Ricoh Caplio R3 Announced

September 7, 2005 | Mark Goldstein | Digital Compact Cameras | 422 Comments |

Ricoh Caplio R3The Ricoh Caplio R3 digital camera is announced. The Ricoh R3 is a 5 megapixel compact camera with a 7x optical zoom lens equivalent to 28-200mm. The R3 also features vibration correction of the CCD. The Ricoh Caplio R3 will be available in both black and silver colour. Price and availability to be confirmed.

Ricoh UK Press Release

The Caplio R3: A pocket-sized digital compact that combines the 7.1x optical zoom with vibration control.

London 2005. Ricoh announces the launch of the Caplio R3 compact digital camera. This new model features a 7.1x optical wide zoom - the largest in its class *  – and a vibration correction function.

* Among digital cameras lighter than 150g as of Aug 29th          

With a smaller body, the new Caplio R3, has a 7.1x (28—200 mm) wide-angle, high-powered zoom lens - the biggest in its class. The lens was created by adopting the newly developed Double Retracting Lens System, an advance on the highly successful Retracting Lens System, the original lens storage system engineered by Ricoh for its innovative products. Moreover, to address blurred images caused by hand movement inherent to long focal ranges, the Caplio R3 avoids this problem in telephoto, macro, or indoor shots with the addition of a vibration correction function.

By letting part of the lens assembly protrude from the camera body during lens storage, the wide-angle, high-powered zoom lens is even more compact.

Ricoh has historically manufactured products based on the concept of Expandability. In addition to the wide-angle high powered zoom, the new Caplio R3 expands the range of shooting even further by employing such enhanced features as 1cm macro function - Ricoh’s specialty - and quick response times. 

Ricoh Caplio R3Main Features for Caplio R3:
7.1x wide zoom lens, largest in its class, in a 26mm body!
The newly developed Double Retracting Lens System allows part of the lens assembly to protrude from the camera body during lens storage. This enables the body, a mere 26 mm, to have a 28–200 mm 7.1x wide zoom lens. (The Caplio R2 has a 28–135 mm 4.8x lens.)
The highly versatile Caplio R3 delivers outstanding results in practically any photographic situation, whether it’s capturing a panoramic landscape in one shot, wide-angle images in a room where everything is very close, or the fine details of distant objects.

Vibration Correction Function, based on Ricoh’s original CCD shift method.
Whenever it detects excessive camera motion, the vibration correction system, developed from Ricoh’s original CCD shift method, moves the CCD in the opposite direction to counterbalance camera shake, resulting in sharp pictures that would have been blurred otherwise.

As it is not necessary to incorporate the vibration correction system into the lens, many lens design options, were available, facilitating the design of a slim body and a wide to long telephoto range lens.

The Caplio R3 shows its effectiveness best in high-powered telephoto, macro, or indoor shots without using flash. Once again the vibration correction function allows for sharp images that would not be possible otherwise.

The macro function, a Ricoh specialty, has been strengthened.
The camera’s macro mode, can take a macro shot of an object from just 1 cm away.
The new zoom macro function automatically sets the focal distance of the lens at the optimum distance for capturing an image of each object as large and close as possible.
If AF Target Selection is used, it is even possible to focus on objects within the frame without moving the camera. By determining the optimum field of view, taking into consideration such information as the size or contrast of the object, focusing accuracy becomes that much higher when shooting in macro.

The skew correction function.
Through an original algorithm, which automatically detects trapezoids in images and corrects them to rectangles, images of such things as blackboards, documents, or time schedules shot at any angle can be corrected so that the image looks as though it were shot from the front. The camera is most effective in business environments where blackboards, overhead projector, OHPs, time schedules; signs, etc. cannot be shot from the front.

The popular high-speed response capability enables stress-free shooting.
Release time lag (the time from the instant the shutter button is fully pressed—without using focus lock—until exposure actually starts) is as fast as approx. 0.09sec. on average. Quick responses are essential in order to capture picture-perfect but near-instantaneous moments such as the expressions and movement of children or pets. Now stress-free, near-instantaneous shots are possible.

Time calculated from the instant the focus is locked (half-press) until exposure actually starts is a miraculous 0.007 seconds on average.

Shooting interval and start time are both rapid, approx. 0.5 and 1.1 seconds, respectively (measured while the flash is off).

The long-life rechargeable battery, a standard accessory, lets you shoot approx. 310 pictures.
Thanks to the power-saving features of the internal circuit, it is possible to capture up to 310 separate images under CIPA standards using the standard accessory rechargeable battery even while using the large LCD display.

The 5.13 million square pixel CCD and original image processing system enables shooting of high-definition pictures.
The CCD is effective up to 5.13 million square pixels with the Smooth Imaging Engine image processing system. Combined with the vibration correction function, representative, superior, high-definition images can be created. It is possible to select a 35mm aspect ratio (the horizontal to vertical ratio of the image) of 3:2.

High operational performance.
The Caplio R3 has an easy-to-see 2.5-inch large-scale LCD monitor.

During playback, 12 pictures can be displayed simultaneously on the large screen. While checking previous and subsequent pictures, the screen can be separated into three parts to allow fast forwarding and rewinding.

The brightness of the LCD can be increased to maximum with a single touch and visibility can be adjusted to suit well-lighted areas.

Ricoh Caplio R3A design combining style with portability.
The design combines functionality and texture with such features as a comfortable grip, easy-to-use controls, high-grade materials, surface finishing, and a compact body of 95.0 mm (W) x 53.0 mm (H) x 26.0 mm (D).

Price and Availability:
The Caplio R3 will be available in both black and silver colour. Price to be confirmed.

Ricoh Caplio R3 Major Specifications:
CCD Effective 5.13 million square pixels (5.25 million pixels), 1/2.5-inch primary colour CCD
Lens Focal length f4.6-33 (equivalent to 28-200mm for 35mm cameras. When setting Step Zoom, six fixed possible steps: 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm, 135mm, and 200mm)Brightness (F value) F 3.3 (W)-4.8 (T)
Vibration correction function CCD shift method
Zoom Optical 7.1x zoom, Digital 3.6x zoom
Object Distance approx. 0.3m-∞ (Wide), approx. 1.0m-∞ (Telephoto) Macro: approx. 0.01m-∞ (Wide), approx. 0.14m-∞ (Telephoto)
Shutter

 8,4,2,1-1/2000 sec.   

 1/30-1/2000 sec.
Resolution (pixels)

  2592 x 1944,2592 x 1728,2048 x 1536,1280 x 960,640 x 480   2592 x 1944,2048 x 1536

320 x 240,160 x 120
Picture Mode*1 F(Fine)/N (Normal)
ISO Sensitivity AUTO/64,100,200,400,800
Flash  Auto/ Red-Eye Reduction/ Mandatory Flash/ Slow Synchro/ Flash Off ,Flash Range*2: approx. 0.2m-2.4m (Wide), approx. 0.14m-1.8m (Telephoto) (ISO: AUTO)
Focus Auto Focus/ Manual Focus/ Snap/ ∞ (includes AF auxiliary light)
Exposure Adjustment TTL-CCD method photometric system: Multi (256 segments)/ Center weight/ Spot
Exposure Compensation Manual Compensation (+2.0~-2.0EV in 1/3EV steps) Auto Bracket Function (-0.5EV.±0.+0.5EV)
White Balance Auto/ Fixed (Daylight, Overcast, Tungsten light, Tungsten light 2, Fluorescent, Manual)
Recording Media SD Memory Card (3.3V 32,64,128,256,512MB,1GB)/Multi Media Card, Internal Memory (26MB)
Storage Capacity*3 (No. of Pictures)(Internal 26MB Memory) <Still> 2592x 1944(F:13,N:22), 2592x1728(F:14) 2048x1536(F:18,N36),1280x960(F:33,N63),640x480(N:277)
Storage Capacity(Time)(Internal 26MB Memory) <Motion> 1 minute 17 seconds (320x240, 15frames/second), 4minutes 38 seconds*4 (160x120, 15 frames/second),39 seconds ( 320x240, 30frames/second),2minutes 26 seconds(160x120, 30 frames/second)<Sound> 56 minutes 45 seconds *5
Storage Capacity (File Sizes)(Internal 26MB Memory) <Still> 2592 x 1944. F: approx. 1.83MB N: approx. 1.06MB,2592x1728. F:1.63MB, 2048 x 1536.F: approx. 1.31MB N: approx. 672KB,1280 x 960 F: approx. 686KB N: approx. 356KB,640 x 480 N: approx. 83KB
Recording Mode Still (Continuous, S-Continuous, M-Continuous), Scene Mode (Portrait, Sports, Distant Landscape Night Scene, Text, High Sensitivity, Zoom Macro, Skew correction), Motion, Sound
Recording Format

