conradyiu
closer
Though not significant price drop for R-D1 at this time, as M4/3 and the like camera coming out, choices on the market to use classic vintage lens is getting common with just an adapter.
I really like my R-D1 (purchased in second hand in Shanghai) but too much tempting camera outside. I'm also waiting for the fuji x-100.
I mostly use the R-D1 and supplement with LX-3. Should I go for a M4/3 with some adapter and sell my R-D1 when the market price still not too low?
I really like my R-D1 (purchased in second hand in Shanghai) but too much tempting camera outside. I'm also waiting for the fuji x-100.
I mostly use the R-D1 and supplement with LX-3. Should I go for a M4/3 with some adapter and sell my R-D1 when the market price still not too low?
jarski
Veteran
why go m43's, when you can get NEX with same sized sensor than your RD1 ?
guess main question is, do you need the rangefinder ?
guess main question is, do you need the rangefinder ?
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
With the RD1 you still can get kind of wide with relatively inexpensive lenses. With the M4/3 your crop factor will again limit you on how wide you can go, if you're into that type of shooting.
I owned two RD1 bodies and I loved them. I only moved up to the M8 and M9 because of the long-term support that the Leica system offers with regard to repair & parts availability. If the RD1 had that better support I'd still have those bodies. That's not to say that it's worthless, hardly. The RD1 is a very potent performer in the interchangeable lens RF market. Walking around at night with a 35 f/2 lens, camera set to ISO800, it's the best digital RF camera out there for black & white capture. I still think that the RD1 files render better than the m9 before post processing.
Keep it & get some good glass. My $.02
Phil Forrest
I owned two RD1 bodies and I loved them. I only moved up to the M8 and M9 because of the long-term support that the Leica system offers with regard to repair & parts availability. If the RD1 had that better support I'd still have those bodies. That's not to say that it's worthless, hardly. The RD1 is a very potent performer in the interchangeable lens RF market. Walking around at night with a 35 f/2 lens, camera set to ISO800, it's the best digital RF camera out there for black & white capture. I still think that the RD1 files render better than the m9 before post processing.
Keep it & get some good glass. My $.02
Phil Forrest
Ezzie
E. D. Russell Roberts
To be quite honest, and with all due respect. These questions are rather pointless. Who better than you yourself know what you want? You´ll get all the different answers every time you ask a question as wavering as this.
I vote yes, keep the R-D1, because I have one and love it. And who knows what price the R-D1 will fetch in a year or two? Could end up a cult camera, or ...... not.
Someone who likes the m4/3 offerings will tell you get one of or the other m4/3 cameras. With this and that lens.
And someone has already told you to consider something else altogether. And yet there are still other options.
I vote yes, keep the R-D1, because I have one and love it. And who knows what price the R-D1 will fetch in a year or two? Could end up a cult camera, or ...... not.
Someone who likes the m4/3 offerings will tell you get one of or the other m4/3 cameras. With this and that lens.
And someone has already told you to consider something else altogether. And yet there are still other options.
usayit
Well-known
I enjoy my m4/3 camera and adapting my collection of lenses (PK, M42 Pentax, M). One of them often travels as a second camera to my R-D1. On the other hand, I would never consider m4/3rds as a replacement for either. R-D1 is a rangefinder of unique design and the other is not.
First decide if you like the R-D1 enough to keep it...
Honestly, their are m4/3rd options out there that are inexpensive enough to buy without the sale of the R-D1. Its just a matter of saving up...
First decide if you like the R-D1 enough to keep it...
Honestly, their are m4/3rd options out there that are inexpensive enough to buy without the sale of the R-D1. Its just a matter of saving up...
nestacio
Member
I've had my RD1 for the last three years and like you, felt the lure of newer (and thus, better supported) systems like the m4/3 and Leica Ms. I can provide some insight into my own thinking, because I actually went ahead and bought BOTH a GF1 and an M9 - the M9 is still being delivered so I can't make a meaningful comparison.
