David Kieltyka
Clicking away feverishly
RSE is great. I'm using it for the majority of my R-D1 photos. Among other things it does a good job of mapping out hot pixels. 
I still prefer PhotoRAW's b&w conversions, though. I wish RSE had Sunny, Cloudy, Incandescent, etc. color balance presets too. I like to use them in other apps, like PhotoRAW, as jumping off points.
-Dave-
I still prefer PhotoRAW's b&w conversions, though. I wish RSE had Sunny, Cloudy, Incandescent, etc. color balance presets too. I like to use them in other apps, like PhotoRAW, as jumping off points.-Dave-
pfogle
Well-known
David - good point about the b/w - I also like the PhotoRAW jobs. The noise turns into great grain!
I love RSE's browser, though.
I love RSE's browser, though.
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
pfogle said:
I can figure out that EPR is an abbreviation for Epson Photo Raw (I assume this is the Windows-only standalone application.)
But what is RSE?
DaShiv
21st century digital boy
RawShooter Essentials, a free RAW converter. Here's a writeup.
sevres_babylone
Veteran
I thought Michael Reichmann’s review which isn’t a review was quite fair. I think that he makes it clear where he is coming from, and that puts his thoughts into perspective.
I should indicate where I am coming from. I have never owned a digital SLR. My sole digital experience was with a Nikon 3500 and was not a happy one. The only SLR system I have used has been Olympus OM, which I have used for nearly 30 years. I shoot mostly when I travel, and after that, my main subjects are bands in dimly lit clubs, and some modern dance. My “kit” has generally been a 40mm or 50mm along with either the 85mm F2 or 100 2.8. While many of you may have been waiting for a digital M, all I ever wanted was a digital OM. When I first read about the R D1, I was attracted by its size.
I do have some rangefinder experience with my Mamiya 7 and my XA; but in terms of focusing, I would have described myself as an SLR person.
I have had my R-D1 for one month now. In that time I have shot a few bands, and just got back Thursday from two days in Havana and nine in Els Salvador. I shot a bit of “dance” at the outdoor Rhumba and at the Tropicana, both in Havana.
Ergonomics: I have been really pleased with the handling of the R-D1, even if the shutter speed dial is where everyone except Olympus put it. I haven’t found using the R-D1 to be a “funky experience.” My Mamiya experience may be a factor here, but I would say that I am more comfortable focusing the R-D1 than the Mamiya 7. Focusing in low light has been a revelation, and has been more accurate for me than with my Olympus. Someone coming from an autofocus SLR system might have a different experience. I don’t know.
Framing: I wear thick glasses. I was aware of the 28mm framing issue before I bought the camera. I bought it eyes wide open, which is for me, a position in which I can see slightly better than eyes closed tight. I have been using two Voigtlander lenses, the 35 2.5 pancake II and the 50 Nokton. Framing with the 50mm is wonderful. I actually have been having some trouble with the 35mm lines -- not enough to make me regret my purchase, but problems none the less. For some reason, I do better at night with my framing. I have had trouble with “architectural” lines, using the 35mm frame lines. This is not new for me, but has been worse than with my other cameras. For some reason, I do better in portrait mode. The only (slight) consolation, is that I can see the results quickly, and re shoot, rather than a few weeks and a few thousands of miles later.
Controls: I disagree with Reichmann’s comments regarding the ISO dial. As he pointed out in his Canon 300D review, with digital cameras ISO becomes a third and equal partner to F-stop and shutter speed. I think the R-D1 implementation is wonderful. I guess it depends on where you are coming from in terms of readability, but I find its readability no worse than on my OM-4T or the XA. But you don’t really have to read it. There are no intermediate settings. Just 200, 400, 800, 1600. The dials clicks nicely, and I find it easy to set by feel.
I like the analogue dials. More than I thought I would. I need to learn more about the white balance settings though. As for the the frame line setting, my experience is differerent from Reichmann’s. I have accidentally changed the setting while getting the camera out of my Domke 803.
Wind lever and battery: I put both together, because if the wind lever really helps battery life, than it is a useful if not necessary feature. If not, I could do without it. I have missed some shots. But I agree with Reichmann that the battery life is very disappointing. I was glad to have have bought a third battery the day before my trip. It doesn’t help that the included charger only allows you to charge one battery at a time.
