The weather has been fairly nice again so I decided to head out and take some comparison pictures for my GR review. I packed the GRD I, GRD IV, GR and the GXR A12 28mm and did a few real life shots around Greenwich.
There will be more extensive comparisons in my full review but for now a quick teaser to how the cameras perform.
The GR and GXR A12 28mm are obviously the most detailed and have the highest dynamic range, there is not really much difference between them in most cases so both are very capable although the GR retains more details. The GRDs are fairly well matched and the biggest difference is that the GRD I has more noise but it also looks more crisp and more 'film like'.
The below are out of camera JPGs taken in b&w mode at ISO 400 and f2.8, the image names shows the camera but top left is GR, top right GRD , bottom left GRD IV and bottom right GXR A12 28mm.
To see the below crops at 100% open the image in a new tab and change the URL to say /s1920/ instead of /s1600/, e.g. http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-zeQ05gj5LDc/Uctmnsb3vfI/AAAAAAAAcd4/FfSgrgqdRq8/s1920/26-06-2013_02.JPG
Below are the DNG files processed with RAW Therapee wit the Neutral and the BW1 profile respectively.
Its an interesting comparison. I hope I don't sound bias but the GR does seem to win out overall. Perhaps not unexpected.
ReplyDeleteThe GRD1 and IV do very well IMO considering sensor size but are quite different in rendering, the IV seems smoother the GRD1 more gritty.
I like the more luminosity of the GRD IV over the GXR but the GXR wins for detail of course.
None of them are really wrong just different renderings of the image.
Tonally and DR wise IMO the GR is more what I like and look for - the sitters shirt sleeve demonstrates it best.
Thanks for your comment!
ReplyDeleteThe GR is indeed best but it's interesting to see that all GRDs and the GXR hold up quite well. Each has a slight different rendering so all are similar but different at the same time.