more crazy thoughts...revisited

back alley

back alley

IMAGES
Local time
8:48 AM
Joined
Jul 30, 2003
Messages
41,289
some thoughts and only thoughts at this time...

if the x100 works out for me and i get used to it and can figure out lightroom and can consistently create images that i am happy with...then this would be a fine back up camera and first line camera when needed/wanted.

then, would it make sense for me to sell both rd1 bodies and buy an m8.2 body?

would the m8.2 make a difference in the technical quality of my images over the rd1?
 
Yes images out of m8.2 are better. As I said in the other discussion, ergonomics, in my opinion, is not.
 
Ok I'll just say it. I like your pre X100 stuff better. I do understand the high iso advantage of the Fuji though.
 
The M8.2 will give you neither a 1:1 viewfinder nor a decently large 50mm frame but frame lines are more accurate at short to medium distance and IQ is second to none at low isos. Also you will have less vignetting with the M8.2 but if you like 40mm lenses you won't have accurate frame lines with it contrary to M8 and R-D1. Leica batteries are very expensive and third party ones must be totally drained before recharging failing which the battery level of the camera will give false results. Finally despite the so-called "vulcanite" leatherette, the M8.2 is slippery like a soap bar so you will need a thumb up or a hand grip presumably. Ah yes i forgot, IQ wise the available raw converters (incl. Aperture 3, Lightroom 3 and ACR) are generally mediocre with the M8 at the sole exception of Capture One IMHO.
 
I like my M8, still use it along side the M9. As stated, at low ISO it delivers a clean and crisp image.

You have Two RD-1's, and now an X-100. Sell one of the RD-1's, buy the M8 or M8.2. If you do not like it, you can turn it around with a minimum loss. If you like it- sell the RD-1.
 
i have to stop asking the same question again and again...

i just got the x100 and it has stirred up all those 'time for new/different' gear feelings that travel deep inside me...

i am satisfied with my rd1 and rd1s...they work great and one just had a tune up from epson...it would be crazy of/for me to sell them now for another camera that may or may not up my game.

i think i'll store the rd1/s in their favourite domke and just shoot with the x100 for awhile and hope for improvement and better images than i am currently getting with it.

worse come to worst and i will sell IT...
 
back alley said:
i have to stop asking the same question again and again...

i just got the x100 and it has stirred up all those 'time for new/different' gear feelings that travel deep inside me...

i am satisfied with my rd1 and rd1s...they work great and one just had a tune up from epson...it would be crazy of/for me to sell them now for another camera that may or may not up my game.

i think i'll store the rd1/s in their favourite domke and just shoot with the x100 for awhile and hope for improvement and better images than i am currently getting with it.

worse come to worst and i will sell IT...
Click to expand...
Joe, that makes sense to me.
 
The X100 shots you are posting are great... I really like my M8, except the crop factor which irritates me. The images from the M8, however, are superb! And keep at Lightroom, it is really excellent :)
 
Lens for lens, the M8 is sharper OOC than the RD1, but it isn't all about sharpness. The ergonomics of the RD1 are superior to the M8 but the M8 has a much more solid RF. Both will produce very good A3+ prints (18x12), but if you need to go bigger then the M8 wins. The M8 uses a Kodak sensor which produces great colour, but the RD1 also produces great colour albeit different. RD1 high ISO is better than M8. if you normally shoot at or below 1600 (1280) there is nothing to choose in real life. On the other hand, the X100 has better high ISO than both the RD1 and M8, has much better AF :D, has great colour and a great lens etc, etc.

As I said in a previous post, your images have improved significantly since you started using the RD1s. That may just be due to the immediacy of digital in which case the X100 or an M8 won't do that improvement any harm. You don't need any more cameras, you are doing just fine with the RD1s, but what has need to do with anything;) If you've started hankering after an M8, then just get one (M8 not M8.2). If you don't like it you'll probably be able to turn it around without loss. However, if you move the RD1s on, you'll find it difficult to replace them.

See how you get on with the X100 before diving in:)
 
Thardy said:
Ok I'll just say it. I like your pre X100 stuff better. I do understand the high iso advantage of the Fuji though.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, a few days worth of work (X100) against a collective body of work over an extended period of time (R-D1)? Doesn't seem fair to me.
 
I too just got an X100, and I'm still coming to grips with it. (I keep trying to use it as if it's my R-D1s :) ) I think the X100 will be a keeper, just because it's small, relatively simple, very good IQ, and autofocus. That's enough to make it a useful alternative to the R-D1s when the circumstances warrant. I'm mostly using the X100 now, just so I can learn it.

I've also been tempted by the call of the M8.2, and I think I'll eventually succumb, but I don't think I'll ever sell my R-D1s. My irresponsibly large accumulation of lenses is worth several times what I could realize from the sale, and at the very least the R-D1 will serve as a great hand-me-down to my daughter when she's big enough to hand-hold a real camera.

So, IMO: Keep the X100, assuming it works out for you; keep one R-D1 body; save for an M8.2.

::Ari
 
I did something diffirent .....

I did something diffirent .....

There are times when I just love the RF experience, and then those when it downright is just too hard ...... The RD-1 is just not my everyday shooter. But oh the images ....

That said, the G1 was too big, the EP-1 has no VF at all, neither is quite what I need when AF is just more important.

The way that I'm balancing the photo budget, the RD-1 would have to go for an X100. I decided that stuck at 35mm is not where I want to be.

So, I will Flea-Bay/forum off the G1/EP-1, and get a G3 ( all micro 4/3rds)

To me, your quandary is bit of Angles on a pin head, once you're across the RF bridge for all practical purposes the M8/RD-1 are equal. Yeah, I know all the tech stuff, but from 30,000 feet, they are the same. The M9 changes the DRF game.

JMHO, YMMV

Dave
 
I'm fairly sure, after taking pictures all these years, that the "best" photo is completely independent from technically the "best" camera, the best photo I feel comes from the most comfortable camera ... and if that happens to be a camera that's been obsolete for years, well it's still "best"
 
I've shot a friends x100 over the weekend. Cannot complain about the ISO at all, outstanding. viewfinder was awesome. Shutter was so stealthy. But it is not a manual focus camera, at least not with the firmware he had and it really made it feel like a hybrid between a high end P&S and a rf style camera. I didn't really enjoy it, but i didnt hate it.

After using and R-d1, it was the closest thing to my M bodies and unique in its own right, though dated. If you do not need high ISO and are not printing large, i see no reason to upgrade if you are happy. Not sure you need 2 R-d1 bodies, thats reallyup to you
 
I've owned and used both a lot. True, the RD1 ISO 1600 esp. for b/w is better than the M8 at 1250.

Of the 4 RD1/s I've had, one had the misaligned VF brand new, but IQ wise, the RD1 is right up there with the M8 IMHO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom