Ricoh GR III vs Sony RX0 II
The Ricoh GR III and the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX0II are two digital cameras that were officially introduced, respectively, in February 2019 and March 2019. Both the GR III and the RX0 II are fixed lens compact cameras that are based on an APS-C (GR III) and an one-inch (RX0 II) sensor. The Ricoh has a resolution of 24 megapixels, whereas the Sony provides 15.4 MP.
Below is an overview of the main specs of the two cameras as a starting point for the comparison.
|Ricoh GR III||Sony RX0 II|
|Fixed lens compact camera||Fixed lens compact camera|
|28mm f/2.8||24mm f/4.0|
|24 MP, APS-C Sensor||15.4 MP, 1" Sensor|
|1080/60p Video||4K/30p Video|
|ISO 100-102400||ISO 80-12800|
|Viewfinder optional||No viewfinder, LCD framing|
|3.0" LCD, 1037k dots||1.5" LCD, 230k dots|
|Fixed touchscreen||Tilting screen (not touch-sensitive)|
|4 shutter flaps per second||5.5 shutter flaps per second|
|In-body stabilization||No shake reduction|
|Not weather sealed||Waterproof body (10m)|
|200 shots per battery charge||240 shots per battery charge|
|109 x 62 x 33 mm, 257 g||59 x 41 x 35 mm, 132 g|
Going beyond this snapshot of core features and characteristics, what are the differences between the Ricoh GR III and the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX0II? 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: Ricoh GR III vs Sony RX0 II
The physical size and weight of the Ricoh GR III and the Sony RX0 II are illustrated 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 width, height and depth dimensions are rounded to the nearest millimeter.
If the front view area (width x height) of the cameras is taken as an aggregate measure of their size, the Sony RX0 II is considerably smaller (64 percent) than the Ricoh GR III. Moreover, the RX0 II is substantially lighter (49 percent) than the GR III. It is noteworthy in this context that the RX0 II is splash and dust-proof, while the GR III does not feature any corresponding weather-sealing. More than that, the RX0 II is water-proof up to 10m and can, thus, be used for underwater photography.
The battery packs of both cameras can be charged via USB, which can be very convenient when travelling.
The table below summarizes the key physical specs of the two cameras alongside a broader set of comparators. If you would like to visualize and compare a different camera combination, just use the right or left arrows in the table to switch to the respective camera. Alternatively, you can also navigate to the CAM-parator app and make your selection from the full list of cameras there.
|Ricoh GR III»||4.3 in||2.4 in||1.3 in||9.1 oz||200||n||Feb 2019||899||Ricoh GR III|
|Sony RX0 II«||2.3 in||1.6 in||1.4 in||4.7 oz||240||Y||Mar 2019||699||Sony RX0 II|
|Canon SX740« »||4.3 in||2.5 in||1.6 in||10.5 oz||265||n||Jul 2018||399||Canon SX740|
|Fujifilm X-T30« »||4.6 in||3.3 in||1.9 in||13.5 oz||380||n||Feb 2019||899||Fujifilm X-T30|
|Fujifilm XF10« »||4.4 in||2.5 in||1.6 in||9.8 oz||330||n||Jul 2018||499||Fujifilm XF10|
|Leica C-LUX« »||4.4 in||2.6 in||1.8 in||12.0 oz||370||n||Jun 2018||1,049||Leica C-LUX|
|Panasonic GX9« »||4.9 in||2.8 in||1.9 in||14.4 oz||260||n||Feb 2018||849||Panasonic GX9|
|Panasonic ZS200« »||4.4 in||2.6 in||1.8 in||12.0 oz||370||n||Feb 2018||799||Panasonic ZS200|
|Ricoh GR II« »||4.6 in||2.5 in||1.4 in||8.9 oz||320||n||Jun 2015||699||Ricoh GR II|
|Ricoh GR« »||4.6 in||2.4 in||1.4 in||8.6 oz||290||n||Apr 2013||799||-||Ricoh GR|
|Sony A6400« »||4.7 in||2.6 in||2.0 in||14.2 oz||410||n||Jan 2019||899||Sony A6400|
|Sony RX100 VI« »||4.0 in||2.3 in||1.7 in||10.6 oz||240||n||Jun 2018||1,199||Sony RX100 VI|
|Sony RX10 IV« »||5.2 in||3.7 in||5.7 in||38.6 oz||400||Y||Sep 2017||1,699||Sony RX10 IV|
|Sony RX0« »||2.3 in||1.6 in||1.2 in||3.9 oz||240||Y||Aug 2017||699||-||Sony RX0|
|Sony RX10 III« »||5.2 in||3.7 in||5.0 in||37.1 oz||420||Y||Mar 2016||1,499||Sony RX10 III|
|Sony RX10 II« »||5.1 in||3.5 in||4.0 in||28.7 oz||400||Y||Jun 2015||1,299||-||Sony RX10 II|
|Sony RX100 III« »||4.0 in||2.3 in||1.6 in||10.2 oz||320||n||May 2014||799||-||Sony RX100 III|
|Note: Measurements and pricing do not include easily detachable parts, such as interchangeable lenses or optional viewfinders.|
Any camera decision will naturally be influenced heavily by the price. The listed launch prices provide an indication of the market segment that the manufacturer of the cameras have been targeting. The RX0 II was launched at a somewhat lower price (by 22 percent) than the GR III, which makes it more attractive for photographers on a tight budget. Normally, street prices remain initially close to the MSRP, but after a couple of months, the first discounts appear. 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: Ricoh GR III vs Sony RX0 II
The imaging sensor is at the core of digital cameras and its size is one of the main determining factors of image quality. A large sensor will tend to have larger individual pixels that provide better low-light sensitivity, wider dynamic range, and richer color-depth than smaller pixel-units in a sensor of the same technological generation. Moreover, a large sensor camera will give the photographer more control over depth-of-field in the image and, thus, the ability to better isolate a subject from the background. On the downside, larger sensors are more costly to manufacture and tend to lead to bigger and heavier cameras and lenses.
Of the two cameras under consideration, the Ricoh GR III features an APS-C sensor and the Sony RX0 II an one-inch sensor. The sensor area in the RX0 II is 68 percent smaller. As a result of these sensor size differences, the cameras have a format factor of, respectively, 1.5 and 2.7. Both cameras have a native aspect ratio (sensor width to sensor height) of 3:2.
Technology-wise, both cameras are equipped with CMOS (Complementary Metal–Oxide–Semiconductor) sensors.
With 24MP, the GR III offers a higher resolution than the RX0 II (15.4MP), but the GR III nevertheless has larger individual pixels (pixel pitch of 3.91μm versus 2.74μm for the RX0 II) due to its larger sensor. It is noteworthy in this context that the two cameras were released in close succession, so that their sensors are from the same technological generation. Coming back to sensor resolution, it should be mentioned that the GR III has no anti-alias filter installed, so that it can capture all the detail its sensor resolves.
The resolution advantage of the Ricoh GR III implies greater flexibility for cropping images or the possibility to print larger pictures. The maximum print size of the GR III for good quality output (200 dots per inch) amounts to 30 x 20 inch or 76.2 x 50.8 cm, for very good quality (250 dpi) 24 x 16 inch or 61 x 40.6 cm, and for excellent quality (300 dpi) 20 x 13.3 inch or 50.8 x 33.9 cm. The corresponding values for the Sony RX0 II are 24 x 16 inch or 61 x 40.6 cm for good quality, 19.2 x 12.8 inch or 48.8 x 32.5 cm for very good quality, and 16 x 10.7 inch or 40.6 x 27.1 cm for excellent quality prints.
The GR III has on-sensor phase detect pixels, which results in fast and reliable autofocus acquisition even during live view operation.
The Ricoh GR III has a native sensitivity range from ISO 100 to ISO 102400. The corresponding ISO settings for the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX0II are ISO 80 to ISO 12800 (no boost).
For many cameras, data on sensor performance has been reported by DXO Mark. This service assesses and scores the color depth ("DXO Portrait"), dynamic range ("DXO Landscape"), and low-light sensitivity ("DXO Sports") of camera sensors, and also publishes an overall camera score. The following table provides an overview of the physical sensor characteristics, as well as the sensor quality measurements for a selection of comparators.
|Ricoh GR III»||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||1080/60p||-||-||-||-||Ricoh GR III|
|Sony RX0 II«||1-inch||15.4||4800||3200||4K/30p||-||-||-||-||Sony RX0 II|
|Canon SX740« »||1/2.3||20.2||5184||3888||4K/30p||-||-||-||-||Canon SX740|
|Fujifilm X-T30« »||APS-C||26.0||6240||4160||4K/30p||-||-||-||-||Fujifilm X-T30|
|Fujifilm XF10« »||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||4K/15p||-||-||-||-||Fujifilm XF10|
|Leica C-LUX« »||1-inch||20.0||5472||3648||4K/30p||-||-||-||-||Leica C-LUX|
|Panasonic GX9« »||Four Thirds||20.2||5184||3888||4K/30p||-||-||-||-||Panasonic GX9|
|Panasonic ZS200« »||1-inch||20.0||5472||3648||4K/30p||-||-||-||-||Panasonic ZS200|
|Ricoh GR II« »||APS-C||16.1||4928||3264||1080/30p||23.6||13.7||1078||80||Ricoh GR II|
|Ricoh GR« »||APS-C||16.1||4928||3264||1080/30p||23.6||13.5||972||78||Ricoh GR|
|Sony A6400« »||APS-C||24.0||6000||4000||4K/30p||24||13.6||1431||83||Sony A6400|
|Sony RX100 VI« »||1-inch||20.0||5472||3648||4K/30p||-||-||-||-||Sony RX100 VI|
|Sony RX10 IV« »||1-inch||20.0||5472||3648||4K/30p||-||-||-||-||Sony RX10 IV|
|Sony RX0« »||1-inch||15.4||4800||3200||1080/60p||22.4||12.4||548||68||Sony RX0|
|Sony RX10 III« »||1-inch||20.0||5472||3648||4K/30p||23.1||12.6||472||70||Sony RX10 III|
|Sony RX10 II« »||1-inch||20.0||5472||3648||4K/30p||23.0||12.6||531||70||Sony RX10 II|
|Sony RX100 III« »||1-inch||20.0||5472||3648||1080/60p||22.4||12.3||495||67||Sony RX100 III|
Many modern cameras are not only capable of taking still images, but also of capturing video footage. Both cameras under consideration are equipped with sensors that have a sufficiently high read-out speed for moving images, but the RX0 II provides a better video resolution than the GR III. It can shoot movie footage at 4K/30p, while the Ricoh is limited to 1080/60p.
Feature comparison: Ricoh GR III vs Sony RX0 II
Beyond body and sensor, cameras can and do differ across a range of features. The GR III and the RX0 II 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. That said, the GR III can be equipped with an optional viewfinder – the GV-1. The following table reports on some other key feature differences and similarities of the Ricoh GR III, the Sony RX0 II, and comparable cameras.
