kshapero
South Florida Man
I have a New Nikon D200 with:
Nikon 28mm/3.5 Ai'D
CV 40mm/2.0 Ai-P
Nikon 50mm/1.4 Ai'D
Nikon 60mm/2.8 Micro AF
A little bigger, a little bulkier. Built in Flash. Built like a tank.
But I like my ZI better. But the whole thing cost me about $1300.
Nikon 28mm/3.5 Ai'D
CV 40mm/2.0 Ai-P
Nikon 50mm/1.4 Ai'D
Nikon 60mm/2.8 Micro AF
A little bigger, a little bulkier. Built in Flash. Built like a tank.
But I like my ZI better. But the whole thing cost me about $1300.
laptoprob
back to basics
huh? Where does the R-D1 come in?
back alley
IMAGES
drinking again?
peter_n
Veteran
He got a new D200 from BestBuy for $599.
back alley
IMAGES
d200=rd1?
nah
nah
peter_n
Veteran
He didn't say it was...
peter_n
Veteran
equal, that is... 
Jason Sprenger
Well-known
I think his Nikon D200 rig is what was purchased in place of an R-D1, like buying a Bessa or a ZI as a cheap M7. I did essentially the same thing with a Canon Rebel XSi.
With top-notch performance and dramatically lower cost, giving up the RF viewfinder and handling, while regrettable, can be a very reasonable way to go at this time.
With top-notch performance and dramatically lower cost, giving up the RF viewfinder and handling, while regrettable, can be a very reasonable way to go at this time.
back alley
IMAGES
...like buying a Bessa or a ZI as a cheap M7...
bite your tongue!
bite your tongue!
raid
Dad Photographer
this thread gets more confusing ....
where does the RD-1 come in?
where does the RD-1 come in?
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
Do not try and understand the thread, that's impossible. Instead only try to realize the truth...that there is no RD-1 ...
Jason Sprenger
Well-known
By cheap, I simply mean comparatively low in price. I own two Bessas and a ZI and have considered them all a good value for my hard-earned.
Sam N
Well-known
Key difference: Bessas and ZIs are rangefinders that use the same lenses as M7s....
The D200, while a great deal, is not even a rangefinder.
frankweir
Member
I agree with Sam...how far do we go with this?? There are many different digital SLRs, used and new, that would be cheaper than an RD-1 and certainly a Leica M 8.2. And many have excellent image quality. The point being?? As has been said many times, the RD-1 has a way of operating and a feel to it that many users enjoy more than an SLR. I have heard good things about Pentax and Olympus which even have image stabilizing in the bodies and are even cheaper than the D-200.
Kevin
Rainbow Bridge
I bought a new R-D1s, including a 15mm Heliar, for 250 Euro.
It's called the Sigma DP1.
It's called the Sigma DP1.
sevres_babylone
Veteran
I think the mods should call an emergency caucus and decide which forum to move this thread to.
back alley
IMAGES
we did, but then realized we don't have a 'confused' section...
sevres_babylone
Veteran
If we did, I think I could live there. I'm coming to understand Dennis Hopper's line in The American Friend: "Every day, a little bit older, a little bit more confused."
peter_n
Veteran
I don't know what's wrong with you blokes, the OP's post is crystal clear: he bought a new D200 for $599 and considers it a "cheap" RD-1.
Wot is confusing about that?
Wot is confusing about that?
MCTuomey
Veteran
i'm with peter, meaning i'm not confused. i had an rd-1. sold it to return to film RFs and a small(er) digi SLR since i couldn't afford to own digi and film RFs at the same time. simple. works for me. i like using film RFs and a digi SLR more than i liked using an rd-1 by itself. just me though. and akiva, of course.