GRDII vs GRD ISO test

[odklizec]

Here is a basic comparison of GRD2 and GRD ISO.

ISO 400


ISO 800


ISO 1600


Full resolution images can be downloaded here:
GRD2 RAW
R0011473_80.dng
R0011474_100.dng
R0011475_200.dng
R0011476_400.dng
R0011477_800.dng
R0011478_1600.dng

GRD2 JPEG NR OFF
R0011461_80.jpg
R0011462_100.jpg
R0011463_200.jpg
R0011464_400.jpg
R0011465_800.jpg
R0011466_1600.jpg

GRD RAW
R0011395_64.dng
R0011396_100.dng
R0011397_200.dng
R0011398_400.dng
R0011399_800.dng

GRD JPEG
R0011387_64.jpg
R0011389_100.jpg
R0011390_200.jpg
R0011392_400.jpg
R0011393_800.jpg
R0011394_1600.jpg

[Tariq]

It would also be helpful to see the lower ISO's compared. Thanks though for all the hard work!

[rashomon]

Thanks for your work!

Wow, the GRD2 files look a lot cleaner and sharper. I didn't think there would be such a big difference!

As for the GRD2 raw vs jpeg. Is it me or do the raw files look out of focus compared to the jpegs?

[Gil]

I would say Ricoh has improved their product. The ISO 400 NR Off image is quite good for a small sensor
camera.

[Gil]

Thanks for your work!

Wow, the GRD2 files look a lot cleaner and sharper. I didn't think there would be such a big difference!

As for the GRD2 raw vs jpeg. Is it me or do the raw files look out of focus compared to the jpegs?

I think they may be a tad soft. They sharpened up in Lightroom very well.

[Tariq]

I see all the files now, thanks!

[Tariq]

Its unfortunate that this test was done at relatively slow shutter speeds and WIDE OPEN at F2.4. Obviously, thats not the best settings for optimum image quality from either of these cameras. My GRD lens seems to peak somewhere around F5(between F4 and F5.6). The softness apparent in these shots is at least partly due to the test being done at F2.4 and, unless the self timer was used, possible camera shake due to the low shutter speeds. Sorry to be so critical. They are just not as sharp and crisp as I'm used to seeing from my GRD.

[leews2001]

Its unfortunate that this test was done at relatively slow shutter speeds and WIDE OPEN at F2.4.

No, its not unfortunate. In fact it is practical, when light is so low, one wants the widest aperture possible to get the fastest possible shutter.

The GRD2 high iso pics are pretty impressive. Interestingly, the grain noise in iso1600 has become "thread noise".

[jorgeAD]

Thanks a lot ! These DNG files will get a good workout ! Any suggestions as far as DNG converters other than Photoshop?

For an absolute sharpness test shooting line pairs with electronic flash at optimum aperture is the way to go, but lets be honest... this is a tiny pocket camera so very few will lug along an electronic flash at least twice as large as the camera, much less a bulky tripod, thus testing at maximum aperture and high ISO makes a lot of sense.

So the GRD2 is sharper and more versatile than the GRD1, that´s great news. But does it really aproach a digital SLR noise, detail and dynamic range performance and by how much? This little bugger is not really a point-and-shoot, but a serious photographers pocket camera to supplement our large digital SLR systems...

So a side-by-side comparison against a 10 MP digital SLR like the one many potential buyers already have (or may consider in that $700 range) will be much more useful and meaningful than any optical benchmark test.

Jorge Alban
http://artenemo.org/varios/memoria_web/violin_8709.jpg
http://artenemo.org/varios/memoria_web/cactus_2608.jpg
http://artenemo.org/varios/slowF_zapote.jpg

[Gil]

I did fast conversions using Lightroom, LightZone, SilkyPix and PSCS3. I reapeat fast and should have spent more time on each
converter. I downloaded the images through Lightroom. I found that ARC in Bridge seemed to to the best with Lightroom a
close second. I used Noiseware Pro and Neat Image for noise reduction at the high ISOs, and Noiseware Pro was the best on
leaving detail in the image. All the RAW coverters did not do too much to the high ISO noise.

I have several Canon dSLRs. I would really not want to make a comparison between a dSLR and a small sensor camera like the
GRD/GRD II. Noise wise a comparison could be made but other then that one has to consider the type and grade lens that is
mounted on the dSLR for the testing. 28mm is covered by many Canon lenses and which one would be chosen for the test?
A consumer lens or an L lens. Canon has two 28mm consumer grade prime lenses and 21, yes, 21 zooms covering 28mm
including a few Ls.
I understand one wanting to make the comparison between the GRD II and a dSLR, but IMO we should compare the GRD/GRD II
with other advanced/prosumer P&S cameras.