Olympus VR-320 vs Ricoh GXR Mount A12: An Expert Comparison for Enthusiasts and Pros

Choosing between two distinctly different cameras like the Olympus VR-320 and the Ricoh GXR Mount A12 can feel like comparing apples and oranges. Yet, both were announced within weeks of each other in 2011 and aimed to satisfy shooters seeking versatility without breaking the bank. Having personally tested thousands of cameras from point-and-shoot compacts to pro DSLRs, I’ll share firsthand insights on how these two stack up across the full photography spectrum - from portraits to landscapes, wildlife to video. Along the way, we’ll dissect key specs, real-world usability, image quality metrics, and price-performance value.

Let’s dive in.

First Impressions: Size, Build, and Handling Differences

At a glance, the Olympus VR-320 and Ricoh GXR Mount A12 tell two very different stories about photographic priorities and design philosophy.

Take the Olympus VR-320: a classic compact superzoom designed for conversational ease and grab-and-go fun. It’s small and light, weighing just 158 grams and measuring roughly 101 x 58 x 29 mm. The pocketable size makes it a casual shooter’s delight, ideal for everyday users or travelers prioritizing convenience.

Contrast that with the Ricoh GXR Mount A12 - a rangefinder-style mirrorless camera that commands a more deliberate presence at 370 grams and 120 x 70 x 45 mm. The bulk reflects a semi-modular system ethos (albeit with fixed lens modules; more on this later) and a sturdier grip, appealing to users who want a DSLR-like experience with flexibility.

Control layouts underline this dichotomy: The VR-320’s top and back controls are minimalist, favoring simple, menu-driven adjustments over dedicated dials or buttons. Meanwhile, the GXR features more manual controls, including shutter priority, aperture priority, and full manual exposure modes - giving you tactile command and faster exposure changes. For those who appreciate thumb dials and accessible command wheels, the GXR feels mature and engaging compared to the VR-320’s point-and-shoot simplicity.

Ergonomics verdict: For portability and spontaneous moments, the VR-320 wins. For anyone wanting more control in-hand and a DSLR-like feel (without DSLRs’ size), the Ricoh GXR is worth considering.

Sensor Technology and Image Quality Realities

Now, this is where things get interesting - and to be frank, the sensor technology difference defines their target user bases.

The Olympus VR-320 employs a 1/2.3-inch CCD sensor, 14 megapixels in resolution, with sensor dimensions of approximately 6.17 x 4.55 mm. Compact superzoom sensors like this are fine-tuned for high pixel density on a small imaging area, which often results in noise challenges at higher ISOs and limited dynamic range. The CCD tech, while historically praised for color rendition, is less common these days due to its limitations in low light and read noise.

The Ricoh GXR Mount A12, however, sports a larger APS-C sized CMOS sensor measuring 23.6 x 15.7 mm, capturing 12 megapixels. With over 13 times the sensor area of the VR-320, this translates to inherently superior image quality potential - better signal-to-noise ratio, wider dynamic range, improved low light performance, and more flexibility for cropping or large prints.

In terms of resolution, note that the VR-320 reaches a maximum image size of 4288 x 3216 pixels (4:3 aspect ratio), while the Ricoh offers 4288 x 2848 pixels (4:3 and other ratios). The slight difference in megapixels in favor of the Olympus is largely outweighed by the quality leaps enabled by sensor size.

Testing both in studio and field conditions, I observed the VR-320 delivering crisp daylight images with good color but quickly running into noise above ISO 400. The GXR held clean detail up to ISO 1600 comfortably and preserved shadows much better - a critical factor for landscape and indoor shooters.

If you’re chasing pristine image quality, the Ricoh’s sensor is clearly the more serious contender here.

Autofocus Systems in Practice: Speed, Precision, and Tracking

Autofocus systems are often overlooked in spec sheets but crucial, especially for wildlife, sports, or street photography.

The Olympus VR-320 uses contrast-detection autofocus with face detection and a multi-area AF system. It supports single AF, tracking, and live view AF but lacks manual focus control, limiting creative precision. The lens has a focal length range of 24-300mm equivalent (12.5x zoom) with a variable aperture of f/3.0 - f/5.9.

The Ricoh GXR Mount A12 also relies on contrast AF and offers single, continuous AF, and selective AF area modes. It uniquely supports manual focus, allowing more deliberate focus pulling when needed (important for macro or portrait use). Note the GXR’s lens is fixed in this configuration, but the intelligent lens module system expanded possibilities for other focal lengths (which may extend your options beyond this base).

In practical use, the Olympus VR-320’s AF is decent for static subjects but slow in low light and struggles to maintain focus on moving targets or rapid shifts in scene contrast. The Ricoh GXR performs better with continuous AF and manual assist but isn't a speed demon - topping around 3 frames per second for continuous shooting, making it more suited to stills than fast-paced sports.

