New RD-1x

Personally I'm more intrigued by the rationale behind why Epson have reintroduced the R-D1, than a groundhog day monologue about why someone won't buy it.

Has there ever been any consensus over serial number for the original camera - ie how many were produced?

I find the theory that this version simply uses up the old parts slightly implausible; why would they have amassed, say, 1,000 set of parts and not assembled them?
 
Paul T wrote - Personally I'm more intrigued by the rationale behind why Epson have reintroduced the R-D1, than a groundhog day monologue about why someone won't buy it.

That's where I sit on this. I wonder if there is some other camera in development at Epson? Restarting an assembly line for a 1,000 cameras seems peculiar.

As I continue to schlep my Nikon DSLR gear along with my Leica gear with me on trips and grow weary of bringing not only two bodies, but two lens systems along - I get closer and closer to pulling the trigger for a used RD-1.
 
sonwolf said:
In addition to my R-D1, I also own a mid-level DSLR. The technical sophistication of the camera blows the R-D1 away, but when I walk out the door of my house, I always reach for the R-D1 unless I have a specific technical reason to take the DSLR. I simply enjoy using the R-D1 more than the "superior" DSLR.
Click to expand...

Could not have said it better. It is the camera that goes with me everywhere and I use it as my mainstay for low light and I also own a DSLR (mainly for sport) .

Call me obsessive but it is the one thing I own that I worry would be stolen if my house got broken into - though maybe the thieves would discount an 'obsolete' camera and just take my DSLR?

Now I don't have to worry - spares and support will accompany the new R-D1x. They should have kept the swivel screen though.

This after all a RF forum and it is an RF. And there are only two digital RFs to choose from. So if you want one, you got to pay the price. Granted that there are many cheaper (and newer) digital cameras that would take great shots such as a DSLR or G1 - but they are not RFs. If that comparison was valid, why not compare a M6 to a SLR? Because, in the end, it is not a true comparison. They are fundamentally different.

Nobody seems to worry as much about the price difference between an M6 and a Olympus 35 - and yet in the right hands the end result would be indistinguishable. So why the grief about the R-D1's price? For some it is more than justified (me) and for others, just don't buy it.

Cheers - John
 
And there's a one year old M8 in the classifieds currently for $2500.00 which seems to be fairly typical of the going price. You'd have to really want the Epson badly and believe it has some advantage over the Leica to be prepared to pay what they're asking for the new X over a used M8!

Maybe this will force used RD-1 prices down to around $1000.00 ... I find the current gap between a used RD-1 and a used M8 interesting. The Epson price has been pretty steady over the last year or so while the M8 has continued to drop! Perhaps the fact that the Epson was no longer readily available new has helped maintain it's steadier value?
 
I would think if Epson were offering it to the world market the price would probably be less.

M8s are going down in value because there is more supply than demand...Epsons have remained steady because the supply and demand have been relatively even. A used Epson in the $1400 range is still quite a bit less than a used M8.
 
digitalintrigue said:
I would think if Epson were offering it to the world market the price would probably be less.

M8s are going down in value because there is more supply than demand...Epsons have remained steady because the supply and demand have been relatively even. A used Epson in the $1400 range is still quite a bit less than a used M8.
Click to expand...



I can't help wondering how many new RD-1s are out there ... Matsuiya still has one listed for US $2,367 and he's had them listed for as long as I can remember. He may still have a fair few in stock and will possibly be listing the X in the future!
 
Yes, he has...and the used price has remained steady. Some posts say the new RD1x will depress used prices, but I don't see that happening, unless all the RD1 and RD1s users suddenly decide to buy an RD1x out of Japan and sell their existing camera.

If I owned one now, I'd be happy that Epson is continuing the line, but I wouldn't upgrade, just to get a grip and lose the swivel LCD. It's a 6MP camera, SDHC cards don't matter, you can get plenty of shots on a plain old SD. :)
 
Keith said:
And there's a one year old M8 in the classifieds currently for $2500.00 which seems to be fairly typical of the going price. You'd have to really want the Epson badly and believe it has some advantage over the Leica to be prepared to pay what they're asking for the new X over a used M8!
Click to expand...

I agree Keith. If my R-D1 was to die, I would be heading in the M8's direction and was hoping that prices would continue to drop. Now it seems I have a new avenue in terms of support and spares (if they have the same internals) for my own R-D1, which is great.

I don't own an M8 but there seems to be contestable advantages to the R-D1 when shooting over 800 iso, coupled with the analogue controls and swivel screen. But the swivel screen has gone.

I can't do without my R-D1 but if the second hand price was equal I would probably have bought an M8 and I am sure others would have too.

It would be interesting to see what this 'new' camera does to second hand prices.

Cheers - John
 
digitalintrigue said:
Yes, he has...and the used price has remained steady. Some posts say the new RD1x will depress used prices, but I don't see that happening, unless all the RD1 and RD1s users suddenly decide to buy an RD1x out of Japan and sell their existing camera.

If I owned one now, I'd be happy that Epson is continuing the line, but I wouldn't upgrade, just to get a grip and lose the swivel LCD. It's a 6MP camera, SDHC cards don't matter, you can get plenty of shots on a plain old SD. :)
Click to expand...