Compressed: JPEG (Exif ver. 2.21) DCF*6compliant, DPOF support TIFF (MMR system ITU-T.6) AVI (Open DML Motion JPEG Format compliant)

 WAV (Exif ver.2.21 μ law)
LCD Monitor 2.5 inch Translucent Amorphous Silicon TFT LCD (approx. 114,000 pixels)
Self Timer Operating Time: approx. 10 sec./ 2 sec.
Interval Timer Shooting interval: 5 sec. – 3 hours (in 5 sec. increments) *7
PC Interface USB1.1 Choice of Ricoh original or Mass Storage driver*8
AV Interface Audio Out/ Video Out
Video Signal Method NTSC/PAL switchable
Dimensions (W x D x H) 95.0mm(W) x26.0mm(D)x53.0mm(H) (excluding projections)
Weight Approx. 135g (without battery, Hand strap)Accessories approx. 30g (Rechargeable battery, Hand strap)
Battery Rechargeable Battery (DB-60), AC adaptor (AC-4c,optional accessories)
Shooting Capacity*9 Based on CIPA Standard: using the DB-60, approx. 310 pictures
Operating Temperature 0~40 ℃ 

*1: Only N (Normal) is available for 640×480 size, only F (Fine) is available for 2592x1728 size
*2: When the flash range is set for ISO AUTO or ISO 400
*3: Average number of still images it is possible to record.
*4: Maximum recording time of 168 min. 30 sec. is possible with a 1GB SD card.
*5: Maximum recording time of 2063 min. 25 sec. is possible with a 1GB SD card.
*6: DCF is the abbreviation of JEITA standard “Design rule for Camera File system”. (It does not guarantee perfect inter-camera compatibility.)
*7: With flash OFF
*8: Mass Storage driver is compatible with Windows Me/2000/XP, Mac OS9, and OSX10.2-10.4
   It is not compatible with Windows 98/98SE or Mac OS8.6,
*9 Battery performance was measured using CIPA-standard parameters. Actual performance may vary according to usage conditions and the brand of the battery.

*Windows is a registered trademark or trademark of Microsoft Corporation in the U.S.A. and other countries.
* Mac OS is a registered trademark of Apple Computer, Inc. in the U.S.A. and other countries.

About Ricoh:
A pioneer in digital office equipment, Ricoh provides state-of-the-art multifunctional printing devices tailored to corporate office customer needs, and offers a broad range of digital, networked products, including copiers, printers, fax machines, DVD/CD media, and digital cameras.
With 347 consolidated subsidiaries worldwide, Ricoh employs 75,100 people with consolidated sales of 1.81 trillion YEN. The Ricoh Group currently enjoys No.1 market share for plain paper copiers in Europe, Japan and No.2 share in the USA.



Tracker Pixel for Entry

Your Comments

422 Comments | Newest Oldest First | Post a Comment

#201 Maggie

Hi John
Could not say if what you were told is true or not but I have heard that Sangers, the company that distribute Ricoh's in the U.K. has got into difficulties but it was hoped that the cameras could still be sent out!!!!! This may explain some of the delays, perhaps why Mark is not able to get a camera to review.

Heidrun, well done for taking the trouble to show us your pictures, some of them are really good.

One thing about this Forum, contributors are so helpful and as a"Newbie" I have learnt quite a lot from the very useful hints that people share with us all. Of course, with some of the initials, ie OIS I have had to enquire from my local dealer as to what they stand for but it all helps with the learning process.

All of the tips are VERY much appreciated.

Thank YOU

10:48 am - Tuesday, November 29, 2005

#202 Mark Goldstein

Just to clarify, I do now have a working R3 in for review, it's just been pushed down in the queue (the Panasonic DMC-LX1 is next...).

As far as I know, Ricoh is fine - I will check about Sangers.

11:50 am - Tuesday, November 29, 2005

#203 Mike

Mark G, Do you have an ETA on when R3 review will be published? Thx.

6:53 pm - Tuesday, November 29, 2005

#204 Mark Goldstein

It definitely won't be this week, as I'm reviewing the DMC-LX1 first.

I've spoken to Ricoh's PR company and they are definitely still selling in the UK. Apparently Sangers, their distribution company, went into receivership about 3 weeks ago. Ricoh are saying business as usual...

10:24 pm - Tuesday, November 29, 2005

#205 GARY POGODA

Maggie, here is a tip you might find useful. Should you encounter an
unfamiliar camera term, just Google it. You would be amazed at how
much useful information you can find on the Web.

For example, if you wanted to find out more about OIS, you could just
type the following (capitalization does not matter) into the Search field
and hit Return:

ois

Upon doing this, you will notice that there is a lot of OIS info that has
nothing to do with cameras. You can search for OIS info specifically
related to cameras by typing the following into the Search field:

ois & camera

The ampersand instructs the search to find all related info which has
BOTH words in it, somewhere.

Suppose you wanted info on Panasonic's version of OIS, namely, its
MEGA OIS. You would type the following into the Search field:

"mega ois"

The quotes are necessary for multiple word terms you want to keep
together; otherwise the search will look for all info on MEGA, as well
as all info on OIS, separately.

If you wanted to find info on the MEGA OIS for a specific camera like
the FZ30, you would type the following into the Search field:

"mega ois" & fz30

If you were looking for a review that talked about the FZ30 MEGA OIS,
you would type the following into the Search field:

"mega ois" & fz30 & review

Not all the info you find will be relevant, but much of it will be. Should
you find too much info, you can always narrow the search by stringing
together additional relevant terms with the ampersand.

Of course, I would not want you to think that I have ever had to resort
to any such Google searches, since I already know all there is to know
about cameras. :)

9:09 pm - Wednesday, November 30, 2005

#206 PETER PEARCE

Gary your so modest .

10:30 pm - Wednesday, November 30, 2005

#207 PETER PEARCE

U.K. What do you think the idea of slipping the name of the country that we are corresponding from as a bit of added interest, JUST A THOUGHT .

10:40 pm - Wednesday, November 30, 2005

#208 Maggie

Don't know if Gary is modest or not but I know I am so grateful for his help. THANK YOU Gary.

10:58 pm - Wednesday, November 30, 2005

#209 Maggie

Hi Peter,

Forgot to say, my postings are sent from Wrexham, which is near to Chester, in the U.K.

11:01 pm - Wednesday, November 30, 2005

#210 p.marshall

right all you people out there, lets have a count and see how many of us are going to buy a r3.
I will so that makes the total 1

11:09 pm - Wednesday, November 30, 2005

#211 MarkT

Size, price and specification wise the R3 is just what I'm looking for.
But ..... until I am satisfied that picture quality is good enough, its on hold.
Unless I find an alternative beforehand.

11:50 pm - Wednesday, November 30, 2005

#212 Maggie

Still undecided - waiting for Mark's review and IF the R3 should arrive in the shops in the next week - I would like to handle it and a Samsung L55W and then hopefully choose. Ricoh have not done themselves any favours though and if there is much more delay, I am going for the L55W - like the idea of the confidence shown by Samsung in giving a two year guarantee as well.

10:01 am - Thursday, December 1, 2005

#213 Alex B

Hi everybody

I have looked and looked... Everywhere there doubt, even over the specifications...

I think most important would be that somebody will take same pictures with the R3 and with other camera. Then you REALLY can compare. And end this solution.

I am from Belgium. And it is really difficult to find a shop that sells Ricoh. I found one: he told me next week (after 5dec). He also told me that for Europe there are to delivered 2000 pieces (not much).

