Help: Pros and Cons of Two R-D1s

[Phil_Hawkes]

I have had my R-D1 for about 8 months now. I love it, and use it far more than I ever used my Hexar RF (not that the Hexar was inferior, but the film was costing too much). The major limiting factors of the R-D1 (for my use of the camera) are the small buffer and absence of framelines for > 50mm. I can live with everything else, but these few factors are making me miss shots or miss-align shots.

I am faced with one more problem that is common to all rangefinders: Often I see a picture that requires a change of lens, but the picture is gone by the time I have the lens changed. Last wedding I did, I missed nearly all photos coming down the aisle as a result of such circumstances :bang: ... luckily I had other photos that half-redeemed myself for that mistake.

I have a wedding to shoot in mid November and I am realising that I cannot afford to miss important shots because I have the wrong lens mounted. So I am considering arming myself with two rangefinders when I am at a "project" (e.g. wedding).

The options I see are: (a) use my R-D1 and Hexar; or (b) buy another R-D1.

(a) The Hexar will cost me in terms of film, and will make it confusing trying to decide which lens set to assign to which camera (due to the crop factor).

(b) A second R-D1 would mean that I don't have to juggle focus lengths and crop sizes. The savings on film will probably pay forthe camera (in some sense) within a year or a year and a half. However.... the next generation of digital rangefinders are likely to have appeared within a year or so (whether it be from Lieca, Epson or Zeiss Ikon). I, like others, am hoping the next generation will have dealt with my complaints above. If so, I will probably be satisfied with the next generation digital rangefinder for many years to come. I think the R-D1 will be an excellent complement to this next generation digital rangefinder, so I should be able to stop buying cameras after the next generation digital rangefinder comes out. That is my curent line of thinking anyway.

My dilemma is that if I buy a second R-D1 now, then the second R-D1 will have little value for me once the next generation digital rangefinder appears. This worries me a little.

I know that a couple of people on this forum have ended up buying two R-D1s, and there may be more "double owners" that I am not aware of. I am sure that others who already own one R-D1 have considering buying another. I am interested to hear from both groups of people to find out the reasons that you decided for or against a second R-D1. I am also interested to hear of the shooting experience when you have two R-D1s or juggling an R-D1 and film body.

You may speak freely: you will be indemnified against responsibility if I end up succumbing to GAS 🙂

Thank you in advance for your comments...


Phil

 

[AlexC]

Which two lenses would you typically be switching between?

 

[SolaresLarrave]

Alex beat me to it.

Now... I don't know about your lens arsenal, but considering the problems that the RD-1 has sometimes, I wouldn't consider buying another and shooting all with one lens in the RD, and another completely different in the Hexar. See, the RD cannot use wide angles, so I'd use it for shots requiring a long lens. The Hexar would be left with a wide-angle lens, for other kinds of images.

Now... are you a pro-wedding photographer?

 

[Phil_Hawkes]

Which two lenses would you typically be switching between?

Good question. That would depend on the event. Typically, I would be using up to 3 lenses at a shoot, so I am going to have times when I have a wrong lens on at the wrong time. But at least I'll have a better chance of having the right lens mounted!!!!

At the moment, most of my photography falls into three groups...
-weddings
-live performance dance events (I hope dancers will buy photos off me)
-friend's parties (which I photograph for free as a form of self promotion).

The lenses I own are: 1x15mm, 1x28mm, 1x35mm, 2x50mm & 2x90mm. I'm contemplating buying a 75. (Why lie.. I'm contemplating buying everything!!!...but the 75mm has best chance to getting bought).

The lenses I will typically use (on the R-D1) are:
WEDDINGS:
-28 or35: 40%.
-50: 40%.
-90/75. 15%. (I haven't actually used this at a wedding yet).
-15: 5%.

DANCING:
-90/75 for photos of individuals. 40%.
-50 for pairs. 40%.
-28 or 35 for group shots. 20%.

PARTIES:
-50 50%.
-90/75 30%.
-15 for large group shots. 20%.

Looking at what I've listed, I'd probably have a "Standard" Camera that keeps the 35 or 50 on (this would be 50mm or 75mm on the Hexar), and a "Variable" Camera that alternates between the wide and tele.

Now... I don't know about your lens arsenal, but considering the problems that the RD-1 has sometimes, I wouldn't consider buying another and shooting all with one lens in the RD, and another completely different in the Hexar. See, the RD cannot use wide angles, so I'd use it for shots requiring a long lens. The Hexar would be left with a wide-angle lens, for other kinds of images.

I completely agree... if I just used the Hexar, this is probably what I'd do. Even if I get an additional R-D1. I'll porbably keep a wide on the Hexar just in case.

Now... are you a pro-wedding photographer?

