30-second review - Ricoh GH-3 for Ricoh GR

Discussion in 'Ricoh' started by Lightmancer, Jul 12, 2013.

  1. Lightmancer

    Lightmancer Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Aug 13, 2011
    Sunny Frimley
    Bill Palmer
    So, I acquired one of these a couple of days ago. I had the GH-2 for my III and liked that, so I shall compare and contrast as well as comment.

    The GH-3 is not a cheap bit of kit - the thick end of fifty quid, in fact. For that I expect it to make my tea... The good news is that it is not only well made but has a couple of significant advances over the GH-2.

    It comes in three parts - a tube, a hood and a rear cap. It is a bayonet fit; once you have removed the trim ring, which then mounts safely on the end cap that the GH-3 comes with (improvement 1 over the GH-2). Once on it improves surety of handling; the left hand naturally cradles it like a lens. The tube completely protects the extending lens - ideal for street or rough and tumble. It doesn't shade the lens much, but that is what the hood is for. The hood is rectilinear and HUGE; nearly as big as that for the Digilux 2, and you could park a small camper van in that... The tube has a 49mm filter thread (improvement 2); I haven't bothered with a filter, because I already have an accmaxx stick-on one on the lens (see pic). What I have bothered with is a snap-cap; this means the tube can effectively be left on and not act as a dust trap. The end of the tube is smoothly finished (improvement 3) the net result is that it is far more likely to be used. The hood itself... Hmmm. it is not an improvement; it is flimsier than that of the GH-2 and I would really need to be shooting close to the sun on a bright day to bother with it.

    Overall, therefore, 7/10

    Tube with snap cap:
    Ricoh GH-3 1 par Lightmancer, on ipernity

    Tube with lens extended:
    Ricoh GH-3 2 par Lightmancer, on ipernity

    Tube with hood:
    Ricoh GH-3 3 par Lightmancer, on ipernity
  2. retow

    retow All-Pro

    Jul 24, 2010
    I assume the wide angle converter lens mounts on that tube. Did you get the wide angle lens as well? I`m quite interested to see a few real life shots with it.
  3. Lightmancer

    Lightmancer Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Aug 13, 2011
    Sunny Frimley
    Bill Palmer
    Yes it does, but no I didn't for I am more a tele-tubby than a wide-boy ;)

    Sent from another Galaxy
  4. Livnius

    Livnius Top Veteran Subscribing Member

    Jun 3, 2012
    Melbourne. Australia
    Bloody hell that hood is huge. Thanks for the writeup.
  5. Luke

    Luke Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Nov 11, 2011
    Milwaukee, WI USA
    that hood really looks the business. If I didn't know that the GR was a serious camera in it's natural state, I'd assume it is with that hood on.
  6. aleksanderpolo

    aleksanderpolo Regular

    Apr 18, 2013
    Does the hood help? I think the front element is already a little bit recessed inside the lens barrel when it is extended, so it is not really that flare prone without the hood.
  7. stillshunter

    stillshunter Super Moderator Emeritus

    Nov 5, 2010
    Down Under
    Does the GR lens need such a high level of shielding? Does it flare and lose contrast when naked? Otherwise is this more about looks?

    Please don't get me wrong this looks the business but seems to nullify one of the most amazing things about the GR...that they managed to squeeze so much capability into such a tiny package. Sort of reminds me of the hood that ships with the Summilux 25/1.4. Piece that baby together on your mu43 body and all of a sudden your small dSLR big.

    In this augmented state that pocket rocket, in anyone's pocket, would certainly look.....well....augmented :blush:
  8. Luckypenguin

    Luckypenguin Hall of Famer

    Dec 24, 2010
    Brisbane, Australia
    Oops, I thought this thread was going to be some kind of Panasonic/Ricoh comparison :redface:
  9. Mike Guffin

    Mike Guffin Regular

    Oct 23, 2012
    Allendale, NJ
    I thought the same thing... These camera makers need to stop using each others model names/numbers...
  10. Livnius

    Livnius Top Veteran Subscribing Member

    Jun 3, 2012
    Melbourne. Australia

    Mark, as far as I can tell almost a month and several hundred shots in, the lens in its naked state is remarkably resistant to flare and fringing of any sort....streets ahead of anything I've seen from an m43 lens. Loss of contrast however is fairly typical....losing out a little when shooting into the sun and such. When I first purchased the camera I almost pulled the trigger on the adapter/hood set thinking it would be a must, not so. I'd hate to bulk the thing out so much for my stroll/street shooting....the size V output ratio of this thing is exceptional and for the time being i'll keep it that way. This summer though when I'll no doubt again head up into the hills around Falls Creek for my holidays for a few weeks I probably will get the adapter set, leave the [email protected] hood at home and attach one of those cheap low profile screw-in metal hoods+fitting cap for $5 from eBay....in fact, I think I already have one in 49mm in a drawer somewhere.

    BILL: that stick-on accmaxxx filter sounds good. I assume they can be peeled off if required without damaging/peeling the finish on the lens ? I read they are quite good and to my surprise don't degrade IQ....has that been your experience ?
  11. Lightmancer

    Lightmancer Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Aug 13, 2011
    Sunny Frimley
    Bill Palmer

    I have never had a flare problem either with my III or the new GR. For me, the tube is useful because with it on a) it affords protection to the extended lens assembly - handy in a crowd, like the Hampton Court Flower Show this last weekend (pics to follow ;) ) and b) it gives a more stable and solid hold for low shutter speeds.

    I may never use the hood itself - it is a monster - but it is a just in case tool.

    The accmaxx is very handy; keeps the dust out and is easily wipe-cleanable. It is removable without a mark - this one came off my III, "Lazarus". It was also wearing one when I drove over it... The filter was smashed but the lens itself was unblemished :D I have found no image degradation from using it.

    Sent from another Galaxy