Ricoh GR II vs Canon M3

The Ricoh GR II and the Canon EOS M3 are two digital cameras that were announced, respectively, in June 2015 and February 2015. The GR II is a fixed lens compact, while the M3 is a mirrorless interchangeable lens camera. Both cameras are equipped with an APS-C sensor. The Ricoh has a resolution of 16.1 megapixels, whereas the Canon provides 24 MP.

Below is an overview of the main specs of the two cameras as a starting point for the comparison.

Headline Specifications

Ricoh GR II		Canon M3
Fixed lens compact camera		Mirrorless system camera
28mm f/2.8		Canon EF-M mount lenses
16.1 MP – APS-C sensor		24 MP – APS-C sensor
1080/30p Video		1080/30p Video
ISO 100-25,600		ISO 100-12,800 (100 - 25,600)
Viewfinder optional		Viewfinder optional
3.0" LCD – 1230k dots		3.0" LCD – 1040k dots
Fixed screen (not touch-sensitive)		Tilting touchscreen
4 shutter flaps per second		4.2 shutter flaps per second
320 shots per battery charge		250 shots per battery charge
117 x 63 x 35 mm, 251 g		111 x 68 x 44 mm, 366 g

Check GR II offers at
ebay.com
Check M3 offers at
ebay.com

Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Ricoh GR II and the Canon EOS M3? Which one should you buy? Read on to find out how these two cameras compare with respect to their body size, their imaging sensors, their shooting features, their input-output connections, and their reception by expert reviewers.

Body comparison

An illustration of the physical size and weight of the Ricoh GR II and the Canon M3 is provided in the side-by-side display below. The two cameras are presented according to their relative size. Three consecutive perspectives from the front, the top, and the back are available. All size dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter.

The M3 can be obtained in two different colors (black, white), while the GR II is only available in black.

If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Canon M3 is somewhat larger (2 percent) than the Ricoh GR II. In this context, it is worth noting that neither the GR II nor the M3 are weather-sealed.

The above size and weight comparisons are to some extent incomplete and possibly misleading, as the GR II has a lens built in, whereas the M3 is an interchangeable lens camera that requires a separate lens. Attaching the latter will add extra weight and bulk to the setup.

Concerning battery life, the GR II gets 320 shots out of its Ricoh DB-65 battery, while the M3 can take 250 images on a single charge of its Canon LP-E17 power pack. The power pack in the GR II can be charged via the USB port, so that it is not always necessary to take the battery charger along when travelling.

The table below summarizes the key physical specs of the two cameras alongside a broader set of comparators. In case you want to display and compare another camera duo, you can use the CAM-parator app to select your camera combination among a large number of options.

Body Specifications

#		Camera Model	Camera Width	Camera Height	Camera Depth	Camera Weight	Battery Life	Weather Sealing	Camera Launch	Launch Price (USD)	Street Price
1.		Ricoh GR II	117 mm	63 mm	35 mm	251 g	320	n	Jun 2015	699	ebay.com
2.		Canon M3	111 mm	68 mm	44 mm	366 g	250	n	Feb 2015	679	ebay.com
3.		Canon M6	112 mm	68 mm	45 mm	390 g	295	n	Feb 2017	779	ebay.com
4.		Canon M100	108 mm	67 mm	35 mm	302 g	295	n	Aug 2017	499	ebay.com
5.		Canon M5	116 mm	89 mm	61 mm	427 g	295	n	Sep 2016	979	ebay.com
6.		Canon T6i	132 mm	101 mm	78 mm	555 g	440	n	Feb 2015	749	ebay.com
7.		Canon T6s	132 mm	101 mm	78 mm	565 g	440	n	Feb 2015	649	ebay.com
8.		Canon G7 X	103 mm	60 mm	40 mm	304 g	210	n	Sep 2014	699	ebay.com
9.		Fujifilm X70	113 mm	64 mm	44 mm	340 g	330	n	Jan 2016	799	ebay.com
10.		Panasonic GM5	99 mm	60 mm	36 mm	211 g	220	n	Sep 2014	749	ebay.com
11.		Ricoh GR	117 mm	61 mm	35 mm	245 g	290	n	Apr 2013	799	ebay.com
12.		Sony RX100 III	102 mm	58 mm	41 mm	290 g	320	n	May 2014	799	ebay.com
13.		Sony NEX-5R	111 mm	59 mm	39 mm	276 g	330	n	Aug 2012	749	ebay.com
14.		Sony NEX-5N	111 mm	59 mm	38 mm	269 g	460	n	Aug 2011	699	ebay.com
15.		Sony NEX-C3	110 mm	60 mm	33 mm	225 g	400	n	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
16.		Sony NEX-3	117 mm	62 mm	33 mm	297 g	330	n	May 2010	599	ebay.com
17.		Sony NEX-5	111 mm	59 mm	38 mm	287 g	330	n	May 2010	699	ebay.com
Note: Measurements and pricing do not include easily detachable parts, such as add-on or interchangeable lenses or optional viewfinders.
Convert to Imperial

