That’s exactly where the Ricoh GR IV fits in.

I’ve taken it out a couple of times recently — once on a walk with Sofia, and again yesterday on a local stroll where I didn’t want to carry a full system camera on a strap or in a bag. Its tiny size means I can slip it into my pocket and no one would even know I have it on me.

It makes it feel as if I’m just going out to spend time with Sofia, or in nature, or simply for a walk in the countryside. I don’t feel any pressure to take photos with it. If it stays in my pocket the whole time, that’s fine — but if I see something worth capturing, I know it still offers the quality to make that photo good enough.

When Sofia gets distracted charging around or discovering something interesting, I can pull it out, and it’s instantly on and ready to shoot, fire off a few shots, and get some memories of these moments and places in our lives — then just as quickly, it’s back in my pocket and out of the way.

No other camera that I own offers that.

If you’re looking at alternatives in this category, I’ve covered the best options in my guide to the best compact cameras.

After using it like this, it becomes pretty clear who should actually buy this camera — and who shouldn’t.

What It’s Actually Like to Use Day-to-Day

The biggest difference with the GR IV isn’t really about specs — it’s how it fits into your life.

Yesterday, walking a local country lane in Perthshire just to get some fresh air, I must have pulled it in and out of my pocket a hundred times or more. And that never gets frustrating in the way pulling a camera out of a bag does.

Before I’ve even brought it up to shooting level, it’s already turned on and ready to go.

I only use the small wrist strap supplied by Ricoh — just to make sure I don’t drop it if I’m clumsy in cold weather — but apart from that (and a screen protector), I keep it as simple as possible. That’s how I like to shoot with this camera.

The fixed 28mm field of view also plays into that simplicity. There’s no choice. That’s the camera I’ve brought, and realistically it’s the only one I would have brought on a walk like this anyway.

Image Quality (In the Real World)

If I didn’t have the Ricoh GR IV — or previously the GR III — with me on these kinds of walks, I probably wouldn’t take any photos at all. Maybe the odd one on my phone, but those are usually just record shots that I’ll never look at again.

The GR IV sits a level above that.

It’s smaller than my phone, yet when I use it I’m far more mentally switched on. I know that unlike with a phone, the shot won’t be wasted because of the output quality.

I’ve been shooting RAW + JPEG, and the Positive Film profile gives very nice-looking results straight out of camera, particularly when there’s a bit of blue sky or sunshine. In the Philippines I was mostly shooting in warm afternoon light, but here in the Scottish Highlands I find myself shooting in whatever conditions I get as I explore the area and make notes on where to come back to in better light.

Battery life is much improved over the GR III. I still don’t have a second battery, but it comfortably gets me through several-hour walks where I’m taking shots every few minutes.

The Trade-Offs (And Why They’re Part of It)

On the odd occasion, I might miss a shot because of the fixed 28mm focal length or slightly slower autofocus compared to larger cameras with interchangeable lenses.

But I don’t really see that as a problem.

I rarely regret anything like that — there’s not much point. If I miss something, I just take it in properly instead of trying to force a photo. That’s part of using a camera like this.

There are a couple of more practical considerations though.

The lack of weather sealing is one. Walking here in Scotland, that did cross my mind yesterday. I was wearing a softshell rather than a waterproof, and I did think — what happens if that cloud bank rolls in and soaks me through? Will the GR IV be alright?

That’s where something like the Fujifilm X100VI, with a filter attached, feels like a safer option.

The other issue — and one that’s always been there with the GR series — is the lack of a viewfinder. Even in a bit of Scottish sunshine, the rear screen simply isn’t bright enough to see clearly. I found myself lining up shots but not being able to properly check the edges of the frame, making sure nothing was creeping in where it shouldn’t.

So I ended up going back to the old DSLR habit of chimping shots afterwards to see what I’d actually captured.

None of this ruins the experience, but it does define what the camera is.

Who Should Actually Buy the Ricoh GR IV

This isn’t a camera for everyone.

But for the right person, it makes a lot of sense.

You don’t want to feel like you’re carrying a camera

If you want to go out for a walk, spend time with your family, or just get some fresh air without turning it into a photography session, this is where the GR IV fits.

You want something you can just slip into your pocket

No bag, no strap, no planning.

Just take it with you and forget about it until you need it.

