Ricoh Caplio R3 Photos

Given the huge amount of interest in the Ricoh R3, I’ve decided to publish the sample photos from my upcoming review a few days before the full review is online. Enjoy…

Website: Ricoh Caplio R3 Photos

Published: Monday, December 12, 2005

Reader Comments

1. Thanks for posting those pictures Mark,
   
   I like what I see. A lot. Yes, when viewing a 100% crops there's evident noise even in the lowest ISO, but it's very easy to clean for blowups, and completely negligible when printing 8x10.
   
   Now, how about that lens? I didn't expect this corner-to-corner sharpness from an rather extreme 28-200 lens on such an inexpensive camera. There’s also no hint of the blocky vignetting we saw in one of the early reviews of the camera.
   
   Prog.

   Prognathous at 05:05pm on Friday, December 09, 2005

2. hey thanks for posting all the photos, would you mind posting some macro photos with vibrant colors... also, can u demonstrate the camera's image stablization device with a comparison between shaking on vs off. thanks
   
   will

   will at 08:32pm on Friday, December 09, 2005

3. Without knowing its ISO setting, it is difficult to judge, but that image
   with the white blocks really shows off the noise.
   
   My guess is that it was shot at ISO 200, but I am hoping that it was
   ISO 400, and I would be VERY disappointed if it were ISO 100.

   GARY POGODA at 08:37pm on Friday, December 09, 2005

4. YUCK!
   
   NOISE NOISE NOISE!
   
   And this camera is only 5MP?
   
   Compared to my KM X50, the noise from these samples is seriously awful. You would be surprised at how nice the KM shoots. At least there is no color chroma noise this bad!

   NG at 11:21pm on Friday, December 09, 2005

5. WHITE NOISE!
   
   Man I can't believe there is that much noise in the white areas. I mean look at the one with the white stairs. Terrible - and it's daylight.

   NG at 11:26pm on Friday, December 09, 2005

6. If I didn't know where these had come from, I would have guessed they were taken with somebody's camera-phone. Awful.

   Liam at 12:00am on Sunday, December 11, 2005

7. Horrible! The picture of the bridge with the clock for instance was taken at iso 114 according to the exif data and it has noise all over the place.

   Sander at 04:09am on Sunday, December 11, 2005

8. Hi
   
   I did also look at the pictures, but i can't find de Exif data....
   
   Without taking the exif in remark, pictures look below average.
   
   I think that this camera is great! BUT picture quality below average. Because you buy a camera for the pictures, it is not good enough. I don't understand why they put all those gadgets on the camera but pic qualty was on the last place.
   
   What is the use of a 200mm when quality is really miserable?
   
   Want to have new look at pics but with the Exif data?
   
   So anyone...

   Alex B at 10:43am on Sunday, December 11, 2005

9. Alex B, to see the EXIF, just save the pictures to your local disk and then check their properties from there.
   
   As for the noise, let me remind you all that viewing 100% crops is a rather pointless habit that's good for satisfying your pixel-peeping lust, but is less than helpful for evaluating the camera's suitability for your actual needs. Try *printing* these pictures to 8x10 and you'll see that they look very very nice - colorful and detailed. If you need to do extreme blow ups, you obviously need a camera with better image quality (a DSLR maybe?), but the question to ask yourself is really how large do you intend to print. If, like most people, it's usually 4x6 and 5x7, there's really nothing here to even think about. The R3 can easily deliver quality images at those sizes, as well as 8x10 (which is a lot less commonly used).
   
   Prog.

   Prognathous at 12:06pm on Sunday, December 11, 2005

10. I just happened to have an almost identical shot of the white boxes, taken with my Casio EX Z-750, and it is not necessary to look at 100% crops to see the difference in the noise. Sharpness and fringing were also visibly worse with the Ricoh. I agree that at sizes below 8x10, without cropping, it would be hard to differentiate, but then I quite often do crop, and I always print at A4, so for now the undoubted advantages of a 28-200mm range in a compact camera are still some way off I fear.

    Alan Robertson at 01:26pm on Sunday, December 11, 2005

11. noise..noise..noise... very bad image quality... jes like they were taken with cheap digital camera (camera-phone exactly).
    
    i think digital camera technology is getting better and better.. and i surprise to see that image quality comes out from this Ricoh R3 is terrible.
    are you listening RICOH ?

    Droe at 03:06pm on Sunday, December 11, 2005

12. It would bother me to know that the noise is there, even though my
    smaller prints might not show it.
    
    Sander and/or Prog, what ISO do you get for image #21, as per my
    comment #3?