Very true. I hope we get the firmware upgrade. FYI Leica is going to release the discreet mode in it's next firmware upgrade. That brings it one step closer to an R-D1;^)
 
I think the comparison that's been made over time of the Epson's superior ability in low light at 1600 ISO over the M8 is very conditional. The crop factors of both cameras really penalise their abilities to shoot wide with fast lenses. I find my Nokton 35mm marginal at times in the environment I use it most in ... I'm constantly wedged up against walls or walking backwards into people when I do my gallery shoots :p

I thought seriously about having an Epson as backup for these gigs but a focal length (using the Nokton) exceeding 50mm would be near impossible for me ... unless I have a really fast 28mm on the Epson and the fastest available realistically priced 28mm is the Ultron at 1.9. It confuses me to the point where I now just take along a film body and ten rolls of Fuji 800 colour to get me out of trouble if the M8 should suddenly go terminal on me!

WE NEED A FULL FRAME DIGITAL RANGEFINDER ... Epson are you there?

I have yet to see anything that convinces me that RD-1 files are superior to the M8's at high ISO's ... the M8 relies on accurate exposure to get the best out of it ... blow that and you may as well have taken the shot with a G9. I think the Epson is more forgiving in this area ... but not superior!

:)
 
Keith said:
I think the comparison that's been made over time of the Epson's superior ability in low light at 1600 ISO over the M8 is very conditional. The crop factors of both cameras really penalise their abilities to shoot wide with fast lenses. I find my Nokton 35mm marginal at times in the environment I use it most in ... I'm constantly wedged up against walls or walking backwards into people when I do my gallery shoots :p

I thought seriously about having an Epson as backup for these gigs but a focal length (using the Nokton) exceeding 50mm would be near impossible for me ... unless I have a really fast 28mm on the Epson and the fastest available realistically priced 28mm is the Ultron at 1.9. It confuses me to the point where I now just take along a film body and ten rolls of Fuji 800 colour to get me out of trouble if the M8 should suddenly go terminal on me!

WE NEED A FULL FRAME DIGITAL RANGEFINDER ... Epson are you there?

I have yet to see anything that convinces me that RD-1 files are superior to the M8's at high ISO's ... the M8 relies on accurate exposure to get the best out of it ... blow that and you may as well have taken the shot with a G9. I think the Epson is more forgiving in this area ... but not superior!

:)
Click to expand...

When I had both cameras, I initially thought the RD-1 @ 1600 was better than the M8 at the comparable ISO.

But it all came down to processing and after being given some tips I found that the M8, in fact, produced a better file. Assuming both were adequately/properly exposed.

That is not to say that the RD-1 files are not great - they really are very nice and the whole 6MP thing is not an issue for most situations.
 
digitalintrigue said:
I got it from this post. :)

"For those who can't be bothered with google translator: 6.1mp APS/C sensor. RAW+.jpg. 16x digital zoom. It comes with a 28mm f3.5 color skopar kit lens. 28/35/50mm framelines. 2.5 inch LCD on the back. It appears to come with a handgrip. Street date in Japan is April 9."
Click to expand...
What the hell is 16X digital zoom? And IMHO if they didn't fix the low battery life, count me out.
 
not sure why

not sure why

Not sure that 10megapixels on the same size sensor would help.

It doesn't help the D40x 10mp vs the original D40 6mp from any photos I've seen.


It would require firmware mods beyond the SDHC support, that Epson R&D probably doesn't want to get into at this point

quote=elshaneo;1001181]Honestly, I'm very disappointed with Epson, I would have expected at least a new sensor at 10 Megapixels at the price of 1800 USD for this new Rangefinder camera, I'd rather save and buy the Leica M8...[/quote]
 
Keith said:
have yet to see anything that convinces me that RD-1 files are superior to the M8's at high ISO's ... the M8 relies on accurate exposure to get the best out of it ... blow that and you may as well have taken the shot with a G9. I think the Epson is more forgiving in this area ... but not superior!
Click to expand...

Hi Keith - I'll try to do some carefully controlled test shots for you, when my M8 gets back from Solms. I took a couple-hundred shots or so with the camera I had over the christmas holidays, but none of them under really controlled conditions. However, it was obvious that in low-light the character of the grain from the RD1s is much better.

Naturally, in really low-light the D90 totally blows the other two cameras away - with nice film-like grain too! But I don't like using it (and 'officially' I gave it to my partner now - so I have to ask her permission when I borrow it) ;)
 
gdi said:
When I had both cameras, I initially thought the RD-1 @ 1600 was better than the M8 at the comparable ISO.
But it all came down to processing and after being given some tips I found that the M8, in fact, produced a better file. Assuming both were adequately/properly exposed.
Click to expand...

I think given enough post-processing, you might even be able to make an IXUS shot look better than the RD1 - but I like the grain that the Epson gives at higher ISOs (800 is the real sweet spot imo).

What I find is that the M8 tends to start smudging shadow detail at higher ISO, regardless of the exposure. Hair, for instance: the detail is simply gone in the files from the M8, whereas with the Epson, the grain draws the detail.

Furthermore, the banding is a lot more marked in the M8 files.

I know that it's now become a mantra that you have to "exactly nail the exposure" on the M8 to overcome it's low-light limitations. This is just another way of blaming the user for the camera's faults.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom