i don't understand

IF I didn't decide to go for the M8 a few years back, I would have given the RD1 a try. However, compared to the M9, X100, and Fuji X-Pro1 (my current cameras)... I just think it wouldn't hold up for my wants/needs. Yes, I do occasionally print as large as 24x36" ... so the 6mp does matter.
 
I stand corrected -> 24mm Summilux - $6500- gulp..... Dont think I will be searching for one any time soon..

Sorry about the text colour; pressed the wrong button!

The ZM 25/2.8 is almost 50% more than I paid for the camera - I will have to be content with what for now - I have spent far to much in the last 2 weeks...
 
I think the RD-1 is one of those cameras that maintains its value due to some quality other than (or at least addition to, since it is hard to separate demand) its scarcity.

The Panasonic LC1/Digilux 2 is another one that comes to mind. While many other cameras quickly or already had better specs (especially the EVF, autofocus speed), what one got out of the lens+sensor was/is good enough for a lot of people, and it maintained its value better than other cameras.
 
I think the shutter cocking lever was a marketing mistake. fine in use, but I think it turned some folks off, seems kinda....poseur. Bigger and louder than a Leica. Honestly, other than that, I can't see why people wouldn't try it. Maybe now, the idea that it might not be supported? Certainly if they had continued the series there would be greater comfort in adopting the R-D1, though I wonder if the price would dive with newer models? Guess we'll never know. I don't have one right now, and that's the right choice for me, but I REALLY enjoyed the R-D1. The X100 is ALMOST as fun!
doug
 
dreilly said:
I think the shutter cocking lever was a marketing mistake. fine in use, but I think it turned some folks off, seems kinda....poseur. Bigger and louder than a Leica. Honestly, other than that, I can't see why people wouldn't try it. Maybe now, the idea that it might not be supported? Certainly if they had continued the series there would be greater comfort in adopting the R-D1, though I wonder if the price would dive with newer models? Guess we'll never know. I don't have one right now, and that's the right choice for me, but I REALLY enjoyed the R-D1. The X100 is ALMOST as fun!
doug
Click to expand...

I generally agree with you, except i'd argue the shutter cocking lever has only attracted serious RF users, not turned them away. My guess would be all the people who would have gripes with the R-D1 wold not list the shutter crank as one of them (though i could be wrong).

I think it was really smart on Epson's part, for it conserved battery life by not having to build in that motor (and we know the epson's battery life is an achilles) + it does give it that retro/film camera feel (especially with the reversible lcd!) 🙂

If Epson continued the series with an R-D2, i'd be the first in line so long as it was under $4Gs
 
Gabriel M.A. said:
I'm pretty sure there are lots of people who have M-mount lenses and try the RD1. In fact, I've never met anyone who owns an RD1 that doesn't have at least one M-mount lens.

Me missin' somethin'?
Click to expand...

Gabriel, he meant why do users who own M-lenses not TRY an R-D1, as opposed to why do R-D1 owners not own M-Lenses (what you articulated).

The usual gripe is lack options for a true RF in which to mount M lenses, and thus Back Alley's point was why not try the R-D1. The discussion then unfolded from there. I think it'd be silly for an R-D1 owner with a native M-mount camera to not have any M-lenses! 😀
 
dreilly said:
I think the shutter cocking lever was a marketing mistake. fine in use, but I think it turned some folks off, seems kinda....poseur. Bigger and louder than a Leica.
Click to expand...


Oooooh! "Back in the day" (pre-2007) it was quite a ruckus (no, Auto-de-Fe evoking) to suggest otherwise.

Oh, how times change. Unless, of course, one doesn't know what "Twitter" means 😉
 
i bought an R-D1. had some issues with the LCD and worried about getting it repaired, but didn't really like the camera much anyway - it didn't fit my hands terribly well and the controls were funky. i sent it back for a refund.

i debated between the M8 and M9 for a bit, decided i preferred the same format as my M4-2, and went for it. fits my hands better, controls work just the way i want. it produces beautiful results. cost a bunch but i can afford it.

the M9 is simply the camera i wanted, the R-D1 wasn't.
 
huntjump said:
Gabriel, he meant why do users who own M-lenses not TRY an R-D1, as opposed to why do R-D1 owners not own M-Lenses (what you articulated).

The usual gripe is lack options for a true RF in which to mount M lenses, and thus Back Alley's point was why not try the R-D1. The discussion then unfolded from there. I think it'd be silly for an R-D1 owner with a native M-mount camera to not have any M-lenses! 😀
Click to expand...

Ah.


I think the main issue is obvious: most people fear what they don't know, and it's even worse when one reads more negative things about it than good things. I think the main reason why the RD-1 still fetches a relatively high price is because it's not the target of the same noise machine that the Leica brand attracts.


For those too shy to try "digital", in the OP's case, it's a surer bet to buy a new m4/3 or Sony NEX and resell (or gift away) to others if the experiment isn't to their liking, than a cult camera such as the RD-1.
 
maybe i'm an oddball but i have no m mount lenses!

i chalk it up to the fact that i also use my LTM lenses on my bessa R and my russian cameras.
 
I have a 10x15'ish print made by RichC, a member here and of the RPS, made with an RD1 I was surprised by just how good it was, I understand some of his RPS submission was made with the camera so it must be pretty good to live in that company

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom