OurManInTangier
An Undesirable
Merry Christmas to everyone!
I currently own a Contax G1, I'm still new to rangefinders and haven't decided quite where to go in terms of future kit. I use Nikon Pro digitals for my work but shoot alot of street and documentary stuff personally - hence getting the smaller G1. As a digi user I've enjoyed getting back into film but am finding it very hard to find decent film processors in the UK, as well as generally getting my head back round not seeing my images immediately. I know I could get a darkroom again but its just not an option anymore so my big question is...
Do I buy an Epson RD1 or save up and buy the Leica M8?
I know both have their pitfalls and pluses but I'd really like some objective opinions from you guys.
My main concern is that the Epson may be half the cost and a good way into Leica optics ( ready for the day when I do own a prized Leica!) but surely by the time I've bought a body and a couple of lenses I could have spent that on an M8 body and rationaled the extra cost of a lens to go with it.
Sorry to ramble but I'm in a state of flux....help me out, please!!
I currently own a Contax G1, I'm still new to rangefinders and haven't decided quite where to go in terms of future kit. I use Nikon Pro digitals for my work but shoot alot of street and documentary stuff personally - hence getting the smaller G1. As a digi user I've enjoyed getting back into film but am finding it very hard to find decent film processors in the UK, as well as generally getting my head back round not seeing my images immediately. I know I could get a darkroom again but its just not an option anymore so my big question is...
Do I buy an Epson RD1 or save up and buy the Leica M8?
I know both have their pitfalls and pluses but I'd really like some objective opinions from you guys.
My main concern is that the Epson may be half the cost and a good way into Leica optics ( ready for the day when I do own a prized Leica!) but surely by the time I've bought a body and a couple of lenses I could have spent that on an M8 body and rationaled the extra cost of a lens to go with it.
Sorry to ramble but I'm in a state of flux....help me out, please!!
iml
Well-known
I made the leap into RF photography in Sept, with an R-D1s and a Voigtlander 35/1.7 Ultron. The SLR has had no use at all since. I've subsequently added to the lens lineup with a secondhand Canon 50/1.2 and a Voigtlander 21/4.0. The Voigtlander lenses are excellent, and fantastic value for money.
Robert White have an offer at the moment, IIRC about £1600 + VAT for an R-D1s and a Zeiss 35mm. I'd leap at it if I were you. Make sure you ask them to give the camera a good check over first (something they are happy to do). It seems Robert White staff have recently been trained by Epson is some aspects of maintenance too, which makes it a bit less of a risk.
I wouldn't say no to a digital Leica in the future, but the M8 doesn't look like a camera I would spend £3K on.
-- Ian
Robert White have an offer at the moment, IIRC about £1600 + VAT for an R-D1s and a Zeiss 35mm. I'd leap at it if I were you. Make sure you ask them to give the camera a good check over first (something they are happy to do). It seems Robert White staff have recently been trained by Epson is some aspects of maintenance too, which makes it a bit less of a risk.
I wouldn't say no to a digital Leica in the future, but the M8 doesn't look like a camera I would spend £3K on.
-- Ian
Last edited:
OurManInTangier
An Undesirable
iml - have you had any problems with your RD1s? I suppose what I should really do is visit a shop and check it out in my hand. Something I always say to myself I should do but too often don't.
Do you know if any shops will give you a trial for an hour or two?
Thanks
Simon
Do you know if any shops will give you a trial for an hour or two?
Thanks
Simon
iml
Well-known
hi Simon, I've had no problems at all with mine, and it gets carried everywhere and used nearly every day.
If you want to have a play with one first, Robert White is probably the only dealer with new stock (there are a couple of dealers with the older R-D1, Jacobs in New Oxford St had a tatty demo one few weeks ago, and The Classic Camera had one secondhand), but maybe you can find an RFF member near you who has one. If you're ever on the south coast in Hastings you're welcome to have a look at mine (oo-er missus, sounds a bit rude!)
Ian
If you want to have a play with one first, Robert White is probably the only dealer with new stock (there are a couple of dealers with the older R-D1, Jacobs in New Oxford St had a tatty demo one few weeks ago, and The Classic Camera had one secondhand), but maybe you can find an RFF member near you who has one. If you're ever on the south coast in Hastings you're welcome to have a look at mine (oo-er missus, sounds a bit rude!)
Ian
Last edited:
Sailor Ted
Well-known
Well I'll most likely catch a HUGE amount of stuff for what I'm about to say but it's my opinion. First I love my R-D1s. It's the first digital camera I’ve ever liked however I love mine. It takes nice pictures but more importantly it allows me to take pictures in the format I feel most comfortable- the range finder format. My photo style I guess would be best classified as street and documentary (with some land scape thrown in from time to time). Long story short the R-D1s has performed much like my Leica M6 without needing to mess with film- the only time I really see my self shooting film in the future will be on the ocean sailing my boat to distant islands in the Pacific where a film cameras robust nature and resistance to moisture make it the logical choice.
Now for the rub. First the R-D1's range finder goes out of whack very easily- very. Mine went out in just three days from new- no kidding. I must now send it back for repair and this is a pain and means I will not have my camera during this time. Second I have noticed the R-D1 exhibits a shift to red on some black material so it will need filters just like the M8 however it also exhibits significant flare on images shot in situations of high dynamic contrast or when ever bare light bulbs are present in dimly lit surroundings- so you still have a shift on black AND you have the artifacts the M8 sought to avoid by not placing the thick filter in front of the sensor. The worst of both worlds in my estimation.
Range Finder- the R-D1's range finder base is ridiculously short. This means it's difficult focusing lenses longer then 35mm when compared to the M8 with it's much longer range finder base or when focusing lenses faster then 2.0 with their much narrower depth of filed. Now some will say, "hey buddy I can focus mine just fine and it's a 75mm!" Perhaps but the R-D1's range finder base is way too short and I for one don't understand why this is the case with Cosina cameras and wish my R-D1's range finder base were longer.
Now to the M8. It needs IR cut filters to prevent synthetic fabrics from showing a magenta cast under certain lighting conditions but so does the R-D1. That said the M8 does not exhibit sensor/filter flair due to it's much thinner sensor filter and this is why it's IR shift on black under certain conditions is more pronounced when compared to the R-D1. I'll take no sensor/filter flare- seems the correct compromise in my opinion. The image quality according to some of the biggest names in professional digital printing state the M8's images are on par with that of a Hassablad camera and are among the sharpest in the world. We are also starting to see images that show the best of Leica glass qualities coming through so this is a serious camera for serious photographers. Comparatively the R-D1's images are somewhat soft but film like and with nice colors (colours: ) however the M8 and it's unique set of design compromises mean it's capable of incredible image sharpness and dynamic range of color in a film like (medium format) way. If you're willing to mess with a few pictures out of a hundred when processing your RAW files the M8 will reward you with outstanding results and so will the R-D1 but in a different and lower league.
What did I do? I purchased an R-D1 because I could not find an M8 and I'm glade of it. I now know I want to shoot digital (I was having a hard time with the M8's price and did not know if digital would be something I wanted to do. Five grand seemed a lot of money to spend to find out). Now that I have my R-D1 I can wait a few months for the bugs to get ironed out of the M8 but I can't wait to get one or to see how it's images and features will improve my photography. Hope this helps.
Now for the rub. First the R-D1's range finder goes out of whack very easily- very. Mine went out in just three days from new- no kidding. I must now send it back for repair and this is a pain and means I will not have my camera during this time. Second I have noticed the R-D1 exhibits a shift to red on some black material so it will need filters just like the M8 however it also exhibits significant flare on images shot in situations of high dynamic contrast or when ever bare light bulbs are present in dimly lit surroundings- so you still have a shift on black AND you have the artifacts the M8 sought to avoid by not placing the thick filter in front of the sensor. The worst of both worlds in my estimation.
Range Finder- the R-D1's range finder base is ridiculously short. This means it's difficult focusing lenses longer then 35mm when compared to the M8 with it's much longer range finder base or when focusing lenses faster then 2.0 with their much narrower depth of filed. Now some will say, "hey buddy I can focus mine just fine and it's a 75mm!" Perhaps but the R-D1's range finder base is way too short and I for one don't understand why this is the case with Cosina cameras and wish my R-D1's range finder base were longer.