I am looking for a camera with following possibilities:
-wide angle
-compact

And that limits it to two cameras:
Ricoh R3 (+/- 350€) and the Canon S70 (450€).
At first i set my budget between €250 - €350. Now i am doubting...

Difficult choice. And it seems that i am not the only one.
Anyone knows other cameras that are a possibility for me?

10:27 am - Thursday, December 1, 2005

#214 Andreas T

Thanx for the description of Gary in 195

I tested the R3 in a Shop (Germany)
Generell feeling was ok.
with ISO > 100 the images were noisy.
Using the OIS (with 64 ISO) somtimes I got sometime sharp images, somtimes not.
(May be the focus problem, I think they have not updated the R3 in the shop)

Taking picture under the desk without und without using the flash has poor performance in focusing.

Nevertheless I am on the way to buy it.
But
1. I need i test of the quality of the movies , after transfering to DVD
2. Need more informations and tests on the L55W, which is my second choice.

1:14 pm - Thursday, December 1, 2005

#215 Prognathous

1
Alex B wrote:

> I think most important would be that somebody
> will take same pictures with the R3 and with
> other camera. Then you REALLY can compare. And
> end this solution.

I agree with every word. It seems that many people have made up their mind that Ricoh's image quality is below average. I really would like see the R3 compared with other 5MP-cameras with a 28mm lens. There aren't many cameras with these attributes today, but it shouldn't be too difficult to find models from recent years the fit the bill (e.g. Fuji E510, Minolta A1, Canon S60 and Olympus C5060).

Prog.

2:07 pm - Thursday, December 1, 2005

#216 Steven Conroy

For those who say the R£ is not available in USA !

4:22 pm - Thursday, December 1, 2005

#217 Steven Conroy

I'll try again - R3 on sale in USA:
Broadway Photo

4:24 pm - Thursday, December 1, 2005

#218 Robbo

UK Update

R3 is now on sale in the UK. local jacobs (leeds) photographic shop have them in stock at £249.99. Salesman had a letter from Ricoh saying they had now got a new distributer

5:19 pm - Thursday, December 1, 2005

#219 Steven Conroy

MMmmm... Jacobs, the full price shop !

Park Cameras have had black ones for a week or so. See internet ads.

5:26 pm - Thursday, December 1, 2005

#220 Maggie

Yes, I have had an email to say the R3 is available in certain outlets and I have also been sent a copy of the "WHICH" Review of the camera. It is an attachment to an email and has received an 86% rating and generally favourable comments same as the Review in "What Camera". Unfortunately, I do not have the knowledge as how to attach the review to this blog entry !!!! Maybe I shall print it out and type it up into this section.

5:33 pm - Thursday, December 1, 2005

#221 Steven Conroy

A nice offer but I'm not sure if it is wise to put it on here for copyright reasons. "WHICH" might be a bit sensitive !

6:46 pm - Thursday, December 1, 2005

#222 Deb

i've really enjoyed following the info re. the R3. Initially, I'd set my heart on it however - talk about 'people's-voice marketing' - am now not so sure!! It feels like a long wait and now some have arrived! I have one 'on order to view' at Jessops. If anyone else has a jessops near by they have a company policy to match the price if you found it cheaper elsewhere - and this includes some internet sites e.g. fotosense was pre-selling for £219, unfortunately, now they have it in stock it is £229!. (I was told to take in a photo-copy of the details).
Yet to be tested, but thought it was worth passing on if only to negotiate up a + memory card!
Off on hols soon - looks like I'll be taking a disposable! Merry click/ing.

6:55 pm - Thursday, December 1, 2005

#223 Maggie

Thanks for your advice Steven - I did start to type it up and then had the same thought as what you have had and realised I could be skating on thin ground and so will not be posting anything from the Which.

If you are not a subscriber to Which, normally Public Libraries have copies in their Reference Sections. If only though, someone would do a review of the Samsung L55W !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

7:30 pm - Thursday, December 1, 2005

#224 GARY POGODA

I think Heidrun should be about ready to do a review. :)

Heidrun, I just got around to checking out your photos. I see what you
mean about the maximum image size in 4:3 mode being 2592 x 1944
(which is 5.0 megapixels), and the maximum image size in 16:9 mode
being 2944 x 1656 (which is 4.9 megapixels). This begs the question,
is there a 3:2 mode with a maximum image size of 2944 x 1944?

Regardless, that still gives you two aspect ratios at practically the same
maximum resolution of 5 megapixels.

I was curious as to why many of your shots, both in 4:3 mode and 16:9
mode, were shot at less than the maximum image size, which yields a
reduced resolution.

BTW, I especially liked your #6 photo with the icicles on the wall.

7:43 pm - Thursday, December 1, 2005

#225 Heidrun

Hehe Gary, you're joking. No, I cannot do a review, I thought the pics could help a little. Why not the highest resolution? I wanted to get as many pics on the memory card as possible and thought they are fine enough for me. Meanwhile I see that there is space enough on a 512 MB card to use the full "fine" resolution and so I will this weekend when we go to Hamburg and hopefully take some shots.
I still follow this blog because I hope some of you will get happy with their Ricoh and maybe some of you will exchange their impressionson L55W when they decided to buy that camera.

8:30 pm - Thursday, December 1, 2005

#226 PETER PEARCE

212 Hi Maggie i think that you will find that Ricoh also give a two year guarentee in the U.K. and Equipment Express of Altrincham give another year making THREE years , wow i hear you say .
Essex boy .
P.S.My brother in law and my self have both ordered an R3, so thats 3 of us .

10:20 pm - Thursday, December 1, 2005

#227 Mike

I just got mine, that makes 4 then.

12:22 am - Friday, December 2, 2005

#228 Cliff

I've got an R3 (black)and I love it. Ok the LCD has a lower resolution than I would like but it's probably a trade off on the battery power. The camera is impressively fast at everything and the zoom is amazing.

Check out this glowing review of it:
http://www.goodgearguide.com.au/index.php/taxid;2136212588;pid;1018;pt;1

1:16 am - Friday, December 2, 2005

#229 Mark Foster

Just thought I'd post with a printing update for those who are interested.
I had an ISO400 shot printed today. The flash was used and zoom was 15.7 mm or a touch under half. It is of my son on a merry go round in a mood lit Santa's Cave. They were printed on the digital lab at the local variety store.
At 6in x 8in when you hold it about 6 inches from your face you can pick out the noise in the darkest part of the background. It doesn't jump out at you but you can see it if you are looking. Hold the pic at arms length and you can't see it.
I cropped the image by about 50%, eliminated red eye and used Corel Paint Shop Pro one step noise reduction and had that one printed at 8in x 10in and noise is non existant.
I had another ISO400 printed at 8 x 10 with having used the noise reduction function and again no noise.
I am more than happy with the results.
Hope this help those who are still undecided.

6:50 am - Friday, December 2, 2005

#230 Gio

Dear People,

I read all of your postings, and some more sites for R3 & LX-1 review, comparison & comments. I'm still deciding on which one I'll get.
I don't care about higher resolution 5M is more than enough for this size of lens/body.
But my concern are picture quality. Some said that with LX-1 RAW mode can eliminate the noise problem.

But I ask my friend who's doing photo business, he said, that the noise isn't that much problem, 'coz if you want to print it on, let's say 4R-6R, the noise isn't that noticable, the only problem is we try to look at it full size on screen, which if we just resize it to the usable size let's say 50%, noise problem will lessen.

The second worry is the IS, as I think the CCD shift method isn't that effective and lens's OIS. I think I want IS, so if the R3's IS is NOT working, then I'll go for LX-1. Any idea?

If possible, I wanna try both cameras and will post the pictures if they available here in Bangkok. (LX-1 is here with around US$570, but R3 isn't here yet, AFAIK)

For me the
R3
pro are;
1. Compact size
2. Cheaper price
3. More zoom
cons are;
1. That breaky batt/mem compartment
2. IS? I'm not sure if I can hold its small body steady at max zoom, like some review i read.
3. Focus?

LX-1
pro are;
1. OIS
2. RAW
cons are;
1. price
2. size & that lens
3. little bit more zoom would be nice

So, now I'm waiting for LX-1 review and then compare.
What do you guys think?

7:02 am - Friday, December 2, 2005

#231 Daniel

and what about Fuji Finepix E900? The same price as R3, so much more cheaper than Pana LX1, BUT really no noise at 5MP at 800ISO, max 9MP and 32 mm wide-angle, VGA movie.
What do you think?

PS: Reviews + samples are here http://www.front-rows-pits-and-pavements.com/e900/e900.html
photoxels.com/fujifilm-e900-review.html
http://www.ecoustics.com/dt/3316

7:15 am - Friday, December 2, 2005

#232 nick in japan

Gio.. With flashbacks from R@R in Korat, Uban, Udorn during my vacation in Vietnam in the mid sixties, I send greetings and , IMHO, a couple comments.... I just finished picture # 2246 with my LX-1, and I am still in love with this camera. I use lottsa cameras and this is my favorite.. Sure , it has grain in some shots, especially if you are underexposed, but grain is a fact of life in most point and shoots. The wide aspect and IS , along with the color renditions , make this camera a joy to use. A few bucks more is a small price to pay for the smiles you will get, I read alot of critisism from folks that arn't using the camera, very few from folks that actually use one. Another thing , Camera shops use printers that incorporate software that aids picture quality. My file viewed on the Laptop shows a bit of grain , sometimes, the print from the Camera shop has actually cleaned it up during the print process. If you can get one in your hands for a test shoot, you may be pleasantly suprised. I wish you satisfaction with whatever you decide on! Semper Fi!

7:52 am - Friday, December 2, 2005

#233 Alex B

Hey Mark Foster

You have got the R3? Could you send me some pictures / or upload them somewhere?
I am really interested to see them.

Especially the pictures in the dark, wide angle, zoom 28-100-135-200. Macro isn't necessary because everybody is already convinced by that (unless you have got some nice pics:).

Other question: the shuttertimes aren't manualy adjustable with the R3 (it is all automatic). Do you feel that if it was manual it would make a big difference?

Greetz
Alex

9:51 am - Friday, December 2, 2005

#234 danny

hi all, i already got my ricoh R3... picture quality is very much depend on your settings.. the SCENE modes are very useful but in some cases/condition the pictures taken are not very satisfying. The best is based on your own experience and then make the adjustment of the ISO, flash on/off, exposure time, etc..
The 7x zoom function is great to use, and the macro at 1cm give very nice picture.
You all can get more review of R3 at this site:
<http://www.trustedreviews.com/article.aspx?head=63&page=4613>..

9:52 am - Friday, December 2, 2005

#235 Daniel

for Alex B
founded a 2 pages review of R3 from Japan with full samples of 28/35/50/85/105/135/200mm in the dark

http://www.google.com/translate?u=http://arena.nikkeibp.co.jp/rev/20051117/114302/&langpair=ja|en&hl=en&ie=UTF8

Daniel

9:58 am - Friday, December 2, 2005

#236 Andreas T

Hi R3 owner,
help help
is there anybody out there who can make a movie with the R3 and can share it.
I want to test, how it would look at TV.
My experience is, that an 320x240 movie looks terrible on screen, but fine on TV played with a DVD-Player.

10:40 am - Friday, December 2, 2005

#237 Alex B

Danny

> The best is based on your own experience
> and then make the adjustment of the ISO,
> flash on/off, exposure time, etc..
>
> Posted by danny on Dec 02, 2005 - 09:52 AM

Hi, i was surprised when you said something about exposure time... I thought that it was not possible to manually adjust exposure time on the R3 ???
So how do you adjust it?

Greetz
Alex

PS. Daniel, thanks for the sample pictures.
Can anybody else check these pictures, and give their opinion? (and critical comparitive= comparing with other camera e.g. if there is noise is it much worse than on other compactcamera's ?

11:45 am - Friday, December 2, 2005

#238 Mark Foster

For Alex

I have posted some photos - I took some when I first got the camera and have added somemore today:
http://www.photographyblog.com/gallery/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=4221

It should be noted that all of these shots were taken when I had the camera for less than three days and beofre I did the firmware upgrade.

I have upload the photos warts and all so you can see some of the problems you may experience with indoor shots. These were all taken as point and shoot with minimal time involved. The have not undergone any post production except resizing.

I don't think you can adjust the shutter spped directly on the camera but I guess adjusting exposure comp and ISO would have an impact on shutter speed.

1:43 pm - Friday, December 2, 2005

#239 Paul W

Here's another quite positive review:

The Age

Quotes:
"Five megapixels is not a lot these days, but 5 million clean pixels can deliver better pictures than 8 million noisy ones - and these are very clean pixels indeed."

"This Ricoh has something called Camera Shake Correction. It is not advertised as a feature of the camera but it seems to work, whatever it is. Hand-held pictures at slow shutter speeds are always sharp."

"The combination of lens and sensor produce exceptionally detailed and sharp pictures."

"The absence of an optical viewfinder is a disappointment. There is noticeable barrel distortion at 28mm focal length."

2:01 pm - Friday, December 2, 2005

#240 Steven Conroy

Thanks for that Paul W.

Another review that bucks the general trend with some quite opposite opinions. The barrel distortion is back again, now, this not having been reported since early days!

2:11 pm - Friday, December 2, 2005

#241 Daniel

and yet another review from Japan with a lot of test samples
http://tinyurl.com/9wlmy

Daniel

2:41 pm - Friday, December 2, 2005

#242 Alex B

Hi everybody

This afternoon the shop called to say, the ricoh R3 has arrived. He has got it only in a black edition. (is the material of an silver one the same as the black one? or is black more fragile???

About your pictures, i have seen them. I found them quite grainy (noise). The picture of christmas tree was overlit.

The quality doesn't seem good to me.
PLease other experienced photographers, your opinion compared to another compactcamera.

Greetz

2:45 pm - Friday, December 2, 2005

#243 Terence Puey

After reading so much of findings, i decided to make myself useful too and went to search for chinese review on this camera.

Here is it!:
http://www.it.com.cn/f/dc/0511/22/201391_5.htm

And the all important conclusion ( all right, i know you guys dont know chinese. but there is the score of 82/100) :

http://www.it.com.cn/f/dc/0511/22/201391_7.htm

I will continue to sind more and will keep you all posted :)

4:00 pm - Friday, December 2, 2005

#244 Terence Puey

I am actually looking out for compact camera for some time and actually went through quite some readings. And apparently, noise/grainy issue is present in all compact cameras in some way or another.

On the chinese website i shown on reply 243, they came out with a graph of noise VS ISO readings. I think you guys may want to check it out too.

Ricoh R3 : http://www.it.com.cn/f/dc/0511/22/201391_4.htm
Canon A620 : http://www.it.com.cn/f/dc/0511/9/196283_4.htm
Canon IXUS 750 : http://www.it.com.cn/f/dc/0510/10/182124_3.htm

And for those who are not too good at graphs, here is the summary :

AT ISO 50/64
R3:0.88, IXUS 750:0.68, A620:0.71
AT ISO 100
R3:1.13, IXUS 750:0.84, A620:0.91
AT ISO 200
R3:1.34, IXUS 750:1.25, A620:1.41
AT ISO 400
R3:1.61, IXUS 750:2.04, A620:2.28

The numbers are the grain figures and i assume it is the bigger the worse the picture gets. I am not really an expert on such things.... but i guess in terms of noise, i guess the R3 is not too far off either.

There is also other charts on color, focus.you can see it by just adjusting the last number on the weblink to get the right page. The graphs are luckily in english. I dont really understand what it is really trying to say, but you guys may be able to shed some light on it.

And yes, I couldnt find LX1 review on this site. Thats the sad part, we cant compare.

4:35 pm - Friday, December 2, 2005

#245 GARY POGODA

Please check to make sure that your camera or review says "Ricoh"
followed by "Caplio" followed by "R3". With all the differing opinions
we are getting on the R3, it seems like we are all looking at different
cameras. :)

If you want an ultra-compact with very low noise, try the Fuji F10 or
F11. Fuji uses a proprietary technology that offers very low noise in
comparison to standard CCDs. There are also a few ultra-compacts
out there that offer 6 megapixels (or less) on a 1/1.8" CCD and have
reasonably low noise. Most camera manufacturers have models in
this range, but they are not their latest models, which are now up to
8+ megapixels on a 1/1.8" CCD, with higher noise due to the smaller
pixel size. Of course, all those ultra-compacts with a 1/1.8" CCD are
only 3x (or slightly more) zoom.

