back alley
IMAGES
no one...i have been thinking about this for awhile...that so many folks want a drf but buy 4/3...
They obviously aren't refusing, and aren't dismissing, otherwise the price would not be hovering in the 1100-1300 range for the past few years.
It's not the camera for everyone. Neither is any other camera of course.
ampguy
Veteran
I've had four of them, and they are great cameras. Probably have about 100K images from all four. That said, they're not robust cameras. Two of mine had to go back for service, one was a simple RF alignment (they are CV like bodies).
If you don't need M-mount, the old D100 CCD sensor images very close to the RD1 at a fraction of the price.
I believe that now, you are paying for M-mount capability, and for the fondling of analog dials. The image quality of an EPL1 is now higher than the RD1 in every aspect I can think of, and still mounts M-mount lens, plus about 50 other mounts.
If you don't need M-mount, the old D100 CCD sensor images very close to the RD1 at a fraction of the price.
I believe that now, you are paying for M-mount capability, and for the fondling of analog dials. The image quality of an EPL1 is now higher than the RD1 in every aspect I can think of, and still mounts M-mount lens, plus about 50 other mounts.
paradoxbox
Well-known
The Epl1 is not a rangefinder
The Nex7 is not a rangefinder
The Nikon D4 is not a rangefinder
They are not worth comparing to the R-D1 - if cameras were only about the image produced everyone would have picked a single standard design by now. The handling and viewfinder quality is a huge factor.
You may be able to use Leica M or screw mount lenses on other digital cameras but they do not offer optical viewfinders. There are many situations where an optical viewfinder is the best tool for the job, like in a dimly lit room.
The Nex7 is not a rangefinder
The Nikon D4 is not a rangefinder
They are not worth comparing to the R-D1 - if cameras were only about the image produced everyone would have picked a single standard design by now. The handling and viewfinder quality is a huge factor.
You may be able to use Leica M or screw mount lenses on other digital cameras but they do not offer optical viewfinders. There are many situations where an optical viewfinder is the best tool for the job, like in a dimly lit room.
ampguy
Veteran
CVickery
Established
+1
I enjoyed the R-D1 while I owned it but the ability to use the 24mm framelines on the M8 pushed me to switch.
jarski
Veteran
no matter how good rest of package is, its old sensor with crop factor, low megapix and dynamic range.
when they drop 400 Dollars, will buy one, stick FSU lens on it, and use as digital holga
(runs...)
when they drop 400 Dollars, will buy one, stick FSU lens on it, and use as digital holga
(runs...)
Guaranteed
Well-known
Megapixels smegapixels!
I had once taken a PJ class and my assigned final project was sports photography which I used my 1D classic for, I printed at the required size of 11x14 and matted them. At first the Prof. refused to believe they had come from a lowly 4MP camera so I brought the camera in with the original raw files still on the card. Of the eight chosen to hang in the gallery(at the school, not a proper gallery) three of them were stolen.
One just needs to remember to shoot tight.
I had once taken a PJ class and my assigned final project was sports photography which I used my 1D classic for, I printed at the required size of 11x14 and matted them. At first the Prof. refused to believe they had come from a lowly 4MP camera so I brought the camera in with the original raw files still on the card. Of the eight chosen to hang in the gallery(at the school, not a proper gallery) three of them were stolen.
One just needs to remember to shoot tight.
huntjump
Well-known
Everyone complains they want a TRUE RF (actual rf coupling mechanism) that takes Leica M mount (native)... How many cameras can you name that do that? If you need the R-D1 to make money, then there too many cameras to name that do this...in fact you probably should stick with a modern DSLR or shell out for the m9
But for everyone who wants to have fun with this hobby, use their favorite glass on a true RF body, then the whole complaining about the price is irrelevant. If the price ever hits the $500-600 range, im going to seriously buy another body at least. But i suspect when it hits that price it is when they are beginning to fail and epson is no longer servicing...or the market finally responded to demand and NEW Rf's are out there. But until then... the price holds because the alternatives are far and few between. The x100, the nex etc.. are all nice cameras but i just dont enjoy using them as much. if you do then great, but the r-d1 is so fun i carry it 24/7. And iso 1600 compared to the m8 was superior, a huge factor for me cause i shoot at night often due to work and such. (yes iso 1600 isnt amazing, but with my fast lenses it does the trick A LOT of the times).
I dont print like chris (and if i do i generally dont go very big nor am i selling). But how many people on here complaining about lack of dRF's that take M-mount are printing like chris or really need more than 6 for their web images?
But for everyone who wants to have fun with this hobby, use their favorite glass on a true RF body, then the whole complaining about the price is irrelevant. If the price ever hits the $500-600 range, im going to seriously buy another body at least. But i suspect when it hits that price it is when they are beginning to fail and epson is no longer servicing...or the market finally responded to demand and NEW Rf's are out there. But until then... the price holds because the alternatives are far and few between. The x100, the nex etc.. are all nice cameras but i just dont enjoy using them as much. if you do then great, but the r-d1 is so fun i carry it 24/7. And iso 1600 compared to the m8 was superior, a huge factor for me cause i shoot at night often due to work and such. (yes iso 1600 isnt amazing, but with my fast lenses it does the trick A LOT of the times).