|Ricoh GR III»||-||n||3.0||1037||fixed||Y||1/4000s||4.0||n||Y||Ricoh GR III|
|Sony RX0 II«||-||n||1.5||230||tilting||n||..||5.5||n||n||Sony RX0 II|
|Canon SX740« »||-||n||3.0||922||tilting||n||1/3200s||10.0||Y||Y||Canon SX740|
|Fujifilm X-T30« »||2360||n||3.0||1040||tilting||Y||1/4000s||8.0||Y||n||Fujifilm X-T30|
|Fujifilm XF10« »||-||n||3.0||1040||fixed||Y||1/4000s||6.0||Y||n||Fujifilm XF10|
|Leica C-LUX« »||2330||n||3.0||1240||fixed||Y||1/2000s||10.0||Y||Y||Leica C-LUX|
|Panasonic GX9« »||2760||n||3.0||1240||tilting||Y||1/4000s||9.0||Y||Y||Panasonic GX9|
|Panasonic ZS200« »||2330||n||3.0||1240||fixed||Y||1/2000s||10.0||Y||Y||Panasonic ZS200|
|Ricoh GR II« »||-||n||3.0||1230||fixed||n||1/4000s||4.0||Y||n||Ricoh GR II|
|Ricoh GR« »||-||n||3.0||1230||fixed||n||1/4000s||4.0||Y||n||Ricoh GR|
|Sony A6400« »||2359||n||3.0||922||tilting||Y||1/4000s||11.0||Y||n||Sony A6400|
|Sony RX100 VI« »||2359||n||3.0||1229||tilting||Y||1/2000s||24.0||Y||Y||Sony RX100 VI|
|Sony RX10 IV« »||2359||Y||3.0||1440||tilting||Y||1/2000s||24.0||Y||Y||Sony RX10 IV|
|Sony RX0« »||-||n||1.5||230||fixed||n||..||5.5||n||n||Sony RX0|
|Sony RX10 III« »||2359||Y||3.0||1229||tilting||n||1/2000s||14.0||Y||Y||Sony RX10 III|
|Sony RX10 II« »||2359||Y||3.0||1229||tilting||n||1/3200s||14.0||Y||Y||Sony RX10 II|
|Sony RX100 III« »||1440||n||3.0||1229||tilting||n||1/2000s||10.0||Y||Y||Sony RX100 III|
One differentiating feature between the two cameras concerns the touch sensitivity of the rear screen. The GR III has a touchscreen, while the RX0 II has a conventional panel. Touch control can be particularly helpful, for example, for setting the focus point.The RX0 II has an articulated screen that can be turned to be front-facing. This characteristic will be appreciated by vloggers and photographers who are interested in taking selfies. In contrast, the GR III does not have a selfie-screen.
The reported shutter speed information refers to the use of the mechanical shutter. Yet, some cameras only have an electronic shutter, while others have an electronic shutter in addition to a mechanical one. In fact, the RX0 II only has electronic shutter, which makes completely silent shooting possible. However, this mode is less suitable for photographing moving objects (risk of rolling shutter) or shooting under artificial light sources (risk of flickering).
The Ricoh GR III 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.
Both the GR III and the RX0 II have built-in prime lenses. The GR III has a 28mm f/2.8 optic and the RX0 II offers a 24mm f/4.0 (focal lengths in full frame equivalent terms). Hence, the Ricoh provides more tele-photo reach than the Sony. The GR III offers the faster maximum aperture.
The GR III writes its imaging data to SDXC cards, while the RX0 II uses micro SDXC or Memory Stick Micro cards. Both cameras can use UHS-I cards, which provide for Ultra High Speed data transfer of up to 104 MB/s.
Connectivity comparison: Ricoh GR III vs Sony RX0 II
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 III and Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX0II and, in particular, the interfaces the cameras (and selected comparators) provide for accessory control and data transfer.
|Ricoh GR III»||Y||stereo||mono||-||-||-||3.0||Y||-||Y||Ricoh GR III|
|Sony RX0 II«||-||stereo||mono||Y||-||micro||2.0||Y||-||Y||Sony RX0 II|
|Canon SX740« »||-||stereo||mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||Y||Y||Canon SX740|
|Fujifilm X-T30« »||Y||stereo||mono||Y||-||micro||3.1||Y||-||Y||Fujifilm X-T30|
|Fujifilm XF10« »||-||stereo||mono||Y||-||micro||2.0||Y||-||Y||Fujifilm XF10|
|Leica C-LUX« »||-||stereo||mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||-||-||Leica C-LUX|
|Panasonic GX9« »||Y||stereo||mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||-||Y||Panasonic GX9|
|Panasonic ZS200« »||-||stereo||mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||-||-||Panasonic ZS200|
|Ricoh GR II« »||Y||stereo||mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||Y||-||Ricoh GR II|
|Ricoh GR« »||Y||mono||mono||-||-||micro||2.0||-||-||-||Ricoh GR|
|Sony A6400« »||Y||stereo||mono||Y||-||micro||2.0||Y||Y||Y||Sony A6400|
|Sony RX100 VI« »||-||stereo||mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||Y||Y||Sony RX100 VI|
|Sony RX10 IV« »||Y||stereo||mono||Y||Y||micro||2.0||Y||Y||-||Sony RX10 IV|
|Sony RX0« »||-||stereo||mono||Y||-||micro||2.0||Y||-||Y||Sony RX0|
|Sony RX10 III« »||Y||stereo||mono||Y||Y||micro||2.0||Y||Y||-||Sony RX10 III|
|Sony RX10 II« »||Y||stereo||mono||Y||Y||micro||2.0||Y||Y||-||Sony RX10 II|
|Sony RX100 III« »||-||stereo||mono||-||-||micro||2.0||Y||Y||-||Sony RX100 III|
It is notable that the GR III has a hotshoe, while the RX0 II does not. This socket makes it possible to easily attach optional accessories, such as an external flash gun.