Any camera decision will obviously take relative prices into account. The listed launch prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. Usually, retail prices stay at first close to the launch price, but after several months, discounts become available. Later in the product cycle and, in particular, when the replacement model is about to appear, further discounting and stock clearance sales often push the camera price considerably down. Then, after the new model is out, very good deals can frequently be found on the pre-owned market.

Sensor comparison

The size of the sensor inside a digital camera is one of the key determinants of image quality. A large sensor will generally have larger individual pixels that offer better low-light sensitivity, provide wider dynamic range, and have richer color-depth than smaller pixels in a sensor of the same technological generation. Further, a large sensor camera will give the photographer additional creative options when using shallow depth-of-field to isolate a subject from its background. On the downside, larger sensors are more costly to manufacture and tend to lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.

Both cameras under consideration feature an APS-C sensor, but their sensors differ slightly in size. The sensor area in the M3 is 10 percent smaller. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have format factors, respectively, of 1.5 (GR II) and 1.6. Both cameras have a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 3:2.

Despite having a smaller sensor, the M3 offers a higher resolution of 24 megapixels, compared with 16.1 MP of the GR II. This megapixels advantage comes at the cost of a higher pixel density and a smaller size of the individual pixel (with a pixel pitch of 3.72μm versus 4.79μm for the GR II). Moreover, it should be noted that the GR II is a somewhat more recent model (by 4 months) than the M3, and its sensor might have benefitted from technological advances during this time that further enhance the light gathering capacity of its pixels. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that the GR II has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.

The resolution advantage of the Canon M3 implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the M3 for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 30 x 20 inches or 76.2 x 50.8 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 24 x 16 inches or 61 x 40.6 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 20 x 13.3 inches or 50.8 x 33.9 cm. The corresponding values for the Ricoh GR II are 24.6 x 16.3 inches or 62.6 x 41.5 cm for good quality, 19.7 x 13.1 inches or 50.1 x 33.2 cm for very good quality, and 16.4 x 10.9 inches or 41.7 x 27.6 cm for excellent quality prints.

The M3 has on-sensor phase detect pixels, which results in fast and reliable autofocus acquisition even during live view operation.

The Ricoh GR II has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 25600. The corresponding ISO settings for the Canon EOS M3 are ISO 100 to ISO 12800, with the possibility to increase the ISO range to 100-25600.

Technology-wise, both cameras are equipped with CMOS (Complementary Metal–Oxide–Semiconductor) sensors. Both cameras use a Bayer filter for capturing RGB colors on a square grid of photosensors. This arrangement is found in most digital cameras.

For many cameras, data on sensor performance has been reported by DXO Mark. This service is based on lab testing and assigns an overall score to each camera sensor, as well as ratings for dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), color depth ("DXO Portrait"), and low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports"). Of the two cameras under review, the GR II has a notably higher overall DXO score than the M3 (overall score 8 points higher), which gives it an advantage in terms of imaging quality. This advantage is based on 0.8 bits higher color depth, 1.9 EV in additional dynamic range, and 0.1 stops of reduced low light sensitivity. The following table provides an overview of the physical sensor characteristics, as well as the sensor quality measurements for a selection of comparators.