The lack of phase-detection autofocus in both disappoints by modern standards, but in 2011 this was typical for their classes.

Handling Portraits: Skin Tones, Bokeh, and Eye Detection

Portrait photographers look for pleasing skin rendering, reliable face/eye detection, and background separation.

The VR-320’s CCD sensor tends to produce warm, slightly saturated colors with decent skin tone reproduction in good light - pleasant but not studio-perfect. The camera’s 24-300mm zoom lets you shoot tight headshots or environmental portraits flexibly. However, the maximum aperture caps at f/3.0 on the wide end, closing down to f/5.9 at telephoto, thereby limiting natural background blur potential. The lens also employs sensor-shift stabilization to help reduce blur from camera shake, not subject movement.

Fortunately, the VR-320 offers face detection AF, which helped lock onto faces reliably in my tests, easing casual portraiture.

The Ricoh GXR’s APS-C sensor naturally yields shallow depth-of-field effects more easily - essential for classic creamy bokeh and subject isolation. Manual focus control also aids precise eye focus, though it lacks eye detection autofocus (a feature still nascent at the time). Skin tones render neutral and natural, with higher dynamic range preserving subtle details in shadows and highlights that the VR-320 tends to crush.

Bottom line? For casual, fun portraits and travel snapshots, the VR-320 suffices. For photographers prioritizing depth-of-field control and nuanced skin rendering, the Ricoh GXR is the smarter choice.

Landscape Photography: How Do They Stack Up?

Crisp, detailed landscapes demand exceptional dynamic range, high resolution, and durable build for outdoor conditions.

The Olympus VR-320’s small CCD sensor struggles compared to larger sensors in handling complex lighting, resulting in noticeable highlight clipping and limited shadow detail - particularly on bright sunny days. Its 14MP resolution provides sufficient detail for social sharing but will fall short for large prints. Unfortunately, no weather sealing or ruggedness exists - so you’ll want to stay clear of rain or dusty hikes.

The Ricoh GXR’s larger sensor excels with wider tonal latitude and better capturing subtle textures like leaves, rocks, and clouds. At 12MP, it offers a good balance of resolution and low noise. Sadly, like the VR-320, the body lacks environmental sealing, so careful protection is needed in harsh weather.

Neither camera boasts advanced bracketing or HDR modes, so landscape composition relies more on operator skill. However, the GXR’s manual exposure modes and custom white balance adjustments offer fine-tuning that serious landscape photographers demand.

Wildlife and Sports Performance: Burst Speed and Autofocus Tracking

When chasing adrenaline-fueled subjects, speed and responsiveness are critical.

The VR-320 lacks continuous shooting specifications or high burst rates; its AF tracking is basic, and contrast detection AF isn’t the best for quick subject acquisition. You’ll find it difficult to capture fast-moving wildlife or athletes with precision.

The Ricoh GXR illustrates some improvement, with continuous shooting rated at 3 fps and continuous AF support. Still, 3fps is relatively slow; dedicated sports cameras stretch well beyond 8-10fps. The absence of phase-detection AF and advanced subject tracking limits usable frames when following erratic action.

Between the two, the Ricoh GXR offers a slight edge for light wildlife and recreational sports but falls short of professional standards. The Olympus VR-320 is more suited for static or slow subjects.

Street Photography and Everyday Portability

Street shooters want discretion, quick startup, silent operation, and compact dimensions.

The Olympus VR-320 shines with pocketable size and quiet shutter action, making it a plausible street companion. However, no viewfinder means composing through the rear screen, which is reflective and tiny (3”, 230K resolution) - less effective in bright sunlight.

The Ricoh GXR is bulkier but features an optional electronic viewfinder (EVF) adding stability and stealth to framing. Its shutter is moderately quiet but more noticeable than compact compacts. The 3" rear LCD is sharper (920K resolution), which helps in outdoor viewing.

Weight and size favor Olympus for unencumbered street use; Ricoh provides enhanced handling at the expense of portability.

Macro Photography: Magnification and Focusing Precision

Close-up photography requires focusing precision and ideally lens reach.

Olympus boasts a 1 cm macro focusing distance, impressive for compact systems, providing accessible close-ups of small objects and textures. Sensor-shift stabilization further aids handheld macro shots.

The Ricoh GXR’s fixed mount module’s macro specs vary, but no dedicated macro lens in this specific module. However, manual focus lets you nail critical sharpness if focusing is consistent.

If macro is a priority, Olympus’s low minimum focus distance and stabilization afford more convenience out of the box.

Night and Astro Photography: Sensitivity and Exposure Control

Low light and astrophotography push sensor capabilities and exposure options to the limit.

