Popular Blog (Gizmodo) Dissing Epson R-D1 and Rangefinder Cameras

[ikiru]

I Noticed that the person who started this thread is "cafemotorbike". I'm a Cafe motocycle rider too! Nice old bikes and rangefinders? Seems like a perfect combination.

 

[LCT]

...WHY is this camera so expensive????....

And why do pictures look so nice with this camera, in fact much nicer than my Nikon D70 or D2H pics for instance?
Funny how rarely basic subjects like colour gamut, brightness, 3D rendition, analog or 'plastic' look, skin tonality, B&W abilities and other esthetical points are compared in most reviews and even good forums like this one...
Is it because those are too subjective matters?
When we compare a Steinways to a Yamaha piano, a MontBlanc to a Parker pen, or even two different painting brushes some of them being much less "affordable" than others, we are discussing subjective matters mainly aren't we?
Then why is a R-D1 or a MontBlanc so "expensive"?
Because it is better my friend, that's all
Best,
LCT

 

[Nikon Bob]

Could it be expensive, in part, because it is the only one of it's type? I am not doubting that I does a nice job capturing an image.

Bob

 

[LCT]

The supply and demand law might play a role for the MontBlanc as well but i'm not quite sure if the price of the R-D1 (or R-D2) will drop when the Digital M will be launched at some 5,000 US dollars next year...
Best,
LCT

 

[Nikon Bob]

The supply and demand law might play a role for the MontBlanc as well but i'm not quite sure if the price of the R-D1 (or R-D2) will drop when the Digital M will be launched at some 5,000 US dollars next year...
Best,
LCT

That is the trouble with niche markets. I still can not get my head around why anyone would pay $5000 for a digital M if the body has the build quality of my M4 and the electronic guts built to basically self self distruct/be nonrepairable in about 5 years. It might be different if it was modularly upgradable. It will make the Epson look better on price point alone though.

Bob

 

[LCT]

Agree of course but what will Leicaphiles decide actually?
If we have the money most of us won't resist purchasing the Leica i guess.
Now some of us could well be tempted to keep the R-D1 if the Leica has not a 1:1 viewfinder for instance or because we got accostumed to the 1.5x crop factor.
Otherwise a $2,500 to 3,000 R-D2 with a D200 chip, a better QC and a longer RF base could be a great alternative IMHO.
Best,
LCT

 

[cafemotobike]

I Noticed that the person who started this thread is "cafemotorbike". I'm a Cafe motocycle rider too! Nice old bikes and rangefinders? Seems like a perfect combination.

Yes, I love classic bikes and rangefinder cameras! I currently ride a 70's Honda CB550 that has been "caffinated". I'm saving up for a Vincent and a new Triumph Thruxton. For rangefinders it's an M3 and an R-D1. It's a love affair.

 

[Jim Watts]

Agree of course but what will Leicaphiles decide actually?
If we have the money most of us won't resist purchasing the Leica i guess.
Now some of us could well be tempted to keep the R-D1 if the Leica has not a 1:1 viewfinder for instance or because we got accostumed to the 1.5x crop factor.
Otherwise a $2,500 to 3,000 R-D2 with a D200 chip, a better QC and a longer RF base could be a great alternative IMHO.
Best,
LCT

I think what will persuade me to purchase an Leica Digital M (although I doubt I would be able to afford it) or an R-D2 will be built in framelines for wider angle lenses than my present R-D1. Either by using a full frame sensor (the way micro lenses are used on the sensor in the Leitz R Module seems to offer some promse that this may be possble with a Digital M) or by having frames for say 21mm, 24mm and 35/40mm with the 1.5x crop factor. I could live with a 0.72x finder to achieve this, but a longer rangefinder base and the D200 chip would be nice.

 

[djon]

All Sony has to do is produce a compact version of their new APS 10 MP digicam with a short f2 Zeiss zoom and a zooming optical tube viewfinder (like Contax or Canon digicams) and Leica's dead meat. Stick a fork in it. Wouldn't take any new technology.

While 1:1 is nice (I shoot Canon Ps), tube viewfinders were good enough for HCB and Capa, and a lot of us still love IIIC and IIIF.

Epson's quietly resigned that market (no updated model, not even ruggedized).

But Sony won't create that Leica replacement because hardly anybody but you and me wants anything like a Leica: the fundamental problem.