The problem with higher zoom models is that, in order to squeeze so
much zoom into an ultra-compact size, you need to use a 1/2.5" CCD
which has a lot smaller pixels, and therefor more noise. These higher
zoom ultra-compacts all use a 1/2.5" CCD, so it really comes down to
how well they can manage the noise with noise reduction.

So if you want the higher zoom, you will have to either go with a larger
camera, or live with the higher noise. If you absolutely want a low noise
ultra-compact, you will have to go with one of the older ultra-compacts
having 5 or 6 megapixels on a 1/1.8" CCD, and live with their 3x zoom.

The Fuji E900 is a good compromise, since it is not that much bigger
than an ultra-compact, and has a 4x zoom.

The other option is to wait. You can wait for Fuji to come out with a
high zoom ultra-compact, or you can wait for Canon or Sony to offer
a CMOS high zoom ultra-compact. In these cases, the 1/2.5" image
sensor used would be far less noisy than standard CCDs of that size.

7:32 pm - Friday, December 2, 2005

#246 Jimbo

Been teetering over an R2, wondering whether I could put up with less than class-leading images against very fast shot time. Then I discover the R3, think it's going to solve those concerns and now I'm more confused than ever!

Anyway just found this:

http://www.dpexpert.com.au/archives/2005/12/_ricoh_caplio_r.html

Hope it's of interest

8:33 pm - Friday, December 2, 2005

#247 Will

Hey guys I was just ready to make a purchase on eBay on a ricoh r3 until I saw this review:
http://www.w4rmk.com/ricoh/RicohR3.htm

so I am still conflicted if I should get a Panasonic LX-1 for better pictures vs. the R3 for the zoom I may need occasionally :(

9:02 pm - Friday, December 2, 2005

#248 GARY POGODA

Unless you are shooting in 16:9, I don't think you will find the pictures
of the LX1 to be any better than those of the R3. The L55W might be
a good compromise for 16:9 with a long zoom in an ultra-compact.

BTW, that review is by far the worst rating of the R3.

9:22 pm - Friday, December 2, 2005

#249 Will @ http://planetnomad.com - Free photo posting

Gary,
Yeah, I know, that's why I am in a state of indecisive torment! :down:

9:40 pm - Friday, December 2, 2005

#250 Mark Foster

Here is the reason I bought this camera (I hope the link works - if not it is under my gallery)

http://www.photographyblog.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=25940&sort=1&cat=500&page=1

It is my eldest at swimming lessons. I clicked the shutter as soon as I saw him move ito his jump so you have to account for my reaction times. Given that delay shutter lag was effectively zero. If you can find a 28-200 zoom camera this small that will catch pics this fast then buy it.

As I have stated before, printing ISO400 with no post production at 6in x 8in or smaller means noise is negligible. If you watch the images on a standard TV noise is not an issue.

I guess if all you do is look at your pics on the screen at full resoultion, you don't want this camera.

9:35 am - Saturday, December 3, 2005

#251 Steven Conroy

Mark F - you've done an excellent job at supporting this thread.

You are quite correct about viewing at 100% on the monitor. If we were to splash out on equivalent size prints and hang them on the wall we would stand back a few paces to view them, wouldn't we?

I believe a bit of noise/grain is always a problem with big enlargements. I remember the first ISO400 colour films and they WERE grainy even at normal postcard size.

I'm leaving my R3 on order and look forward to it arriving!

Thanks also to everyone else for their input.

10:51 am - Saturday, December 3, 2005

#252 Gio

Hi Guys,

Today, I had my hands on them, touched and tried both R3 and LX-1, but didn't have any memory with me, so I can't bring back the picture to post. I was so disappointed with the R3's material, it was really cheap plastic and the battery patch is very breaky, unlike its ancestors R1/2, the body feels metalic.

The IS on R3, like the review said, I feel indifferent. I tried it with different shop, so it's light environment is different, but I think the Panasonic OIS is little better (as it should be).

Then, I saw R2 laid there, and it's around US$40 cheaper, and next week it'll be camera fair here, so now I'm holding my breaths and waiting to see the fair's offer.

If their offer is good, you'll see my picture posting R3.

5:20 pm - Saturday, December 3, 2005

#253 GARY POGODA

There it is again, that cheap plastic feel. Something I cannot tolerate.

8:27 pm - Saturday, December 3, 2005

#254 MarkT

I can't understand this - are there 2 versions of the R3 our there.
Build quality, auto-focus, noise, picture quality, barrel distortion, AF assist light, and more ....
All of these items have received strongly conflicting reviews. Whilst I appreciate that some of these things are subjective I cann't get my head round such conflicting advice.
All I can be sure of is that the R3 has a 7.1 optical zoom and a naff battery cover.

9:19 pm - Saturday, December 3, 2005

#255 Mark Foster

MarkT,

From my perspective let me try and clarify some of the conflicting aspects of the reviews.
Build quality. This should not be confused with materials used although they may impact on the overall fell of the camera. My unit feels tight. It doesn't ratttle and except for the battery cover all of the panels fit tightly together. The buttons all have a good tactile feel. They dont feel at all mushy. The plastic panels are thick enough not to bow or depress when when pressed on with an above average amount of force. If you don't like plastic panels you may think the camera feels cheap. Is there a diffrenece between 'plastic feel' and 'cheap plastic feel'? That is probably the subjective element.
Auto focus. I have had some shots that haven't come out as clear as I would like. Some of it has been focus and some of them have clearly been movement of the camera. I would say less than one percent have been focus and most of those have been on moving targets with low ISO settings. Sice I changed to Spot AF and have upgraded the firmware I have had a lot less. While I am on this subject the image stabiliser seems to work best for gross movements, like shooting from a moving car, as opposed to moving the camera slightly at the wrong time. Perhaps that defeats the purpose of having it.
Noise/Image Quality. The images do have more noise that other cameras the same size particulary in the higher ISO settings. I have found it to be fixable and not to impact on prints. I think the sharpness of the images is fine but others might not find it acceptable. If you want crystal clear images right through the ISO range this is not the camera for you but you might need to go for something bigger to get the same optical zoom and noiseless pictures.
Barrel Distortion. I understand this is most evident on vertical surfaces. I have posted the only photo I have that i can find where it is evident (this is a crop but you get the idea)

http://www.photographyblog.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=25987&sort=1&cat=500&page=1

You can judge for yourself if it is unacceptable.

AF assist light. The camera does not have an AF assist light in the form of a lamp that comes on and stays on in a half shutter press situation. Instead the flash fires several times (even when not set on red eye reduction) and the camera tries to focus during ths pre flashes. So far it has worked well for me on images taken within the range of the flash.

As I have stressed before this camera is a compromise. Because it is so small I take it places I would feel self concious or couldn't be bothered taking a larger unit. I am thankful for the extra zoom as I have used it quite a bit and I have already expressed how happy I am with the speed.

Balancing all the factors I am happy with the camera but it wont be everyone's cup of tea. Lets face there are enough cameras on the market that you don't have to get this one if it doesn't suit your needs there is probably another out there that does. If there isn't one yet, hold out for a while and there porbably will be.

5:28 am - Sunday, December 4, 2005

#256 Gio

More on focus,

My friend who own R1, said there is active infrared focus, the little window next to flash, he said it help focusing, even in the dark. If u look you'll see 2 LED there.

5:50 am - Sunday, December 4, 2005

#257 Mark Foster

Gio,

I don't think that feature has been carried over to the R3. My video camera can "see" the infrared flashes given off by TV remote controls. When I hold it in front of the R3 in a totally dark room and do a half press on the shutter button I don't see an infrared signal from the AF window.