You’d otherwise just use your phone — or nothing at all

If the alternative is not taking photos, or relying on your phone for quick snapshots, the GR IV gives you something noticeably better without adding effort.

You prefer simplicity over flexibility

No lens choices. No zoom. No overthinking.

Just a fixed 28mm view and a camera that’s ready when you are.

You want the option to take photos, not the obligation

You don’t feel like you have to use it.

But when you do, it’s there and it’s capable.

Who Should Avoid It

You want one camera to do everything

This isn’t that camera.

You need fast autofocus for demanding situations

It’s fine for what it is, but it’s not built for speed.

You want zoom or multiple focal lengths

The fixed 28mm lens is part of the appeal — but also the main limitation.

You rely on a viewfinder

If you struggle with rear screen composition, like I do, especially in brighter conditions, this might frustrate you.

Final Thoughts

For me, the Ricoh GR IV fills a very specific role.

It’s the camera I take when I don’t want to carry anything — when I just want to go for a walk, spend time with Sofia, or get out into the countryside without it becoming about photography. It’s also the camera I would feel most comfortable with, shooting street photography, or around town where I don’t like to draw attention to myself.

And because of that, it’s a camera that offers something that none of my other cameras do.

Not because it’s the best camera I own — but because it’s unique.

Well, except for the Ricoh GR III, which when used in the same way offers a very similar experience. The main difference is that the GR IV simply does everything that little bit quicker.

I own both the Fujifilm X100VI and the Ricoh GR IV, and I’ve also shot extensively with the Ricoh GR III. Recently, I’ve been using the GR IV quite a lot and spent time comparing it directly to the GR III. While it is a better camera overall, I’ll be honest — the updates feel a little underwhelming, especially given how strong the GR III already was.

I’ve been shooting with the X100VI since I pre-ordered it, and it has firmly taken on the “bring-it-everywhere” role in my kit. That said, it’s simply not as small as the GR series. It’s also more expensive, harder to get hold of, and — despite being compact — asks more of you in terms of size and commitment.

So the question is obvious: can the Ricoh GR IV replace the X100VI? And is it actually the better compact camera? If you want to see which compact cameras are the best heading in to 2026 then I’ve written a full article on just that subject.

This article contains affiliate links. If you buy something through these links, I may earn a small commission at no extra cost to you. This helps support the site and lets me keep creating free content. Thank you.

Size, Handling, and Everyday Carry

I’m going to cut straight to the chase here: these cameras simply don’t function in the same way.

The Ricoh GR IV is genuinely pocketable. It’s tiny and slips into almost any pocket without effort. You can take it out with you and genuinely forget it’s even there. This has nothing to do with style or how the camera looks — it’s about always having a camera on you for everyday life, or being as unobtrusive as possible to get shots you simply wouldn’t if you’d left your camera at home.

In my view, the X100VI is not this kind of camera. While it is relatively small — and some people say it fits comfortably in their pockets — it doesn’t fit in any of mine. It’s also too nice an object for me to want to squeeze it in alongside keys and other items. This is a camera that asks to be carried with a bit more care.

That’s because it offers more in terms of the shooting experience. The X100VI has a hybrid optical/electronic viewfinder, dedicated physical dials for shutter speed, ISO, and aperture, and a beautifully machined tilting rear LCD. All of that makes it more engaging to use, but it also means there’s a greater level of commitment involved in taking it out with you. It’s not a “throw it in your pocket and forget about it until you need it” kind of camera.

That said, it is compact and lightweight enough to be far more suitable as an everyday carry camera than most interchangeable-lens systems.

Which camera is actually “better” really comes down to how you plan to use it, and a set of very personal preferences around how you like to shoot. What I will say is this: both cameras are excellent at what they’re designed to do — they just approach the problem from completely different directions.

Viewfinder vs Screen-Only Shooting

The Ricoh GR IV uses the same rear LCD screen as the GR III. It’s perfectly usable in dull to normal light, but here in the Philippines — especially in bright sunlight — I do sometimes struggle to see the screen clearly enough to compose precisely. You can work around it by finding a bit of shade or adjusting how you hold the camera, but it does make accurate composition more difficult at times.

The screen is also fixed, so if you want to shoot from more unusual angles you either have to move your body into position or shoot blindly and hope you get what you want. It’s not a huge issue — and, as I’ve said, there are workarounds — but it does affect how fluid and precise the shooting experience feels.

