Pt. 1 - Appearance and Zoom Range
Pt. 2 - JPEG Noise
Pt. 3 - ISO 80 JPEG Crops at 35mm & Full Aperture
Pt. 4 - Flare Performance
Pt. 5 - Noise Performance Revisited
Pt. 6 - G7 Default JPEG vs GX100 Silkypix Conversions
Pt. 7 - Key Timings
Pt. 8 - Build Quality, Quality Control, and Battery Life
Pt. 9 - Conclusion

The Ricoh GRD has a reputation for "grain-like" noise, particularly with black and white photographs. I was anxious to see whether the GX100 would offer a pleasing quality of noise since noise is such an important part of small sensor digital photography. To me, the effects of over-zealous noise reduction are much more offensive than those of noise itself, especially if the noise can be considered "grain-like." Unlike the G7, the GX100 and D-LUX 2 each offer the option to shoot RAW, with complete control over noise handling. However, before I dive into a comparison of processed RAW files from the GX100 and D-LUX2, I thought I'd compare the default B&W and color JPEGs from the three cameras from a noise standpoint.

Methods: The following are all 100% crops with the camera on a tripod, self-timer, image stabilization on, aperture priority mode at f4 (f4.1 on the GX100 since it won't do f4). All B&W images were taken using default in-camera B&W settings. All sharpening, color, white balance, exposure compensation, contrast, and noise reduction settings were at default.

I didn't get the framing exactly right, and the file sizes of the D-LUX 2 made for a very different field of view. Between that issue and the poor white balance, I think the Leica was made to look worse than it is. However, it's fair to say that the D-LUX 2 is not the best at handling noise when shooting JPEGs.

In the following crops, the D-LUX 2 is on the left, the GX100 is in the middle, and the G7 is on the right. In each case, click on the image to see at full size.

EDIT - Sorry for any inconvenience, the crops have been removed. If you are interested in reviewing the full-resolution files (large), they can be downloaded from this Flickr set.

As I have posted before, the GX100 is very attractive to me on the basis of its wide angle capability, RAW mode, and step zoom. However, Flickr samples seem to show that at ISO 80 the Ricoh GX100 produces far noisier default JPEG results than my Canon G7, despite the latter preserving at least as much detail. The GX100 also seems to produce less vibrant color, and I have seen some nasty CA in some of the samples. However, with proper RAW processing, I am hopeful that the GX100 will approach the image quality of the G7. With that in mind, I have ordered the GX100 (without EVF) from Adorama and am looking forward to it shipping on Tuesday morning.

I will be doing a detailed head-to-head comparison of the GX100 and G7 and will post my results here. If you have any specific recommendations or requests for things you would like me to test or compare, please leave a comment to let me know.

Addendum: I also plan to borrow my dad's Leica D-LUX 2 (same as Panasonic LX1) so I can compared the GX100 processed RAWs to the Leicasonic output. In my mind, the GRD/GX100, G7, and LX1/2 are high on the list of compact cameras which offer flexible photographic control.

I've had a Powershot G7 for some time now, and for the most part I've been lamenting its lack of wide angle, RAW, and an accurate viewfinder. I have been seriously considering selling it to buy a Ricoh GX100, which has all of those things. Well, I'm happy to report that the G7 has really been growing on me. As an exercise, I've been using it with the focal length fixed at 35mm, using zone focusing for street shots (manually focused to one notch over 2 meters with aperture at f/4). This has really given me a new appreciation for this camera.