Krosya
Konicaze
HI,
I just posted this same message at the CVUG and thought I"d post it here to get more opinions (please - this is not to make anyone upset or start DSLR vs DRF wars, it's just my line of thinking and I'd like DRF user opinions to see if I'm missing something):
This is what I do not understand, why would ANYONE get a digital RF that doesn't have a full frame sensor? I know I know many use RD1s and M8s and I'm happy for everyone who likes their DRFs, yet I feel it's a terrible compromise. I felt tempted to buy one several time. I read people's reviews of them and how happy they are with their DRFs, yet I didn't yet. Why you ask? NO, not even the price and not all the issues these RF cameras had. Just one thing - no full frame sensor (well for Rd1 it's a short RF base too)! I know, it's been talked many times over, yet I still have a problem with it. I have my favorite lenses, like I'm sure, many of us do. And I want my 50mm lens be a 50mm lens. not 75 or whatever else, depending on a sensor size. I want my 90mm to be 90mm. etc. Plus as of right now, there are very few and very they are either very slow or very expensive wide lenses that I'd have to use to get me to that usual FL I'm used to. So, my 25/4 lens would a a slow 40, right? Me personally, after a long trial and error, I came up with a selection of the lenses that I really like. That means a certain look that lens delivers in a certain FL. As of now, I'd have to start all over again , considering D-sensor crop factor and I don't like my options - very few and of those not many I like how they draw. I'm mostly a 50-90mm shooter, so current wider lenses that would become normal on either RD1 or M8 don't really please me. So, unless CV starts making some more very fast wide and not terribly expensive lenses, I really don't see why I'd get a digital RF. For me it's wiser to spend 2K on a Canon 5d than on RD1s. And I prefer RF camera. Matter of fact I don't even own a DSLR now. But even ones with a crop sensor are better choice in DSLR lineup for me due to their lens selection/availibility.
So, I'd like to hear from DRF users, how they got around this problem - having to either deal with their favorite lenses become longer FLs and/or being stuck with a small and limited selection of wider ones that we have now.
Again, this post is not intended to start any DSLR vs DRF fights, but rather help me understand and possibly justify a DRF purchase, as I'd really like to have one.
So, am I missing something? I do really want to have a DRF of some kind.
I just posted this same message at the CVUG and thought I"d post it here to get more opinions (please - this is not to make anyone upset or start DSLR vs DRF wars, it's just my line of thinking and I'd like DRF user opinions to see if I'm missing something):
This is what I do not understand, why would ANYONE get a digital RF that doesn't have a full frame sensor? I know I know many use RD1s and M8s and I'm happy for everyone who likes their DRFs, yet I feel it's a terrible compromise. I felt tempted to buy one several time. I read people's reviews of them and how happy they are with their DRFs, yet I didn't yet. Why you ask? NO, not even the price and not all the issues these RF cameras had. Just one thing - no full frame sensor (well for Rd1 it's a short RF base too)! I know, it's been talked many times over, yet I still have a problem with it. I have my favorite lenses, like I'm sure, many of us do. And I want my 50mm lens be a 50mm lens. not 75 or whatever else, depending on a sensor size. I want my 90mm to be 90mm. etc. Plus as of right now, there are very few and very they are either very slow or very expensive wide lenses that I'd have to use to get me to that usual FL I'm used to. So, my 25/4 lens would a a slow 40, right? Me personally, after a long trial and error, I came up with a selection of the lenses that I really like. That means a certain look that lens delivers in a certain FL. As of now, I'd have to start all over again , considering D-sensor crop factor and I don't like my options - very few and of those not many I like how they draw. I'm mostly a 50-90mm shooter, so current wider lenses that would become normal on either RD1 or M8 don't really please me. So, unless CV starts making some more very fast wide and not terribly expensive lenses, I really don't see why I'd get a digital RF. For me it's wiser to spend 2K on a Canon 5d than on RD1s. And I prefer RF camera. Matter of fact I don't even own a DSLR now. But even ones with a crop sensor are better choice in DSLR lineup for me due to their lens selection/availibility.
So, I'd like to hear from DRF users, how they got around this problem - having to either deal with their favorite lenses become longer FLs and/or being stuck with a small and limited selection of wider ones that we have now.
Again, this post is not intended to start any DSLR vs DRF fights, but rather help me understand and possibly justify a DRF purchase, as I'd really like to have one.
So, am I missing something? I do really want to have a DRF of some kind.
Thardy
Veteran
Oh, for a second I thought I was in the Canon forum at photo.net.
Yep, that whole crop factor thing is a cause of angst for many.
Yep, that whole crop factor thing is a cause of angst for many.
JNewell
Leica M Recidivist
Too much thinking, really. 
Here's the short version of how and why I bought an R-D1.
Scanning was killing me. Actually, what's killing me is guilt and anxiety because I get ever further behind and literally may never even keep up with current film use much less get into the "archives."
I bought an almost NIB D100 purely to put a toe in the water for $350. I really liked it. That got me over the small sensor phobia. When Epson released a bunch of refurbs for $1400 I clicked on "buy" so fast there were carbon tracks on the screen.
The shots I've taken with the R-D1 are really great, and guess what? No more scanning...
Yeah, it ain't a Leica...yeah, it ain't full 35mm format...yeah, it caused some chaos in the lens selection due to the crop factor. So far my accomodation on that has been to buy a 21D finder so I can use my 21mm Elmarit as a 35mm and a 135mm finder for when I get brave and try the 90mm 'Cron on the R-D1...may wind up buying a CV 15mm, but that won't break the bank and it'll give me 21mm coverage on the R-D1. The big thing is...no more scanning... YMMV, but that was really important for me, and an M8 is totally out of my current budget, with one kid in college and another one about to go.
Here's the short version of how and why I bought an R-D1.Scanning was killing me. Actually, what's killing me is guilt and anxiety because I get ever further behind and literally may never even keep up with current film use much less get into the "archives."
I bought an almost NIB D100 purely to put a toe in the water for $350. I really liked it. That got me over the small sensor phobia. When Epson released a bunch of refurbs for $1400 I clicked on "buy" so fast there were carbon tracks on the screen.
The shots I've taken with the R-D1 are really great, and guess what? No more scanning...
Yeah, it ain't a Leica...yeah, it ain't full 35mm format...yeah, it caused some chaos in the lens selection due to the crop factor. So far my accomodation on that has been to buy a 21D finder so I can use my 21mm Elmarit as a 35mm and a 135mm finder for when I get brave and try the 90mm 'Cron on the R-D1...may wind up buying a CV 15mm, but that won't break the bank and it'll give me 21mm coverage on the R-D1. The big thing is...no more scanning... YMMV, but that was really important for me, and an M8 is totally out of my current budget, with one kid in college and another one about to go.
Last edited:
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I don't understand why the crop factor becomes such an issue when we start talking about rangefinders. Out of all the amazingly good DSLR's on the market how many have full frame sensors ... bugger all! It hasn't hindered the progress of digital photographers who chose not to go full frame much at all and there are millions of happy DSLR users out there taking great photos who probably don't even know what a full frame sensor is and what a crop factor represents.
When I bought my D70s a few years ago I'm not ashamed to admit that I knew absolutely nothing about photography. I pressed the shutter and it took amazing photos and if someone had asked me about the crop factor of it's sensor I would have stared at them blankly. Now I have an M8 ... I'm smarter and poorer and the crop factor bothers me very little because I understand that Leica were not in a position to give the M8 a full frame sensor with the design restrictions of the rangefinder body and available sensor technollogy!
Do not ... I repeat do not, let the crop factor be the reason not to buy a DRF. You will be denying yourself one of photographys absolute joys ... pure effective simlicity!
When I bought my D70s a few years ago I'm not ashamed to admit that I knew absolutely nothing about photography. I pressed the shutter and it took amazing photos and if someone had asked me about the crop factor of it's sensor I would have stared at them blankly. Now I have an M8 ... I'm smarter and poorer and the crop factor bothers me very little because I understand that Leica were not in a position to give the M8 a full frame sensor with the design restrictions of the rangefinder body and available sensor technollogy!
Do not ... I repeat do not, let the crop factor be the reason not to buy a DRF. You will be denying yourself one of photographys absolute joys ... pure effective simlicity!
cmedin
Well-known
Keith, I think that since SLR owners often work in the mid to long lens range, the crop factory isn't much of a negative; in fact for sports/wildlife it's a boon since your lens is now a lot 'longer' than it used to be!
For rangefinders though, a lot of people prefer wider lenses, and then the crop factor really becomes an issue because your 28 or 35 isn't wide at all anymore. You have to step down to the really really wide lenses to get the equivalent field of view; even the 15mm Voigtlander becomes just a plain wide....
For rangefinders though, a lot of people prefer wider lenses, and then the crop factor really becomes an issue because your 28 or 35 isn't wide at all anymore. You have to step down to the really really wide lenses to get the equivalent field of view; even the 15mm Voigtlander becomes just a plain wide....