6:38 am - Sunday, December 4, 2005

#258 MarkT

:-) Hey Mark F. - I wasn't criticising you or your review. What you have said is supported by many other reviews that I have read. However having read many reviews on the R3 (I feel like I know it intimately now !) there do seem to to be 2 sets of opposing views on almost all aspects of this camera.
As I said before many issues are very subjective and can't be easily measured.
I suspect that there are a number of factors which need to be considered when taking in a review.
Professional reviewers will probably be better placed to judge aspects like picture quality, colour reproduction, noise levels etc. But they may also expect too much from mid to low end cameras by comparing their output to more expensive models that they have used. Whereas the amateur user - possibly commenting on what is only their first or second digital camera - may not be best placed to comment on its output and may be satisfied with second rate images because they haven't seen what can be obtained with other models.
On the other hand - the amateur user may have read the manual properly and taken the time to become acquainted with camera and can comment accurately on its features, ergonomics and its day to day usage. Professional reviewers may not have the time or the camera long enough to properly familiarise themselves with it and as a result may mis-report certain features or capabilities of a camera.
And then there is the grey area in between - people who have had plenty of experience using digital cameras who can offer sound advice - but are they commenting on a camera that they have owned and used extensively or one that they have just picked up and tried in the shop?
All these factors have to be taken in to account when deciding how to receive any review.
Personally I am very grateful to ALL of the people who have taken the time and effort to record and publish their views on the R3 and the many other cameras that I have been looking at recently. Without their input it would be a lot harder to decide what camera is best suited to your needs.
Like you said Mark - the R3 is a compromise - like every other camera - like life.

10:36 am - Sunday, December 4, 2005

#259 Mark Foster

No worries MarkT.
I didn't take it as criticism. I was just trying to help clear up the areas of conflict you had identified while trying to make it clear to other readers that this camera is not the be all and end all of ultra compacts.
Sorry if I came across self righteous or churlish.

12:19 pm - Sunday, December 4, 2005

#260 Alex B

I think it is true that there is a lot of subjective opinions.(that is why we call it review :)

But we have to compare on objective grounds.
Don't compare the R3 with other bigger camera's. Because of the smaller CCD, the pictures will be more noisy.

Why are you thinking of the R3.

I was looking for a digital camera with following needs (my needs):
- wide angle (28mm)
- compact camera (so i can easily take it with me

For my needs there are only 2 cameras (i know of):
Ricoh R3 and the Canon S70

R3 is cheaper, smaller, better battery, zoom, good wide angle. (340€)
Canon s70 is a little bigger, better lens, better picture quality, manual shutter and aperture (450€)


Are there more cameras for me? Love to hear it.

2:03 pm - Sunday, December 4, 2005

#261 nick in japan

The Panasonic LX-1 was determined to be worthy of becoming Leica's first attempt of a copy process, dressing it up as a Leica for the cult crowd! It must have some redeeming qualities! It sure fits your basic needs, fits mine ! I haven't heard much complaints from it's users, just from folks that havent used it!
Semper Fi!

2:17 pm - Sunday, December 4, 2005

#262 Alex B

Nick

I have done some research on the LX1.
Very nice!

BUT too expensive (600€) for me.
My absolute max is 450€.

The Canon S70 lays ahead for me.

But i am still open for reactions...
But i still don't know if the picture quality of the R3 is worse than other cheaper cameras. Looking at quality of pictures and forgetting other features of the camera. Is the R3 better than cheaper ones or worse????

3:50 pm - Sunday, December 4, 2005

#263 Gio

Mark F,

If the infrared focus didn't brought from R1/R2, it's a shame, that why my friend's R1 can focus even in darkness, that explain many things. I came across the "Mystic Blue" R2, if it's cheap enough, it'll interest me, coz now, I'm not sure about R3, but know that R2 was worked nicely for sometimes

6:05 pm - Sunday, December 4, 2005

#264 GARY POGODA

Well, thanks everyone. That certainly clears up many of the conflicting
opinions about the R3 ... Not !!!

Mark "Superman" Goldstein to the rescue ??? :)

6:34 pm - Sunday, December 4, 2005

#265 nick in japan

Alex.... I understand your attitude about cost, but, there is another side to it all. For many, many blogs, I continually hear the same reason, "It costs too much". I respectfully submit, that you will make a choice, and when you do you may very well be saying to yourself that "I should have spent the extra money!" I think, from my experience, that saying " I sure am glad I spent a few more for this camera" would apply in this case. I do not work for Panasonic, nor do I respect their deceptive advertising (Thickness data of the LX-1), but I do know that this is a great little camera, and the IS combined with wide view make my daily picture taking much more enjoyable! Please try hard to actually use one, then decide. If you are in Japan I could help you out, the yen has gone up and the camera here is right at $500 US, WITH extra battery.

10:29 pm - Sunday, December 4, 2005

#266 Alex B

Hi everybody

All these reviews make me crazy %-P

Let us put all the competitors of the R3 on a list. It must be compact and have a wide angle. BEcause that is why we all got on this blog!

I now these:
- Canon S70 (or S60)
- Panasonic LX1

Then we will put up all these cameras next to each. (and compare...)(technical info with REAL user comments)

Because to know the value of the R3, you have to compare (sometimes it looks like we are searching for the "perfect camera", forgetting that some features will exclude or diminiush other. (comprimises)

Greetz
Let us compare!

9:02 am - Monday, December 5, 2005

#267 nick in japan

Alex .. Did you ever buy a car? Yes? Well how did you finally decide on the one you wanted, was it the specs/ sure, somewhat, was it your friend's comments? sure, was it Consumer's Digest? sure! The way a camera fits in your hand, the impression it gives you when you hold it in your hand and the way it performs for you is the ultimate test, just like a car! Are you planning on buying a camera without holding it first? Then you are short-changing yourself. Dont get the bum's-rush by the dealer and walk out with something you arn't happy with. These little beauties have crossed over from ocassional snapshooters, to tools that are capable of winning ccontests, most of them will! ( With your artistic ability applied)
You are down to a couple candidates, maybe it's time to go look at them, and , I'm anxious to hear your impressions!
It snowed here today, I'm very impressed with the 75 pictures I took with the LX-1, I compare the quality to the Sony F-828, pretty close!
Good luck!
Semper Fi!

10:18 am - Monday, December 5, 2005

#268 Alex B

Nick... Yes i did buy a car.
But can you compare buying a car with camera => NO

Needs for a car are more different. My car doesn't have to go 220 km/h. My camera does!
But i understand your opinion.

But when you go to a store, you can't make comparitive pictures because you don't know the camera (camera has to be discovered).

The good and bad points are noticable when you REALLY use it, like a car ;-)
That is why i first want to compare the quality of the pictures (that is very important) of real users.

This is my first digital camera by the way. That is why i want to buy a camera that lasts for a few years.

Greetz
Alex

PS. if you have sample pictures of the LX1, i am very interested to see them!

10:59 am - Monday, December 5, 2005

#269 nick in japan

I'm Sorry , I don't understand why a test drive is not important to you. People buy cameras as if all their dreams will come true from what they read, pity the poor sucker that reads the ads for the thickness of the LX-1, Leica D-Lux 2, that is advertised as 1" thick, only to discover when they open the box that it is REALLY 2" thick! IMHO, I was trying to point out that you can try the camera at some shops, even use it a bit, before you buy it, If you are someone that that just buys stuff without doing the research first, then these comments are a waste of time.
My last shot today was number 2317, still loving this camera, for what it's worth.
If you are interested in research, read the LX-1 blog, ALL your answers about this camera are there!

12:48 pm - Monday, December 5, 2005

#270 Andreas T

It seems that the R3 has a poor performance in indoor situations.

I made a test in a shop and the R3 needs 2-4 seconds to get a picture.
The L55W in the same situation always made a picture in less a second.

So the R3 is no party / snapshot camera.

5:40 pm - Monday, December 5, 2005

#271 GARY POGODA

Do you know if the camera you tested had the new firmware update
(which presumably would have corrected that problem)?

Here is my list:

Ricoh Caplio R3
Samsung Digimax L55W
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX1
Canon PowerShot S80
Canon PowerShot S70
Ricoh Caplio R2

And not necessarily in that order. :)

6:52 pm - Monday, December 5, 2005

#272 Alex B

Hi

Is there anyone who has already bought the Ricoh R3 ? Would like to see some samples. Saw a few of Mark Foster but they are all resized, so for me not fully representable.

