leif e
-
Hi! I´m new since yesterday - and maybe it´s impertinent to ask this kind of question on my second day. :angel: Still, it´s like this; I love my Bessa R2, but I also use my digital Nikon SLR a lot. In many ways the DSLR is also more convenient. On the other hand; I´m a better photographer with a RF in hand. So, here´s the question: Has anyone had experience with the Epson R D-1, which I guess is a digital Bessa - more or less?
The camera is awfully pricey - has anyone seen a more realistic used sample?
Thanks
The camera is awfully pricey - has anyone seen a more realistic used sample?
Thanks
pvdhaar
Peter
You're safe here as long as you use it to take pictures of your R2..leif e said:
Ah, salvation.. that's always a good thing..leif e said:
R
RML
Guest
The R-D1 is a wonderful camera to use. It feels and handles like a film rangefinder yet has the conveniences of digital: review of shot, no more buying film/ dev'ing film/scanning film, RAW, etc.
I wrote _a little review_ on the R-D1. And _my photo portfolio blog_ is full with shots taken with the R-D1. Take a look.
I wrote _a little review_ on the R-D1. And _my photo portfolio blog_ is full with shots taken with the R-D1. Take a look.
leif e
-
Thanks; both of you! Technical quality is obviously an issue with a camera at that price. But your pics, RML, quite clearly shows R-D1 can be a tool of great potential. I guess I´ll keep looking around!
And Peter; you´ve given me a lot of comfort. I´ll try to be brave next time!
leif e
And Peter; you´ve given me a lot of comfort. I´ll try to be brave next time!
leif e
JoshRoot
The NW will rise again.
The RD1 is a LOT of fun for me. I am really enjoying it and have probably shot 5-600 frames in the month or so that I have had it.
Now, that having been said, I don't shoot film any more. So the difference between dSLR and the R-D1 in terms of "fun" is a lot larger than between the R2 and the R-D1.
It has it's issues. The foremost (for me) being the lack of a fast 35mm (equiv) lens, badly designed button/menu interface, small buffer for RAW shooting, and high price. But it is the only beast of it's kind at the moment. And even when/if Leica comes out with a digital "M", I can guarentee that it will be more expensive by at least 30% than the R-D1.
There is a short review HERE that I wrote last year about the R-D1 on photo.net. But it was only based on an afternoon with the camera. I am in the process of writing a follow-up review that should be done shortly.
Now, that having been said, I don't shoot film any more. So the difference between dSLR and the R-D1 in terms of "fun" is a lot larger than between the R2 and the R-D1.
It has it's issues. The foremost (for me) being the lack of a fast 35mm (equiv) lens, badly designed button/menu interface, small buffer for RAW shooting, and high price. But it is the only beast of it's kind at the moment. And even when/if Leica comes out with a digital "M", I can guarentee that it will be more expensive by at least 30% than the R-D1.
There is a short review HERE that I wrote last year about the R-D1 on photo.net. But it was only based on an afternoon with the camera. I am in the process of writing a follow-up review that should be done shortly.
S
Sean Reid
Guest
If it's helpful: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/epson-rd1.shtml
I'll have a long-term review of the R-D1 published on my site soon.
Cheers,
Sean
I'll have a long-term review of the R-D1 published on my site soon.
Cheers,
Sean
JoshRoot
The NW will rise again.
FWIW, Sean's review is much more extensive than mine.
He are a gudder writer than I be.
He are a gudder writer than I be.