rvaubel
Well-known
Jimbobuk
Your questions indicate that you ARE going to figure this out. I dont have enough time to go into depth but will after I placate my wife.
But briefly, your right about the depth of focus being deeper behind the focus plain. But at F1.4 its so shallow it doesn't really matter. Do the near focus test with only the 40mm F1.4 at say 1 meter only. Dont keep changing variables, lenses, distances....it gets to confusing.
Use a ballpoint to draw a horizontal line next to lines of text put a very short vertical line thru it. It is easier to focus on the vertical line but it is at a slightly different distance from the lens, so kept it short! Take multiple pictures, refocusing each time. This is best done on a tripod because moving your head even an inch ruins the results.
When your done, your images should be focused on the "+" with only one or two lines off regular newsprint text in focus in front of and behind the "+"
This is the first step. Your camera has to pass this test first.
More later
Rex
Your questions indicate that you ARE going to figure this out. I dont have enough time to go into depth but will after I placate my wife.
But briefly, your right about the depth of focus being deeper behind the focus plain. But at F1.4 its so shallow it doesn't really matter. Do the near focus test with only the 40mm F1.4 at say 1 meter only. Dont keep changing variables, lenses, distances....it gets to confusing.
Use a ballpoint to draw a horizontal line next to lines of text put a very short vertical line thru it. It is easier to focus on the vertical line but it is at a slightly different distance from the lens, so kept it short! Take multiple pictures, refocusing each time. This is best done on a tripod because moving your head even an inch ruins the results.
When your done, your images should be focused on the "+" with only one or two lines off regular newsprint text in focus in front of and behind the "+"
This is the first step. Your camera has to pass this test first.
More later
Rex
jimbobuk
Established
Ok, here are some pics i took similar to your suggestion just hand held..
In each i was trying to focus on the subtitled word, to be honest i found it quite hard, that close with such strong lines it was clear that the focus patch image was coming from a place to the side of the main viewfinder, they didn't particularly line up well at all..
With that in mind and the fact it was casually hand held I think the focus point could have moved, i will try it with a tripod sometime..
Its much better than when i tried the test with a chart for my afore mentioned 350D .. it appears there is more focus at the front of the plane of sharpness rather than the rear.
In each i was trying to focus on the subtitled word, to be honest i found it quite hard, that close with such strong lines it was clear that the focus patch image was coming from a place to the side of the main viewfinder, they didn't particularly line up well at all..
With that in mind and the fact it was casually hand held I think the focus point could have moved, i will try it with a tripod sometime..
Its much better than when i tried the test with a chart for my afore mentioned 350D .. it appears there is more focus at the front of the plane of sharpness rather than the rear.
Attachments
lightwriter
Established
rvaubel said:
Yep, I have backlash that I have to take up by focusing the lens when going in one direction only. It's getting really frustrating.
rvaubel
Well-known
Lightwriter
What you describe sounds exactly like backlash. All rangefinders have it to a certain degree but you CAN determine the source, and the amount. There are 3 possibilities 1) the roller cam in the body 2) The interface between the lens camming ring and the body roller 3) Inside the lens itself
The easist one to check and the one that affects all lens is, of course, 1) The roller cam in the body- To check this
a) remove the lens
b) inside the lens baynot near the top you will see a roller bearing
c) gently push on this bearing. This will actuate a lever that is indirectly connected to the rangefander patch. Push it in and let go a few more tmes. A spring will return it to the front part of the camera.
d) now look thru the rangfinder and observe the patch. With one finger gently push on the roller bearing. Notice the IMAGE INSIDE the rangefinder patch and the FRAMELINES move together from right to left as you push in and back again when you release the roller bearing. Do this a bunch more times to get a feel for it
e) look at an object like a wall clock that would be easy to focus on. Now push on the roller bearing until you get the image of the hands of the clock in the patch merge with the image of the hands in the rangefinder. In other words, focus the damn thing without a lens. By this time it may be dawning on you how this rangefinder business works.... if you'v had some trig... forget it, you don't need to know how it works to figure out if its broken.
