy the R4 in spite of the noise. Yes, there is some noise, and no, it does not appear to combine photosites when set to a smaller size mode. But that wide zoom just kept calling my name, and the controls really work well with my usage style. I especially like the Adjust button, which is a dedicated button to bring up exposure compensation, white balance, and two more that one can program to one's liking (I chose ISO and on/off of the "image with sound" feature) - it's very fast for getting to the controls you need without going through the menu. Other controls also are where I would like them to be, whereas many cameras put my favorites deep in menus and ones I never use on dedicated buttons - I'm sure you all can relate to that. As for the noise, I'm just hoping that if I take the phots at the full 6 megapixels but typically shrink them down (perhaps with some software noise reduction), it'll be okay. I'm not the type to print 8x10s - in fact, most of my photos are used either on screen only or printed small as documents that combine text and photos, so I'm not very pixel-demanding.

I haven't used the image with sound feature yet, but I imagine it will be nice in sightseeing situations or when taking a photo of someone whose name I want to remember - rather than taking notes about where shots were taken or other info, if "image with sound" is on, the camera records eight seconds of audio after each shot so you can just say what you want. The camera can also record pure audio like an iPod or something, storing it as WAV files on the memory card.
OsakaShutter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 13, 2006, 7:22 PM   #35
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2
Default

hi

as a former owner of R2 i did and do follow the "progress" of new ricoh DCs. my conclusion after comparing the first reviews (samples) with new ones is that the noise issue of Ricoh are fixed by following firmwares, even if Ricoh dont make it public. the newer samples (of 2006) are surprisingly clean.I did post about this at dpreview: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=19550070

what do you think?

p.s. Ricoh do not build DCs for pixel-peeper! (when i compare pictures ofRicoh and Fuji at 100% i can not believe how sharp Fuji is and how soft Ricoh is) if you do often do this, than take Fuji, but if you just print so the per-pixel-sharpness noes not count.
eugenk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 24, 2006, 11:04 PM   #36
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7
Default

I'm not sure what "non-public" firmware update you are talking about. There is no firmware upgrade listed on the Ricoh (Japanese) website for the R4, and I just got done asking a Ricoh support rep, who also said there is no firmware update that they know of for the R4 - they think you must be referring to a different model.

You said in your dpreview post: "p.s. compare the pics of R3 and R30 the R30 are looking cleaner. I think because the test of R30 was made in April 06 and of R3 in Dez 05, so the R30 have to be with newer firmware." If you are simply comparing the samples of the R30 with the R3 and assuming the R30's better quality must be due to firmware, that may not be a safe assumption. The R30 has a different lens with less zoom range, so although on paper the aperture spec is the same (f3.3 - f4.8 ), there may be differences that don't show up in the spec which affect how much light gets in. Also, the CCD itself may be a newer design, even though the number of pixels is the same as the R3.

I hope you can post again and clarify what you mean, as I am keenly interested in improving the quality of the shots I'm getting. In other respects, though, I continue to be pretty happy with my R4 - it's easy to use, it's fast compared to my old camera (turning on, shutter response, etc.), it has a wide range of features I find useful, and the battery lasts a long time. It also survived its first durability test - I fell while running on a sidewalk, and although I did my best to keep the camera in my hand from hitting the concrete, it did hit and got scratched on the corner, but works fine.
OsakaShutter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 25, 2006, 2:59 PM   #37
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2
Default

@ osaka shutter

maybe you are right. but here is another comparence:

Dezember 13. 2005

1. http://www.photographyblog.com/revie...aplio_r3_7.php

January 16. 2006

2. http://www.digicamreview.com/ricoh_caplio_r3_review.htm

ithink, that there is an improvement. but maybe it is a better CCD (R30 was announced at 10.01.2006) or a newer firmware? if its a better version of CCD, than we can compare R4 (after announcment of R40 at 22.05.2006) to first versions of R4 too.


eugenk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 25, 2006, 8:18 PM   #38
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7
Default

I would say it's hard to compare those two web pages - the photos taken were very different, and for the blog in 12/2005 no controlled test at different ISOs was done.

...than we can compare R4 (after announcment of R40 at 22.05.2006) to first versions of R4 too.

I don't know anything about an R40 - it isn't mentioned on the Ricoh web site, although the R5 is there, which wasn't in the stores when I bought my R4 at the end of July. I really wish that manufacturers would work on a model with less pixels and better light response rather than merely squeezing more pixels on that little chip with each successive model. Hey Ricoh: can I have something like an R2 but with current technology? [img]images/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif[/img]

On a totally different topic, if Over Achiever is still watching this forum, I noticed that you said you were having trouble with line breaks on the forum - I did to, when I was traveling and used someone's Mac. When I got back home I edited my post on my Windows machine and it was fine. For some reason it seems that the way Macs use CR and LF characters is not recognized by the forum software. I don't know if there is a workaround or not, but you could ask the "management".
OsakaShutter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 5, 2006, 9:34 PM   #39
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 30
Default

Does anyone know anything about the new Caplio R5?* I am somewhat amazed that Steves and the other major digital camera sites don't seem to pay any attention to the Ricoh R4, let alone the new R5?* It looks like a great camera if you want a small camera with a good wide angle and telephoto?* i am looking at the Canon SD700IS and the NIkon s6, but the Ricoh seems to be a better combination than both.* is there something about the Ricoh that I am missing?
Lenow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 6, 2006, 9:45 AM   #40
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7
Default

It looks like a great camera if you want a small camera with a good wide angle and telephoto?�

In those respects it is identical to the R4 and R3 - the only difference (that I am aware of) is number of pixels. Personally I would prefer less pixels if it meant better low light performance. But anyway, there are more reviews about the R3 - anything they say about the lens and other features would apply to all three models.

My overall impression, from simply owning an R4, is that feature-wise it is a very sweet camera - definitely a lot of lens in a small package, feature-packed, and easy to use. The major downside is that it isn't so good in low light - digital noise in apparent as the ISO setting goes up. Also, if you are trying to use it in a very quiet setting without attracting attention, the sound of the lens zooming and focusing may give you away, so to speak. Although I would like better image quality, overall I have no regrets buying it as the camera I always keep in my bag to be ready for whatever (I have another camera I use for more critical occasions) - that lens definitely captures more "Kodak moments" than the typical point-and-shoot.
OsakaShutter 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 4:58 PM.