Didier
"Deed"
Received the replacement R-D1s
Received the replacement R-D1s
I have received the replacement R-D1s this week. The sensor and framelines are OK (I mean are not tilted), the rangefinder adjustment is, as Jon Cuff of RW had tested himself, within the specs of Epson (1 inch tolerance at close focus wide open, measured with a Color Skopar PII 35/2.5), but not really spot on on close focus with my 35 summilux asph, 50 summicron, 40 Nokton and 50/1.2 Canon; which have the the sharpness 2-5cm after the plane where I was focused.
This leads to endless discussions about focusing tolerances of each lens, as I believe this may vary from sample to sample. For instance, I owned the 35 Skopar PII two years ago, and it overfocused very strongly at infinity (on a CLA'd M6).
The horizontal alignment of the R-D1s was spot on at infinity, but after only 70 shots, it is slightly disaligned again. The vertical alignment was already slightly off when I opened the box.
To conclude, the camera is in a better state than the one I sent in, but still not 100% satisfying. Additionally, I encountered unexpected problems with focusing the Summilux 75. Not that I use this lens much on the Epson, but anyway I would have liked to use it from time to time.
Nevertheless I decided to keep the Epson, because of two reasons: the alternative digital rangefinder, the M8, is out of my financial reach (and not without flaws, too); and selling the whole M/LTM gear to jump into a DSLR system would not suit my photographing philosophy (and selling my M/LTM glass would break my heart).
Didier
Received the replacement R-D1s
I have received the replacement R-D1s this week. The sensor and framelines are OK (I mean are not tilted), the rangefinder adjustment is, as Jon Cuff of RW had tested himself, within the specs of Epson (1 inch tolerance at close focus wide open, measured with a Color Skopar PII 35/2.5), but not really spot on on close focus with my 35 summilux asph, 50 summicron, 40 Nokton and 50/1.2 Canon; which have the the sharpness 2-5cm after the plane where I was focused.
This leads to endless discussions about focusing tolerances of each lens, as I believe this may vary from sample to sample. For instance, I owned the 35 Skopar PII two years ago, and it overfocused very strongly at infinity (on a CLA'd M6).
The horizontal alignment of the R-D1s was spot on at infinity, but after only 70 shots, it is slightly disaligned again. The vertical alignment was already slightly off when I opened the box.
To conclude, the camera is in a better state than the one I sent in, but still not 100% satisfying. Additionally, I encountered unexpected problems with focusing the Summilux 75. Not that I use this lens much on the Epson, but anyway I would have liked to use it from time to time.
Nevertheless I decided to keep the Epson, because of two reasons: the alternative digital rangefinder, the M8, is out of my financial reach (and not without flaws, too); and selling the whole M/LTM gear to jump into a DSLR system would not suit my photographing philosophy (and selling my M/LTM glass would break my heart).
Didier
Last edited:
RichC
Well-known
Perhaps the rangefinder mechanism needs a bit of use to bed in to become stable (a bit like my Guzzi for about 500 miles after its rebuild!). Also, you should be able to get the near focus spot on with your 35 lux, etc. (Epson should use a more critical lens than the CV 35/2.5 as their standard lens to check focus).Didier said:
For the first few months after buying my camera, all my photos had a fairly deep depth of field, so I don't know how out of adjustment my camera was when new (infinity focus was fine). When I got around to checking the close focus, it was off by a couple of inches wide open, which I corrected, and the rangefinder remained correctly calibrated for several months until I dropped it (no damage, thankfully!) and had to recalibrate it. The camera has since been knocked around a bit, but not dropped again, and the rangefinder has remained in calibration.
All of my lenses focus accurately except for a cheap Soviet one and a ratty Elmar 90/4 - which I put down to the lenses, not the camera.
Anyway, what I'm saying, is I hope you've got a good R-D1s this time, Didier, and that after a bit of use and recalibration, the rangefinder will hopefully remain stable and in adjustment.