f) Now, the critical part that requires learning a skill i.e. detecting backlash in a mechanical system. First you must merge the image of the clock. Then holding the roller in position, push very gently to see if you can get roller to move slightly without the image changing. If you can, that would be bad. What we want is the slightest movement of the roller cam result in a corresponding movement in the rangefinder image. This can be very subtle. Wiggle your finger the tinyest amount and look for motion in the image. Do this for five minutes. Have a drink. Do it some more.
When you finally convince yourself that their is a 100% linkage between the roller and the image, congratalations because you have deluded yourself into thinking that there is no backlash in your system. There is ALWAYS backlash in a mechanical system. Hopefully, if you are lucky, it will be very small. If you can easily detect it, your screwed, send it to DAG, dont even try and fix it.
2) If test one passes then go on to the roller to lens interface- If you could follow step one, your clever enough to figure out step 2 by yourself.
3) The final step, backlash in the lens- This is pretty rare and if it does occur it, of course, will be only in that one lens. Although it can be fun to rebuild lenses, I only accept that challenge on an individual basis
Backlash in your rangefinder system can ruin your whole day as it leads to wild goose chases with regards to backfocus issues, etc. That is, you cant really trace the source of any other problems until excessive backlash has been eliminated. Fortunately, its pretty rare.
Rex
What you describe sounds exactly like backlash. All rangefinders have it to a certain degree but you CAN determine the source, and the amount. There are 3 possibilities 1) the roller cam in the body 2) The interface between the lens camming ring and the body roller 3) Inside the lens itself
The easist one to check and the one that affects all lens is, of course, 1) The roller cam in the body- To check this
a) remove the lens
b) inside the lens baynot near the top you will see a roller bearing
c) gently push on this bearing. This will actuate a lever that is indirectly connected to the rangefander patch. Push it in and let go a few more tmes. A spring will return it to the front part of the camera.
d) now look thru the rangfinder and observe the patch. With one finger gently push on the roller bearing. Notice the IMAGE INSIDE the rangefinder patch and the FRAMELINES move together from right to left as you push in and back again when you release the roller bearing. Do this a bunch more times to get a feel for it
e) look at an object like a wall clock that would be easy to focus on. Now push on the roller bearing until you get the image of the hands of the clock in the patch merge with the image of the hands in the rangefinder. In other words, focus the damn thing without a lens. By this time it may be dawning on you how this rangefinder business works.... if you'v had some trig... forget it, you don't need to know how it works to figure out if its broken.
f) Now, the critical part that requires learning a skill i.e. detecting backlash in a mechanical system. First you must merge the image of the clock. Then holding the roller in position, push very gently to see if you can get roller to move slightly without the image changing. If you can, that would be bad. What we want is the slightest movement of the roller cam result in a corresponding movement in the rangefinder image. This can be very subtle. Wiggle your finger the tinyest amount and look for motion in the image. Do this for five minutes. Have a drink. Do it some more.
When you finally convince yourself that their is a 100% linkage between the roller and the image, congratalations because you have deluded yourself into thinking that there is no backlash in your system. There is ALWAYS backlash in a mechanical system. Hopefully, if you are lucky, it will be very small. If you can easily detect it, your screwed, send it to DAG, dont even try and fix it.
2) If test one passes then go on to the roller to lens interface- If you could follow step one, your clever enough to figure out step 2 by yourself.
3) The final step, backlash in the lens- This is pretty rare and if it does occur it, of course, will be only in that one lens. Although it can be fun to rebuild lenses, I only accept that challenge on an individual basis
Backlash in your rangefinder system can ruin your whole day as it leads to wild goose chases with regards to backfocus issues, etc. That is, you cant really trace the source of any other problems until excessive backlash has been eliminated. Fortunately, its pretty rare.