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
cmedin said:
I agree ... with longer focal lengths on a DSLR it's not such an issue. On the other hand after using a 15mm Helliar on my M8 I would be loath to want anything wider than the 20mm it became ... but I guess that's just my preference and I understand what you're saying.
jbf
||||||
Keith said:
You know what's funny? It was a D70s that got me into serious photography! Seriously. After i got fed up with my crappy photo taking skills with the D70s I started to learn about composition, lighting, timing, content, etc.
It wasnt until I switched from the D70s and moved to my first rangefinder (A FSU Zorki 4K) that I really began to take the time to think about my photos. I think that I am a thousand times better photographer than I was then.
I constantly think about what is going on, anticipate the "decisive moment" (for lack of better words) and I've constantly being surprised with my film when I pull it out of the developing tank. I've gotten some great shots!
Krosya
Konicaze
Keith said:
Someone already answered that in part, I'll add to this - while for most DSLR shooters it doesn't matter, there are some that it does. And whats good about it is - a full frame sensor DSLRs are availible. More $$, but you can get one if you really want one. Plus they have a lot more lenses to play with in DSLR world, that were made just for DSLRs. Not so in DRF. With DRF - all we got is Epson and M8. And neither offers a full frame sensor. Had they made M8 with one - I'd already own it. But my thing is - I like my lenses. I like them as they are.
For example, my 50 Planar would become a 75mm Planar. WHile it may be an interesting option, but far less useful to me as now I don't own a 75mm lens since I prefer 90mm. At the same time, lens like a CV 35/1.7, while good and I like it ( I have one) it doesn't draw like a 50 Planar, so when it becomes some near 50mm FL on a DRF, I get different lens, lens I like when it's a wide lens, yet for 50mm work it doesn't give me a look I want and like. I don't think there is a 35mm lens out there that has exactly same look/drawing to an image as any given 50mm lens, so I could just substitute. Since each lens in each FL has it's character, I'd be losing that on a DRF smaller sensor.
And that's my biggest problem with small sensor DRFs.
Thardy
Veteran
Seems to me you just need a lens in the 21mm range, but just like us dslr users who buy wider and wider lenses to cover what we've lost via the crop factor you'll just lament on what could've been.
Nikon finally capitulated and brought out a FF body.
Nikon finally capitulated and brought out a FF body.
victoriapio
Well-known
Quote from Krosya
"For example, my 50 Planar would become a 75mm Planar. WHile it may be an interesting option, but far less useful to me as now I don't own a 75mm lens since I prefer 90mm. At the same time, lens like a CV 35/1.7, while good and I like it ( I have one) it doesn't draw like a 50 Planar, so when it becomes some near 50mm FL on a DRF, I get different lens, lens I like when it's a wide lens, yet for 50mm work it doesn't give me a look I want and like. I don't think there is a 35mm lens out there that has exactly same look/drawing to an image as any given 50mm lens, so I could just substitute. Since each lens in each FL has it's character, I'd be losing that on a DRF smaller sensor.
And that's my biggest problem with small sensor DRFs."
I have a Canon 1DsMk2 - FF sensor and I love it and need it for some of my work. But I shoot everyday with my rd1s and much prefer its ergonomics and in a way, the way it processes images. Does the IQ of the rd1s even come close to the Canon? No. But I still prefer it.
You are wrong about the lenses on a crop camera. Your 35mm does NOT mysteriously change into a 50mm when mounted on a crop camera. That is against the laws of physics. What happens is you are using a smaller field of view from that same lens. All you are doing is using a smaller angle from that same lens. There is no change in "character" other than you are not using all of the lens' angle of view.
One last thing, EVERYONE WANTS A FULL FRAME RANGEFINDER!! But if you are waiting for a full frame RF before you buy a digital RF, you probably have a very long wait. Even crop RFs are already at the limit of lens compatibility due to the inherent design and application of RF lens and the distance between the rear element and the sensor. If someone did roll out a FF DRF, chances are it would have to use a completely different set of lenses than what exist now. You think current Leica and Zeiss glass are a bit expensive, wait for a FF DRF
What Leica did after the rd1s was introduced was increase the size of its sensor a tiny bit, but more importantly improved the quality of pixels that were captured. Until a FF DRF is introduced, what we need are continued improvements in the quality of the sensor and the pixels it captures.
O.C.