What I can say is that it never crossed my mind to sell my RD1 and treat the new purchases as "upgrades". I saw a place in my set of 'tools' for the RD1 going forward, regardless of whatever new systems come out. Here is a short set of the reasons:
+ larger sensor than m4/3, which converts your focal lengths to 2x instead of 1.5x
+ better (native) primes than m4/3; there is no 35 f/1.4 focal length for m4/3 unless you take an 18mm in an alternate mount
+ better imho high-iso performance than Leica M digital (I'll have to see with the M9)
+ "control by feel" dials to change ISO compared to checking LCD settings
+ manual shutter recock (I like this feature) since you can limit the noise of a full shot by recocking slowly and independently from firing the shutter
Of course, there are two other factors that will could make or break your decision to keep your RD1:
- Is there a repair shop nearby to do future services if Epson ends support
- Can you afford to keep the RD1 and try new systems
In my case, I have the very excellent Steve's Camera in Los Angeles nearby, he already CLA'd my RD1 when I first purchased it and I can walk in for service. In addition, I am fortunate to be able to support my hobby (I'm not a pro) so cost, while part of the decision, is less of a consideration for me.
Good luck,
Neil
What I can say is that it never crossed my mind to sell my RD1 and treat the new purchases as "upgrades". I saw a place in my set of 'tools' for the RD1 going forward, regardless of whatever new systems come out. Here is a short set of the reasons:
+ larger sensor than m4/3, which converts your focal lengths to 2x instead of 1.5x
+ better (native) primes than m4/3; there is no 35 f/1.4 focal length for m4/3 unless you take an 18mm in an alternate mount
+ better imho high-iso performance than Leica M digital (I'll have to see with the M9)
+ "control by feel" dials to change ISO compared to checking LCD settings
+ manual shutter recock (I like this feature) since you can limit the noise of a full shot by recocking slowly and independently from firing the shutter
Of course, there are two other factors that will could make or break your decision to keep your RD1:
- Is there a repair shop nearby to do future services if Epson ends support
- Can you afford to keep the RD1 and try new systems
In my case, I have the very excellent Steve's Camera in Los Angeles nearby, he already CLA'd my RD1 when I first purchased it and I can walk in for service. In addition, I am fortunate to be able to support my hobby (I'm not a pro) so cost, while part of the decision, is less of a consideration for me.
Good luck,
Neil
menos
Veteran
Personally, I would not even consider the µ4/3 cameras a substitute to the venerable R-D1 or any other RF camera for that matter.
They might have more modern sensors, but what they all lack compared to any real RF camera is the experience of seeing the world through a rangefinder with delicate mechanical controls of all exposure values.
It is like asking the question, whether buying a new small Toyota, to sell the old classic sports car, as it lacks ABS, has slightly less horse power, no CD radio, no electric sunroof and has to be fixed from time to time at the local mechanic's place (or your own garage).
If the question would be "Should I sell the R-D1 for a Leica digital RF?" the reasoning would be a much better match to serious answers - but a µ4/3 ?
I am in a slightly different quandary for some weeks now.
I don't use the R-D1 anymore, shoot mainly a M8.2 and have found much love lately for old film SLR cameras and of course, using film with the Leica M.
I can still not answer the question, whether I should part with the R-D1 or not.
(there is still hope, my better half develops an interest in photography by herself - I would hate, to find one of those electronics, when a wonderful R-D1 is in storage)
They might have more modern sensors, but what they all lack compared to any real RF camera is the experience of seeing the world through a rangefinder with delicate mechanical controls of all exposure values.
It is like asking the question, whether buying a new small Toyota, to sell the old classic sports car, as it lacks ABS, has slightly less horse power, no CD radio, no electric sunroof and has to be fixed from time to time at the local mechanic's place (or your own garage).
If the question would be "Should I sell the R-D1 for a Leica digital RF?" the reasoning would be a much better match to serious answers - but a µ4/3 ?
I am in a slightly different quandary for some weeks now.
I don't use the R-D1 anymore, shoot mainly a M8.2 and have found much love lately for old film SLR cameras and of course, using film with the Leica M.
I can still not answer the question, whether I should part with the R-D1 or not.
(there is still hope, my better half develops an interest in photography by herself - I would hate, to find one of those electronics, when a wonderful R-D1 is in storage)
Sell, Buy, Keep, etc the camera you think you will use the most...
elmer3.5
Well-known
Hello, I´d rather keep the rd1 than a 4/3 camera!
Bye!