Rex
rvaubel
Well-known
Jimbobuck,
Congratulations!! You have just performed the test that will eliminate a lot of confusion and uncertainty in your life. Yes, you are correct, your cameras rangefinder and image sensor are not calibrated correctly. The critical focus area in the first shot is +2 lines up & -7 lines down. The second shot is +0 lines up & -10 lines down. The third shot is off the map.
Something is wrong but dont leap to conclusions yet. Their are two possibilities 1) the lens to sensor distance needs to be adjusted to agree with the rangefinder. Or 2) the rangefinder needs to be adjusted to yield correct focus from your above test.
The reality is you don't know which one it is.....yet.
To find out, using the same lens at f1.4 (I didnt need to tell you that of course) , focus at infinity using the INFINITY STOP ON THE LENS.
Not the rangefinder patch. Take a few pictures of stuff with a lot of detail in the center, refocusing at infinity every time (looking for backlash....pay no attention to this comment if you havent read my backlash post). BTW, in general do everything 3 or 4 times as a matter of habit.
Now check to see if this shots are sharp. Compare them to the areas in the newsprint shots that are sharp. They should at least be the same and probably better. If not you have a lens to focal plane issue. If it is sharp you have a rangefinder adjustment issue.
I will stay tuned anxiously awaiting the results of your test.
*One Caveat is in order* I assume you are using a lens of known quaility. You indicated you have the 40mm/f1.4 Nockton. Although, a little short for critical test its pretty good and the QA is consistent. I'd use the CV for your test. Remember wide open only!!
Rex
Congratulations!! You have just performed the test that will eliminate a lot of confusion and uncertainty in your life. Yes, you are correct, your cameras rangefinder and image sensor are not calibrated correctly. The critical focus area in the first shot is +2 lines up & -7 lines down. The second shot is +0 lines up & -10 lines down. The third shot is off the map.
Something is wrong but dont leap to conclusions yet. Their are two possibilities 1) the lens to sensor distance needs to be adjusted to agree with the rangefinder. Or 2) the rangefinder needs to be adjusted to yield correct focus from your above test.
The reality is you don't know which one it is.....yet.
To find out, using the same lens at f1.4 (I didnt need to tell you that of course) , focus at infinity using the INFINITY STOP ON THE LENS.
Not the rangefinder patch. Take a few pictures of stuff with a lot of detail in the center, refocusing at infinity every time (looking for backlash....pay no attention to this comment if you havent read my backlash post). BTW, in general do everything 3 or 4 times as a matter of habit.
Now check to see if this shots are sharp. Compare them to the areas in the newsprint shots that are sharp. They should at least be the same and probably better. If not you have a lens to focal plane issue. If it is sharp you have a rangefinder adjustment issue.
I will stay tuned anxiously awaiting the results of your test.
*One Caveat is in order* I assume you are using a lens of known quaility. You indicated you have the 40mm/f1.4 Nockton. Although, a little short for critical test its pretty good and the QA is consistent. I'd use the CV for your test. Remember wide open only!!
Rex
rvaubel
Well-known
Jimbobuk,
Whoops. I forgot that the first part of your thread was concerning a particular sample of a 90mm/f4 Elmar. My dissertation concerns checking the camera body, not the lens. Before you can evaluate the 90mm (which is going to be more sensitive to body error than most of your lens) you need to check the body against a known source. Since you may not have one, I suggest the Nokton because of its F ratio and modern QA inspection. A recent fast Leica or other quality lens would be fine but for the older ones, their history my be unknown. Anyway, I test all my lenses.
Once its established the body is good, then on to the Elmar. Often times a simple shim will fix a probelm. With a quality lens like the Elmar, I doubt it can't be fixed. The 90mm is a LOT of fun to use. It is not too long as some would suggest, even for a well calibrated R-D1. Don't worry about viewfinders either. I have cludges for using framelines for everything but extreme wide angle.