The X100VI, by contrast, offers a completely different way of working. Its hybrid optical/electronic viewfinder allows me to immerse myself far more fully in the act of photographing, and I find I’m simply more accurate with my compositions when shooting through a viewfinder. The tilting rear screen also makes low- or high-angle shots much easier without resorting to guesswork.

Shooting via an LCD screen feels more casual to me. That’s not a criticism — some people will actively prefer that approach. But if, like me, you value immersion and precision in how you frame your images, the X100VI’s viewfinder makes a meaningful difference. Others will feel the exact opposite, and that’s perfectly valid too.

Autofocus and Responsiveness

Neither the Ricoh GR IV nor the Fujifilm X100VI is known for lightning-fast autofocus, but both are more than capable of getting the shot in most everyday situations.

This is an area where the GR IV has improved significantly over the GR III. In daylight, autofocus is now genuinely usable as long as your subjects aren’t moving too quickly. I can, for example, get sharp photos of Sofia playing at the playground — just not when she’s racing around at full speed. The camera can keep up with casual movement, but not fast, unpredictable action.

The X100VI is a little better, but it’s not in a different league. It won’t suddenly let you track fast-moving subjects with confidence, and neither camera is designed for that kind of shooting. If your main priority is reliable subject tracking at speed, neither of these is the right tool.

Low-light autofocus is where the gap widens.

On a recent trip to Dumaguete, the GR IV struggled noticeably at night. In a poorly lit restaurant, it hunted back and forth repeatedly and often took multiple attempts to lock focus. In that scenario, I’d estimate my focus hit rate was around one in four — workable if you’re patient, but far from ideal.

The X100VI isn’t fast in low light either, but it does perform noticeably better. Focus acquisition is more reliable, and the f/2 lens helps here compared to the GR IV’s f/2.8, giving the camera a small but meaningful advantage when light levels drop.

In terms of overall responsiveness, the X100VI always felt quicker than the GR III, but the GR IV has clearly caught up. Menu navigation, changing settings, and general operation now feel much more modern. Both cameras feel responsive, efficient, and up to date in everyday use.

28mm vs 35mm Equivalent: Lens and Focal Length Philosophy

I want to start this section by saying something that often gets overlooked in comparisons like this: image quality really isn’t a deciding factor between these two cameras, at least in my opinion.

Both use very good APS-C sensors — the Ricoh GR IV with 26 megapixels and the Fujifilm X100VI with 40 megapixels. On paper, that gives the X100VI a slight advantage for cropping, which may matter to some people. In reality, the difference is far smaller than it sounds. I’ve printed images from both, and I’d wager that 90% of people wouldn’t be able to tell the difference based on image quality alone.

Where these cameras genuinely differ is focal length and field of view.

The Ricoh GR IV uses an 18mm lens (28mm full-frame equivalent), while the X100VI is built around a 23mm lens (35mm equivalent). That might not sound like much — after all, what’s a few millimetres between friends — but in real-world shooting, the difference is very noticeable.

The 28mm equivalent field of view lets a lot more into the frame, which means you need to be much more careful about what’s happening around the edges. It encourages you to move closer and immerse yourself in the scene, but it also demands greater awareness of perspective and distortion, particularly when people are involved. For street and travel photography, it’s incredibly popular for good reason — but unless you’re being deliberate, it’s not the most flattering focal length for people.

The X100VI’s 35mm equivalent, on the other hand, is just that bit narrower, and that makes it more flexible. It can still give a wide, expansive feel when needed, but it’s far easier to include people in your images without worrying as much about distortion or exaggerated verticals. It’s simply more forgiving.

Personally, I like both — but for different reasons.

I tend to enjoy 28mm for Alex Webb–style compositions, where you’re consciously organising multiple elements in the frame and creating depth. It asks more of you as a photographer, and nailing a composition takes work, but when it comes together the results can be exceptional. The 35mm equivalent of the X100VI, though, is easier to live with day to day and works well across a broader range of subjects and situations but if you’re not deliberate, images can stray into feeling a little safe and boring.

Ultimately, this is one of the most important differences between these two cameras, and it really does come down to personal preference and how you like to see the world.

Who Each Camera Is Really For

Ultimately, I think this matters far more than whether one camera is slightly better than the other at autofocus or low-light performance. In my view, these are the two best compact cameras available today — but they suit different people and different styles of photography.

