Just curious-How many R-D1s does this list have?

[driggett]

I was just wandering how many of you have an R-D1?
I have one.
Thanks,
Chris

 

[driggett]

I do not belong to any vendor or marketing company. I was just wandering.
Thanks,
Chris

 

[RML]

Chris, I wish you were working for Epson so I could ask you where in Holland I could fondle and perhaps buy an R-D1.

Epson Holland sucks when it comes to providing any information on the R-D1. They refer me to a webpage where I can check for dealers. Turns out that in a 100 km radius around Amsterdam there's not ONE Epson dealer, which means (small as Holland is) that there's not one dealer in the entire country. Or that search tool is crappy. Anyway, for someone who might be willing to part with 3000+ euro you might expect a bit more service.

On eBay the R-D1 goes for well over 3000 euros, plus I don't know (and thus trust) the sellers, at least not when it comes to that kind of loot. I might just get myself a tripp to Japan and buy the R-D1 there....

 

[driggett]

RML,
If you want one from a reputable camera dealer check out B&H photo video in NY or Calumet. I know B&H ships overseas because when I was staying in Switzerland I bought many an item from them. The US price is $2999 and with the EURO against the dollar that it a pretty cheap way to go. I have enclosed the link to the product page.

<http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?ci=1&sb=ps&pn=1&sq=desc&InitialSearch=yes&O=SearchBar&A=search&Q=*&shs=epson+r-d1&image.x=7&image.y=7>


How about taking a trip to London to see one. I believe several camera dealers in London maybe Robert White may have one for you to play with.

Good luck,
Chris

 

[Sean Reid]

I decided to own an R-D1 after writing my review.

Sean

 

[pete]

i decided to own one after reading your review.

 

[Sean Reid]

LOL, I do hear that from time to time. I hope you like it.

Cheers,

Sean

 

[mfs]

Hi.

I have read your reviews Sean, and I am very interested in the RD-1. My only reluctance is the cost, and the possibility that one of two things will happen.
1) The camera is not a financial success, and will not be supported in the future, or
2) the concept of a digital RF is financially successful, and either a RD-2, Zeiss-Ikon digital, or Leica digital comes along with improved feature sets.
I realize that Leica had indicated a digital M in 2006 (even more expensive??), and that Zeiss has hinted at a digital versiion of the new ZI film body.

I also realize that with the fast changing digital world one must make a decision, and either go for it, or wait it out (thus not enjoying the use and advantages of the product).

I am still in the process of deciding.

I have seen some of the on line postings, and I am most impressed with the apparent low noise performance at ISO 1600. My Canon 20D cannot perform at that low noise level. However, in all fairness, web posted images should not be compared with either monitor images, or printed images.

So, I am asking for your help again with this important, and expensive decision.

What should I do??????????????????????

Thank you.

Martin

 

[driggett]

Martin,
My own viewpoint is that this camera is great for a carry around, travel, snap shots and the like. It is also good for other things but this is what my purpose is.

As for the cost figure it out like this. Figure out what your cost of a roll of film and it's developing but not the prints is and then divide the camera cost by this figure. Will you shoot this many rolls of film in what you perceive is the life time of you owning this camera? If it is close then the camera pays for it's self. That is one of the deciding factors of mine when decidng on this camera vs an M7.
Good luck,
Chris

 

[mfs]

Thanks Chris.

My reluctance is starting to wear down.

Of course, I would add the cost of a spare battery, and several SD cards to the equation. But, you are correct, in the long run the operating costs favor the RD-1.

Have you noted any problems with the RD-1??? Any incompatible lenses??? Any operational problems??

Thanks.

Martin

 

[driggett]

Martin.
No problems so far. Although I swear the frame lines are a little smaller than the actual caputred picture area.

Think of it this way, at 6.1 mega pixels the camera captures great photograghs for blow up sizes greater then the average non professional photographer needs. It is small and light enough to use it as a second body when the r-D2 or Leica MD camera comes out. I just wish it had framelines for a 21 mm and 90 mm lenses.
Cheers,
Chris

 

[mfs]

Thanks again Chris.

I hav already purchased a 21D, and 15D viewfinder from CameraQuest for $ 175.

I guess I am more inclined to purchase the RD-1 than I sound.

Martin

 

[driggett]

Martin,
I will sell you mine for only $1. The shipping and handling which is mandatory will cost you $10000;-)

I have a question about those viewfinders that you purchased. When they say 21mm they mean for a 21mm real lens but framed for a 31.5 mm is this correct?

Just go out and buy one already;-)
Cheers,
Chris

 

[mfs]

Boy, am I killing myself by agonizing over this.

