Compact Warriors: Comparing the Ricoh GR III and Samsung SL620 in the Real World

Choosing the right camera often comes down to balancing your shooting style, budget, and what features really matter. Today, I’m putting two seemingly different compacts head-to-head: the Ricoh GR III (a large sensor, enthusiast-focused pocket camera) versus the Samsung SL620 (an ultracompact zoom model from a decade earlier). Despite their categorically different lineages, these cameras can both serve as trusty sidekicks, but how do they stack up across real-world photography demands?

Having personally tested thousands of cameras over the last 15 years, I’ll walk you through every angle - from sensor technology to handling, autofocus savvy to video chops - so you get a hands-on feel for where each one shines and where compromise creeps in. Whether you’re hunting a stylish carry-anywhere or a budget zoomer, consider this your comprehensive field guide.

Size and Ergonomics: Hold Me Tight or Slip Me Fast?

The Ricoh GR III and Samsung SL620 both boast compactness, but their design philosophies couldn’t be more different. I’ve often found that size and control layout profoundly impact shooting comfort during extended sessions, so I tested them side-by-side for real-world handling.

The GR III is chunkier but delightfully confident in hand, featuring a sturdy magnesium alloy body with textured grip areas that invite your fingers to settle in like clubs for thumbs. At 257 grams and dimensions of 109x62x33mm, it's compact but built for serious use. Its fixed 28mm-equivalent f/2.8 lens strikes a nice balance between portability and image quality without the compromises of zoom glass.

Contrast that with the Samsung SL620, which is a fraction of the size and noticeably lighter at 168 grams and about 92x61x23mm. It’s closer to a point-and-shoot, pocket-friendly, and discrete. But the tradeoff is the slippery plastic shell and minimal physical controls, which can frustrate users who crave tactile adjustment wheels or buttons.

In everyday shooting, the GR III feels like a camera you want to pick up and shoot - its button clusters and thumb dial reside where your hands naturally rest. The SL620 demands more screen tapping and menu navigation, slowing down rapid-fire changes. It’s a cheapskate’s pocket companion for casual snapshots, whereas the Ricoh plays more like the serious photographer’s stealth weapon.

Sensor Technologies and Image Quality: Bigger is Better, But By How Much?

Anyone familiar with imaging tech knows the sensor size is an elephant in the room - larger sensors generally deliver cleaner images, better dynamic range, and flexibility at high ISO settings. But how much difference does sensor size made nearly a decade and a half apart really make?

The GR III boasts a 24MP APS-C sized CMOS sensor, measuring a substantial 23.5x15.6mm with no anti-aliasing filter - a setup usually reserved for enthusiast and professional cameras. This combination allows for richly detailed stills up to 6000x4000 pixels, remarkable dynamic range, and performance across a wide native ISO spectrum (100-102400), though to be truthful, usable noise control starts to drop past ISO 6400.

The SL620 houses a 12MP 1/2.3” CCD sensor, which is tiny at 6.08x4.56 mm. This smaller sensor restricts resolution to 4000x3000 pixels and inherently suffers in low light, exhibiting noise and limited dynamic range beyond ISO 400-800 thresholds. While CCD can offer pleasant color rendering in some scenarios, it generally can’t keep up with modern CMOS when it comes to speed and noise performance.

In practice, the GR III significantly outperforms the SL620 in image quality across the board. Whether shooting landscapes with high contrast or portraits needing delicate skin tone rendition, the APS-C sensor preserves vibrant details with minimal grain. The SL620’s processing results in mushy fine details and muddy shadows under challenging lighting.

Navigating Controls: Are You Driving a Sports Car or a Kid’s Toy?

Delving under the hood, a camera’s usability comes alive with its interface and handling controls, especially if you’re the type who appreciates direct, physical access to aperture, shutter speed, ISO, and exposure compensation.

The GR III features an intelligently ergonomic top plate - clusters of dials and buttons are crisp, responsive, and logically placed without clutter. I particularly like the dedicated exposure compensation dial and the thumb wheel, which make tweaking settings intuitive during street or landscape shooting. The rear 3-inch touchscreen with 1037k-dot resolution supports responsive touch interaction - although a bit small by today’s standards.

The SL620, meanwhile, is a minimalist affair. Its controls are minimal and predominantly menu-driven with a single control dial and a few multifunction buttons scattered around. The 2.7-inch LCD’s low 230k-dot resolution means image review and menu navigation feel archaic and imprecise. For users who want quick, manual exposure tweaks on the fly, the SL620 will frustrate rather than facilitate.

Overall, the GR III’s control scheme feels like an extension of your photographic intent. The SL620’s interface leans towards casual users or beginners who want an out-of-the-box automated experience.

Autofocus and Shooting Performance: Fast and Accurate Wins the Race

Speed and focus precision are critical, especially when shooting moving subjects - sports, wildlife, or capturing fleeting street moments. Let’s see how these two stack up with their AF systems and burst capabilities.

