Forum: Ricoh GR
05-15-2018, 10:03 PM
|
|
Yes. The 28mm (or equivalent) FOV has been associated with the GR line from the beginning, and it's been pretty consistent, and I don't know why. The rationale has never been explained. I'd rather have something closer to a normal lens. I'd rather have a 40mm equivalent. I know I'm not the only one who feels this way. I've seen messages posted in other forums wishing for a 40mm GR.
No. A small M4/3 body with a pancake lens would be "pretty small" but would not comfortably fit in my vest pocket. I bought my GRD4 because it fits comfortably in my pocket. Even my Pentax Q7, which I adore in almost every other way, doesn't fit in my pocket with the 01 lens. I mean, I can kind of stuff it in there, but it's awkward and not comfortable, and it doesn't slip in and out easily. If it did I would have been happy to stick with it and never would have even been interested in a GR. ---------- Post added 05-16-18 at 12:06 AM ----------
I'm one of those few weirdos who likes my Q7 just the way it is, and I don't think it needs a bigger sensor. (I do have a Q-series fantasy wish list, but a bigger sensor isn't on it.) However, the Q7 is not really pocketable, and those M4/3 cameras are not pocketable, not the way any GR is.
|
Forum: Ricoh GR
05-11-2018, 08:51 PM
|
|
Keeping the same lens and replacing the APS-C sensor with a four-thirds sensor would be just about ideal to me, both in terms of aspect ratio and field-of-view. And if it were possible to fit in shake reduction, that would be another benefit. But of course, that's not going to happen. A slightly smaller sensor would be seen as a mark of shame.
|