Ricoh G600

Opinion: I am going back to Antarctica in October, so I thought an upgrade from the Ricoh 500G I used on the previous 2 trips was attractive because of the extra reach at the tele end of the zoom (though you lose the optical viewfinder), smaller size and lighter weight, and the couple of extra megapixels (should give a bit extra detail for enlargement).

I've just donesome comparison shots between the two (a large bookshelf in my study, using flash at ISO100). At first glance exposure and general appearance of the images was extremely close. But looking closer... ouch! The G600 is noticeable less sharp and has more visible grain at ISO 100! It's no good having extra pixels when they can't hold extra detail and add noise.

Guess I'll be taking the 500G instead!

Opinion: Bought the Ricoh G600 specifically for use as a waterproof and robust camera that I could have with me all the time on a 10 day white-water rafting descent of Tasmania’s Franklin River. I chose the G600 so that I could use the same DB60 batteries as the GRD and R4 (as well as AAAs). Camera worked fine in all situations. G600 appears designed for simplicity and it is easy to use with gloves on – shake the water off and snap away. Picture quality is not at the GRD standard but is fine at all focal lengths. The interface is familiar Ricoh – easy to use, with quick access to key functions through the ADJ button. It is quite a chunky device with a strong rubberised covering – it all seems to be very well built. It is pocketable, but there is no need to do that as it can safely stay outside the whole time. The zoom mechanism is entirely within the body so it does not increase the camera’s size. The matching DW5 wide angle adapter works well and is much more compact than the one for the GRD. The whole package is free of gimmicks and well thought out.

Opinion: There are some surprisingly excellent features in the scene-modes. But the camera does lack an M-mode.

The IQ really is pretty good, but I would not recommend big crops or shooting too often at high ISO`s.

Use up to ISO 100, and make the light work for you...then the images will display good depth and colour.

The camera, like all the good Ricohs, remains quite pricey. You should get this only of you need a level-7 waterproof and level-5 bash-proof camera.

Opinion: From the field - Some that studiotesting not always cover

I'm going to compare it to the 400G which I had.

Operation is imo very quick actually, once I got used to it. The same goes for the 400G

*Noisiness - General.

The G600 is extremely silent except for the buttons (everyone except the power and shutter release) which clicks a little loud for my taste. The 400G is dead silent on that criteria

*AF and zoom noise and general focusing.

G600: Noiseiness. Very low, I can't hear it or the zoom work unless I put my ear next to it. The same goes for the AF and I can barely hear the shutter.

400G: I can hear the zoom and shutter work, but it is silent enough to not make any sense. The same goes for the AF (except in macro mode) which make a reasonable low rattling
noise and the shutter is only highly marginally more loud than the G600.

*Performance

G600: AF is quick in daylight and less so indoors/low light. Even though it use to find focus. Sometimes it don't lock and need to be refocused one or two times.

Macro: G600 I think it is quick and accurate. Unlike the 400G, It have a cross which can be moved around. Very useful and really should be available in normal AF too.

400G: AF is quick in daylight and indoors/low light. As with the G600, It may need one or two attempt to lock.

Also worth to mention: Sometimes it stalls when I do the halfpress and won't focus immediately, even though the light is good. I don't know what is causing that. Maybe because I didn't use the special battery but Sanyo Eneloops AA? I had the latest firmware installed.

Macro: Marginally slower than the G600 and almost as accurate. No cross which can be moved around as far as I know though.

*IQ and lens performance

G600: I have so far only used it at iso 100 except for a few iso samples. But I think that it is noisy already at iso 100 and it do not look very impressive I think. Also colored noise in dark parts of the images.

There is also CA/purple fringing in high contrast around edges (Actually a little worse than the 400G, though I compensate equally with slight underExposing, also to save highlights). There also seems to be a fair bit of some kind of barrel distortion and slight softness.

400G: I used it mostly at Iso 125 (lowest iso) and the noise when it shows up may look like some kind of dirt and a little colored in darker parts.
My impression is that 400G is a little sharper, not that much barrel distortion.

It seem have equally good/bad DR as the G600 and both require slight underexposing not to blow highlights.
Lens:

My general impression is that 400G is having a shorter but overall optically better lens performance. 28-85m f2.6- (dont rembember but may have been 5.2 on the long end?) VS 28-140mm f3.5-5.5.

That extra reach may come in handy sometimes, even though I didn't think very often that 85mm is a bit short and rather would swap that for a lens which is faster on the wide end instead. But that's just me.

*The LCD.

G600: Big and very good actually, I haven't used it in sunlight yet though.

400G. Small but OK even for manual macro-focus. Not very impressive in sunlight but atleast there is a viewfinder.

I can also mention that the G600 at least have nice contrast and clarity.