The GR III combines hybrid autofocus - phase detection assisting contrast detection - to lock focus quickly and accurately, even in low-light scenes. It supports single AF, continuous AF, tracking, face detection, and touch AF for refined subject acquisition. While continuous burst shooting isn’t blazing (around 4 fps), it’s adequate for standard street or everyday shooting.

Conversely, the SL620 relies entirely on contrast-detection AF with no phase-detection, which is inherently slower and less reliable in challenging lighting or with moving subjects. Continuous AF and tracking features are nonexistent, and burst shooting isn’t available.

For wildlife and sports needs, the GR III margins way ahead in usability and successful hit rates. The SL620’s sluggish AF means you’ll need patience and often end up with missed moments unless subjects are stationary and lighting is good.

Lens Quality and Versatility: Prime Purpose vs Zoom Convenience

Lens quality and focal length flexibility affect the shooting style drastically - in essence, do you want a fixed prime with sharpness or a zoom to cover multiple scenarios?

The Ricoh GR III offers a fixed 28mm equivalent prime lens at f/2.8 - wide enough for environmental portraits, streetscapes, and landscapes. It’s sharp edge-to-edge with minimal distortion or chromatic aberration, perfect for high-res APS-C capture. Macro focusing down to 6cm enables close-up creativity but no optical zoom forces you to move your feet.

The Samsung SL620 sports a 35-175mm (5x zoom), which is handy for casual travel and family snaps, letting you quickly zoom between wide to telephoto perspectives. While not as sharp as prime lenses (common for compact zooms), it’s versatile for that era's budget-oriented users. Macro focus starts at 5cm but image detail is limited by the sensor.

If you prioritize ultimate image quality and shooting speed over focal length flexibility, the GR III’s prime lens is your friend. If you prefer zoom convenience for snapshots and casual travel, the SL620 covers more angles but delivers lower image fidelity.

Display and Viewfinder Experience: Preview and Playback Matter

Viewing your shots properly in varying light conditions helps confirm focus and exposure, and influences satisfaction after the shutter clicks.

The GR III’s 3-inch fixed touchscreen offers a 1037k-dot resolution - bright, sharp, and responsive. It supports touch focus, taps to capture, and quick menu diving. However, there is no built-in viewfinder; an optional external optical viewfinder is available but adds bulk and cost.

The SL620 has a smaller 2.7-inch display with a meager 230k-dot resolution. The lack of touch capability and relatively dim screen makes framing and reviewing images in bright sun frustrating. It has no viewfinder options, so composing under direct light is a chore.

For photographers serious about accuracy in composition and quick operational feedback, the GR III's screen really elevates shooting comfort despite lacking a built-in EVF. The SL620’s screen is a limiting factor in vibrancy and ease of use.

Image Stabilization and Low Light Performance: Keeping It Sharp and Clear

Whether handheld or dusk-lit, optical and sensor-based stabilization can mean the difference between a usable photo and a blurry disappointment.

The GR III integrates sensor-shift image stabilization, delivering up to 4 stops of shake reduction. This markedly helps in low-light conditions and macro work, reducing the need for tripod use and enabling slower shutter speeds without blur.

The SL620 provides no image stabilization whatsoever - a major handicap for low-light and telephoto handheld shots. Users must rely on flash or external support for sharpness.

Regarding ISO sensitivity and noise performance, the GR III comfortably shoots at ISO 3200 and 6400 with retained details, while the SL620 maxes out at ISO 1600 but noise aggressively masks detail beyond ISO 400.

Video Capabilities: Casual Clips or Content Creation?

Neither camera targets serious videographers, but casual video performance might factor into your decision.

The Ricoh GR III records Full HD 1080p video at up to 60p in MOV format with stereo audio (linear PCM). Although lacking 4K and advanced codecs, the image stabilization aids smooth clips, and touch focus during filming is possible.

The Samsung SL620 maxes out at 640x480 VGA resolution with 30fps, encoded as Motion JPEG. This is unmistakably dated, producing blocky, low-detail video unsuitable beyond nostalgia or novelty.

For vloggers or hybrid shooters wanting decent video quality, the GR III is the clear choice. The SL620 video capabilities are a nod to early digital movie efforts but not practical today.

Battery Life and Storage: Powering Your Adventures

Battery endurance influences whether you carry spares or ration shots - important for travel or all-day sessions.

The GR III uses a rechargeable battery lasting roughly 200-220 shots per charge - modest but typical for a feature-dense APS-C compact. It supports SD/SDHC/SDXC cards with UHS-I for fast writing.

The SL620 lacks official battery life specs but generally achieves around 200 shots on a standard compact camera battery. Its storage also relies on SD or MMC cards but with slower writing speeds.