Rex
Whoops. I forgot that the first part of your thread was concerning a particular sample of a 90mm/f4 Elmar. My dissertation concerns checking the camera body, not the lens. Before you can evaluate the 90mm (which is going to be more sensitive to body error than most of your lens) you need to check the body against a known source. Since you may not have one, I suggest the Nokton because of its F ratio and modern QA inspection. A recent fast Leica or other quality lens would be fine but for the older ones, their history my be unknown. Anyway, I test all my lenses.
Once its established the body is good, then on to the Elmar. Often times a simple shim will fix a probelm. With a quality lens like the Elmar, I doubt it can't be fixed. The 90mm is a LOT of fun to use. It is not too long as some would suggest, even for a well calibrated R-D1. Don't worry about viewfinders either. I have cludges for using framelines for everything but extreme wide angle.
Rex
jimbobuk
Established
Thanks for the pointers rvaubel.
I had another go at the test tonight with a tripod and a couple of lenses (couldn't find my ultron 1.7 ... but used the nokton and my 40mm minolta CLE lens..
The problem seems to persist. The thing is I do find it quite hard to focus on the line, as i said the edges distort on things that are too big.. i'm wearing glasses as well so real fine focusing i think is more difficult, not even sure if i'm not slightly offset from centre as my glasses force me to be to then see the focusing spot clearer.
I think a lot of it is down to me not being that accurate.. typical subjects dont seem to be as critical of this sharpness, and you dont always have the time to be dead right!?
I've got some infinity shots i took yesterday i'll dig them out.. they look ok.. i have the other problem with my R-D1 where fine pixel sized patterns sometimes cause the moire pattern or similar to make it look a bit ugly, visible on water, but also on trees when they're small enough that they just become close to pixel sized branches.
Assuming that its focal plane to lens, or rangefinder problem what are the solutions.. the focal plane one sounds almost impossible to fix?
How can it be done in the UK i wonder? I've been considering contacting Epson regarding the strange pattern problem. The thing is its brought from Germany i think, don't know if Epson UK would want to touch it.
Plus finances at the moment are quite tight.
Day to day it rarely seems to effect me, only noticed it with that 90mm lens, if indeed that's the only problem with that situation.
Good stuff to know, I just dont think there is anyone to do a DAG equivelant service in the UK, or if it was a focal plane problem whether that would even be fixable by such a thing. I fixed my own vertical rff misalignment but found it hard enough working with that screw, i'd not like to try any others
Cheers
I had another go at the test tonight with a tripod and a couple of lenses (couldn't find my ultron 1.7 ... but used the nokton and my 40mm minolta CLE lens..
The problem seems to persist. The thing is I do find it quite hard to focus on the line, as i said the edges distort on things that are too big.. i'm wearing glasses as well so real fine focusing i think is more difficult, not even sure if i'm not slightly offset from centre as my glasses force me to be to then see the focusing spot clearer.
I think a lot of it is down to me not being that accurate.. typical subjects dont seem to be as critical of this sharpness, and you dont always have the time to be dead right!?
I've got some infinity shots i took yesterday i'll dig them out.. they look ok.. i have the other problem with my R-D1 where fine pixel sized patterns sometimes cause the moire pattern or similar to make it look a bit ugly, visible on water, but also on trees when they're small enough that they just become close to pixel sized branches.
Assuming that its focal plane to lens, or rangefinder problem what are the solutions.. the focal plane one sounds almost impossible to fix?
How can it be done in the UK i wonder? I've been considering contacting Epson regarding the strange pattern problem. The thing is its brought from Germany i think, don't know if Epson UK would want to touch it.
Plus finances at the moment are quite tight.
Day to day it rarely seems to effect me, only noticed it with that 90mm lens, if indeed that's the only problem with that situation.
