First DRFF M8 VS R-d1

[orendanger]

I am going to get a "new camera" but not sure witch
in one corner we have the epson R-d1(950$) with a 35(380$~) mm lens and maybe a 50mm
And in this corner a Leica M8 (1350$) with just a 35 (400$)

also how do adapters work? like the leica screw mount or canaon L mount?

 

[Lss]

They are both great cameras. The M8 is more flexible and overall better. The Epson is a more specialized camera with the 1:1 viewfinder. As long as you know the specs and their implications to your photography, you will be fine going either way.

 

[ornate_wrasse]

in one corner we have the epson R-d1(950$) with a 35(380$~) mm lens and maybe a 50mm

I think you'd be overpaying if you bought the Epson R-D1 for $950. I just sold mine here on RFF for under $700. There have been others, too, recently offered for sale here for around $700.

Although I own an M9, I've never used the M8 so I have no experience comparing the two cameras.

Ellen

 

[jarski]

sensor crop M8 1.3 and RD1 1.5 is also good to remember.

from the two I'd go with M8, but personally am on fence between M9 and Sony A7 series 😱

 

[krötenblender]

If the logo is important, buy the M8. The R-D1 is too expensive, as was already mentioned. For pure shooting experience, the R-D1 is matched by no other digital camera I ever owned. That camera is just a piece of art. - Image quality is pretty good and no filters needed compared to the M8. The M8 has the better long term value, though. If you will ever resell, the M8 will be better value for you.

 

[orendanger]

reply

reply

Bought it used early the year, really enjoy the digital Rangefinder experience, ended up buying a Leica. Ever since then, this one has been sitting in dry box, barely taken out, so I'll let it go. Reskined with Italian Leather(the front), kept the original back skin though. The machine has been pretty well used, but it's cleanView finder and LCD has some dusts in there, nothing has impact though. The eye piece is a little bit bent, but won't affect anything. All function goes perfectly, CCD is clean, meters works fine, shutter works fine, a little dust in viewfinder and right corner of LCD, any question feel free to ask. Here's what's included, the camera, soft release button, body cap, seven (7) batteres, neck strap, 2gb SD card, original front skin,

that is what the seller of the rd-1 is saying i like the film feeling of it( i shoot an argus c-3 for film) How is the image quality for real? does any one have full size pics at varying ISO?

 

[rbelyell]

in reality even m8 fans admit you cannot shoot it above iso650. i routinely shoot my rd1 at 1600 with lovely film like results. with the m8 you must use special IR filters on each lens because the QC guys at leica could not figure out how to get the camera to properly render black. the m8 has focus and color shift issues with some lenses, the rd1 to my knowledge does not. the m8 always has two sets of framelines in the vf, the rd1 always has only the one set you want. the m8 has a .65 vf and the rd1 has a fully immersive 1:1 vf. i have owned literally scores of cameras in my life but have never gotten as many compliments on my photos as with the rd1. certainly the m8 takes wonderful pictures as well, but there is nothing it can do that the rd1 cannot, while there are several things the rd1 does better.

 

[raid]

I have never used and RD-1, but I am quite happy with using the M8 side by side with the M9. The M8 has far fewer repair reported than the M9. It can be used as a 16 bit camera, becoming as good as an M9.

 

[krötenblender]

that is what the seller of the rd-1 is saying i like the film feeling of it( i shoot an argus c-3 for film) How is the image quality for real? does any one have full size pics at varying ISO?

IQ of the R-D1 up to ISO 1600 (it's max value) is/was great. If you want, I can provide examples, RAWs and developed from base ISO up to max. But I can not upload them here because of file size restrictions.

Since I sold mine, I miss it and look for a (very) cheap replacement, just for the fun of using it. I sold mine for an M9, which was a real step up at that time. For an M8 I would not have traded it off.

Nevertheless, the asked price of $950 is too much. I have seen them go away for $700 in very good condition. I think, today $750 for one in good condition would be reasonable.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I think it comes down to only one thing. Are you ready to accept Epson sensor which is absolute in terms of MPs?
For some it is big deal due to their pixel hunger nature, while others are printing up to A3 from it.
How long you are planning to keep it? With more recent RD you could still get support. At least it is supported officially, but not the first model. Don't know with M8 is still serviceable for electronic parts.

 

[froyd]

They are both great cameras. The M8 is more flexible and overall better. The Epson is a more specialized camera with the 1:1 viewfinder. As long as you know the specs and their implications to your photography, you will be fine going either way.

This would be the main deciding factor for me.

I like 35mm as my everyday lens, so the 1:1 finder of the Epson is a deal-breaker. If I'd liked 50mm more (like I used to) then the Epson would be be my first choice because of the extremely intelligently laid out controls.