    GARY POGODA at 09:40pm on Sunday, December 11, 2005

13. Gary, the EXIF for image #21 is as follows:
    
    ISO-161, 1/32, wide open (f3.3), 4.6mm
    
    In this case, switching to ISO 64 would have required the shutter to fire at about 1/15 of a second, which is not very difficult to handhold at this focal length, let alone with the anti-shake system of the R3. Granted, this would have resulted in some more visible motion blur with moving/walking subjects.
    
    Prog.

    Prognathous at 10:52pm on Sunday, December 11, 2005

14. Thank you, Prog. ISO 161 is close to what I had suspected (ISO 200)
    but not nearly what I had hoped (ISO 400), although somewhat better
    than what I had feared (ISO 100).
    
    Conclusion, very disappointing. I have all but given up on the R3 as a
    potential buy. I suspect Mark's review will put the final nail in its coffin.

    GARY POGODA at 11:48pm on Sunday, December 11, 2005

15. It seems that the "Preferred Photo" folks listed above as selling the Caplio R3 aren't entirely trustworthy. I haven't purchased from them, but if you google for:
    
    "Preferred Photo" preferredphoto.com
    
    You get some very illuminating comments, such as the ones at http://www2.resellerratings.com/seller10652.html
    
    I was very excited that there was someone in the US finally selling this camera, but after reading all that, I won't order from them, Also, beware, Ricoh USA does not sell (and therefore support) this camera, so you'd be on your own for that--as someone on another site said, Ricoh seems more interested in creating cool cameras than actually selling them.
    
    Sigh.

    Ian Crew at 02:52pm on Friday, December 16, 2005

16. I am a complete novice and looking for a camera that is:
    very small,
    has a very wide angle/yet great zoom,
    shows no shutter lag
    inexpensive.
    
    I plan on shooting family type stuff for 4x6's mostly, maybe an occasional 8x10. I generally do not blow up shots. If I were to do something, I have a leica film camera to do that with.
    
    I was very excited about the R2 and then this came out and I became ecstatic. Ricoh Canada will sell this to me. However, I am nervous about the above reviews about noise. I am not sure I really need to worry about this since my purpose for the camera is different.
    
    I would appreciate your advice. Thank you!!

    Julie at 03:01pm on Monday, December 19, 2005

17. The thing about noise is, it's there more when you are looking for it,
    than when you are not. Based on the criteria you presented, I think
    the R3 is a perfect camera for you. In fact, I will go one step further,
    I think you are the perfect user for the R3. If there were more users
    like you, Julie, Ricoh would have a gold mine in the R3.

    GARY POGODA at 05:11pm on Monday, December 19, 2005

18. Just got my R3 and so far I'm happy. The camera is small and fast. I really like the wide angle compared to the competition. Except for noise, the image quality is pretty good, especially when considering the zoom range. Sharpness is good, color is good. This is also what most reviews have found. Noise is (much) worse than the competition (eg canon ixus55/sd450). I'm not sure if this is due to worse performance of the ccd, the ccd readout electronics or the in-camera post processing. I suspect it is the last, because software like neat image of noise ninja make the pictures a lot better and (IMHO) on par with Canon.
    Another thing I didn't expect to like was the extra flash to help focusing in low light (instead of an AF assist light). From other camera's (like my film canon eos 30) that also have this extra flash, the time between the focus flash and the actual flash is too long. People will react to the first and the moment is spoiled when the picture is taken. For the R3 the time between the two flashes is short, a fraction of a second which reduces my objections against using the flash as AF assist.

    Wouter at 08:39am on Tuesday, December 20, 2005

19. Has anybody tried the new firmware yet? Because I'm very interested in this camera and want to know if the quality of the pictures has got any better?

    Robin at 11:46am on Tuesday, December 20, 2005

20. I'm currently on 1.27 and I did not see any difference in the noise. In the shop where I bought the camera they showed me prints of two simultaneous shots with two R3's where one had a firmware update (I guess 1.24) and one did not. With the firmware upgrade the exposure (in backlight conditions) improved.
    Hope this helps...

    Wouter at 04:15pm on Tuesday, December 20, 2005

21. Wouter can you publisch a random taken picture of you? And do you find the noise irritating on the pictures?

    Robin at 04:30pm on Tuesday, December 20, 2005

22. That's good news about the AF assist pre-flash.

    GARY POGODA at 06:05pm on Tuesday, December 20, 2005

23. I'll try to publish some photo's on friday. If it's ok with you, they will not be of me .
    
    When I looked at the photo's printed in the shop (unprocessed according to the shop owner) the noise did not annoy me. Size of the photo's was 13 by 19 cm. (~5" by 7.5").
    