"For example, my 50 Planar would become a 75mm Planar. WHile it may be an interesting option, but far less useful to me as now I don't own a 75mm lens since I prefer 90mm. At the same time, lens like a CV 35/1.7, while good and I like it ( I have one) it doesn't draw like a 50 Planar, so when it becomes some near 50mm FL on a DRF, I get different lens, lens I like when it's a wide lens, yet for 50mm work it doesn't give me a look I want and like. I don't think there is a 35mm lens out there that has exactly same look/drawing to an image as any given 50mm lens, so I could just substitute. Since each lens in each FL has it's character, I'd be losing that on a DRF smaller sensor.
And that's my biggest problem with small sensor DRFs."
I have a Canon 1DsMk2 - FF sensor and I love it and need it for some of my work. But I shoot everyday with my rd1s and much prefer its ergonomics and in a way, the way it processes images. Does the IQ of the rd1s even come close to the Canon? No. But I still prefer it.
You are wrong about the lenses on a crop camera. Your 35mm does NOT mysteriously change into a 50mm when mounted on a crop camera. That is against the laws of physics. What happens is you are using a smaller field of view from that same lens. All you are doing is using a smaller angle from that same lens. There is no change in "character" other than you are not using all of the lens' angle of view.
One last thing, EVERYONE WANTS A FULL FRAME RANGEFINDER!! But if you are waiting for a full frame RF before you buy a digital RF, you probably have a very long wait. Even crop RFs are already at the limit of lens compatibility due to the inherent design and application of RF lens and the distance between the rear element and the sensor. If someone did roll out a FF DRF, chances are it would have to use a completely different set of lenses than what exist now. You think current Leica and Zeiss glass are a bit expensive, wait for a FF DRF
What Leica did after the rd1s was introduced was increase the size of its sensor a tiny bit, but more importantly improved the quality of pixels that were captured. Until a FF DRF is introduced, what we need are continued improvements in the quality of the sensor and the pixels it captures.
O.C.
nemjo
Avatar Challenge
Hi,
I'm afraid I can't help you justify the DRF.
To be honest, it was very hard to justify it for me, but for different reason .
If you feel the so called crop thing disturbing, just wait for the FF DRF.
But let me tell, how I choose a lens to use, in practice.
At a first guess I choose the lens on the top of the camera (RD-1).
When looking through the VF, two things can happen:
a. I'm satisfied with what I see within the frame (More or less. The rest can change by my feet...)
b. I'm not satisfied, I feel I need a wider/longer lens. So, do so - the rest again to my feet...
... don't forget to put on the lens chosen, and take off the lens cap...
nemjo
I'm afraid I can't help you justify the DRF.
To be honest, it was very hard to justify it for me, but for different reason
.If you feel the so called crop thing disturbing, just wait for the FF DRF.
But let me tell, how I choose a lens to use, in practice.
At a first guess I choose the lens on the top of the camera (RD-1).
When looking through the VF, two things can happen:
a. I'm satisfied with what I see within the frame (More or less. The rest can change by my feet...)
b. I'm not satisfied, I feel I need a wider/longer lens. So, do so - the rest again to my feet...
... don't forget to put on the lens chosen, and take off the lens cap...
nemjo
LCT
ex-newbie
Justify a DRF has no meaning to me.
What you need to know is do you like shooting rangefinders or not.
If so the crop factor is the same problem on a DRF than on 90% DSLRs.
What you need to know is do you like shooting rangefinders or not.
If so the crop factor is the same problem on a DRF than on 90% DSLRs.
JonR
Well-known
Well - I have never understood the discussion about a full frame sensor or not. The question is really about the functionality, the quality of the pictures the camera produce and if it meets the needs. I have Nikon RF´s, Nikon SLR´s and Nikon DSLR (yes - with the crop factor of 1,5) and they all have slightly different charcateristics. BUT - My 50 mm lens is still a 50 mm lens on my D80, just as when I use it on my FM2n but yes there is a crop factor on the digital file which I would not get if I used my FM2n. But there are houndreds of other differences also in terms of camera functionality, film, processing, scanning etc and so on....
Don´t overcomplicate this issue !!
And just my own thoughts.... Waiting for a full frame all dancing rangefinder camera is just stupid. It will not come at reasonable cost in the near future (out of both technical and commercial reaons) so why not enjoy what is available today, combine film and digital in the way it makes sense for the needs you have and go out there and use it! For me that means a Nikon D80 with both new DX and old Nikon lenses, sometimes my older Nikon F/FM-cameras and as a very dear hobby also the film rangefinders!
Jon
Don´t overcomplicate this issue !!
And just my own thoughts.... Waiting for a full frame all dancing rangefinder camera is just stupid. It will not come at reasonable cost in the near future (out of both technical and commercial reaons) so why not enjoy what is available today, combine film and digital in the way it makes sense for the needs you have and go out there and use it! For me that means a Nikon D80 with both new DX and old Nikon lenses, sometimes my older Nikon F/FM-cameras and as a very dear hobby also the film rangefinders!