Anyway, the D designation on the finder indicates that it is set up for the RD-1 field of view. Therefore, the 21D actualy has a field of view of 21x1.53, or a 31mm equivalent lens.

If I buy your RD-1, will you buy another one??

What lenses do you use with the RD-1???

Martin

 

[driggett]

Martin,
Yes I would buy another one even though it has some limitations it fits my needs.
I have the Lecia 28 f/2, 35 f/2, and the 50 f/2 Lenses. I would like to buy a 21mm and a 90mm.
Cheers,
Chris

 

[mfs]

That is a nice mix of lenses.
I just recently purchased a used (mint) Leica 21mm asp.
I tested it in my usual way (newspaper at closest focus, and at comparable distances for image size comparisons to my other Leica lenses - 28, 35, 50mm) on Kodak 400 chromagenic film.

It was surprisingly sharp at the edges even wide open. The angle of view is staggering. Can't wait to try it in real life!! Maybe on an RD-1!!!!!!!!!

Thanks for all of help, advice, and support.

Martin

 

[Sean Reid]

Hiya Martin,

I couldn't begin to tell you what to do. I think many of us hesitated for quite awhile before buying because of the camera's $3000 cost. Two years ago I plunked down $7200 for a 1Ds and that certainly created a few butterflies in my stomach. Don't answer this question on the forum (but rather in your own head): Can you afford it? If this is not the best time to spend $3000, follow your common sense. If you can afford it and you want it, then go get it. You'll likely lose a lot of money on it if you sell it in a couple of years. But if you keep it, you'll lose nothing. If you keep it a very long time it may even become collectable, but there's no point in counting on that.

You wrote:

"My only reluctance is the cost, and the possibility that one of two things will happen.
1) The camera is not a financial success, and will not be supported in the future"

That's possible although right now Epson tells me they're planning on another model down the line. But you never know. The folks who can work on Voigtlanders may be able to fix parts of the camera and folks who work on digital SLRs may be able to work on the rest. Or maybe you won't need repair. Or maybe Epson will take care of us no matter what. They've been very good so far about replacing cameras with problems or defects.

", or
2) the concept of a digital RF is financially successful, and either a RD-2, Zeiss-Ikon digital, or Leica digital comes along with improved feature sets. I realize that Leica had indicated a digital M in 2006 (even more expensive??), and that Zeiss has hinted at a digital versiion of the new ZI film body."

I know that Leica plans to do that and Zeiss may do it if they can. Can you wait? Do you want to? It's all gambling, really.

Those of us who've bought this camera are largely in uncharted waters. First serious camera for Epson, first digital rangefinder, etc.. Many people think we're crazy to spend $3000 for an R-D1. I couldn't care less. I buy what I want or need if I can afford it. If I don't like it later on I sell it, eat the loss and keep on truckin. I'm one of those people who believes that any of us could be hit by a bus tommorow, so I don't tend to wait around a lot unless I must.

I've made thousands of pictures with the R-D1 already. Some have already earned $$. Some aren't intended to earn anything. A bit of paint has already chipped off my on-off switch - more wear is inevitable even though I take fairly good care of my equipment. I don't really care about the chipped paint or the eventual brassing or whatever happens. Near the end of my warranty I'll check the camera out carefully and if anything's failed I'll send it in to Epson. Otherwise, a person couldn't pry this camera from my hands.

But that's me....and I didn't enjoy the $3000 price any more than anyone else.

Cheers,

Sean

 

[Sean Reid]

You got the Leica 21 Asph? Great lens.

Chris: The captured area is indeed larger than the frame lines. The frame lines show about 85% of the capture. Leica M show about the same as do most rangefinders. I discussed this in the reviews, as well as the coverage of the D finders, etc.

Cheers,

Sean

 

[jlw]

You got the Leica 21 Asph? Great lens.

Chris: The captured area is indeed larger than the frame lines. The frame lines show about 85% of the capture. Leica M show about the same as do most rangefinders. I discussed this in the reviews, as well as the coverage of the D finders, etc.

Cheers,

Sean

Here's a link to some rather boring pictures I shot that show how the R-D1's finder frames compare to the actual image area:

R-D1 finder pix

The first two comparo pictures show the 35mm and 50mm framelines. Sorry, I don't own a 28mm lens.

The others show longer lenses used with an auxiliary finder. You can see from these why Epson decided to build in the 85% 'safety factor' -- it doesn't take much error to raise the risk of cropping out parts of the subject that you wanted to be in the picture.

 

[Sean Reid]

Those were interesting to see. Thanks JLW.

Cheers,

Sean