 

[anglophone1]

On a recent NYC visit [Photoplus] I acquired an RD-1 and a digital SLR body [Pentax 1stDS2 to go with all my K lenses] on exactly the same day.
asme day
The pentax is both Small and Light, so may of the usual dslr criticims don't hold up........................
In the subsequent 3 weeks I have shot the equvalent of 3x1gb card on the rd-1 and about 20 images on the Pentax.
So...................guess which I ike best, I believe the rd-1 is the perfect blend of of new technology working within a familiar old -tech envelope [that i can use without even thinking]
I don't really think about it as digital, except for the joy of getting nearly 100 raw images on a card [ and then editing down -this for a 5/6 rolls a day shooter is bliss [and cheap!]
The ability to flip out the screen and show someone their photo has also come in very useful in "building bridges"
To sum up, I'm very pleased , although I now want a 21mm f2 M mount lens from somwehere !
Clive

p.s I should say that the Pentax istDS2 is also pretty nifty compared with most of the DSLRs I have tried!

 

[djon]

There's a more-credible-than-most post (Alex Shinshin) on photo.net to the effect that the Digital M will be introduced in October @ 4000 pounds.

With one Leica lens, it may be 7X the price of the 10MP APS Sony DSC R1 with Zeiss 24-120 zoom, waist-level-finder, and same resolution

 

[ezio gallino]

There's a more-credible-than-most post (Alex Shinshin) on photo.net to the effect that the Digital M will be introduced in October @ 4000 pounds.
:

euros not pound (it's different)...
About the price of rd-1 even for me is too much: the reason Epson is not Leica, and it's not just a matter of names.

Time ago I bought an epson inkjet printer, for home purposes; 5 or 6 times ink-jets got dry and there was no way to clean them (oh yes 200 euros to the assistance on the other part of the city). after all this experience I throw the printer away and bought another (alway Epson ) and this apart the astronomical costs of consumables :bang: does its job.
But we are in the range of hundred euros, dealing with thousands Leica is the only brand I trust.
I might spend 10.000 euros for a watch but for a Patek-philippe (running the risk of earnings) never for a seiko-epson who sooner or later will reach my basket.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

There's a more-credible-than-most post (Alex Shinshin) on photo.net to the effect that the Digital M will be introduced in October @ 4000 pounds.

That is one heavy camera!! Well, I don't know if I'd be inclined to believe Mr. You-Better-Do-Shipments-To-Asia-Or-Else; although he may have access to gear prior it hitting the U.S. market. He's pulled the trigger on a few things before, but he doesn't make anything up.

I'd like to sit and wait on the latest developments on sensors which don't require microlenses. That should give pause to a lot of E. Puts' digital musings on the matter, for one, and that would also mean that wideangle lenses finally have a chance to be themselves and not pseudo-normal focal length substitutions.

 

[LCT]

...With one Leica lens, ....the Digital M... may be 7X the price of the 10MP APS Sony DSC R1 with Zeiss 24-120 zoom, waist-level-finder, and same resolution

Leicas have never been cheap as far as i remember.
But what a pleasure to view pics shot by a Summicron 28mm, a Summilux 75mm or even a mere Elmar 50mm.
Expensive pleasure indeed but lovers don't count do they?
Best,
LCT

 

[Azinko]

"...euros not pound (it's different)..."

Well, 4000 euro is not much more than the price of current Leica which is about £1600 in Uk,...even the 'Digilux 2' is £1200!!

The digital Leica and 'Zeica' are both likely to be much more than 4000 euro and a lot more than £4000,....the R-D1 is a stqggering £2000 here!

 

[LCT]

...The digital Leica and 'Zeica' are both likely to be... a lot more than £4000...

Where does such a rumour come from Azinko?
According to recent statements attributed to Stefan Daniel, head of product management at Leica Germany, the price goal of the Digital M would be under USD 5,000.
See http://tinyurl.com/82ur6
Then even if we add VAT the price in Europe would not be much higher than EUR 5,000 or GBP 3,500 in round figures.
Best,
LCT

 

[Sean Reid]

And why do pictures look so nice with this camera, in fact much nicer than my Nikon D70 or D2H pics for instance?
Funny how rarely basic subjects like colour gamut, brightness, 3D rendition, analog or 'plastic' look, skin tonality, B&W abilities and other esthetical points are compared in most reviews and even good forums like this one...
Is it because those are too subjective matters?
When we compare a Steinways to a Yamaha piano, a MontBlanc to a Parker pen, or even two different painting brushes some of them being much less "affordable" than others, we are discussing subjective matters mainly aren't we?
Then why is a R-D1 or a MontBlanc so "expensive"?
Because it is better my friend, that's all
Best,
LCT

Specifically, the lenses are better. They draw differently than SLR lenses and that drawing appeals very much to me. In terms of picture quality, one of the most important aspects of the R-D1 is that M lens mount...

Cheers,

Sean

 

[LCT]

...In terms of picture quality, one of the most important aspects of the R-D1 is that M lens mount...

... and that it respects the lens signatures which is not a feeble compliment.
Best Sean
LCT

 

[Sean Reid]

That's very true, Cheers LCT..

Sean