jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
The R-D 1 has a 1x finder magnification, although with a relatively short base length. It seems to focus the 50/0.95 OK as long as you pick a "focusable" area on the subject and take some care in lining up the two images. A longer RF base definitely would make it easier (it was noticeably easier with the same lens on my Canon 7s) but I think I'm gettin' by.
It was a bit hard to tell about percentages, because I also was shooting a lot of the time at pretty slow shutter speeds. I'm not always good at telling whether a picture is blurry because I misfocused, or because I or the subject moved during the exposure.
As I get more experience with it, I'll post an update.
It was a bit hard to tell about percentages, because I also was shooting a lot of the time at pretty slow shutter speeds. I'm not always good at telling whether a picture is blurry because I misfocused, or because I or the subject moved during the exposure.
As I get more experience with it, I'll post an update.
lightwriter
Established
So, otherwise it is the same formula. That makes sense though.jlw said:
That's it! Now I HAVE to get one just so that I have something to do over Xmas break!!jlw said:
That would be awesome, I look forward to seeing them.jlw said:
Thanks for all the info.
BTW - Your pics look great...for a "a crummy, unsharp lens"
Last edited:
mactansblue
Member
Who changed it for you ?
Who changed it for you ?
Who changed it for you ?
I would love to get my 0.95 changed over to M mount.jlw said:
Yes, I've really put my foot in it this time. I paid a guy serious money to convert my somewhat doggy Canon 50mm f/0.95 lens (previously wedded to my Canon 7s) to Leica M mount so I could use it on my R-D 1.
I wasn't sure this would even work, and even less sure that it would be a good idea: after all, the lens has a mixed reputation at best, and sometimes even lenses that work quite well on film don't make an easy transition to digital.
I had tried "dry-fitting" the lens to the camera body (just by holding it up to the lens mount) and it looked as if it probably wouldn't block the viewfinder or rangefinder windows... but beyond that, the whole thing was a roll of the dice.
Anyway... I got the converted lens back today, and in the evening I headed off to a "Nutcracker" rehearsal to try it out. For variety, I also tried a few shots with another unlikely lens: a 135/2.8 Komura in Leica screwmount, fitted to the R-D 1 via an adapter.
Since getting home, I've stayed up much too late running images through Adobe Camera Raw, selecting a few, and writing captions. To spoil the suspense only slightly, I'll say that I was surprised... but largely in a good way, I think.
For a fuller rundown, you'll need to click the following link:
Canon 50/0.95 on Epson R-D 1
R
RML
Guest
I missed this post!
JLW, great post, great photos. I was most impressed with the shot of the two girls discussing pointe shoes.
Dang, this one other lens to add to the list of lenses-to-buy-when-I-win-the-lottery-bigtime.
JLW, great post, great photos. I was most impressed with the shot of the two girls discussing pointe shoes.
Dang, this one other lens to add to the list of lenses-to-buy-when-I-win-the-lottery-bigtime.
Bob Parsons
Established
Some time ago I purchased a converted lens specifically to use for function photography where flash and a noisy SLR would be a no no.
I'm very pleased indeed with the results. With careful post processing the slight softness and lower contrast at 0.95 can be overcome, if needed. Only minor gripe I have is that under very high contrast backlit conditions some flare does spill over into darker regions - only really a problem if you want to cut out and paste objects into another image.
I find it necessary to use a 72mm 486 UV-IR cut filter to avoid magenta casts due to the R-D1's IR sensitivity when photographing in tungsten lit venues - that's unfortunate because the filter does add additional flare/reflections. I'm trying to obtain an MRC version.
I've found when used with the R-D1's crop factor a 72-67mm step down ring and a 67mm B+W metal tele hood work well to protect from extraneous light. A Canon 72mm lens cap (squeeze release) fits the end of the lens hood.
Perhaps a warning. On my lens it's advised you mount and unmount with the lens set to it's closest focus, otherwise there's the possibility the cam follower roller wheel in the camera can touch the rear element. When my lens is set to infinity the R-D1 is OK, the Leica M6 is not. I checked by breathing on a cold lens (to form condensation) mounting and unmounting and looking to see if the condensation had been marked. Whether this will be a problem depends on the design of the coupling tab that has been added to the lens when it was modified.
I'm considering obtaining a second lens, but first I want to see how the one I have will perform on the M8.
Here's a recent example taken at or near full aperture on the R-D1. The lighting was was very low contrasty yellow tungsten. Image is about half the frame area @ ISO 800.
Bob.
I'm very pleased indeed with the results. With careful post processing the slight softness and lower contrast at 0.95 can be overcome, if needed. Only minor gripe I have is that under very high contrast backlit conditions some flare does spill over into darker regions - only really a problem if you want to cut out and paste objects into another image.
I find it necessary to use a 72mm 486 UV-IR cut filter to avoid magenta casts due to the R-D1's IR sensitivity when photographing in tungsten lit venues - that's unfortunate because the filter does add additional flare/reflections. I'm trying to obtain an MRC version.
I've found when used with the R-D1's crop factor a 72-67mm step down ring and a 67mm B+W metal tele hood work well to protect from extraneous light. A Canon 72mm lens cap (squeeze release) fits the end of the lens hood.
Perhaps a warning. On my lens it's advised you mount and unmount with the lens set to it's closest focus, otherwise there's the possibility the cam follower roller wheel in the camera can touch the rear element. When my lens is set to infinity the R-D1 is OK, the Leica M6 is not. I checked by breathing on a cold lens (to form condensation) mounting and unmounting and looking to see if the condensation had been marked. Whether this will be a problem depends on the design of the coupling tab that has been added to the lens when it was modified.
I'm considering obtaining a second lens, but first I want to see how the one I have will perform on the M8.
Here's a recent example taken at or near full aperture on the R-D1. The lighting was was very low contrasty yellow tungsten. Image is about half the frame area @ ISO 800.
Bob.
Attachments
Last edited:
zuikologist
.........................
Good work. The lens seems to perform above expectations and gets the shots which would not otherwise be possible.
Terao
Kiloran
This is what I like about the R-D1 - esoteric old film lenses given a new lease of life
I'm really enjoying using my Canon 50mm f/1,2 on the R-D1 - its a pleasure to use such a heavy well-crafted chunk of glass and brass...
I'm also consistently amazed by the low noise (or rather the pleasentness of the noise) that the R-D1 generates at high ISOs...
I'm really enjoying using my Canon 50mm f/1,2 on the R-D1 - its a pleasure to use such a heavy well-crafted chunk of glass and brass...
I'm also consistently amazed by the low noise (or rather the pleasentness of the noise) that the R-D1 generates at high ISOs...