Ricoh GR III vs GR IV: I Dismissed It Until I Shot With It

When I heard the Ricoh GR IV announcement, I immediately jumped onto Ricoh’s website to see what had changed. I was excited — I imagined what they might have done with this latest iteration, because let’s be honest, the GR series is unique, but the GR III is starting to show its age.

A new tilting rear screen? Oh for sure. Maybe they’d finally weather-seal it too. And I kept wondering: what else could they possibly add to what is already the best true pocket camera?

Then I checked the details… and re-checked them, thinking I must have missed something.

If you’re comparing the Ricoh GR IV to the rest of the market, you may also want to read my guide to the best compact cameras for travel photography, where the GR series has consistently ranked near the top. I also compared the Ricoh GRIV against the Fuji X100VI.

Six years. Six years for improved AF, slightly better battery life, and a small rearrangement of the rear controls. I was sceptical about those claims, because let’s be honest — every camera claims these improvements and they don’t always translate to much in real shooting.

Still no weather sealing. Still a fixed screen. No resolution bump. No brighter aperture. Surely the GR IV was dead on arrival with such a small list of tangible upgrades. And at that price, you’re edging dangerously close to Fuji X100VI territory. Thanks, but no thanks, Ricoh.

But as a few weeks passed and I got over my initial frustrations, I kept wondering about the GR IV. What would actually improve my GR III in a way that matters to me? I don’t want it any bigger, so the f/2.8 aperture is the compromise needed to keep it pocketable. Do I really need weather sealing? I’d like it, sure — but the camera is small enough to slip in my pocket if the heavens open. Head to my full review of the Ricoh GRIV for more details.

I’m in the Philippines where dust is a real issue, but I’ve not personally had a problem with it on my GRIII so far. And let’s be honest: dust spots usually show up when you stop down to f/11 and beyond, and I rarely do that on the GR III.

So partly for my own peace of mind, and partly because the website has grown to a point where enough people will care about this comparison, I bit the bullet and bought one. I’ve now been shooting with it for about six weeks — at home, on errands, on a couple of trips to Dumaguete — and in this article, I’ll give my honest, frank opinion on whether it’s worth upgrading from the GR III.

Size & Handling

On paper, the GR IV is almost identical to the GR III. The GR III weighs 257g, the GR IV 262g, and the dimensions are essentially the same at 109.4 × 61.9 × 33.2 mm. In the hand, that translates to a camera that feels virtually the same — in the best possible way. It still slips easily into the small cargo pocket on the front of my favourite trousers, which is exactly why I use the GR cameras so much. They’re the only cameras I own that feel genuinely pocketable.

That pocketability changes how and when you shoot. Last week in Dumaguete, Sofia wanted to go to the little playground in the apartment complex we were staying at. I slipped the GR IV into my pocket without even thinking about it. While she played, I took it out and started experimenting with compositions and colours, and ended up getting shots I simply wouldn’t have otherwise — because I wouldn’t have taken any of my other cameras. And she got longer at the playground because both of us were entertained.

Ricoh have clearly decided not to mess with the core GR philosophy, and I’m glad. The size, weight, and overall feel remain familiar, but the GR IV has a slightly more refined character to its handling. The biggest change is the switch from the GR III’s soft, slightly mushy rear dial to the new dedicated buttons on the GR IV. At first they felt a bit awkward, simply because my muscle memory was tied to the GR III. But after a short time, they started to feel like a genuine improvement. The buttons give a clear, tactile click, and exposure compensation is now quicker and more precise — a firm press in either direction and you know exactly what you’ve dialled in.

The GR IV doesn’t feel like a different camera, but it does feel like a more mature one. Same footprint, same concept — but a bit more refined in the places that matter during real use. Are those upgrades worth it if you’re a GRIII owner, absolutely not. IS the GRIV a nice camera to handle, yes.

Startup Speed

The GR IV boasts an improved startup speed which, I think is one of the most underrated features in a compact camera — or in any camera used for street and candid photography. But in reality, the Ricoh GR III already had a fast startup time, on par with the Fuji X100VI as I noted when I compared the two cameras.

Yes, on paper the GR IV starts up quicker, but the real question is: does startup time ever make you miss shots? And for both the GR III and GR IV, I’ve never found that to be the case. Both are quick.

I always appreciate improvements, but in this case it’s one that’s only noticeable in spec sheets and not something that makes a difference in real shooting, at least not for how I use the camera. So while it’s a nice upgrade to have, in reality it’s irrelevant.

Autofocus (The Big Upgrade)

In my field notes on the Ricoh GR IV, I mainly shot the camera in the same way I shoot the GR III, and because of that, I didn’t fully appreciate just how much of a difference the improved AF speed would make. With the GR III, I’m well aware that the AF isn’t quick. Unless I point it at areas with a lot of contrast, it struggles in dim light. And if I want to shoot people, I cannot rely on face or eye detect. When I say I can’t rely on it, I mean it’s so bad it’s basically unusable. I’d use the touch screen to focus on a face or do a quick focus-and-recompose. I adapted, slowed down, and accepted that some types of shot just weren’t realistic with the GR III.

After using the GR IV more extensively, I can say the AF speed increases — and the improvements in face detection — are the single biggest and most meaningful upgrade the GR IV has. It’s still not lightning quick, and it’s not infallible in the way a Sony A7 IV is, for instance, but it is finally usable. It won’t pick up faces as quickly or at such an angle as my Nikons, OMs, or even my Fujis, but once you learn how it behaves, it becomes something I actually use now — and it works well. A slight sidestep or a small adjustment to reveal more of the face usually does the trick, and once it locks, it’s accurate and fast enough that you get the shot most of the time.