Sensor Characteristics

#		Camera Model	Sensor Class	Resolution (MP)	Horiz. Pixels	Vert. Pixels	Video Format	DXO Portrait	DXO Landscape	DXO Sports	DXO Overall
1.		Ricoh GR II	APS-C	16.1	4928	3264	1080/30p	23.6	13.7	1078	80
2.		Canon M3	APS-C	24.0	6000	4000	1080/30p	22.8	11.8	1169	72
3.		Canon M6	APS-C	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60p	23.4	12.6	1317	78
4.		Canon M100	APS-C	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60p	23.5	12.9	1272	78
5.		Canon M5	APS-C	24.0	6000	4000	1080/60p	23.4	12.4	1262	77
6.		Canon T6i	APS-C	24.0	6000	4000	1080/30p	22.7	12.0	919	71
7.		Canon T6s	APS-C	24.0	6000	4000	1080/30p	22.6	12.0	915	70
8.		Canon G7 X	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	1080/60p	23.0	12.7	556	71
9.		Fujifilm X70	APS-C	16.0	4896	3264	1080/60p	23.7	13.0	1608	80
10.		Panasonic GM5	Four Thirds	15.8	4592	3448	1080/60p	22.1	11.7	721	66
11.		Ricoh GR	APS-C	16.1	4928	3264	1080/30p	23.6	13.5	972	78
12.		Sony RX100 III	1-inch	20.0	5472	3648	1080/60p	22.4	12.3	495	67
13.		Sony NEX-5R	APS-C	16.0	4912	3264	1080/60i	23.7	13.1	910	78
14.		Sony NEX-5N	APS-C	16.0	4912	3264	1080/60i	23.6	12.7	1079	77
15.		Sony NEX-C3	APS-C	16.0	4912	3264	720/30p	22.7	12.2	1083	73
16.		Sony NEX-3	APS-C	14.0	4592	3056	720/30p	22.1	12.0	830	68
17.		Sony NEX-5	APS-C	14.0	4592	3056	1080/60i	22.2	12.2	796	69
Note: DXO values in italics represent estimates based on sensor size and age.

Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but can also record movies. Both cameras under consideration are equipped with sensors that have a sufficiently high read-out speed for moving images, and both provide the same movie specifications (1080/30p).

Feature comparison

Apart from body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. The GR II and the M3 are similar in the sense that neither of the two has a viewfinder. The images are, thus, framed using live view on the rear LCD. However, optional viewfinders – the GV-1 for the GR II and the EVF-DC1 for the M3 – are available as accessories. The adjacent table lists some of the other core features of the Ricoh GR II and Canon M3 along with similar information for a selection of comparators.

Core Features

#		Camera Model	Viewfinder (Type or 000 dots)	Control Panel (yes/no)	LCD Specifications (inch/000 dots)	LCD Attach- ment	Touch Screen (yes/no)	Max Shutter Speed *	Max Shutter Flaps *	Built-in Flash (yes/no)	Built-in Image Stab
1.		Ricoh GR II	optional	n	3.0 / 1230	fixed	n	1/4000s	4.0/s	Y	n
2.		Canon M3	optional	n	3.0 / 1040	tilting	Y	1/4000s	4.2/s	Y	n
3.		Canon M6	optional	n	3.0 / 1040	tilting	Y	1/4000s	9.0/s	Y	n
4.		Canon M100	none	n	3.0 / 1040	tilting	Y	1/4000s	6.1/s	Y	n
5.		Canon M5	2360	n	3.2 / 1620	tilting	Y	1/4000s	9.0/s	Y	n
6.		Canon T6i	optical	n	3.0 / 1040	swivel	Y	1/4000s	5.0/s	Y	n
7.		Canon T6s	optical	Y	3.0 / 1040	swivel	Y	1/4000s	5.0/s	Y	n
8.		Canon G7 X	none	n	3.0 / 1040	tilting	Y	1/2000s	6.5/s	Y	Y
9.		Fujifilm X70	optional	n	3.0 / 1040	tilting	Y	1/4000s	8.0/s	Y	n
10.		Panasonic GM5	1166	n	3.0 / 921	fixed	Y	1/500s	5.8/s	n	n
11.		Ricoh GR	optional	n	3.0 / 1230	fixed	n	1/4000s	4.0/s	Y	n
12.		Sony RX100 III	1440	n	3.0 / 1229	tilting	n	1/2000s	10.0/s	Y	Y
13.		Sony NEX-5R	optional	n	3.0 / 920	tilting	Y	1/4000s	10.0/s	n	n
14.		Sony NEX-5N	optional	n	3.0 / 920	tilting	Y	1/4000s	10.0/s	n	n
15.		Sony NEX-C3	optional	n	3.0 / 920	tilting	n	1/4000s	5.5/s	n	n
16.		Sony NEX-3	optional	n	3.0 / 920	tilting	n	1/4000s	7.0/s	n	n
17.		Sony NEX-5	optional	n	3.0 / 920	tilting	n	1/4000s	7.0/s	n	n
Note: *) Information refers to the mechanical shutter, unless the camera only has an electronic one.