 

[krötenblender]

This would be the main deciding factor for me.

I like 35mm as my everyday lens, so the 1:1 finder of the Epson is a deal-breaker. If I'd liked 50mm more (like I used to) then the Epson would be be my first choice because of the extremely intelligently laid out controls.

Due to the crop factor of 1,5 a 28mm lens gives a FOV like a 42 on FF, that is indeed the widest possible on the R-D1. On my R-D1 a Minolta Rokkor-M 28mm was my main lens. It was okay for me and I loved the 1:1 viewfinder and shooting with both eyes open. But yes, if you need wide-angle, the R-D1 may not be a good choice. OTOH the difference between 1,3 and 1,5 is not that much...

Megapixels is also a valid argument. I printed some images with up to 80cm on the long side for an exhibition from the R-D1. I think, that was little bit too much, but the 60cm prints were absolutely okay.

 

[f16sunshine]

What are your priorities when buying this particular camera?

Speaking only of each cameras greatest Strengths

M8... Image Quality.

The RAW files from the M8 if you use an IR filter on your lens are sharp and beautiful. There is plenty of resolution.

RD1 Ergonomics and fun factor.

The RD1 cameras shoot like analogo cameras. All the controls for actual image making are analog.
No menus to enter for iso or exposure comp.

If you want ultimate IQ get an M8. If you want a camera that is a pleasure to use while delivering good but somewhat lightweight image files go for the RD1(lower resolution due to 6mp).

I love them both but now have neither.
I owned 2 M8's and an RD1 for a few years together.

The M8's got the nod if I was on a payed shoot or when I knew I maight print large.
For days of playing around or travel... RD1 all the way. It's just way more fun!

 

[rbelyell]

Due to the crop factor of 1,5 a 28mm lens gives a FOV like a 42 on FF, that is indeed the widest possible on the R-D1. On my R-D1 a Minolta Rokkor-M 28mm was my main lens. It was okay for me and I loved the 1:1 viewfinder and shooting with both eyes open. But yes, if you need wide-angle, the R-D1 may not be a good choice. OTOH the difference between 1,3 and 1,5 is not that.

yes and no. my everyday lens is the leica elmarit 21/2.8. that equals a 33 or so mm and is just about equal to the entire vf frame. i keep the 50mm framelines on just to aid as a 'center' and use the full vf to very good effect, as i too am a 35mm fan.

couldnt agree more on the 1:1 vf. just no way i can 'see' this as a negative. if youve never used one, you owe it to yourself to try it. it makes you part of the scene. hate to be a zendope but being one with your scene is cannot be oversestimated.

 

[orendanger]

About the wide angle.. if the lens it to wide i can still focus right? and use an external finder no? i plan on useing it for fun and MAYBE priniting for my self i know the leica is a much better digital camera but even if i pay 900$ for the epson it is still 400$ cheaper than the leica.. and thats the price of some used voigtlander lenses so wouldnt it make more sense to get the R-d1 with more lenses and in a couple of yearsupgradeto anM9? or even an M8 when the price goes still more down... or is the price done going down on the m8?

P.S. sorry for my lack of knowledge i am very new to rangefinders like i said mine is an argus c-3.. and i dont get the same feeling with digital..

 

[krötenblender]

Of course you can use a wide angle and focus through the finder and compose through an external VF. And yes, if you want to upgrade from an Epson, the M9 or newer would be the next logical step. The M8 is a too small upgrade to the R-D1.

For the $400 price difference you can get one or two pretty good Voigtländer lenses. The Color Skopars for example make a nice combination with the Epson.

 

[_sgb_]

I used to use a 24mm Elmarit-M with the R-D1 which equates roughly to about 36mm on a full frame. Framing is never a problem using the 24mm on the R-D1 cos with the whole 1:1 viewfinder is roughly the 35mm frame.

I have now been using a M240 since October last year and the focusing patch is nite (r-D1) and day (M240)

 

[astro8]

Yes you can still focus wide angle lenses on the R-D1. My most used lens is a 21mm...samples in my gallery.

I think using the 'extra' money to purchase lenses is a good idea.

I've never felt the R-D1 wanting for more resolution for the photographs that I like to make. I print up to A3. You may be different.

The next logical step for me would be an M9, but I'm very happy with the R-D1 as it is for the foreseeable future.

 

[rbelyell]

i do think you owe it to yourself to try to pay less for the rd1. i think there is at least one for sale here and you can get an rd1s, which is still serviced by epson, for less than $900 on ebay.

 

[orendanger]

correct me if im wrong but wouldnt a 21 or 24 mm lens be about a34 on the r-d1 be about 30-35 mm effective, so the Olympus VF1 for the 17 mm(X2 crop) on micro 4/3 would work for framing? or am i being overly optimistic