Good stuff to know, I just dont think there is anyone to do a DAG equivelant service in the UK, or if it was a focal plane problem whether that would even be fixable by such a thing. I fixed my own vertical rff misalignment but found it hard enough working with that screw, i'd not like to try any others
Cheers
rvaubel
Well-known
It sounds like you have problems with the focus of the rangefinder PATCH. I know you didnt want to know that their is an adjustment for that too. Although using a coincident rangefinders takes some practiice, it sounds like you are having way too many probems.
Do you have access to a Leica, Voightlander, or any other 35mm rangefinder camera? If so take a gander thru one of those. Focusing should be easy.
Vertica lines are easier to line up than horizontal. If the most convienent lines are horizontal, turn the camera to the vertical mode.
Rex
Do you have access to a Leica, Voightlander, or any other 35mm rangefinder camera? If so take a gander thru one of those. Focusing should be easy.
Vertica lines are easier to line up than horizontal. If the most convienent lines are horizontal, turn the camera to the vertical mode.
Rex
lightwriter
Established
rvaubel said:
I have already done some testing and determined that it is indeed the camera and not any of my lenses. The only difference is that I held the camera in place with a precision vise and used dial indicators to indicate movement rather than relying on the "feel" of my finder, which can often be misleading. I concluded that the backlash is somewhere in the range of 15-20 mils. Does not seem like much but it equates to a few degrees. Depending on the lens and where in the focus range I am in, this can be as little as an inch or as much as tens of feet out of focus. I had been willing to deal with it as much as possible but am getting rather fed up with the whole thing. It has really taken a lot of the fun out using the camera.
rvaubel
Well-known
Lightwriter
Holy Shit! 15-20 tho is a LOT of backlash. I can usually feel .001- .002
That much backlash would equate to about 1/2 a turn on the focus barrel, I'd quess. No wonder your frustrated.
I guess that the pivot screw on the lever arm is very loose or even fallen out. But it could be alot of things.....that you can't fix
Whats your warrenty situation? I'd want a new camera from Epson. If its out of warrenty or you just dont want to deal with Epson, bite the bullet and send it to DAG. He can fix almost all rangefinder problems.
When this camera is on, it is so much fun. From an equipment fetishist point of view, it can be used to evaluate all those great old Leica, FSU's, canons, and other M and SM lenses. Until the DM comes out, its the only player. Don't deny yourself the pleasure, cough up the $ and get it fixed.
I know its not fair, you paid good money,,,,etc
Rex
Holy Shit! 15-20 tho is a LOT of backlash. I can usually feel .001- .002
That much backlash would equate to about 1/2 a turn on the focus barrel, I'd quess. No wonder your frustrated.
I guess that the pivot screw on the lever arm is very loose or even fallen out. But it could be alot of things.....that you can't fix
Whats your warrenty situation? I'd want a new camera from Epson. If its out of warrenty or you just dont want to deal with Epson, bite the bullet and send it to DAG. He can fix almost all rangefinder problems.
When this camera is on, it is so much fun. From an equipment fetishist point of view, it can be used to evaluate all those great old Leica, FSU's, canons, and other M and SM lenses. Until the DM comes out, its the only player. Don't deny yourself the pleasure, cough up the $ and get it fixed.
I know its not fair, you paid good money,,,,etc
Rex
lightwriter
Established
It's one of those things that I've been meaning to do but never gets done. One of the reasons is b/c my M7 is on a German tour of the repair facility (won't read DX coding). It has been gone since December 7th and is still not back. I sent it when I knew I was going to receive the replacement R-D1 (rangefinder patch misalignment) from the RFF'r that I bought it from as I did not want to be without a camera. The R-D1 has always had issues - RF patch was not aligned quite right and there was some backlash. I cured RF patch misalignment, but the backlash just seemed to continue to get worse. I wanted to send it back but with Christmas coming and all I decided to wait. Well here we are 5 months later and it still has the same issues. This thread got me to call Epson today. I spoke to a very pleasant young lady who told me that it was out of warranty and that there was nothing she could do but did suggest that I speak to their realations department. The relations department, also a very pleasant young lady, spoke with her manager on my behalf and agreed to repair it since it was technically less than a year old. I dropped it off at the reapair facility today and hope to hear back from Epson or Leica before I go on vacation June 9th. With my luck, I'll probably receive both the day I get back. I have already planned on renting an x-pan and buying some of those cardboard box disposables. Just kidding, I prefer the ones in the plastic box instead If they can't or won't fix it; I'll bite the bullet and send it to DAG for repair.