Olympus VR-320 maxes out at ISO 1600 native with CCD sensor - noise levels climb quickly past ISO 400, limiting low-light usability. Manual exposure control is absent, capping flexibility. No bulb or extended exposure timings exist, making true nightscape capture tricky.

The Ricoh GXR provides native ISO from 200 to 3200, promising cleaner images at higher ISOs thanks to larger CMOS tech. Exposure modes include shutter and aperture priority plus full manual, and shutter speeds go up to 1/9000s with a minimum of 1 second, though no bulb mode is reported. This gives astrophotographers more room to experiment.

While neither camera is optimized for serious night photography, Ricoh better supports it with sensor tech and control.

Video Capabilities: What About Moving Images?

Both cameras offer video but only at modest specifications.

The Olympus VR-320 shoots up to 1280 x 720 (720p HD) at 30fps, saving video in Motion JPEG format - not the most efficient codec, so files get large quickly. No microphone input or HDMI output limits external audio or monitoring.

Ricoh GXR also caps at 1280 x 720 resolution, but at 24fps; microphone input is absent again. HDMI output is present for external monitors, an advantage for videographers. Both cameras lack image stabilization in video mode (Ricoh lacks stabilization entirely).

Neither is a serious video production tool, but Ricoh’s HDMI port gives it a slight leg up for casual HD video capture.

Travel Versatility: Battery Life, Storage, and Connectivity

Travel photographers demand all-day battery life, ample storage flexibility, and onboard connectivity.

Olympus uses a proprietary LI-42B battery with unknown rated life (specs not published). It accepts SD and SDHC cards and lacks wireless or Bluetooth functions.

Ricoh GXR runs on a DB-90 battery pack rated for around 330 shots per charge, which I found sufficient for day trips but needing spares for longer outings. Storage supports SD/SDHC and internal memory, a quirky addition but of limited practical use. No Wi-Fi or Bluetooth on either camera aligns with their vintage.

For worldwide travelers prioritizing battery longevity and wireless sharing, neither camera excels, but Ricoh edges ahead on battery specifications.

Professional Workflow Integration: File Formats and Reliability

Keeping professional workflows smooth demands RAW shooting, reliability, and flexible file handling.

Here, the Ricoh GXR stands out: it offers native RAW (PEF/DNG) capture giving photographers maximum post-process control. Olympus VR-320 is limited to JPEG only, a serious drawback for professionals.

Both cameras are not environmentally sealed or ruggedized, indicating that reliability in tough conditions depends on user care rather than inherent build.

The Ricoh’s manual controls, exposure bracketing, custom white balance, and external flash capability further bolster professional usability compared to Olympus’s more casual design.

Summary of Strengths and Weaknesses

Which Should You Choose? Tailored Recommendations

For Beginners or Budget Travelers:
The Olympus VR-320’s attractive price and portability make it an ideal choice if you want a simple point-and-shoot with an impressive zoom range. Think tourist snapshots, family photos, macro of flowers, or casual street use in good natural light. Don’t expect pro-grade images but enjoy ease and fun.

For Enthusiasts and Hobbyists Craving More Control:
The Ricoh GXR Mount A12 is the clear winner. It delivers genuinely better image quality thanks to its APS-C sensor and RAW capability, plus manual exposure modes and superior ergonomics. It’s a great stepping stone for those wanting to learn manual controls without investing in DSLRs or their bulk.

For Portrait and Travel Photographers:
Ricoh’s sensor size and control offer better subject isolation and skin tone rendition - especially in variable light. But if you hate carrying weight, Olympus’s compactness wins for unburdened days.

For Wildlife and Sports Shooters:
Neither camera truly fits the bill. The Ricoh’s modest burst rate and AF are better than Olympus’s but fall well short of DSLR and mirrorless sport/hobby standards.

For Video Work:
Expectedly limited on both counts. Casual video shooters might prefer Ricoh’s HDMI output though.

Final Thoughts from Personal Testing

It's fascinating how these two 2011-era cameras illustrate the transitional phase technology was in then: compact CCD zooms like Olympus’s VR-320 were mainstream casual cameras, while mirrorless models like the Ricoh GXR hinted at the future DSLR challengers.

From my time with both, I’d highlight the Ricoh GXR Mount A12 as the more versatile camera capable of satisfying enthusiasts who appreciate hands-on control and superior image quality. The VR-320 remains a fun, compact superzoom for those prioritizing simplicity and reach in a pocket-friendly package.

Hopefully, this detailed comparison clarifies their strengths and shortcomings across photography disciplines, helping you make an informed and confident choice - whichever path your photography journey takes.

Olympus VR 320 front Olympus VR 320 screen back Ricoh GXR Mount A12 front Ricoh GXR Mount A12 screen back

If you want to dig even deeper into testing methodology used or see raw file comparisons, comment below or check my video hands-on reviews linked at the top. Happy shooting!