Let the REAL users stand up!

6:06 pm - Tuesday, December 6, 2005

#273 GARY POGODA

A friend of mine's cousin has a roommate whose brother is dating girl
whose ex-boyfriend's next door neighbor's boss has one on order. :)

7:44 pm - Tuesday, December 6, 2005

#274 will

Does anyone know the writing speed of the camera, at how many megs/sec? In other words, does it matter what kind of SD card I should get, 50x, 60x, 100x?

8:59 pm - Tuesday, December 6, 2005

#275 Prognathous

Will, Ricoh cameras don't have fast data transfer, but they're still very sensitive to card speed and brand. See the following thread for more details:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1001&thread=16154055

Prog.

9:50 pm - Tuesday, December 6, 2005

#276 Prognathous

If clicking the above link re-directs you to the main dpreview forum page, try to copy paste it the address in your browser instead of clicking the link. It should work.

Prog.

9:53 pm - Tuesday, December 6, 2005

#277 will

prog.
that link was a bit too complicated for me to understand. can anyone just tell me the maxmium camera write speed for r3, that way i'll know how to gage on which speed sd card i need to buy. thanks!

10:40 pm - Tuesday, December 6, 2005

#278 Prognathous

No problem, just forget about theoretical maximum speed and get a Panasonic card. They're by far the best cards for Ricoh digicams.

Prog.

11:24 pm - Tuesday, December 6, 2005

#279 nick in japan

IMHO, seems like the capacity of storage cards/sticks is the primary factor in speeds, the larger the card, the faster it's operation, I personally dont go higher than 512, too many pictures on one card could spell disaster if something goes wrong, or loss becomes reality. My cheapo cards work just as well as my expensive ones!
Semper Fi!

1:15 am - Wednesday, December 7, 2005

#280 Daniel

Hi, If somebody can read czech- here is a review fotografovani.cz

for others - studio test samples are here
http://www.fotografovani.cz/art/forec_amater/ricoh-r3-r.html?pos=3
and live samples are here
http://www.fotografovani.cz/art/forec_amater/ricoh-r3-r.html?pos=5

The conclusion of review:
chasi- very good, good handling and feeling
speed- very good, 1. picture is taken in 2s
zoom- very good
IS- good, but depending on specific conditions
display - good
picture quality- only average in class
noise- by 64 ISO visible in 1:1, by 400 ISO visible in prints, by 800 ISO very, very high noise; R3 has higher noise than other 5MPx ultra compacts with big color grains
white- average

= only average ultra compact, but with 28mm and IS as bonus


Im waiting for your comments, Daniel.

7:07 am - Wednesday, December 7, 2005

#281 Alex B

Thanx to Daniel

Nice Czech site (pitty it is only in Czech).
But at least you can compare pictures (almost same stuff)

Ricoh R3:
http://www.fotografovani.cz/art/forec_amater/ricoh-r3-r.html?pos=3

Canon S70:
http://www.fotografovani.cz/art/forec_amater/Canon-PowerShot-S70.html?pos=3

What do you think about the pic's?

Greetz
Alex

3:45 pm - Wednesday, December 7, 2005

#282 Peter uk

I've been following this forum for the last4 or 5 weeks as i was really interested in the R3 mainly because of the 7xzoom starting at 28mm and the small size but so many doubts mainly on picture quality that justification is difficult.Re. post No. 231 I checked out the FUJIFILM FINEPIX E900 and i'm definately now leaning to that.
Compare/consider these:
1)9MP on fuji's latest 1/1.6" advanced CCD
2)32-128 4xzoom.OK not 28 but 32 is VERY close and like the CANON S80 you CAN get extra 24mm and 256mm lenses to attach if you want(£70 each)
3)Slightly smaller than S80 and slightly bigger than R3.
4)Takes AA batts.
5)Perhaps MOST IMPORTANTLY all professional reviews (there are about 4 look in google)confirm that picture quality is excellent,low noise,probably as good as Canon S80,fast operation and available everywhere.
6)E900 cost is £247 in Jessops UK (S80 is abt.£498!!) about same cost as R3 but seems MUCH better quality.The ONLY slight drawbacks are SLIGHTLY bigger,standard zoom w/out attachments 128mm but IS the 200mm any good on R3??E-900 attachment to 256mm!!

Any comments???

6:31 pm - Wednesday, December 7, 2005

#283 GARY POGODA

The thing about the Fuji E900 is that it is even BIGGER than the S80
(from the picture on DPReview, it looks like the battery compartment
is approximately the width of 3.5 AA batteries, which is about 2") and
therefore hardly qualifies as an ultra-compact or pocketable camera.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0507/05072801fuji_e900.asp

If you can live with its 2" thickness, and the fact that it is only 4x zoom,
and the fact that the wide end of the lens does not quite make 28 mm,
then yes, you will be happy with its noise performance as compared to
the R3, or for that matter, the S80.

7:57 pm - Wednesday, December 7, 2005

#284 Peter uk

Hi Gary,
The E900 is not 2" thick.Spec dimns. as follows :
R3 : 95x53x26 mm thick
S80 :104x57x39 mm "
E900:102x63x34 mm thick body (enlarges to 42 mm just at batt. end )
So the E900 is about the same size as the S80 ;smaller than the S70 and only 8mm thicker than the R3 (16mm thicker just at batt end )
ie. not TOO much bigger and should fit shirt pocket OK.(S80 did !)
32mm wide very little diff. to 28mm and the zoom is fully useable ,quality wise, to 128mm.
Fuji Lens adaptors expand this to 24-256mm and if you want the video performance is higher qlty.
Pity , because I was really interested in the R3 but now worried I might be disappointed with the pic quality and maybe at around 200mm it's not that good????

11:26 pm - Wednesday, December 7, 2005

#285 Andy - Dublin

Hi.

I found this page as I searched for any information I could find on the R3. I'm in the market for a small digital camera right now and have narrowed it down to four possibilities:

- Canon Ixus 55 (aka the Powershot SD450)
- Panasonic Lumix FX9
- Ricoh Caplio R3
- Fuji Finepix Z2

All are in or around the same physical size and are in the same ballpark where price is concerned. So, considering that they will all fit in my pocket, which is my best buy?

My thoughts are as follows:

Canon
pro: it's a really nicely built camera; it's got a viewfinder. Plus, my brother's got an SD200 that does a good job for him.
con: battery life isn't that good; low-res LCD screen.

Panasonic
pro: image stabilisation; high(ish)-res LCD screen.
con: there has been some mention in reviews of sometimes shaky image quality.

Ricoh
pro: 7x zoom!!!
con: can't find much information on the thing, certainly not more than one review from what one might call a mainstream camera review source.

Fuji Z2
pro: hi-res LCD screen; ISO 1600 for excellent low light capabilities.
con: the z1's photo quality was sometimes in question - haven't seen many reviews of the z2. I also don't really like the idea of having to lug the cradle around with me for uploading pictures etc..

Any advice would be hugely appreciated. I've ruled out everything else, it's down to these four and I'm going slowly insane trying to choose between them.

Oh, and I'm not a proper photographer. I am, however, somebody who appreciates quality.

1:18 am - Thursday, December 8, 2005

#286 Mark Foster

My R3 was returned to the retailer today after developing a bright green dot on the photos after shot 130. Looks like about 5 pixels have become dead/hot and are affecting about 16 all up. The camera is now on it's way to the Australian national service centre. I expect to be dusting of the 35mm for xmas shots.
I will advise how things got because I expect after salses service is important to potential buyers.
On the card speed issue I have a standard Lexar 128 and and 50x Kingston 256. I can't notice a diffence in rela time performance. I have tried them both with stills and video and I can't see a difference.

3:02 am - Thursday, December 8, 2005

#287 Mike

MarkF, Did you see the dots on the LCD or on the print out? I have taken almost 500 pictures so far and haven't seen the problem you have encountered. Did you notice any irregularities/symptoms before the green dots showed up? As for the card speed, I don't see any problem with mine as well, I am using Sandisk 1GB.