These improvements also change how the GR IV competes in the wider compact camera market, which I explore in my guide to the best compact cameras for travel photography.

At night or in low light, the difference in focus speed is honestly night and day. The GR III really struggles with hunting; the GR IV is in a different league altogether, allowing you to focus reasonably quickly on your subject. But it’s not just these edge cases where the AF is noticeably better — it’s faster, less hesitant, and more accurate in every scenario.

This is the one area that, on its own, can justify the upgrade if you shoot like I do: people, family, candid, travel, and street photography. Is it worth the cost if you already own a GR III? Only you can answer that, because it depends on how much you use your camera and what you shoot. But the difference is not marginal.

Image Quality

The GR III gave me image quality I was always happy with. The lens was sharp in the centre, dynamic range was decent, and although low-light performance wasn’t on the same level as my Fuji X100VI, I never really expected much low-light ability from an f/2.8 compact anyway.

The new GR IV is said to have better image quality — and it does. The lens is sharper into the corners, but what I really notice is that the files just look cleaner. They have more clarity and feel more lifelike. When I edit the files in post, they seem a little more malleable, even if the differences aren’t huge.

The GR IV images do look sharper into the corners than the GR III, but I think the overall improved look is a combination of the new lens, the new sensor, and the improved image pipeline and processing inside the camera. Low-light performance has improved too, but again — at f/2.8 on an APS-C sensor, this isn’t a camera you’d buy for low-light performance in my opinion. It will get you by in a pinch though. ISO 6400 is my limit with this camera (the same as the GR III), but I have to do noticeably less post-processing on the GR IV files to get them looking clean.

The increased resolution is an absolute nothing-burger. It’s only there because Ricoh moved to a new sensor and that happened to be the pixel count. But that’s perfectly fine, because I’ve printed up to 30×20″ from my GR III and I know the GR IV will print even better.

I don’t think the image-quality improvements justify buying the GR IV if you’re already a GR III owner. But the files do look sharper, cleaner, and have more micro-contrast and bite. Combined, those subtle changes give an overall more pleasing look.

Battery Life

Battery life is one of those improvements brands claim with virtually every new camera, and quite frankly, I’m always sceptical. I assume they massage the numbers or the difference is so small it’s meaningless. I assumed the same with the GR IV (which uses the 1,800 mAh DB-120 battery) and in fact I asked my dealer to send me two spare batteries when I bought it. Unfortunately they didn’t have any, so I’ve been stuck with just the one.

Based on my experience with the GR III (which uses the 1,350 mAh DB-110 battery) I thought this was going to be a major issue. The GR III would start giving me low-battery anxiety after about an hour and a half of walk-around shooting, even when I diligently turned the camera off between shots. I planned my trip to Dumaguete specifically to shoot the GR IV, and I was genuinely worried the battery life was going to hinder me.

In reality, the battery life on the GR IV is genuinely much improved. I took it to Dumaguete on the Monday and shot for 30–60 minutes that night. The next day I carried it with me when we visited a forest resort and shot for another hour or two. Then I had the playground session with Sofia, which added about another 30 minutes of shooting. I didn’t charge the camera throughout the trip, and when I got home it still had a little power left.

That’s a big improvement. I could never have gotten through that trip on one battery with the GR III — I couldn’t even have gotten through a single day. It’s not worth upgrading purely for battery life, of course, because GR III batteries are cheap, but it is the second most significant improvement on the GR IV in my opinion.

Is It Worth the Upgrade?

If you’re trying to decide between picking up a GR III while it’s still available or going straight to the GR IV, you could be forgiven — after reading everything above — for thinking the GR IV simply isn’t worth it. And if you already own the GR III, or if you shoot slowly and methodically, set up street scenes, and wait for the decisive moment, the decision is a bit harder.

All I can tell you is this: the GR III is a camera that requires you to adapt to its nuances and annoyances. It will still get the job done most of the time, but you have to work around it. The GR IV — not through any one single upgrade, but through a combination of faster AF, better battery life, improved responsiveness, and a more refined control layout — is a camera you no longer need to jump through hoops to shoot with. You don’t need to adapt to the camera anymore. You just pick it up and shoot.

The autofocus is the single biggest improvement, and it makes the GR IV far more usable and far more enjoyable. Less frustration, fewer missed shots, and more confidence to shoot the way you want to shoot.

Yes, the price of the GR IV has increased compared to the $1,100 I paid for my GR III, but GR III prices have climbed as well, so the gap between them isn’t as big as it might seem.

If you’re happy with your GR III and only shoot it occasionally, then you’re probably better off keeping your money and spending it on something else. But if you want a compact camera that’s genuinely pocketable, and you want at least half a chance of getting in-focus shots of family, people, and anything that moves faster than a snail, the GR IV will make you happier, make the whole experience smoother, and ultimately give you photos that simply aren’t possible with the GR III.

I just wish Ricoh had found a way to integrate a tilting screen.

Ultimately, if and when I get back to Scotland next year, I’ll almost certainly sell my GR III and keep the GR IV. It’s simply a more enjoyable camera to bring with me.

A quick note of thanks to Henry’s camera photo for helping me get hold of the Ricoh GR IV quickly. They’ve been my dealer of choice since moving to the Philippines, and their support has always been excellent. This isn’t a sponsored review — just genuine appreciation for the great service I’ve consistently had from them.

Ricoh GR III vs GR IV FAQ