Tuesday, May 28, 2013

Ricoh GR DxOMark Tested (vs The Fuji X100)

About five weeks ago I said, "Its closest competitor is the Fuji X100s, which is a pretty highly regarded camera, and probably a better camera than the GR. The Fuji camera costs significantly more, so it will be interesting to see if the price difference is equal to the quality difference."

DxOMark has recently tested the Ricoh GR, and now we can see how it and the Fuji X100 compare. DxOMark tested the sensors and not the lenses, and while both cameras have excellent lenses, the Fuji lens is generally considered the sharper one. The GR doesn't have an anti-aliasing filter.

The Ricoh GR, to my surprise, actually outperforms the Fuji X100, according to DxOMark. The GR has better dynamic range and color depth, while the X100 has better high-ISO performance. The differences aren't huge, but considering that the GR is less expensive, there are really compelling reasons to choose it over the Fuji camera.

Now DxOMark hasn't tested the Fuji X100s, which is an improved version of the X100. It will be interesting to see how it compares.

For those considering purchasing the Fuji X100, you may want to take a close look at the Ricoh GR. For about $250-$350 less (depending on where you shop), you can get essentially the same thing. More so, the GR might actually be the better of the two cameras.

This post has been updated for corrections.


  1. The Fuji x100 and X100s use completely different sensors, it's not just software tweaking. The X100 uses a 12MP CMOS Sony sensor (surely made to Fuji's specs) and the X100s appears to using a Sony 16MP sensor with their own unique Trans sensor array instead of a standard bayer array. One last thing, careful when comparing sensors on DxOmark.com. Their up front numbers for high ISO are not really real, and they favor high MP sensors. You need to dig into the measurements and change the 'print' score to the real score the 'screen' score. compare the fuji x100 to the Ricoh that way. That's how the mediocre Nikon D800 beat out the Nikon D4 sensor. The Ricoh has a 4MP advantage for the 'print' score and still only scored 972. last year's NEX F3 beats it and it probably has the same sensor. So on paper, the Sony sensor in the Ricoh is nothing to get worked up about, it's used in the Leica X2, Nikon coolpix A, Nikon dSLRs, Pentax, Sony dSLT and NEX. Fuji on the other hand did better with an updated 12MP sensor and its larger pixels and in camera processing that hasn't been touched by any camera I can think of in its price range. Looking at the real scores, for noise, the Fuji x100 still beats out every 12MP APS C sensor ever made, and virtually every 16MP sensor, only the new sensor in the K5 II seems to beat it.

    1. Yep, you're right! I stand corrected, and will correct the post. Thanks!

  2. Thanks for review, it was excellent and very informative.
    thank you :)