4:40 am - Thursday, December 8, 2005

#288 GARY POGODA

Peter, I'm curious as to where you obtained the 42mm dimension for
the E900. I can only estimate from the DPReview picture and it looks
pretty big, especially at the battery end.

Andy, when folded optics cameras first came out, they were a novelty,
and if you wanted something that small with 3x zoom, they were your
only choice. Now, you can get pretty close to that size without having
to resort to folded optics, so the size advantage of a Fuji Z2 does not
outweigh the disadvantage of its reduced image quality, compared to
a normal retracting lens.

As for the Panasonic FX9, I cannot see putting up with a noisy 1/2.5"
CCD, and only getting 3x zoom in return.

Ditto for the Canon SD450.

I haven't been keeping track, but whatever that leaves, that's the one
I would get. :)

8:41 am - Thursday, December 8, 2005

#289 Mark Foster

For Mike,

No symptoms. I just took a phot last night and when I viewed it on screen the dot was in an area of darkness so it stood out like a sore thumb. I went back through the last couple of days and found that on the last shot of one day there was no dot and on the first shot of the next day there it was. It appears on every shot since. It isn't visible on the LCD unless you are reviewing shots and then you can se it if you know where to look.
I haven't had any printed since the dot. I would expect that at lower sizes it wouldn't be visible but I would expect to see it at 8'x10'. I don't expect to do much printing at that size but a flaw of this nature is just unaccceptable to me.
Hopefully mine will be an isolated case.

2:59 pm - Thursday, December 8, 2005

#290 MarkT

Mark F
Green dots aside, can you draw any conclusions about image quality from the 130 shots you've taken ?

7:19 pm - Thursday, December 8, 2005

#291 wolfie

I have received my R3 today and shall write a review this weekend. First impressions good, it starts-up like a springing cat...

12:42 am - Friday, December 9, 2005

#292 GARY POGODA

Did that spring have a cheap feel to it, or a quality one? :)

6:08 am - Friday, December 9, 2005

#293 Andy - Dublin

Gary - thanks for your reply. What do you mean by a "noisy 1/2.5" CCD"? Is it the same with the Ricoh? Is this a big problem? I ask because both cameras have got pretty good reviews around the place. If so, what good will having a 7x zoom be?

4:12 pm - Friday, December 9, 2005

#294 Mark Goldstein

Here's a weekend treat for you all...I've published the sample photos from my Ricoh R3 review, which will appear in full early next week...

http://www.photographyblog.com/index.php/weblog/comments/ricoh_caplio_r3_photos/

4:52 pm - Friday, December 9, 2005

#295 Prognathous

New Caplio R3 image gallery, here at photographyblog.com:

http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews_ricoh_caplio_r3_7.php

Prog.

6:40 pm - Friday, December 9, 2005

#296 GARY POGODA

Each pixel has a certain amount of noise associated with it due to the
electronics used in CCD technology (sort of like the static noise which
can be heard in an audio amplifier). When an abundance of light hits
each pixel, the strong signal produced will mask the noise so that it is
unnoticeable (much like a strong audio signal masking the static noise
of an audio amplifier, as compared to a low passage, where the noise
can be more easily heard).

There are two ways to mask noise in a CCD. One is to shoot only in
bright light (low ISO) situations. Since this is not always possible, the
other way is to make the pixels as large as possible, which allows the
pixel to use more surface area with which to absorb light, and makes
it possible to shoot in dim light (high ISO) situations.

When a manufacturer uses a particular size CCD, and crams a fixed
number of pixels onto that CCD, you can calculate the resulting pixel
size, and the larger each pixel, the better. For a 1/1.8" CCD, a good
rule of thumb is to stay within 6 megapixels maximum to avoid noise.
For the smaller 1/2.5" CCDs, that number would be considerably less;
however, since nobody these days would buy a camera with less than
5 megapixels, cameras with 1/2.5" CCDs have generally settled on 5.

So the question is, why would anyone buy a 5 megapixel camera with
a 1/2.5" CCD having such small pixels. The answer is they would not
unless it were absolutely necessary. With a high zoom ultra-compact,
it is necessary to utilize a 1/2.5" CCD in order to have a small enough
lens so that it can be retracted into a 1" thick camera body. With a 3x
zoom camera, manufacturers can use a 1/1.8" CCD and still fit its lens
into a 1" thick body, so the only reason why these cameras would use
a 1/2.5" CCD, is to cut costs.

If you are willing to settle for 3x zoom, there is no reason to also settle
for 1/2.5" CCDs, since such ultra-compacts are available with a bigger
1/1.8" CCD. Just make sure the megapixels are not too high (5 would
be ideal, and anything over 8 is a complete waste due to smaller pixel
size, and thus added noise).

If you want an ultra-compact with greater than 3x zoom, you have no
choice but to settle for a 1/2.5" CCD. In that case, look for 5 (or less)
megapixels, and hope the camera has quality built-in noise reduction
firmware, or has a way to bypass the in-camera noise reduction (such
as with RAW mode), and then utilize the available computer programs
to reduce the noise in post-processing.

The R3 is one of those cameras where you have to be willing to settle
for a potentially higher noise, 5 megapixel 1/2.5" CCD as a tradeoff for
having 7.1x zoom in a 1" thick camera body. Let's just hope that Ricoh
has developed some high quality noise reduction firmware for the R3;
otherwise, resign yourself to many hours of post-processing with noise
reduction computer programs for anything other than bright light shots.

Andy, hope that helps you decide. I would definitely wait for Mark's R3
review, due out next week, before making any decisions. Just don't get
your hopes up too high with respect to the R3's noise. :)

8:03 pm - Friday, December 9, 2005

#297 GARY POGODA

Peter, according to the review at Steve's Digicams, an E900 will easily
fit in your pocket. So while not quite an ultra-compact, it's an excellent
combination of compact size, low noise, high resolution, abundance of
manual control, extended zoom range, and affordable price.

The only negatives I see are its lack of low-light AF assist, and no 16:9.

9:13 pm - Friday, December 9, 2005

#298 Andy - Dublin

Gary - thank you for your great explanation. I've been trying to find ultracompacts with a 1/1.8" sensor but the only one I can find is the Dimage X1 (I'd ruled it out because of the length of time it takes to power up as well as from shot to shot). If the Ixus 750 was the same size as the 55 I'd go for it, but it's not. It's actually a good bit bigger...

Would anybody have any suggestions?

11:28 pm - Friday, December 9, 2005

#299 nick in japan

Super job on #296 Gary!! I would like to add a couple things to this conversation if I may, so many factors of "needs" and "wants" get blurred, along with how much you really want to spend. We are all wanting the best quality and performance for the best price, so we agonize to almost hysteria over it all. Until the CMOS gets it's debut in our pocketable little gems we have to put up with the balancing act. I just got a Pentax S6, for a couple reasons, before you throw-up, let me tell you why.. Size! wow is it small! New movie format for small cameras, and, I have had good luck with Pentaxes in the past, AND the COST. A great user especially for close-ups and ease of operation, I tolerate the noise, as I do with the LX-1. I am happy with my choice, as it will be my Wife's Christmas present, replacing her Sony U2. 28mm feature isn't there, but all those NEEDS for me are not even WANTS for my wife.
Good luck with your decision, Good shooting to you all!
Semper Fi

12:39 am - Saturday, December 10, 2005

#300 GARY POGODA

Andy, here are some ultra-compacts, or near-ultra-compacts, having
1/1.8" or larger CCDs. There are others.

Fuji Finepix F10 or F11
(lowest noise, highest ISOs)

Nikon Coolpix 5900 or 7900
(in-camera red-eye fix and D-lighting, optical viewfinder)

Canon PowerShot S70 or S80
(28mm wide lens, full manual controls, optical viewfinder)

HP Photosmart R717
(in-camera red-eye removal and adaptive lighting, optical viewfinder)

Casio EX-Z120
(full manual controls, optical viewfinder, AA batteries)

Casio EX-Z750
(full manual controls, optical viewfinder, weak flash)

Casio QV-R62
(optical viewfinder, AA batteries)

1:29 am - Saturday, December 10, 2005