Both the GR III and the RX0 II are recent models that are part of the current product line-up. The GR III replaced the earlier Ricoh GR II, while the RX0 II followed on from the Sony RX0. Further information on the two cameras (e.g. user guides, manuals), as well as related accessories, can be found on the official Ricoh and Sony websites.
Review summary: Ricoh GR III vs Sony RX0 II
So what is the bottom line? Is there a clear favorite between the Ricoh GR III and the Sony RX0 II? Which camera is better? Below is a summary of the relative strengths of each of the two contestants.
Reasons to prefer the Ricoh GR III:
- More detail: Offers more megapixels (24 vs 15.4MP) with a 25% higher linear resolution.
- Maximized detail: Lacks an anti-alias filter to exploit the sensor's full resolution potential.
- Better image quality: Features bigger pixels on a larger sensor for higher quality imaging.
- Richer colors: The pixel size advantage translates into images with better, more accurate colors.
- More dynamic range: Larger pixels capture a wider spectrum of light and dark details.
- Better low-light sensitivity: Larger pixels means good image quality even under poor lighting.
- Better live-view autofocus: Features on-sensor phase-detection for quicker and more confident autofocus.
- More framing options: Can be equipped with a hotshoe-mounted accessory-viewfinder.
- Larger screen: Has a bigger rear LCD (3.0" vs 1.5") for image review and settings control.
- More detailed LCD: Has a higher resolution rear screen (1037k vs 230k dots).
- Fewer buttons to press: Is equipped with a touch-sensitive rear screen to facilitate handling.
- Easier time-lapse photography: Has an intervalometer built-in for low frequency shooting.
- Better light gathering: Has a lens with a wider maximum aperture (f/2.8 vs f/4.0).
- Sharper images: Has hand-shake reducing image stabilization built-in.
- Better lighting: Features a hotshoe and can thus hold and trigger an external flash gun.
- Faster data transfer: Supports a more advanced USB protocol (3.0 vs 2.0).
Arguments in favor of the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX0II:
- Better moiré control: Has an anti-alias filter to avoid artificial patterns to appear in images.
- Better video: Provides higher definition movie capture (4K/30p vs 1080/60p).
- 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.
- More selfie-friendly: Has an articulated screen that can be turned to be front-facing.
- Faster burst: Shoots at higher frequency (5.5 vs 4 flaps/sec) to capture the decisive moment.
- Less disturbing: Has an electronic shutter option for completely silent shooting.
- Wider view: Has a wider-angle lens that facilitates landscape or interior shots.
- More compact: Is smaller (59x41mm vs 109x62mm) and will fit more readily into a bag.
- Less heavy: Has a lower weight (by 125g or 49 percent) and is thus easier to take along.
- Longer lasting: Gets more shots (240 versus 200) out of a single battery charge.
- Better sealing: Is splash and dust sealed for shooting in inclement weather conditions.
- Water-proof: Is rugged and sealed and can thus be used for underwater photography (up to 10m).
- More affordable: Was released into a lower priced segment (22 percent cheaper at launch).
