Ricoh GX200 Review

Announced two days ago, the Ricoh GX200 is a compact digital camera aimed at all those photographers who want a similar feature-set to their DSLR cameras. The GX200 certainly fits that billing, on paper at least - 24-72mm, 3x optical zoom lens, RAW mode via the Adobe DNG format, 12 megapixel sensor, 2.7-inch screen with 460K pixels, removable electronic viewfinder, optical image stabilisation, all in a well-built body that’s just 25mm thick. We’ve been testing out the new Ricoh GX200 for the past week, and today we’ve published our full review. Click the link below to find out if this is the professional pocket camera for you…

Website: Ricoh GX200 Review

Published: Thursday, June 26, 2008

Reader Comments

1. Thank you for this quick and fair review Mark!
   
   It's exactly as I thought it would be. GX200 seems to apply the same JPEG NR processing as in GRDII. If you still have the camera, is there any chance you can try the new "NR OFF" option? GRDII does have the same option, but it still applies certain level of NR. It would be nice to know if it's also the case of GX200?
   
   At least there is now a decent RAW buffer so we can completely avoid shooting in JPEG

   Pavel Kudrys at 03:42pm on Thursday, June 26, 2008

2. Hi Pavel.
   
   Glad you found the review useful!
   
   I've still got the camera. All the ISO shots were taken with the Noise reduction menu option set to Off. Is that the option that you're referring to?

   Mark Goldstein at 03:49pm on Thursday, June 26, 2008

3. this review is far too positive for a camera that produced dull colors, smeary images and is just a plain piece of shit.

   Mr. Disgusted at 04:59pm on Thursday, June 26, 2008

4. Thanks for the great review, Mark.
   
   Is there any way we could get access to the ISO 800 and ISO 1600 RAW files you used for the image-quality comparison crops? I'd be interested to see how much it is possible to squeeze out from them using dedicated noise-reduction software (such as NoiseWare).
   
   Prog.

   Prognathous at 05:02pm on Thursday, June 26, 2008

5. Thanks Mark! Yes, this Noise Reduction option is the same as in GRDII menu. So the result is exactly the same. Well...at least there is RAW and speedy operation

   Pavel Kudrys at 06:26pm on Thursday, June 26, 2008

6. "The Ricoh GX200's main drawback in terms of image quality is noise."
   
   I would argue that the main drawback isn't noise, but noise reduction, which the author doesn't even mention. Noise reduction is evident throughout the entire ISO range, and the sample photos included look very poor to me as a result. The lack of sharpness mentioned is a direct result of all the noise reduction being applied. Adding additional sharpness via photoshop is not a very good solution.
   
   This would have been a much better camera if Ricoh had limited the megapixel count to 8 or less.

   RobJ at 09:09pm on Thursday, June 26, 2008

7. Prog, you can download the ISO 800 and 1600 RAW images using these links:
   
   http://tinyurl.com/6xqpel (ISO 800)
   
   http://tinyurl.com/6jcgu9 (ISO 1600)
   
   Let us know how you get on with running the files through Noiseware.

   Mark Goldstein at 07:46am on Friday, June 27, 2008

8. Thanks a lot Mark.
   
   I downloaded the files and processed them. To make it easier to compare the results I created a page that contains the crops and links to the processed files.
   
   NOTE: I added credit to you and a link to this review, but if you want me to remove the page, I’ll do it as soon as I get your message (I’m subscribed to get notifications about new comments).
   
   As for the conversion, I not only reduced the noise (using Noiseware) and changed the tone curves (using PSP X2), but also downsized the files to the DP1 size - 4.7MP. Needless to say, the faster lens of the Ricoh and its IS mean that DP1 at ISO 1600 should actually be compared to the GX200 at ISO 400, or at the very least at ISO 800.
   
   Anyway, I hope you'll find the results interesting. You can find the page here:
   
   http://imapnet.com/boren/GX200_HighISO/
   
   Prog.

   Prognathous at 02:46pm on Friday, June 27, 2008

9. Sorry if I've missed this, but could you give us an indication of how long it is before the zoom and/or other controls can be adjusted after taking a first DNG shot?
   
   This is of more significance to the way I'd use the camera than the time to process a multi-shot RAW burst!
   
   With the GX100, everything's locked up for the 9 or 10 indicator blinks and then comes free again once they've finished - is the GX200 any quicker?
   
   Thanks,
   Peter

   Peter Bardwell at 08:56am on Saturday, June 28, 2008

10. Peter, less than a second, and about 2 blinks of the status LED. That's shooting a DNG and the best-quality JPEG together.

    Mark Goldstein at 02:48pm on Saturday, June 28, 2008

11. Thanks for good review.
    
    I got this curiosity- Change camera settings bewteen 12M and 5M pixels would make a different noise appearance throughout the whole sensitivity values?

    Sanghoon at 02:22am on Sunday, June 29, 2008

12. Thanks for the review and thanks for the additional ISO 800 and 1600 images. The comments by the one fellow that mentioned the NR in previous Ricoh cameras is true with jpg images. This seems to occur even when NR is turned off (GRD II), as some NR appears to still be present. It's more like "NR, Low". However by looking at the ISO 800 and 1600 shots that it is much better in the GX200. Perhaps the new engine is a good improvement.

    gilw at 04:18am on Sunday, June 29, 2008

13. The smearing of the reds on the cranes and boat at the bottom of the picture in ricoh_gx200_14.jpg is just awful - obvious at just regular screen resolution. Is this a low ISO shot?

    Michael Cross at 03:28pm on Tuesday, July 01, 2008

14. Image 14 was shot at ISO 64.

    Mark Goldstein at 03:41pm on Tuesday, July 01, 2008

15. Do you know if the smearing of the reds in ricoh_gx200_14.jpg is from the jpeg/noise reduction processing, or is it in the raw files too? (I would love to see the raw file of this photo!)
    
    PS: Thanks for the comprehensive review and samples - very informative!

    Michael Cross at 03:51pm on Thursday, July 03, 2008

16. Michael, comparing the DNG and JPEG versions in Photoshop reveals that the DNg file is markedly better, with much less smearing than in the JPEG.

    Mark Goldstein at 08:54am on Friday, July 04, 2008

17. Your description of 2nd curtain sync seemed a bit strange!

    Dave Taylor at 06:34am on Tuesday, July 15, 2008

18. Enjoyed the review, especially access to the JPEG and RAW files. It was nice to be able to get in and tweak the RAW files, almost like taking a few test shots myself. Thanks. Are any of the sample images taken with the 19mm? Would like to take a look at the sharpness and distortion with that adaptor.

    Mark Anderson at 07:37am on Saturday, August 23, 2008