    Looking at the photo's, like the ones on this site full size on a computerscreen, the noise does annoy me when the photo's are not filtered.

    Wouter at 12:14pm on Wednesday, December 21, 2005

24. As promised, I published a few photo's. You can see both the original and a noise filtered version.
    
    http://fotoalbum.dds.nl/rensen01/r3

    Wouter at 09:01pm on Friday, December 23, 2005

25. Thanks for the pictures Wouter!
    
    I suspected that you would be Dutch because of your name Can you tell me where did you bought your camera?

    Robin at 09:28pm on Friday, December 23, 2005

26. You're welcome! I bought the camera at 'foto starink'in Eindhoven. Actually really close to the location of the photo's.
    
    Good luck deciding what to buy !
    
    Wouter

    Wouter at 08:46am on Saturday, December 24, 2005

27. Where does a US Customer buy this camera? I would think that all camera's purchased in the US would be grey market. I know Ebay has them for about $360 or so. What is the difference between those sold in Hong Kong, Japan, Canada or the UK?
    
    Does anyone have any advice? Thank you!!

    Emma at 04:46pm on Monday, December 26, 2005

28. Hi there
    
    I am still doubting. Another thing what about the "slow shutter"-function? I heard that there is a ability to put in a maximum shutter time.(1/8, 1/4, 1/2) "Limiting shutter release speed".
    Is it comparable to shutter priority-function?
    
    What about the LONG TIME EXPOSURE
    
    Greetz
    Alex

    Alex B at 11:22am on Monday, January 02, 2006

29. Please note that the download link for the movie is broken.

    AA747 at 06:25pm on Friday, January 13, 2006

30. Thanks for letting me know, the movie link is working now.

    Mark Goldstein at 11:53am on Monday, January 16, 2006

31. I am posting this comment on several PhotographyBLOG threads, the
    ones where I have spent considerable time over the past few months.
    
    As you know, I've been searching for a camera for my wife's birthday
    coming at the end of January. I was looking for an ultra-compact with
    a high zoom and minimal red-eye. Some of the cameras I considered
    were the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX1, the Samsung Digimax L55W, the
    HP Photosmart R817, the Nikon Coolpix S4, and the Ricoh Caplio R3.
    
    Unfortunately, all of these cameras were eliminated for one reason or
    another, but mostly for their high image noise. It was only at CES that
    a camera debuted which caught my eye, the Kodak EasyShare V570.
    
    The V570 is a dual lens, dual CCD, ultra-compact. One lens is a fixed
    23mm while the other is a 3x zoom (39 - 117mm), for a 5x total zoom
    range. Both lenses are of the folded-optics variety. The V570 also has
    two 1/2.5" 5 megapixel CCDs, which do not seem to be plagued by the
    excessive noise of similar CCDs. Its in-camera red-eye removal is also
    quite good.
    
    If you are interested in reading more about the V570, or about its CCD
    noise characteristics (as per a review of the V550 which uses the same
    CCD), then check out the links in my comment #20 of the recent "Take
    My Wife's Digital Camera" thread (written by yours truly).
    
    http://www.photographyblog.com/index.php/weblog/comments/take_my_wifes_digital_camera/
    
    The camera is not ordered yet, so any feedback you can offer would be
    greatly appreciated. I would feel better if the camera had been reviewed
    by our own Mark "The Noise Sleuth" Goldstein.

    GARY POGODA at 07:41pm on Tuesday, January 17, 2006

32. Does anyone have a Noise Ninja profile built for the Caplio R3? Saves creating a new one. Can you post it somewhere?

    BC at 11:02am on Sunday, January 22, 2006

33. Check out my actual photos of Brasil through the lens of my Ricoh Capilo R3:
    http://greeneternity.planetnomads.com/r3_brasil
    The site is flash based to save me some time. It includes most of the EXIF info and the original sized photo if you wish to download it.
    All but 2 photos were taken without tripods, on manual setting of ISO 64, with image stablization on, vivid color, auto white balancing, normal sharpness and no flash. Firmware 1.27 was used for this trip. Let's see whatelse? All photos were post processed using Photoshop CS2 (as I do with all my photos) "ctrl + shift + l" fuction which auto levels the picture.... to be honest, it didn't make a whole lot of difference.
    You can find other photos on http://planetnomads.com (unlimited photo storage) and also click the following if you want to buy the "Best of Brasil" calender I made for only $14.99 http://www.lulu.com/content/223860
    
    Will

    Will at 04:35pm on Monday, January 30, 2006