No. I'm a hobby photographer, but I am starting to charge people for my photos. Per year, I only plan to do maybe :
-3-4 weddings over the next year
-8-12 dance events
-8-10 parties

Good questions... keep em coming 🙂
Phil

 

[AlexC]

Another option (which may not be all that viable, depending on whether you need a fast lens) would be a Tri-Elmar (28-35-50/4) on the R-D1. This would cover 80% of your shooting, but you'd be stuck with a f/4 maximum aperture.

 

[Phil_Hawkes]

Another option (which may not all that viable, depending on whether you need a fast lens) would be a Tri-Elmar (28-35-50/4) on the R-D1. This would cover 80% of your shooting, but you'd be stuck with a f/4 maximum aperture.

Most of my photography requires fast lenses, and I don't think f4 will be fast enough. I thinking I'm using f2.8 or wider for 95% of my shots. Even then I'm having to push the ISO past 1600 during RAW processing.

So, unfortunately, the Tri-Elmar isn't quite for me. Thanks for the suggestion though !!!

Cheers,
Phil

 

[RML]

My dilemma is that if I buy a second R-D1 now, then the second R-D1 will have little value for me once the next generation digital rangefinder appears. This worries me a little.

Why do you think this?

Why does a second R-D1 loose its value as a work horse if/when a new generation comes out? It still works, it still does the same ecellent job it did before, and it keeps bringing in money, doesn't it?

You might want the new feautures of the second generation but that's just "want". not "need".

For now there's no second generation digital RF on the horizon (here we go again!) so your worries are like worrying about the sky falling down on your head: scary but unwarranted.

 

[Phil_Hawkes]

Why do you think this?

Why does a second R-D1 loose its value as a work horse if/when a new generation comes out? It still works, it still does the same ecellent job it did before, and it keeps bringing in money, doesn't it?

You might want the new feautures of the second generation but that's just "want". not "need".

Hi RML,

Thanks for your comment. You are correct, there are many things that are wants rather than needs. I will eventually learn how to frame the 90/75mm so the framelines I could live without: I suppose that was more of a want than a need.

However, for the dancing photos that I am taking, I am pretty sure that I "need" that bigger buffer. The bigger/better buffer is probably my only "need". I have already missed dancing shots because of a full buffer on the R-D1, and I can't see any way around it. I guess I'll get better at predicting what a dancer will do next, but there will still be circumstances where I need to take 3 or so shots in a row... and I can't do it with the R-D1.

My only option is to save as jpegs, but I don't think I can do this because image quality would suffer immensely: I usually push a stop or two past 1600 since I need a fast shutter to capture the action.

Everything else about the R-D1 is almost perfect. I sit in the audience with a monopod and am ignored within a few seconds. I just fire away through-out the dance. I get lots of out of focus shots, but the in focus shots can be amazing. I can't blame the camera for bad photos.. those are my fault. ..... But if the camera is losing me potential money and reputation because the camera is preventing me from taking the photo, then I should be considering a camera that will allow me to shoot reasonably fast (say once/twice a second) for several frames.

When/If such a camera becomes available, then my R-D1 will still be an excellent camera for lots of jobs, and will probably remain my preferred camera for lots of jobs. But the camera without the buffer problem will be the camera I "need" to use for shooting dancers.

That explains why I feel a bigger buffer is a "need" for me, rather than a "feature". (Thanks for posing that question RML.. it has helped me clarify my reasoning).

Maybe it is possible to use two R-D1s with the 2nd camera snapping while the 1st camera is clearing its buffer. I suppose that is part of the reason I posted this thread. Does nyone have experience with this?

Alternatively, I would be delighted if readers have some suggestions about my problem with the R-D1 buffer, ... there would be very little stopping the GAS then.

For now there's no second generation digital RF on the horizon (here we go again!) so your worries are like worrying about the sky falling down on your head: scary but unwarranted.

True.. I didnt really mean to get into a debate about the arrival of the next RF or its possible features. For now, I'm just assuming there will eventually be another digital RF that will solve my buffer problem. It hasn't stopped me buying my first R-D1 :angel: and probably won't stop me buying my second...

Cheers,
Phil

*I'm not sure if I'll have problems in shooting weddings since I shot my first wedding in jpeg and the buffer was never a problem. If people want to comments on their experiences with RAW in weddings, that would be great... but probably worth putting on a new thread... this thread covers enoguh issues already !! 🙂

 

[fgianni]

If I could afford another one, I'd get it, unfortunately, with new baby and all, I can only afford the one I have.

 

[RML]

Phil, there's a thread about Majoli shooting only digital P&S cameras. He does the same trick: 3shhot burst, grab other digicam, agian 3-shot burst while first cam empties buffer, repeat. What works for a pro war photog might work well for you too. 🙂

 

[Hektor]

If it were me, and I stress this is my personal preference.......

I would sell the RD-1 before it's superceded and devalues.......

Use the Hexar and say a VC, - two bodies is definately the way to do a wedding....

Buy a years supply of film and a dev tank for B/W.......