The Ricoh GR IV is, for me, the perfect everyday carry camera. It’s especially well suited to photographers who already shoot with a full mirrorless system but don’t want to haul that kit around everywhere just in case they see something worth photographing. It’s so compact, yet still offers the things we actually care about — excellent image quality, full manual control, and a now-improved lens — that you can simply slip it into a pocket and take it everywhere.

The GR IV’s appeal lies in its minimalism. There’s no fuss, no excess, no attempt to be anything other than a tool that does its job quietly and efficiently. It prioritises function over form, and for many photographers, that’s exactly what they want from a second camera.

The Fujifilm X100VI, while capable of filling a similar role, is better suited to photographers who value the shooting experience as much as the utility of having a light, compact camera with them. The physical dials, the hybrid viewfinder, and the overall design create a very different relationship with the camera — one where form and function are balanced rather than purely utilitarian. Let’s not forget that it also offers a built in flash and a 4-stop ND filter compared with the GRIV’s 2 stop ND.

I wouldn’t slip the X100VI into my pocket and grab shots in quite the same carefree way I do with the Ricoh. But I can see the X100VI satisfying me as an only camera — and it has, in the past. The X100T was my sole camera for over a year, and I never felt limited by it.

The GR IV’s higher launch price compared to the GR III brings it closer to the X100VI financially, which makes the choice more nuanced than it once was. If I were advising a friend, my recommendation would be simple:

• As a second camera to a larger system — something genuinely compact for everyday carry — the Ricoh GR IV is hard to beat, provided you’re happy shooting without a viewfinder.
• As a single do-everything camera, one that delivers strong results while also making the act of photographing enjoyable and immersive, I’d recommend the Fujifilm X100VI.

Neither choice is wrong — but they’re right for different people.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is the Ricoh GR IV better than the Fujifilm X100VI?

Neither camera is objectively “better” — they’re designed for different purposes. The Ricoh GR IV is ideal as a genuinely pocketable everyday carry camera, while the Fujifilm X100VI is better suited as a primary camera with a viewfinder, physical dials, and greater overall versatility.

Can the Ricoh GR IV replace the Fujifilm X100VI?

For most photographers, no. The GR IV works extremely well as a second camera but lacks a viewfinder, tilting screen, built-in flash, and the immersive handling that makes the X100VI suitable as an only camera.

Which camera is better for travel photography?

If you want something you can carry everywhere without thinking, the Ricoh GR IV is hard to beat. If you want one camera that can comfortably handle street, people, landscapes, and low-light situations, the Fujifilm X100VI is the more versatile option.

Is 28mm or 35mm better for photographing people?

The 35mm equivalent lens of the X100VI is generally more forgiving for people photography, with less distortion and easier composition. The Ricoh’s 28mm equivalent works well for immersive street photography but requires greater care with framing.

Does the Fujifilm X100VI have better image quality than the Ricoh GR IV?

In real-world use, image quality is very similar. Both cameras use high-quality APS-C sensors, and most differences come down to focal length, handling, and shooting style rather than outright image quality.

I’ve continued shooting with the Ricoh GR IV since my review, and I’ve updated this post to reflect my long-term experience. My overall take remains largely unchanged: the GR IV is a worthwhile improvement over the GR III. Despite it being one of the best everyday carry cameras, I don’t use it that way. I have found that I use it purely for its minimalist design, when I want a camera but I really don’t want to feel like I’m carrying a camera. It’s my ‘just in case I see a shot camera’. Now that you can no longer find new GRIII’s and used prices have held up, anyone thinking of buying a Ricoh GR series camera should choose the GRIV.

The Ricoh GR IV is one of those cameras that’s frustrating to review — not because it’s bad, but because it’s both genuinely improved and still very obviously a GR III at its core. Ricoh has refined almost every area of performance: faster operation, cleaner image quality, slightly sharper corners, better battery life, and meaningful autofocus improvements in daylight. See how the GRIV compares to the Fuji X100VI. If you want to see which are the best compact cameras as we head in to 2026 then I wrote an article just for you.

But it also carries every familiar weakness forward: it still won’t track movement, it still struggles at night, it still isn’t weather-sealed, and the screen is still too dim under harsh sun. Six years after the GR III, I can’t help but feel the upgrades should have gone further.

Yet here’s the thing: despite all of that, the GR IV remains the best genuinely pocketable camera you can buy. Nothing else offers this blend of size, image quality, and simplicity. And because of that, I find it very hard to imagine not owning one. If you are looking for alternatives, then I wrote an article about the best compact cameras.

The Verdict: Is the Ricoh GR IV Worth It?

The Ricoh GR IV is a refined, faster, and cleaner version of the GR III—but it remains a specialist tool at heart. Here is the bottom line:

• The Improvements: Daylight autofocus is genuinely better with usable eye detection, image quality is cleaner with sharper corners, and battery life is finally capable of lasting a full day with just one spare. It now offers improved IBIS, dust sealing and a physical position for snap focus on the PASM dial.
• The Familiar Limits: It still lacks weather sealing and a bright-sun-friendly screen. Indoor autofocus and white balance remain inconsistent, and it still struggles to track moving subjects. It does not open up new types of photography—it just makes the existing experience more reliable.
• Buying Advice: If you don’t own a GR, get the GR IV; it is the best pocketable camera on the market today. If you already own a GR III, only upgrade if you are a heavy user. The improvements are welcome, but they are incremental rather than game-changing.

Final Thought: The Ricoh GR IV remains an unmatched second camera and a capable, if niche, primary camera for those who prioritize ultimate portability and image quality above all else. I own it and really enjoy using it when I want a camera that is there for photos but photography is not the reason for the outing. These days, in all honesty, I don’t use it as much as my other cameras because I prefer shooting through a viewfinder.

This article contains affiliate links. If you purchase through these links, I may earn a small commission at no extra cost to you. Thank you for supporting the site.

First Impressions — Familiar, But Better

Although the GR IV looks almost identical to the GR III, it feels like a more modern camera. It starts up faster, menus respond more quickly, and the redesigned rear buttons make the camera nicer to operate one-handed.

Image quality is also cleaner. Files look slightly more polished straight out of camera, with a touch more microcontrast and noticeably sharper corners. It’s not a night-and-day leap, but it’s an upgrade you feel as soon as you start shooting.

Battery life is also significantly improved. I managed full days of shooting by topping up with a power bank, and this is the first GR where I’d comfortably head out with just one spare battery.

All these small updates add up. The GR IV simply feels more responsive and more reliable — at least in the right conditions.

Autofocus: A True Daylight Improvement (But Still Not a Fast Camera)

The biggest real-world difference between the GR III and GR IV is autofocus.

In daylight, it’s meaningfully better.

On a playground in Dumaguete, I took my daughter Sofia out and was pleasantly surprised. With a little intention and timing, the GR IV could reliably pick up her face when she paused or wasn’t moving quickly. Eye detection is now usable. Not great, not perfect — but genuinely usable in bright light.

The caveat is simple:

It still won’t track motion.

Kids running? Forget it. Subjects moving unpredictably? No chance. The AF system is faster and more confident than the GR III, but it cannot handle action.

Snap to Focus

The GRIV also adds a snap to focus priority mode on the PASM dial which allows you to quickly switch to that mode when you need to fire off shots quickly on the street and can’t rely on the autofocus. It’s just about the only camera that I can think of that offers this and for genuine, from the hip street shooters, it’s an incredibly useful option. Simply set your focus distance, aperture and fire off shots without waiting fo the AF system to lock focus. The depth of field will take care of the rest and hopefully result in getting shots that even the fastest AF systems would miss.

At night, the reality returns quickly.

In a dim Mexican restaurant the GR IV struggled badly. The camera hunted, failed to lock onto my family consistently, and the auto white balance jumped around unpredictably. If you shoot RAW it’s manageable, but JPEG shooters will want to set white balance manually in mixed light.

The contrast with the Nikon Zf + 40mm f/2 I had used the night before was eye-opening — that setup nailed everything instantly. The GR IV simply isn’t built for that.

Image Quality — Cleaner, Sharper, More Refined

Ricoh hasn’t reinvented the sensor, but files from the GR IV look slightly more modern and polished than those from the GR III:

• Cleaner shadows
• Better noise handling
• Sharper corners
• More consistent rendering at wide apertures

It’s subtle, but welcome — and enough that if the GR III and GR IV were the same price, I’d take the GR IV without hesitation.