If the count of relative strengths (bullet points above) is taken as a measure, the GR III emerges as the winner of the contest (16 : 14 points). However, the pertinence of the various camera strengths will differ across photographers, so that you might want to weigh individual camera traits according to their importance for your own imaging needs before making a camera decision. A professional wedding photographer will view the differences between cameras in a way that diverges from the perspective of a travel photog, and a person interested in cityscapes has distinct needs from a macro 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 III and the Sony RX0 II place the cameras among the top in their class? Find out in the latest Best Prime Lens Compact Camera listing whether the two cameras rank among the cream of the crop.
In any case, while the specs-based evaluation of cameras can be instructive in revealing their potential as photographic tools, it remains partial and cannot reveal, for example, the shooting experience and imaging performance when actually working with the GR III or the RX0 II. User reviews that are available, for instance, at amazon can sometimes shed light on these issues, but such feedback is all too often partial, inconsistent, and inaccurate.
Expert reviews: Ricoh GR III vs Sony RX0 II
This is where reviews by experts come in. The adjacent summary-table relays the overall verdicts of several of the most popular camera review sites (cameralabs, dpreview, ephotozine, imaging-resource, and photographyblog). 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.
|Ricoh GR III»||-||81/100||4/5||-||-||Feb 2019||899||Ricoh GR III|
|Sony RX0 II«||-||-||-||-||-||Mar 2019||699||Sony RX0 II|
|Canon SX740« »||+||-||4/5||-||4/5||Jul 2018||399||Canon SX740|
|Fujifilm X-T30« »||+ +||84/100||4.5/5||-||4.5/5||Feb 2019||899||Fujifilm X-T30|
|Fujifilm XF10« »||-||75/100||4/5||-||4.5/5||Jul 2018||499||Fujifilm XF10|
|Leica C-LUX« »||-||-||4.5/5||-||4/5||Jun 2018||1,049||Leica C-LUX|
|Panasonic GX9« »||+||84/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||Feb 2018||849||Panasonic GX9|
|Panasonic ZS200« »||+ +||81/100||4.5/5||-||4.5/5||Feb 2018||799||Panasonic ZS200|
|Ricoh GR II« »||-||-||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||Jun 2015||699||Ricoh GR II|
|Ricoh GR« »||-||79/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||Apr 2013||799||-||Ricoh GR|
|Sony A6400« »||+||85/100||4.5/5||-||4/5||Jan 2019||899||Sony A6400|
|Sony RX100 VI« »||+ +||83/100||4/5||-||4.5/5||Jun 2018||1,199||Sony RX100 VI|
|Sony RX10 IV« »||+||84/100||4.5/5||-||5/5||Sep 2017||1,699||Sony RX10 IV|
|Sony RX0« »||-||-||3.5/5||-||4/5||Aug 2017||699||-||Sony RX0|
|Sony RX10 III« »||+||84/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||4.5/5||Mar 2016||1,499||Sony RX10 III|
|Sony RX10 II« »||+ +||82/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||4/5||Jun 2015||1,299||-||Sony RX10 II|
|Sony RX100 III« »||+ +||82/100||4.5/5||4.5/5||5/5||May 2014||799||-||Sony RX100 III|
|Notes: (+ +) highly recommended; (+) recommended; (o) reviewed; (-) not available.|
The above review scores should be interpreted with care, though. The assessments were made in relation to similar cameras of the same technological generation. Hence, a score should always be seen in the context of the camera's market launch date and its price, and comparing ratings of very distinct cameras or ones that are far apart in terms of their release date have little meaning. Also, kindly note that some of the listed sites have over time developped their review approaches and their reporting style.
Other camera comparisons
Did this review help to inform your camera decision process? If you would like to see a different side-by-side camera review, just use the search menu below. There is also a set of direct links to comparison reviews that other users of the CAM-parator app explored.
