Sam2nd
6x6
Hi all.
I am a new user, second hand, but like new of Epson RD-1S, but I haven't lens, nothing.
I'm thinking about 21mm, 35 or 50mm and 75 or 90mm all Voigtländer lens, haven't money for the Leica and Zeiss lens.
Would you advice me what lens are the best.
The 35 1.2 is a good choice? it has any problem?
A friend of mine borrowed me two Leica lens, 50 1.4 Summilux and one 28 f2 Summicrom, wonderful. But I've seen two or more points white in all shots in the screen, small points. What do you thing about this?
Thanks in advance.
Sorry for my bad English
I am a new user, second hand, but like new of Epson RD-1S, but I haven't lens, nothing.
I'm thinking about 21mm, 35 or 50mm and 75 or 90mm all Voigtländer lens, haven't money for the Leica and Zeiss lens.
Would you advice me what lens are the best.
The 35 1.2 is a good choice? it has any problem?
A friend of mine borrowed me two Leica lens, 50 1.4 Summilux and one 28 f2 Summicrom, wonderful. But I've seen two or more points white in all shots in the screen, small points. What do you thing about this?
Thanks in advance.
Sorry for my bad English
Gid
Well-known
Welcome and congratulations on your new camera. What you choose depends on what you like to shoot. A 35 on the RD1S is equivalent to a 50 on a 35mm camera, that is, normal. I find this focal length very versatile on the RD1 and would rarely use any other. The CV 35 1.2 is a big lens (for an RF) and it has a lot of fans here, but you could buy a ZM 35 or a second hand Leica 35 for less money. If cost is important, then consider the CV 35 1.7 or the CV 35 2.5 both very good lenses, with the 35 2.5 being a real gem.
Regarding the white spots, these sound as if they are hot pixels. You can test for these by shooting a frame with the lens cap on. You can get rid of these by using the pixel mapping function in the RD1S menu. Shooting raw also seems to reduce the incidence of them.
By the way, your English is just fine.
Good luck with your lens choice.
Regarding the white spots, these sound as if they are hot pixels. You can test for these by shooting a frame with the lens cap on. You can get rid of these by using the pixel mapping function in the RD1S menu. Shooting raw also seems to reduce the incidence of them.
By the way, your English is just fine.
Good luck with your lens choice.
Burkey
Well-known
Sam, welcome to the group. One lens you might want to take a look at is the Voigtlander Ultron 28mm/1.9. On the RD-1 this gives you a 42mm equiv. FoV. I use this lens a lot on my RD-1 and might be a good first purchase. The Nokton 40mm/1.4 utilizing the 35mm frames lines has also worked very well for me. Good luck.
. . . Burkey
. . . Burkey
sonwolf
Established
Voigtlander Lenses
Voigtlander Lenses
The first lens I would purchase is the Voigtlander 28mm 1.9 Ultron. This focal length (43mm) is the most universally flexible on the camera and the fast speed allows low light shooting. I use this lens at least 50% of the time on my R-D1. The tonality of the lens works well with the R-D1's sensor and does not noticeably vignette. The slightly large size and weight is the only negative to this lens.
If you are an "I never shoot less than 50mm" type of guy, the 35mm or 40mm lenses would offer a good alternative to the 28mm. The 35mm view is slightly more than the classical 50mm lens (53mm). The 40mm better matches the R-D1's 35mm frame lines. I own the 35mm 1.7 Ultron and find it a fine lens, though the image quality is slightly inferior to the 28mm Ultron. On the plus side, the lens is noticeably smaller and lighter than the 28mm. I would not purchase the 35mm 1.2 Nokton unless you absolutely need an ultra fast lens. The 35 Nokton dwarfs the R-D1, is very heavy, and costs more than twice the Ultron.
The 50mm 1.5 Nokton would be my second lens purchase. The image quality of this lens at its optimum apertures is better than any other Voigtlander I have tried. The 76mm field of view I find very versatile. On the down size, the image quality noticeably degrades at 8.0 (not untypical for a very fast lens) and the slightly heavy weight detracts.
Among the telephoto choices, I opted for the 75mm 2.5 Heliar. Unless you absolutely need the extra magnification of the 90mm (138mm vs. 115mm), the 75mm offers a lower price, smaller size and weight, plus reasonable low light capability (2.5 vs. 3.5). The Heliar has very good image quality but does not match the Ultron and Nokton.
The 21mm 4.0 Skopar is the only lens I did not like. The small size and weight are a plus, but I find the lens' image tonality harsh and it significantly vignettes on the R-D1. The vignetting can be corrected in the raw converter if you do not have a low exposure. I returned the lens to the dealer. Unfortunately, no reasonably priced alternative is available.
Voigtlander Lenses
The first lens I would purchase is the Voigtlander 28mm 1.9 Ultron. This focal length (43mm) is the most universally flexible on the camera and the fast speed allows low light shooting. I use this lens at least 50% of the time on my R-D1. The tonality of the lens works well with the R-D1's sensor and does not noticeably vignette. The slightly large size and weight is the only negative to this lens.