Ergonomics, Battery Life & Handling

• Rear buttons: meaningfully better — far easier to use by feel.
• Start-up time: noticeably quicker.
• Battery: a single battery now lasts most of a day.
• Screen: still too dim for bright Philippine sunlight.
• Weather sealing: still missing, although Ricoh claims improved dust sealing. For an everyday carry camera weather sealing should be standard, esepcially as owners cant clean the sensor due to its fixed lens design.
• Included storage: The Ricoh GRIV includes 53gb of internal storage, something I wish all manaufacturers would do as it’s a life saver if you forget your memory card.

The GR IV is a more pleasant camera to live with… just not the leap forward many of us hoped for.

Where the GR IV Fits — A Second Camera That Can’t Be Replaced

This camera fills exactly the same role for me as the GR III did.

It’s not for action, kids running around, fast movement, or night photography.
It’s not for complex tracking or decisive-moment unpredictability.
It’s not for low-light restaurant moments with family.

But that’s not the point of the GR series.

The GR IV is a daylight, travel, street, always-with-you camera. It’s the one you slip into your pocket when everything else feels too much. It’s the camera that lets you enjoy photography again without thinking about gear. It’s the only genuinely pocketable APS-C camera with full manual control and image quality you’d actually want to print.

And because of that, even with its flaws, it’s a camera I enjoy taking out.

See the latest price for the Ricoh GRIV here.

GR III vs GR IV — Should You Upgrade?

If you own neither:

Buy the GR IV.
It feels faster, cleaner, and simply more modern. The battery life alone is worth the difference.

If you own the GR III and use it daily:

A soft yes.
You’ll appreciate the speed, the daylight AF improvements, the cleaner files, and the better battery.

If you own the GR III but don’t use it constantly:

Save your money.
The GR IV doesn’t enable new types of photography. It just does what the GR III did — but better.

I’ve been shooting with the Ricoh GRIV for around a year now. I bought it when I lived in the Philippines but have continued shooting with it since I moved to the Scottish Highlands. I recently wrote an article on who I think should buy the GRIV.

If you hoped for a huge leap:

You may be underwhelmed.
Six years on, the GR IV is still limited in the same situations the GR III was. For a more detailed comparison, I put the Ricoh GRIII against the GRIV.

Strengths

• Best-in-class portability and image quality
• Faster AF in daylight with usable eye detection
• Clean, refined image quality
• Sharper corners than the GR III
• Much better battery life
• Improved rear buttons
• Faster, more responsive operation
• Still the ultimate “always with you” camera

Weaknesses

• No weather sealing
• Screen too dim in bright sun
• AF still weak in low light
• No action-tracking ability
• Auto white balance unreliable indoors
• Price increase not reflected in the scale of upgrades

Who’s It For?

The Ricoh GR IV is for photographers who value presence over perfection — people who want a camera that asks nothing of them but to notice the world more.

It’s for travellers, walkers, street photographers, parents who want something light while chasing kids (but not photographing them running), and creatives who want a camera that fits in the pocket of shorts without bulging.

It’s not a replacement for a modern mirrorless system.
It’s a companion. A visual notebook. A camera that’s always there when your “real” camera isn’t.

Buy it for what it is, not what you wish it could be.

Who Should Not Buy the Ricoh GR IV?

The Ricoh GR IV is easy to romanticize on social media, but in reality, it is a highly specialized tool. It is not a “do-it-all” camera.

You should probably skip the GR IV if:

• You photograph children or pets: It struggles to track moving subjects effectively.
• You shoot primarily indoors or at night: Autofocus and white balance can be inconsistent in low-light, high-contrast environments.
• You want a versatile “all-in-one”: It lacks weather sealing and features a fixed lens; it does not offer the flexibility of a modern mirrorless system.
• You expect cutting-edge AF: Its autofocus, while improved, is not on par with the latest high-end mirrorless cameras.
• You need it to be your only camera: Unless you are fully committed to its constraints, it is best used as a secondary or niche companion.

Ultimately, the GR IV works best when you accept it for exactly what it is: a portable, simple, and high-quality camera that prioritizes size over versatility.

Final Verdict

The Ricoh GR IV is a clear improvement over the GR III: faster, cleaner, more polished, and undeniably nicer to use. If the two cameras sit at similar prices, take the GR IV every time.

But the truth is simple:

This should have been a bigger upgrade.