Bye!
back alley
IMAGES
i am more than willing to accept all rd1 bodies that need a loving retirement home.
they will be maintained and used enough to keep them feeling young and useful...
just sayin'...
they will be maintained and used enough to keep them feeling young and useful...
just sayin'...
stocknowledge
Newbie
I have both the GF1 and the R-D1 and there is no comparison. The R-Db takes better photos and is much more fun to use. As an earlier poster stated, the only choice is between an R-D1 and a Leica M digital.
menos
Veteran
And even that would be a difficult one …
froyd
Veteran
I think the "fun to use" get to the core of the R-D1 for many people. The winding lever, the reversible display, the analog dials and the familiar RF controls all add up to a camera that sounds really fun to use day in and day out. I write "sounds" because unfortunately I don't own one.
Aside from the higher price of the M8, I wonder if having to rely on menus would ruin the experience for me. Any M8 owners want to help assuage my fears and lend me theirs for a few weeks?
The NEX and the u3/4 marvels sound very capable, but I cannot imagine they would be as much fun for me to use. Then again, I'm basing this assumption on my limited experience with digital cameras.
menos
Veteran
When coming from the EPSON, I hated, to go into the menu, to change ISO, as I constantly switch ISO, when surfing on the edge of shutter speed and light.
I have learned though, that switching ISO with the M8.2 really is just a press one button twice, turn rear dial a click, press button again affair.
I do this all the time and don't watch the LCD at all except the from time to time visual check, I would also do on the R-D1 ISO dial (which is less well readable in low light than the M8.2 LCD ISO value).
So for me, it has become almost a mechanical affair as with the R-D1.
The advance lever though, I deeply, deeply miss, which stings my hard every time, I switch form shooting a film Leica to the M8.2.
It is like jumping on a bicycle and missing the pedal, wanting to speed away ;-)
I have learned though, that switching ISO with the M8.2 really is just a press one button twice, turn rear dial a click, press button again affair.
I do this all the time and don't watch the LCD at all except the from time to time visual check, I would also do on the R-D1 ISO dial (which is less well readable in low light than the M8.2 LCD ISO value).
So for me, it has become almost a mechanical affair as with the R-D1.
The advance lever though, I deeply, deeply miss, which stings my hard every time, I switch form shooting a film Leica to the M8.2.
It is like jumping on a bicycle and missing the pedal, wanting to speed away ;-)
djonesii
Well-known
that could hurt!
that could hurt!
That does sound bad, and it might even hurt!
One of the quirks that like about my RD-1 is that advance lever. Lately, it has been sitting on the shelf due to an E-P1 with a Panasonic 20mm, I know that it's easy enough to focus manually, but the muse has been out lately, and I often just can't be bothered. Luckily I have the choice to use AF in A mode.
Dave
that could hurt!
That does sound bad, and it might even hurt!
One of the quirks that like about my RD-1 is that advance lever. Lately, it has been sitting on the shelf due to an E-P1 with a Panasonic 20mm, I know that it's easy enough to focus manually, but the muse has been out lately, and I often just can't be bothered. Luckily I have the choice to use AF in A mode.
Dave
stocknowledge
Newbie
That 20mm Panasonic "pancake" lens is a marvel. Can't think of a faster focusing lens. The GF1 with the 20mm is a wonderful traveling camera.
isorgb
Well-known
R-D1 is better than m4/3... for all aspects... for me of course.
R-D1 has amazing sensor. Epson's software developers did extremely good job. They gave us digital camera with film feelings on pictures! (Idon't think about winder lever or "fun for use").
m4/3 is very good, newer, faster, smaller, lighter etc. but personally, I sold m4/3 and keep R-D1.
Don't forget that EVF is not good in low light. Refreshing is averege and sometimes useless.
R-D1 has amazing sensor. Epson's software developers did extremely good job. They gave us digital camera with film feelings on pictures! (Idon't think about winder lever or "fun for use").
m4/3 is very good, newer, faster, smaller, lighter etc. but personally, I sold m4/3 and keep R-D1.
Don't forget that EVF is not good in low light. Refreshing is averege and sometimes useless.
conradyiu
closer
thanks all, should keep the R-D1. Just sold some of my canon LTM lens and keep only canon 35/1.5, 50/1.5 and CV 21/4