If you are an "I never shoot less than 50mm" type of guy, the 35mm or 40mm lenses would offer a good alternative to the 28mm. The 35mm view is slightly more than the classical 50mm lens (53mm). The 40mm better matches the R-D1's 35mm frame lines. I own the 35mm 1.7 Ultron and find it a fine lens, though the image quality is slightly inferior to the 28mm Ultron. On the plus side, the lens is noticeably smaller and lighter than the 28mm. I would not purchase the 35mm 1.2 Nokton unless you absolutely need an ultra fast lens. The 35 Nokton dwarfs the R-D1, is very heavy, and costs more than twice the Ultron.
The 50mm 1.5 Nokton would be my second lens purchase. The image quality of this lens at its optimum apertures is better than any other Voigtlander I have tried. The 76mm field of view I find very versatile. On the down size, the image quality noticeably degrades at 8.0 (not untypical for a very fast lens) and the slightly heavy weight detracts.
Among the telephoto choices, I opted for the 75mm 2.5 Heliar. Unless you absolutely need the extra magnification of the 90mm (138mm vs. 115mm), the 75mm offers a lower price, smaller size and weight, plus reasonable low light capability (2.5 vs. 3.5). The Heliar has very good image quality but does not match the Ultron and Nokton.
The 21mm 4.0 Skopar is the only lens I did not like. The small size and weight are a plus, but I find the lens' image tonality harsh and it significantly vignettes on the R-D1. The vignetting can be corrected in the raw converter if you do not have a low exposure. I returned the lens to the dealer. Unfortunately, no reasonably priced alternative is available.
Sam2nd
6x6
Thanks for your kinds advices.
For the moment I've purchased the 15 f4.5 Heliar and the 35 Ultron 1.7
The next purchase, I think will be the 75 Heliar 2.5
I have only one adapter from screw to M-Mount, is the Voigtländer 50-75 for the 15 Heliar, do you know if there are any problems using this one with the 35 1.7 ultron, until that i can found the 35 adapter.
Thanks again for your advices.
For the moment I've purchased the 15 f4.5 Heliar and the 35 Ultron 1.7
The next purchase, I think will be the 75 Heliar 2.5
I have only one adapter from screw to M-Mount, is the Voigtländer 50-75 for the 15 Heliar, do you know if there are any problems using this one with the 35 1.7 ultron, until that i can found the 35 adapter.
Thanks again for your advices.
GrahamWelland
Well-known
Since the R-D1 doesn't have coupling of the framelines to the adapter/lens, it doesn't matter what adapter you use.
Sam2nd
6x6
Thanks Graham, you are very kind.
Revolucion Artistico
Established
I have been using my 35 1.2 on my newly aquired RD1 and it is a good combo so far. I use my cv 28 3.5 or canon 50 1.2 more often as a walkaround lens due to the size of th 35 1.2 which even makes the 50 1.2 smallish.
PrisonersDilema
Established
Gid said:
Agreed.
I initially bought a Zeiss Sonnar C 50 f1.5. It was honestly too long at 75mm due to the 1.5x crop.
I experienced the focus shift issue with the Rd1s and requested the store I bought this lens from to get this lens re-calibrated for me to focus sharply at f1.5. That would mean shipping it to Japan. The store did not want to incur those costs and offered to buy the lens back from me at the price at I paid for it. I junped for the chance and am waiting to get the Zeiss Biogon 35 f2.
Just that now...I guess I'd wait a while. This sub-prime issue is causing a lot of turmoil in the financial markets :bang:. My funds are really stuck in the NYSE and Straits Times Index in Singapore. Anyone who owns shares since early August till now are really stuck. Sorry that I did some OT. Glad I got some money back from the 50mm f1.5 lens. Better keep that in my pockets for a while until the coast is clear.
Nobody knows for sure now what is going on.bankcheck
Established
Congrat to your new find, Sam. Like others have said, it's hard to have other people determine which lense you should buy as you are the one who knows what you want to shoot.
IMHO, a 35mm lense should be a good start as it gives you a ~50mm picture with the R-D1. In case you want to go for film, a 35mm is still considered as "standard lense". 2 birds shot with 1 lense. If you have already bought the 15mm and 35mm, maybe you can consider getting a 50mm; it will give you 75mm with the R-D1. Great portrait setup.
Hope it helps and wish you enjoy the digital RF journey!
Cheers,
D
IMHO, a 35mm lense should be a good start as it gives you a ~50mm picture with the R-D1. In case you want to go for film, a 35mm is still considered as "standard lense". 2 birds shot with 1 lense. If you have already bought the 15mm and 35mm, maybe you can consider getting a 50mm; it will give you 75mm with the R-D1. Great portrait setup.
Hope it helps and wish you enjoy the digital RF journey!
Cheers,
D
Sam2nd
6x6
Thanks again for your advice.
I will wait for a 50 Zeiss or 75 Heliar.
Regards.
I will wait for a 50 Zeiss or 75 Heliar.
Regards.