If they can't or won't fix it; I'll bite the bullet and send it to DAG for repair.rvaubel
Well-known
Personally, I'd stay out of the Epson loop if possible. They will, at best, send you a new camera which may, or may not solve the problem. The DAG option would be best UNLESS the camera is unrepairable. With that thought, I quess you are doing the right thing.
If its any consolation, once you have a proper sample, the rangefinder focusing works really well. From my experience the length of the baseline fine for both the 40mmF1.4 Nokton and the 90mmF4 Elmar. I don't know about a faster telephoto.
Rex
If its any consolation, once you have a proper sample, the rangefinder focusing works really well. From my experience the length of the baseline fine for both the 40mmF1.4 Nokton and the 90mmF4 Elmar. I don't know about a faster telephoto.
Rex
jimbobuk
Established
rvaubel said:
Rex,
I've got too many other cameras at the moment.. all film though.. most are all very similar to focus with.. got a bessa r3a which should pretty much be the same.. not shot a film through it yet that was rangefinder coupled.. I've shot a roll with my Leica CL, that was good.. its narrower baselength made it perhaps a bit harder to focus than my R-D1.
Don't get me wrong.. the patch to me seems fine.. shooting normal objects it works well.. its only when focusing on a line in a magazine at near to the shortest distance possible that i start seeing a long vertical line on paper at an angle with perspective being in different angles outside of the patch no matter what you are focused like (also of course the distance of that line varies with the perspective so would rightfully be shifted relative to the focused rff patch).. I assumed that at this close a distance with the angle at 30 degrees or so its just pushing past the limits and hilighting the very fact that the patch and the viewfinder image have a paralax distance between them so a line will not look like the same exact position.. case in point close alternate eyes whilst looking at your finger 50cm away from your face... it moves slightly when looking through each eye as each eye is to the left and right of the finger... this i assume is whats causing this slight issue i'm seeing when trying to do the newspaper test. This conspires against using a suitably large line to see in the viewfinder, and so again i'm left wrestling with a point that is a lot smaller than what i'd normally have as a guide when doing the rff focusing in the real world.. still it IS visible and i shouldn't be having the results i'm getting.
Also as i said my damned glasses are the biggest hurdle for enjoyable rangefinder focusing.. its doable but overly fussy as its too easy to be at the wrong angle, or have your glasses at the wrong angle forcing you to move the eye away and have another go. Even when successfully "In" you then can't see the wide framelines as your eye is further out from the viewfinder than it would be without glasses.
I clearly do have a focusing issue hilighted by the longer lens and the closer strict test, but i've never noticed any problems with the focusing of 99% of all the images i've ever took in real world situations..
When finances improve and anyone chimes in i may try to see what can be done.. for now i'll be aware of it and stay clear of the longer focal lengths (and narrower DOFs that ~1.4) .. on the former i think my SLR is much preferred for longer shooting, the issue i have with that is that the image looks great in the viewfinder and then is usually dissapointing once the picture is took as the huge focal lengths of 400mm + combined with no lenses with image stabilisation means that camera shake conspires to ruin far too many shots that looked great as you were looking "THROUGH the lens" in the viewfinder. Which is why i love shooting with the wider angle lenses and especially with a rff where the image looks even brighter and clearer through the viewfinder (especially off shoe viewfinders and the one on my Bronica RF645 which both seem to make things look better than reality once viewed through them) and generally the shots come out better due to easier handling and shorter focal lengths banishing camera shake to really extreme and obvious situations.... ahh if only we had a 1.2 aperture 35mm or less image stabilised rff lens, the low light potential would be staggering.. one for Leica and their digital M if only they could power the lenses image stabilisation with some in lens batteries or similar.