Jon
Johnmcd
Well-known
I can feel your pain. But it's all in your head
I have a 20D with a 10-22, 17-50, 70-200, 50 prime and 300 prime. When I go anywhere I take the whole bag because my DSLR 'mindset' says that I might need to change focal lengths.
Now, unless I'm shooting sports, I just take the the RD1 with my only lens, a 40mm Nokton, use the 35mm framelines and just take photos! And you can't wipe the smile of my face There's more to the RD1 than it's sensor.
I bought for the same reasons as JNewell - loved my R3A but got sick of scanning.
Cheers,
John
I have a 20D with a 10-22, 17-50, 70-200, 50 prime and 300 prime. When I go anywhere I take the whole bag because my DSLR 'mindset' says that I might need to change focal lengths.
Now, unless I'm shooting sports, I just take the the RD1 with my only lens, a 40mm Nokton, use the 35mm framelines and just take photos! And you can't wipe the smile of my face
There's more to the RD1 than it's sensor.I bought for the same reasons as JNewell - loved my R3A but got sick of scanning.
Cheers,
John
JNewell
Leica M Recidivist
Honestly, if you feel the objections as strongly as your post seems to indicate, we're not going to be much help convincing you! Needing one is a little like Justice Powell's comment on pornography - you know it when you see it. When you need a DRF, you'll know it.
Needing one is a little like Justice Powell's comment on pornography - you know it when you see it. When you need a DRF, you'll know it.georgef
Well-known
The real difference between aDSLR and a DRF really, is the method of taking pictures. The actual machine and the way it is used. Never mind the different lens properties, quiteness, size etc. It is the way you use it to take pictures.
If you find shooting with an RF better than an SLR, then you will also find things like crop factors become secondary.
Many here either own better resolution DSLRs, or fine film cameras, both of which are superior in resolution to, say the R-D1. But that is not the point! We still love the balance between the "feel" and "method" of the RF with the flexibility of the digital medium.
Is the R-D1 (or the M8 for that matter) the perfect DRF? No! will better ones, even one with a full frame sensor come out? I hope so. Does that stop me from smilling every time I click the shutter on my R-D1? No!
Are you ready to accept what is available now, use it and love it, or wait until there is a full frame DRF? Well, that's a question you have to answer for yourself, isn't it?
If you find shooting with an RF better than an SLR, then you will also find things like crop factors become secondary.
Many here either own better resolution DSLRs, or fine film cameras, both of which are superior in resolution to, say the R-D1. But that is not the point! We still love the balance between the "feel" and "method" of the RF with the flexibility of the digital medium.
Is the R-D1 (or the M8 for that matter) the perfect DRF? No! will better ones, even one with a full frame sensor come out? I hope so. Does that stop me from smilling every time I click the shutter on my R-D1? No!
Are you ready to accept what is available now, use it and love it, or wait until there is a full frame DRF? Well, that's a question you have to answer for yourself, isn't it?
villain 2
John 3:16
Justify
Justify
Hey, Krosya jump in with both feet! You will never be happier. The R-D1 is SWEET!
Justify
Hey, Krosya jump in with both feet! You will never be happier. The R-D1 is SWEET!
sonwolf
Established
Every camera possesses strengths and weaknesses, choosing a particular model always involve compromises and limitations. I own both a R-D1 and a Canon DSLR. The R-D1 is better for some tasks, while the Canon is superior for others. The most important factor in choosing a camera is analyzing your photographic needs, and determining how well a particular model satisfies those needs.
If very wide, fast lenses are very important to you, maybe a R-D1 is not a good choice. For many, including myself, combining the directness of digital photography with the functionality of a rangefinder camera is so satisfying, an undersized sensor is simply a minor annoyance.
If very wide, fast lenses are very important to you, maybe a R-D1 is not a good choice. For many, including myself, combining the directness of digital photography with the functionality of a rangefinder camera is so satisfying, an undersized sensor is simply a minor annoyance.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I know it sounds like digital bashing but I'll say it anyway ... for the price of a used RD-1 you can get an R4A and a scanner and fifty rolls off film, then the whole crop factor issue becomes non existent!
JNewell
Leica M Recidivist
Keith said:I know it sounds like digital bashing but I'll say it anyway ... for the price of a used RD-1 you can get an R4A and a scanner and fifty rolls off film, then the whole crop factor issue becomes non existent!
True, but time...scanning is, for me at least, a significant extra commitment of time...