The autofocus improvements are welcome but it’s still not quick to focus compared with other cameras. The lack of weather sealing and the dim screen feel a little outdated. And the price jump is hard to justify for existing GR III owners. It’s also getting very close in price to the Fuji X100VI.

Yet despite that, the GR IV is still one of my favourite cameras to carry. It’s imperfect, but unique — and still the only truly pocketable camera that delivers such good image quality.

If you understand its purpose and accept its limitations, the GR IV is an exceptional tool. Just don’t expect it to be something it was never designed to be.

Read More

If you’re looking for more context on the Ricoh GR series, you might find these articles helpful:

• Ricoh GR III vs GR IV — Full Comparison
• Ricoh GR III Review
• Fujifilm X100VI vs Ricoh GR III

Frequently Asked Questions — Ricoh GR IV

Last updated: May 20th 2026
I’ve continued to carry the GR IV with me since moving to Scotland when I want a high-quality camera but don’t want to haul larger gear around.

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.

I’ve brought the new Ricoh GRIV with me on my latest trip, alongside its predecessor and the Fuji X100VI, as I want to see how they compare in real life and whether the GRIV is worth upgrading to fro Ricoh GR owners. Below are my notes from the first quick session of shooting.

Autofocus

The AF speed is the first thing I noticed — it’s a big step up from the GR III. It feels more assured and snappier in a way you immediately feel.

Face AF though? Still not good enough to rely on most of the time. It’s usable, but you can’t trust it in the same way you can trust Fuji or Nikon.

Battery Life

Battery life seems improved.

Which is fortunate, because when I bought mine there weren’t any spare batteries in stock anywhere and I’m running on the single original for now. With the GR III the battery always felt like a limiting factor — I’ll continue to test if it still is with the GRIV.

Controls / Handling

There’s a slight change in the rear controls and I’m still adjusting. Not worse — just different. If you’re coming from a GR III your muscle memory will catch you out for the first few days.

Image Quality

I need to shoot more — especially in low light — but on first glance, image quality is very, very similar to the GR III.

And that’s not a criticism. The GR III files already had the exact character that made the GR line so loved. But if anyone is expecting the GR IV to suddenly leap to a different look… it doesn’t feel like that.

IBIS

IBIS is improved on paper (3-axis to 5-axis), but I haven’t had a chance to test specifically for that yet. That’s something I’ll be pushing more when I head out in Dumaguete for some night / street tests.

Startup Time

Quoted as being fractionally quicker — in practice it basically feels the same as the GR III. If there’s a difference, it’s marginal.

Early Summary

Better AF, slightly different controls, same GR look.

That’s where I’m at after a handful of frames.

Next step is to simply shoot a lot more with it.

My full Ricoh GRIV review.

Ricoh GRIV vs GRIII

You can see the latest pricing for the Ricoh GRIV here.

Field-tested in the Philippines across travel, street, family days, harsh sun and low light. This review is from real use — not spec sheets.

Quick Specs

Affiliate note: Some links are affiliate links. I may earn a small commission at no extra cost to you. It helps keep this site free.

Why the GR III Still Hits even in 2026

It disappears in your pocket — and that changes your photography. At 257g, the GR III is I a camera I would grab without thinking. It looks like an old tourist compact, which is its superpower: people ignore you. That invisibility allows you to capture candid moments and lets you work close at 28mm without changing behaviour. The Ricoh GR series are truly pocketable, unlike the Fuji X100VI and that changes how you carry and use the camera. I tested the Ricoh GRIII vs the GRIV, and found that the GRIV, while better, isn’t a huge upgrade.

If you want more flexibility than a compact camera, here’s my guide to the best interchangeable-lens travel cameras

Handling & Controls

PASM done right: I run front dial = aperture, rear = shutter, press-for-ISO, and use the rear dial for exposure comp in A mode. You also get two well-placed Fn buttons, plus C1–C3 on the mode dial that can point to any of six stored presets. The UI feels designed by photographers — everything is where you expect.

Autofocus: Not great but has two Genius Workarounds

AF is fine for static scenes but can lag with movement/low light compared to modern systems. I mostly select a point manually — face detect is there but really isn’t up to much.. The solution for fast shooting is in two Ricoh-isms:

• Snap Focus: instantly fires at a preset distance (0.3m → ∞) when you fully press the shutter. Add aperture for depth-of-field coverage and you’re faster than AF.
• Infinity Focus: hard-locks to infinity with a DOF scale — handy for landscapes/night city scenes.