Anyways thanks for the help.. I've got my first film chemicals arrived today so it'll be trying that out next time i've got photography time
Last edited:
rvaubel
Well-known
I didnt get all of that. But, since you have a R3a compare the views. They should be the same. Its basically the SAME camera. If your R-D1 is much different(worse) there is something wrong. The rangefinder on a R-D1 is one of the easist ones to use. The 28mm framelines are impossible to see but that nothing, you just adapt to that. But the rangfinder itself is capable of pretty fine accuracy.
There must be someone in your neck of the woods you can work on rangefinders. A leica guy maybe.
You really should get it fixed because its so much fun to use when its working right.
Rex
There must be someone in your neck of the woods you can work on rangefinders. A leica guy maybe.
You really should get it fixed because its so much fun to use when its working right.
Rex
Dale Cook
Established
Can you get a viewfinder for a 90mm lens that will work with the R-D1? Just curious because I'm considering picking up a 90, but was not sure if there was any other option beside guesstimating the frame by using the center of the 50mm framelines.
lightwriter
Established
Dale Cook said:
Don't know if there is another option, but I just approximate. I took a few test shots to get a feel for it and have had little to no problems with. There is only one shot that I've taken with the 90mm that I feel I messed up the framing due to not having the 90mm framelines. I also find it cumbersome to use an external viewfinder with this lens...I'm sure that others would disagree. There was a thread a while back where someone, with some skill and patience, "made" some framelines using tape or maybe it was screen protectors.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Leica SHOOC finder for 135 mm, but there are many others.
Last edited:
S
Sean Reid
Guest
lightwriter,
If there actually is an unusual amount of play in your RF mechanism then sending the camera in for repair/replacement was probably a good move. I was speaking with Don at DAG last week and he says that few R-D1s have excessive play but if they do, there's no way he knows of to adjust it out. So, in other words, if your camera body RF has that play, it indeed may be better that you get a different body from Epson. Once you get the body back from Epson (perhaps a new body) test it and see how the focusing is. If the focus doesn't seem right, pack it up and send it to DAG. Don can then at least see what's going on and perhaps remedy it.
Some of us on the forum have made some RF adjustments ourselves but I think that there really is something to be said for allowing an experienced professional to check and adjust the camera if needed. I have an R-D1 body at DAG right now.
Cheers,
Sean
If there actually is an unusual amount of play in your RF mechanism then sending the camera in for repair/replacement was probably a good move. I was speaking with Don at DAG last week and he says that few R-D1s have excessive play but if they do, there's no way he knows of to adjust it out. So, in other words, if your camera body RF has that play, it indeed may be better that you get a different body from Epson. Once you get the body back from Epson (perhaps a new body) test it and see how the focusing is. If the focus doesn't seem right, pack it up and send it to DAG. Don can then at least see what's going on and perhaps remedy it.
Some of us on the forum have made some RF adjustments ourselves but I think that there really is something to be said for allowing an experienced professional to check and adjust the camera if needed. I have an R-D1 body at DAG right now.
Cheers,
Sean
rvaubel
Well-known
I second Seans motion to let a professional adjust the rangefinder. About the only adjustment I would even consider is the vertical and only if it where very minor. The problem is, with all modern rangefinder, one adjustment slightly affects the others so a reiterative process is required for fine tuning. I have heard, also, that too much play in the system is something that DAG cannot fix. The best thing, in that case, is to return the camera for an exchange. At least Epson has been good about doing that.
Rex
Rex
rvaubel
Well-known
Oh, BTW my body is just fine. I have never had a problem and I am at file #2600. I think its important to remind people that their are many trouble free RD's out there. Plus even more satisfied users.
Rex
Rex