I dont print like chris (and if i do i generally dont go very big nor am i selling). But how many people on here complaining about lack of dRF's that take M-mount are printing like chris or really need more than 6 for their web images?
shadeofpale
Established
Isn't dismissed, mate.
There are two or three reasons to replace the R-D1 with a
newer/other cam- to produce big prints, photograph macro
stuff or using a flash system.
To shoot a hundred pictures a minute it might give better
machines too.
For all other opportunities the Epson is as good as any other
cam in the world. It's just a matter of taste I think.
There are two or three reasons to replace the R-D1 with a
newer/other cam- to produce big prints, photograph macro
stuff or using a flash system.
To shoot a hundred pictures a minute it might give better
machines too.
For all other opportunities the Epson is as good as any other
cam in the world. It's just a matter of taste I think.
back alley
IMAGES
all true, but this post was directed at the folks that huntjump was just addressing.
how many times have we read that so and so is a great camera but it's not a rf?
i wonder why these folks don't try thr rd1?
photografity
Established
+1 Couldn't have written this any better myself !!!
djonesii
Well-known
the RD-1 is the most affordable d-CRF. ( full stop)
the RD-1 is the most affordable d-CRF. ( full stop)
As has been touched on in this thread, with it's many short-comings, low number of MPiX, and quirky shutter cocking, the RD-1 is still the cheapest way into a digital range finder.
I had the 15, and found it too wide for WHAT I SHOOT. the 25 is perfect. I pair that with a 40mm and I'm good to go. I set the framlines to the 28 and use that with the 25, set to 50 for the 40, while not perfect, totally workable!
Well over 90% of what I shoot never gets beyond 8X10, and with just a touch of PP, I can get a great 8X10 print from the Epson.
Every time I think of selling it, I go out shooting just one more time, and then decide to keep it!
Have not tried a NEX/GRX with Focus peaking yet, that might just change my mind.
However as said before, if you want a digital coupled rangefinder, the choices a are limited to 3. M8 M9 and RD1
Dave
the RD-1 is the most affordable d-CRF. ( full stop)
As has been touched on in this thread, with it's many short-comings, low number of MPiX, and quirky shutter cocking, the RD-1 is still the cheapest way into a digital range finder.
I had the 15, and found it too wide for WHAT I SHOOT. the 25 is perfect. I pair that with a 40mm and I'm good to go. I set the framlines to the 28 and use that with the 25, set to 50 for the 40, while not perfect, totally workable!
Well over 90% of what I shoot never gets beyond 8X10, and with just a touch of PP, I can get a great 8X10 print from the Epson.
Every time I think of selling it, I go out shooting just one more time, and then decide to keep it!
Have not tried a NEX/GRX with Focus peaking yet, that might just change my mind.
However as said before, if you want a digital coupled rangefinder, the choices a are limited to 3. M8 M9 and RD1
Dave
Gid
Well-known
I sold my R-D1 a few years ago - had it from new. I have regretted that sale many times. I recently had a crop from the R-D1 printed to 24 x 9 inches and it looks superb on the wall. All this R-D1 discussion has reignited my desire to own this camera again. So I just bought one from a fellow RFFer. There had to be a reason my CV 35 2.5 didn't sell recently
thegman
Veteran
I think that's the right idea, but you've just got to look at the fuss made over the MP count of the D800, or the high ISO performance of the D3x, to see that so many people are more interested in numbers and bragging rights.
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
So what are my options if I'm looking for roughly 35mm focal length on an R-D1 ?
umcelinho
Marcelo
the crop factor might be a setback, it's not everyone that will be okay with using a 35mm lens as a 50mm, a 21 as a 35 and so on since the perspective is changed. I'm fine with that, but I really prefer the 35mm field of view and while I can use a 35/1.2 Nokton on full frame, on the R-D1 my best bet is a 21/2.8 Biogon (the 21mm lux is not affordable)... which is more than a 2 stop difference, in low light it matters.
granted, the r-d1 delivers a unique user experience and i think there will never be a camera as weird/cool as it. of course i'd love a new sensor with higher iso capabilities, less banding/noise, full frame bla bla bla but it ain't gonna happen, nowadays when i want a low light 35mm digital i just take the X100. for everything else, i take the R-D1.
i'm waiting to see how's the M10 though, but still i think I won't part with the R-D1, I'd probably regret it badly.
granted, the r-d1 delivers a unique user experience and i think there will never be a camera as weird/cool as it. of course i'd love a new sensor with higher iso capabilities, less banding/noise, full frame bla bla bla but it ain't gonna happen, nowadays when i want a low light 35mm digital i just take the X100. for everything else, i take the R-D1.
i'm waiting to see how's the M10 though, but still i think I won't part with the R-D1, I'd probably regret it badly.
back alley
IMAGES
get a 35mm lens.
with the crop, it still looks like a 35mm lens but from a closer position.
with the crop, it still looks like a 35mm lens but from a closer position.
Gazzah
RF newbie
unfortunately there dont seem to be any fast 25mm lenses, affordable or otherwise. A 25 1.7 would be very nice to have.... or better still a 23.3333 1.4.
hipsterdufus
Photographer?
24mm Summilux.
Seems like a bit of overkill for a 6 megapixel sensor, though... Just an FYI that white type does not show up on members' screens who are using the VBP ISkin Style. You may want to default back to black.