Metering That Protects Highlights

Highlight-Weighted Metering is brilliant: it protects bright areas so you don’t blowout skies or reflective surfaces. More brands should copy this (Nikon already does).

Image Quality

APS-C 24MP files are clean, detailed and print beautifully at A3+ and up to 30×20″ on my Canon 44″ printer. Ricoh colour leans a touch green, but it’s easy to remove that with a little white balance tweak. The lens is sharp wide open in the centre, it softens in the corners wide open; stop down a little and it bites. Low light is usable to ISO 6400, but the grain looks more digital than Fuji’s latest sensor. Still: entirely workable and I’m happy with people shots when exposed right at ISO 3200, 6400 at a push as long as I don’t pixel peep.

JPEG Colour & Recipes

Ricoh’s Positive Film is a favourite for punchy travel colour. The GR ecosystem has great community recipes (I use a Leica-ish one for bright sun, although I’ve customised it by removing a littel green). If you enjoy SOOC JPEGs, the GR delivers — as flexible as Fuji in real use.

IBIS, Battery & Screen

• IBIS: 3-axis stabilisation helps for static subjects but it’s not competitive with other brands at this point in time.
• Battery: plan for 2 hours of active shooting. I carry two spares or a USB power bank.
• Screen: sharp and responsive but fixed and not super bright in tropical noon sun. A simple flip screen would be perfection here.

Reliability & Weather

No weather sealing. Keep it in a pocket or small pouch if you’re near spray/sand. I’ve been fine so far, but dust-on-sensor stories exist — part of the tradeoff for the size and retractable optics.

Best GR III Setup (Fast Start)

• C1: Street quick – A mode, Snap 1.5m, f/8, Auto ISO (100–3200), Highlight-Weighted, +0 to +⅓ EC.
• C2: Low light people – A mode, AF-S centre point, f/2.8–4, Auto ISO (100–6400), Multi metering.
• C3: Travel colour – A mode, AF-S, f/5.6, Positive Film recipe, Auto ISO (100–3200), Highlight-Weighted.

Tip: Learn to judge 1m / 1.5m / 2m by eye and you’ll barely miss a shot with Snap Focus. It’s the GR way.

Who It’s For

• Everyday carry shooters who want a real camera that lives in a pocket.
• Street & travel photographers who favour 28mm’s immersive perspective and getting close.
• Parents who want honest family moments without the intimidation of a big camera.

Reasons to Buy or Skip in 2026

Buy it if you want a genuinely pocketable camera with very good image quality. Just don’t expect it to match recent cameras in terms of autofocus speed. It’s still a quick camera to operate with a fast start up time and if you don’t rely on the autofocus, it enables quick reactive shots for street photography combined with Snap to Focus.

Don’t buy it if you rely on usable autofocus for people shots, candid moments or night time photography.

Alternatives

• Ricoh GR IIIx — Same body with a 40mm-equivalent lens. Better for people/portraits; my daughter uses one.
• Fujifilm X100VI — Costs more and isn’t pocketable but delivers IBIS, 40MP, a viewfinder, better autofocus and richer ergonomics. See my X100VI vs GR III comparison.
• Ricoh GR IV — Newer, pricier but AF, battery life and general speed in use are improved.

Verdict

The GR III isn’t about specs — it’s about showing up. If it lives in your pocket, more days become photo days. Seven years on, it still delivers the same unique combination of an APS-C sized sensor and genuine pocketability. That’s why it is currently commanding a premium on the used market in 2026. The question becomes: Will you shoot enough to justify paying more for the newer GR IV?

For a run down of the best compact cameras available in 2026 read this article next.

FAQ

Is the GR III weather-sealed?
No. Treat it like a premium compact: pocket/pouch it near sand or spray.

How’s startup time?
Fast. Despite the retractable lens, it’s effectively as quick to shoot as larger compacts in practice.

Best battery strategy?
Carry two DB-110 spares or a small USB-C power bank. Expect 2–3 hours of active use per battery.

Can I use film recipes?
Yes — the GR has a healthy recipes community. I use Positive Film variants and a Leica-ish sun recipe.

GR III vs GR IIIx?
Same body; pick GR III for immersive 28mm scenes and travel context. Pick GR IIIx (40mm) if you lean toward people/portraits.