One differentiating feature between the two cameras concerns the touch sensitivity of the rear screen. The M3 has a touchscreen, while the GR II has a conventional panel. Touch control can be particularly helpful, for example, for setting the focus point.

The Ricoh GR II has an intervalometer built-in. This enables the photographer to capture time lapse sequences, such as flower blooming, a sunset or moon rise, without purchasing an external camera trigger and related software.

Concerning the storage of imaging data, both the GR II and the M3 write their files to SDXC cards. Both cameras can use UHS-I cards, which provide for Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 104 MB/s.

Connectivity comparison

For some imaging applications, the extent to which a camera can communicate with its environment can be an important aspect in the camera decision process. The table below provides an overview of the connectivity of the Ricoh GR II and Canon EOS M3 and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.

Input-Output Connections

#		Camera Model	Hotshoe Port	Internal Mic / Speaker	Microphone Port	Headphone Port	HDMI Port	USB Port	WiFi Support	NFC Support	Bluetooth Support
1.		Ricoh GR II	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
2.		Canon M3	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	Y	Y	-
3.		Canon M6	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	Y	Y	Y
4.		Canon M100	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	Y
5.		Canon M5	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	Y	Y	Y
6.		Canon T6i	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	Y	Y	-
7.		Canon T6s	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	mini	2.0	Y	Y	-
8.		Canon G7 X	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
9.		Fujifilm X70	Y	stereo / mono	Y	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
10.		Panasonic GM5	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	-	-
11.		Ricoh GR	Y	mono / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	-	-	-
12.		Sony RX100 III	-	stereo / mono	-	-	micro	2.0	Y	Y	-
13.		Sony NEX-5R	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	Y	-	-
14.		Sony NEX-5N	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
15.		Sony NEX-C3	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
16.		Sony NEX-3	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-
17.		Sony NEX-5	Y	stereo / mono	-	-	mini	2.0	-	-	-

It is notable that the M3 has a microphone port, which can help to improve the quality of audio recordings by attaching an external microphone. The GR II does not feature such a mic input.

Both the GR II and the M3 have been discontinued, but can regularly be found used on ebay. The M3 was replaced by the Canon M6, while the GR II was followed by the Ricoh GR III. Further information on the features and operation of the GR II and M3 can be found, respectively, in the Ricoh GR II Manual (free pdf) or the online Canon M3 Manual.

Review summary

So what conclusions can be drawn? Is there a clear favorite between the Ricoh GR II and the Canon M3? Which camera is better? A synthesis of the relative strong points of each of the models is listed below.

Advantages of the Ricoh GR II:

• Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
• Better image quality: Scores markedly higher (8 points) in the DXO overall assessment.
• More dynamic range: Captures a larger spectrum of light and dark details (1.9 EV of extra DR).
• More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1230k vs 1040k dots).
• Easier time-lapse photography: Has an intervalometer built-in for low frequency shooting.
• Ready to shoot: Has a lens built-in, whereas the M3 requires a separate lens.
• Less heavy: Is lighter even though it comes with a built-in lens (unlike the M3).
• Longer lasting: Can take more shots (320 versus 250) on a single battery charge.
• Easier travel charging: Can be conveniently charged via its USB port.
• More modern: Is somewhat more recent (announced 4 months after the M3).

Arguments in favor of the Canon EOS M3:

• More detail: Has more megapixels (24 vs 16.1MP), which boosts linear resolution by 22%.
• Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
• Better live-view autofocus: Features on-sensor phase-detection for more confident autofocus.
• Better sound: Can connect to an external microphone for higher quality sound recording.
• More flexible LCD: Has a tilting screen for odd-angle shots in landscape orientation.
• Fewer buttons to press: Has a touchscreen to facilitate handling and shooting adjustments.
• More selfie-friendly: Has an articulated screen that can be turned to be front-facing.
• More flexible: Takes interchangeable lenses and can thus be used with specialty optics.
• More heavily discounted: Has been on the market for longer (launched in February 2015).