I can’t comment on digital functions, because I have no point of comparison.
Image Quality: My point of comparison is with film, and I am a fan of low light. Before my conversion, my film of choice was NPZ, shot at 1250 and pushed one stop. Although I have made only a few prints, I have been pleased with the results from the R-D1 at 1600. And I don’t miss the scanning and spotting.
I hope this is helpful to anyone thinking of going the R-D1 route.
I should indicate where I am coming from. I have never owned a digital SLR. My sole digital experience was with a Nikon 3500 and was not a happy one. The only SLR system I have used has been Olympus OM, which I have used for nearly 30 years. I shoot mostly when I travel, and after that, my main subjects are bands in dimly lit clubs, and some modern dance. My “kit” has generally been a 40mm or 50mm along with either the 85mm F2 or 100 2.8. While many of you may have been waiting for a digital M, all I ever wanted was a digital OM. When I first read about the R D1, I was attracted by its size.
I do have some rangefinder experience with my Mamiya 7 and my XA; but in terms of focusing, I would have described myself as an SLR person.
I have had my R-D1 for one month now. In that time I have shot a few bands, and just got back Thursday from two days in Havana and nine in Els Salvador. I shot a bit of “dance” at the outdoor Rhumba and at the Tropicana, both in Havana.
Ergonomics: I have been really pleased with the handling of the R-D1, even if the shutter speed dial is where everyone except Olympus put it. I haven’t found using the R-D1 to be a “funky experience.” My Mamiya experience may be a factor here, but I would say that I am more comfortable focusing the R-D1 than the Mamiya 7. Focusing in low light has been a revelation, and has been more accurate for me than with my Olympus. Someone coming from an autofocus SLR system might have a different experience. I don’t know.
Framing: I wear thick glasses. I was aware of the 28mm framing issue before I bought the camera. I bought it eyes wide open, which is for me, a position in which I can see slightly better than eyes closed tight. I have been using two Voigtlander lenses, the 35 2.5 pancake II and the 50 Nokton. Framing with the 50mm is wonderful. I actually have been having some trouble with the 35mm lines -- not enough to make me regret my purchase, but problems none the less. For some reason, I do better at night with my framing. I have had trouble with “architectural” lines, using the 35mm frame lines. This is not new for me, but has been worse than with my other cameras. For some reason, I do better in portrait mode. The only (slight) consolation, is that I can see the results quickly, and re shoot, rather than a few weeks and a few thousands of miles later.
Controls: I disagree with Reichmann’s comments regarding the ISO dial. As he pointed out in his Canon 300D review, with digital cameras ISO becomes a third and equal partner to F-stop and shutter speed. I think the R-D1 implementation is wonderful. I guess it depends on where you are coming from in terms of readability, but I find its readability no worse than on my OM-4T or the XA. But you don’t really have to read it. There are no intermediate settings. Just 200, 400, 800, 1600. The dials clicks nicely, and I find it easy to set by feel.
I like the analogue dials. More than I thought I would. I need to learn more about the white balance settings though. As for the the frame line setting, my experience is differerent from Reichmann’s. I have accidentally changed the setting while getting the camera out of my Domke 803.
Wind lever and battery: I put both together, because if the wind lever really helps battery life, than it is a useful if not necessary feature. If not, I could do without it. I have missed some shots. But I agree with Reichmann that the battery life is very disappointing. I was glad to have have bought a third battery the day before my trip. It doesn’t help that the included charger only allows you to charge one battery at a time.
I can’t comment on digital functions, because I have no point of comparison.
Image Quality: My point of comparison is with film, and I am a fan of low light. Before my conversion, my film of choice was NPZ, shot at 1250 and pushed one stop. Although I have made only a few prints, I have been pleased with the results from the R-D1 at 1600. And I don’t miss the scanning and spotting.
I hope this is helpful to anyone thinking of going the R-D1 route.
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
DaShiv said:
Thanks for the clarification. Looks nice
Windows only :bang:
David Kieltyka
Clicking away feverishly
jlw said:Thanks for the clarification. Looks nice
Yes, this bites. I've been using PhotoRAW on my PC as well, though, because I find the standalone version more pleasant to use than the plug-in. Sometimes having a dual PC/Mac setup comes in handy. :angel:
-Dave-