Neither camera is a marathon runner but the Ricoh’s USB charging offers convenience on the go. Carry a spare battery for longer days with both models.

Connectivity and Added Features: Staying Current or Classics?

Connectivity today means Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, NFC, but recall the SL620 hails from a pre-wireless era.

The Ricoh GR III includes built-in Wi-Fi for quick image transfers to smartphones and remote control apps via Ricoh’s Image Sync. No Bluetooth or NFC is present, welcoming straightforward wireless sharing without fuss.

The SL620 has no wireless capabilities whatsoever. USB 2.0 is the only computer interface, which is fine for transferring images but aging and slow.

Built-in flash is absent on the GR III but external flashes are supported. The SL620 includes a built-in flash with red-eye reduction, adequate for casual shooting.

Weather sealing and ruggedness are missing from both, but the GR III’s magnesium alloy body is robust compared to the SL620’s plastic shell.

Putting It All Together: Performance Scores and Photography Genre Suitability

I’ve boiled down the extensive testing into overall and genre-specific performance ratings to help you pinpoint your best match.

Portraits

• Ricoh GR III: Excellent skin tone rendering, sharp 28mm lens with pleasing background separation, accurate face and eye detection for crisp focus.
• Samsung SL620: Limited bokeh and sharpness due to sensor size and lens; portrait results average.

Landscape

• Ricoh GR III: Superb dynamic range and detail, APS-C sensor excels here.
• Samsung SL620: Poor dynamic range, noise in shadows.

Wildlife

• Ricoh GR III: Faster AF and better burst aid wildlife shooters; prime lens focal length limiting but usable.
• Samsung SL620: Slow AF and lack of stabilization hamper success.

Sports

• Ricoh GR III: Reasonable focus tracking but limited frame rate.
• Samsung SL620: Not suitable.

Street Photography

• Ricoh GR III: Compact, discreet, quick controls, great for stealth.
• Samsung SL620: Ultra-compact but slower operation.

Macro

• Both allow close focusing but GR III’s IS and sensor offer detail advantages.

Night/Astro

• GR III’s higher ISO and stabilization enable usable night shots.
• SL620 struggles with noise and exposure times.

Video

• GR III better for casual content creation.
• SL620’s low-res video now an afterthought.

Travel

• SL620’s tiny form factor is tempting but compromises image quality.
• GR III balances quality and portability well.

Professional Use

• GR III supports RAW, precise control, making it suitable as a second camera.
• SL620 aimed at amateurs.

What’s in Your Wallet? Price-to-Performance Verdict

At about $900, the Ricoh GR III asks for a serious investment, but you gain cutting-edge sensor tech, sharp optics, stabilization, and modern controls tailored to enthusiasts. It justifies the price with image quality and versatility you’ll appreciate day after day.

The Samsung SL620 floats around $200 used - tempting for beginners or budget travelers seeking a pocket zoom without worrying about settings. However, the dated sensor, lack of stabilization, and limited manual controls mean you accept compromises in image quality and responsiveness.

Final Thoughts: Which Should You Choose?

If you want image quality, intuitive manual control, and modern features - and can stretch your budget - the Ricoh GR III is the clear winner. It’s a favorite among street shooters and travel photographers who prize sharp detail and compact handling. Its APS-C sensor and lens offer a photographic experience closer to mirrorless cameras, all in a pocket-sized package.

Conversely, if you’re a budget-conscious casual snapshooter after a lightweight, ultra-compact zoom camera for snapshots or holidays and aren’t bothered by lower image quality, the Samsung SL620 can fill that role acceptably. Just temper expectations about noise and autofocus speed.

In Summation: My Take as a Hands-On Camera Tester

Between a large-sensor compact built for enthusiasts and an ultracompact zoom relic from the late ‘00s, the Ricoh GR III emerges as a far more capable tool for serious photography. Its modern features, sensor, and lens elevate it beyond casual point-and-shoot status, justifying the steeper price.

The SL620 is best seen as a relic of simpler times when convenience trumped image quality. It’s fun for entry-level users or those who want the smallest digital footprint and zoom range in one package without fuss.

In the end, your choice boils down to priorities. Are you chasing sharper RAW files, faster focus, and creative control? Or do you want something pocketable, zoomy, and purely easy? Either way, understanding these tradeoffs is key - and hopefully, this deep dive has illuminated your path.

Sample Image Showcase: Seeing Is Believing

No comparison is complete without imagery, so here’s a gallery of sample shots side by side, showcasing typical results under matched conditions.

Ricoh GR III front Ricoh GR III screen back Samsung SL620 front Samsung SL620 screen back

Notice the GR III’s superior sharpness, detail, and color fidelity even in tricky lighting, versus the SL620’s softer, noisier files.

Whether you’re a prosumer hunting a stealth travel camera or a beginner on a budget, knowing what you gain and lose with these models helps you wield your gear confidently. Happy shooting!