If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the GR II comes out slightly ahead of the M3 (10 : 9 points). However, the relative importance of the various individual camera aspects will vary according to personal preferences and needs, so that you might like to apply corresponding weights to the particular features before making a decision on a new camera. A professional wildlife photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a family photog, and a person interested in architecture has distinct needs from a sports shooter. Hence, the decision which camera is best and worth buying is often a very personal one.

How about other alternatives? Do the specifications of the Ricoh GR II and the Canon M3 place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best Prime Lens Compact Camera and Best Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera listings whether the two cameras rank among the cream of the crop.

In any case, while the comparison of the spec-sheets of cameras can offer a general idea of their imaging potential, it remains partial and cannot reveal, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance when actually working with the GR II or the M3. At times, user reviews, such as those published at amazon, address these issues in a useful manner, but such feedback is on many occasions incomplete, inconsistent, and unreliable.

Expert reviews

This is why hands-on reviews by experts are important. The table below provides a synthesis of the camera assessments of some of the best known photo-gear review sites (amateurphotographer [AP], cameralabs [CL], digitalcameraworld [DCW], dpreview [DPR], ephotozine [EPZ], photographyblog [PB]). As can be seen, the professional reviewers agree in many cases on the quality of different cameras, but sometimes their assessments diverge, reinforcing the earlier point that a camera decision is often a very personal choice.

Expert Camera Reviews

#		Camera   Model	AP   score	CL   score	DCW   score	DPR   score	EPZ   score	PB   score	Camera Launch	Launch Price (USD)	Street Price
1.		Ricoh GR II	..	..	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jun 2015	699	ebay.com
2.		Canon M3	4/5	o	..	75/100	4.5/5	4/5	Feb 2015	679	ebay.com
3.		Canon M6	..	..	..	80/100	4/5	4/5	Feb 2017	779	ebay.com
4.		Canon M100	3/5	+	..	..	4/5	3.5/5	Aug 2017	499	ebay.com
5.		Canon M5	4/5	+	4/5	82/100	4/5	4/5	Sep 2016	979	ebay.com
6.		Canon T6i	5/5	..	..	75/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Feb 2015	749	ebay.com
7.		Canon T6s	5/5	+	..	77/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Feb 2015	649	ebay.com
8.		Canon G7 X	4/5	+ +	..	77/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2014	699	ebay.com
9.		Fujifilm X70	4.5/5	..	..	76/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Jan 2016	799	ebay.com
10.		Panasonic GM5	3.5/5	+	..	77/100	5/5	4.5/5	Sep 2014	749	ebay.com
11.		Ricoh GR	5/5	..	..	79/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Apr 2013	799	ebay.com
12.		Sony RX100 III	5/5	+ +	..	82/100	4.5/5	5/5	May 2014	799	ebay.com
13.		Sony NEX-5R	..	..	..	..	4.5/5	4.5/5	Aug 2012	749	ebay.com
14.		Sony NEX-5N	3/5	+ +	..	79/100	4.5/5	4.5/5	Aug 2011	699	ebay.com
15.		Sony NEX-C3	3/5	+ +	..	74/100	4.5/5	4/5	Jun 2011	599	ebay.com
16.		Sony NEX-3	..	..	..	70/100	4.5/5	4/5	May 2010	599	ebay.com
17.		Sony NEX-5	3/5	+ +	..	71/100	4.5/5	4/5	May 2010	699	ebay.com
Note: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (..) not available.

Care should be taken when interpreting the review scores above, though. The ratings are only valid when referring to cameras in the same category and of the same age. Hence, a score should always be seen in the context of the camera's market launch date and its price, and rating-comparisons among cameras that span long time periods or concern very differently equipped models make little sense. It should also be noted that some of the review sites have over time altered the way they render their verdicts.

Check GR II offers at
ebay.com
Check M3 offers at
ebay.com

Other camera comparisons

Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? In case you would like to check on the differences and similarities of other camera models, just make your choice using the following search menu. There is also a set of direct links to comparison reviews that other users of the CAM-parator app explored.

~

Check GR II offers at
ebay.com
Check M3 offers at
ebay.com

Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.