- Canon 80D vs Ricoh GR III
- Fujifilm X-E3 vs Ricoh GR III
- Fujifilm X-T20 vs Ricoh GR III
- Fujifilm X-T30 vs Sony RX0 II
- Leica SL vs Ricoh GR III
- Leica X-U Typ 113 vs Ricoh GR III
- Panasonic FZ1000 vs Sony RX0 II
- Ricoh GR III vs Sony A5000
- Ricoh GR III vs Sony A6400
- Ricoh GR III vs Sony A7
- Ricoh GR III vs Sony RX100 III
- Sony RX0 II vs Sony RX10 IV
Specifications: Ricoh GR III vs Sony RX0 II
Below is a side-by-side comparison of the specs of the two cameras to facilitate a quick review of their differences and common features.
|Camera Model||Ricoh GR III||Sony RX0 II|
|Camera Type||Fixed lens compact camera||Fixed lens compact camera|
|Camera Lens||28mm f/2.8||24mm f/4.0|
|Launch Date||February 2019||March 2019|
|Launch Price||USD 899||USD 699|
|Sensor Specs||Ricoh GR III||Sony RX0 II|
|Sensor Format||APS-C Sensor||1" Sensor|
|Sensor Size||23.5 x 15.6 mm||13.2 x 8.8 mm|
|Sensor Area||366.6 mm2||116.16 mm2|
|Sensor Diagonal||28.2 mm||15.9 mm|
|Sensor Resolution||24 Megapixels||15.4 Megapixels|
|Image Resolution||6000 x 4000 pixels||4800 x 3200 pixels|
|Pixel Pitch||3.91 μm||2.74 μm|
|Pixel Density||6.55 MP/cm2||13.22 MP/cm2|
|Moiré control||no AA filter||Anti-Alias filter|
|Movie Capability||1080/60p Video||4K/30p Video|
|ISO Setting||100-102400 ISO||80-12800 ISO|
|Image Processor||GR Engine VI||BIONZ X|
|Screen Specs||Ricoh GR III||Sony RX0 II|
|Viewfinder Type||Viewfinder optional||No viewfinder|
|LCD Framing||Live View||Live View|
|Rear LCD Size||3.0 inch||1.5 inch|
|LCD Resolution||1037k dots||230k dots|
|LCD Attachment||Fixed screen||Tilting screen|
|Touch Input||Touchscreen||no Touchscreen|
|Shooting Specs||Ricoh GR III||Sony RX0 II|
|Autofocus System||On-Sensor Phase-detect||Contrast-detect AF|
|Manual Focusing Aid||No Peaking Feature||Focus Peaking|
|Max Shutter Speed (mechanical)||1/4000/s||..|
|Continuous Shooting||4 shutter flaps/s||5.5 shutter flaps/s|
|Electronic Shutter||no E-Shutter||up to 1/32000s|
|Time-Lapse Photography||Intervalometer built-in||no Intervalometer|
|Image Stabilization||In-body stabilization||No handshake reduction|
|Fill Flash||no On-Board Flash||no On-Board Flash|
|Storage Medium||SDXC cards||mMS or mSDXC cards|
|Second Storage Option||Single card slot||Single card slot|
|UHS card support||UHS-I||UHS-I|
|Connectivity Specs||Ricoh GR III||Sony RX0 II|
|External Flash||Hotshoe||no Hotshoe|
|USB Connector||USB 3.0||USB 2.0|
|HDMI Port||no HDMI||micro HDMI|
|Microphone Port||no MIC socket||External MIC port|
|Wifi Support||Wifi built-in||Wifi built-in|
|Bluetooth Support||Bluetooth built-in||Bluetooth built-in|
|Body Specs||Ricoh GR III||Sony RX0 II|
|Environmental Sealing||Not weather sealed||Waterproof body (10m)|
|Battery Type||DB-110 power pack||NP-BJ1 power pack|
|Battery Life (CIPA)||200 shots per charge||240 shots per charge|
|In-Camera Charging||USB charging||USB charging|
109 x 62 x 33 mm
(4.3 x 2.4 x 1.3 in)
59 x 41 x 35 mm
(2.3 x 1.6 x 1.4 in)
|Camera Weight||257 g (9.1 oz)||132 g (4.7 oz)|
Did you notice an error on this page? If so, please get in touch, so that we can correct the information.