Get a s/h scanner, say nikon or minolta IV, for resale in 1 year if necessary...

Use a P/S or D50 / 350D if digital was absolutely critical, or your camera-phone.

Re-assess when new RF digis are around, MD, Zeiss, etc.

Regards JC.

 

[Hektor]

The alternative is force yourself to work with ONE lens....

you'll run about a lot !!!.......

maybe a 50f1.5 or 35f1.7.....

Hmmmm...... I might do that instead.... HCB did.

 

[Hektor]

p.s I do it my way at the moment,... two M4P's, 35f2 and 75f1.4, motor bases, and an assistant to reload. The critical bit is the reloader !

 

[Val]

Phil...Get a Panasonic LC1 (Digilux 2). I've shot both the LC1 and the R-D1. IMHO, the LC1 will produce images as good (or better) than the R-D1. Plus you've got a 28-90mm zoom with the LC1 and it handles a lot like a traditional rangefinder...Best, Val

 

[Phil_Hawkes]

Phil...Get a Panasonic LC1 (Digilux 2). I've shot both the LC1 and the R-D1. IMHO, the LC1 will produce images as good (or better) than the R-D1. Plus you've got a 28-90mm zoom with the LC1 and it handles a lot like a traditional rangefinder...Best, Val

Hi Val, What is the noise of the LC1 like at high ISO?
Phil

 

[Chaser]

Another good and fairly cheap option would be to get a canon 10d and an 85mm f1.8 or 100mm f2 and use the rd1 with 28mm-35mm lenses and the 10d for the long stuff... I have a 10d and a 100mm f2 and i can attest to the quality of the combonation as well as the sound that the camera makes (it is about as quiet as a leica). This would also give you some extra flexability with close ups and flash.... i think the lens + body combo would only run aprox $800

 

[Phil_Hawkes]

If it were me, and I stress this is my personal preference.......

I would sell the RD-1 before it's superceded and devalues.......

Use the Hexar and say a VC, - two bodies is definately the way to do a wedding....

Buy a years supply of film and a dev tank for B/W.......

Get a s/h scanner, say nikon or minolta IV, for resale in 1 year if necessary...

Use a P/S or D50 / 350D if digital was absolutely critical, or your camera-phone.

Re-assess when new RF digis are around, MD, Zeiss, etc.

Regards JC.

Hi JC,

Thanks for your comments. I appreciate the advice on two cameras for a wedding ... good to know I am thinking in the right direction!!!

However, I think I will stick with the R-D1. I take a LOT of photos (~700 an evening for a dance performance) and the R-D1 is the cheapest way to allow such a large number of photos. I know I probably take more photos than is necessary, but of my reasons for having the R-D1 is to get cheap practise.

I already have a scanner (Epson 4870), so I guess I could simply use film and then transfer it to digital rather than getting prints made direct from film. I must admit that I have found scanning quite time consuming... and I don't have a lot of spare time (since I have a full time job as well). But it is a good back-up if the R-D1 goes tail-up.

Thanks again for your comments! Cheers, Phil

 

[Phil_Hawkes]

Another good and fairly cheap option would be to get a canon 10d and an 85mm f1.8 or 100mm f2 and use the rd1 with 28mm-35mm lenses and the 10d for the long stuff... I have a 10d and a 100mm f2 and i can attest to the quality of the combonation as well as the sound that the camera makes (it is about as quiet as a leica). This would also give you some extra flexability with close ups and flash.... i think the lens + body combo would only run aprox $800

Hi Chaser... I have been starting to think along these lines too. One of the reasons I have gone for a rangefinder is the low light focussing ability... I am more of an available-light kind of photographer. What is the 10d (or for that matter, other SLRs) like to focus at in low light at f2?

Phil

 

[Val]

The LC1 only goes up to 400 (the aperture range is 2.0-2.4). 400 is managable in most instances, but some images may require some post-processing. I do not find the noise any worse than at 400 with the R-D1.

Off the immediate topic but to the point of your original post...The LC1 addresses the lens switching issue. Further, you could buy 2 (or maybe 3, used) LC1s for the price of one R-D1 to address the buffer thing.

Hope this helps...Val

 

[Chaser]

Although there is a part of me that never trusts auto focus, and ignoring the fact that i would trade in my 10d plus lenses for an RD-1 any day, I have had consistent focus in situations where light was almost non-existant. I shot a concert a few weeks back and the lighting dictated that my camera was set at f1.8 1/20th-1/30th of a second at 3200iso and the focus never missed....there were however a good number of motion blurred images. For some samples here is a link to the shots i took that night... all at iso 3200 with canon's best buy 50mm f1.8 lens....

http://www.flickr.com/photos/chaseallgood/sets/1060659/

It is not the most elegant tool but it gets the job done and i figure it will help pay for the RD-1 or digital hexar m whatever ... that i hope to get in the future...