Now to the M8. It needs IR cut filters to prevent synthetic fabrics from showing a magenta cast under certain lighting conditions but so does the R-D1. That said the M8 does not exhibit sensor/filter flair due to it's much thinner sensor filter and this is why it's IR shift on black under certain conditions is more pronounced when compared to the R-D1. I'll take no sensor/filter flare- seems the correct compromise in my opinion. The image quality according to some of the biggest names in professional digital printing state the M8's images are on par with that of a Hassablad camera and are among the sharpest in the world. We are also starting to see images that show the best of Leica glass qualities coming through so this is a serious camera for serious photographers. Comparatively the R-D1's images are somewhat soft but film like and with nice colors (colours: ) however the M8 and it's unique set of design compromises mean it's capable of incredible image sharpness and dynamic range of color in a film like (medium format) way. If you're willing to mess with a few pictures out of a hundred when processing your RAW files the M8 will reward you with outstanding results and so will the R-D1 but in a different and lower league.
What did I do? I purchased an R-D1 because I could not find an M8 and I'm glade of it. I now know I want to shoot digital (I was having a hard time with the M8's price and did not know if digital would be something I wanted to do. Five grand seemed a lot of money to spend to find out). Now that I have my R-D1 I can wait a few months for the bugs to get ironed out of the M8 but I can't wait to get one or to see how it's images and features will improve my photography. Hope this helps.
Last edited:
iml
Well-known
Ted was unlucky with his RF alignment, many people report many months of using the camera with no problems at all. I've dropped mine at least twice and it goes with me virtually everywhere, usually just thrown in a shoulder bag, and I haven't had a single problem with it, the alignment is still spot on. The magenta shift issue is so rare as to be not worth worrying about, in many hundreds of colour shots I've noticed a very faint magenta shift once, and of all the hundreds of R-D1 users who have been contributing to forums over the last couple of years, only a small handful have reported any problems in this area. For your kind of photography, as shown in your gallery, I would expect it to be a non-issue. As for flare, it's not something I've had any problems with other than when I would expect to, i.e., the camera is no more prone to flare than any other AFAICT (depending on the lenses in use at the time, obviously). A longer RF base would be nice, but I have no problems focusing any of my lenses, including the 50/1.2 Canon wide open in extremely low light.
I get the feeling that for Ted the R-D1s is a stepping stone to an M8, which is fair enough, but I think he maybe has a tendency to overstate the issues with the Epson. There are some risks involved in buying the Epson, but if you get a good one experience suggests it's reliable and gives great results. I wouldn't buy one secondhand because I felt it was worth paying to get Robert White's excellent backup service to alleviate any risk. I would recommend phoning Robert White and having a chat with them, raise any doubts you may have, see if they give you a sufficiently warm feeling and support guarantees to want to make the plunge. It worked for me, and I haven't had a single regret about buying the camera.
Ian
I get the feeling that for Ted the R-D1s is a stepping stone to an M8, which is fair enough, but I think he maybe has a tendency to overstate the issues with the Epson. There are some risks involved in buying the Epson, but if you get a good one experience suggests it's reliable and gives great results. I wouldn't buy one secondhand because I felt it was worth paying to get Robert White's excellent backup service to alleviate any risk. I would recommend phoning Robert White and having a chat with them, raise any doubts you may have, see if they give you a sufficiently warm feeling and support guarantees to want to make the plunge. It worked for me, and I haven't had a single regret about buying the camera.
Ian
Last edited:
OurManInTangier
An Undesirable
Thanks to both of you for your in-depth responses, just what I've come to expect from people on this forum and why I keep visiting.
I guess I am a bit like Ted in that ultimately I want to go with the Leica and have that incredible sharpness. As you say iml, most of my stuff is b/w so colour isn't too much of an issue and one I'm willing to deal with on the computer if necessary. The softness of the RD1 is a concern having seen a test but then I shot some personal stuff on a D2X the other day and it just didn't stand up to my G1 for sharpness - I was quite surprised, not sure why!
I will take a drive down to Robert White and have a play around with one to see what I think. Even if it becomes a stepping stone to an M8 then at least I will end up with a perfectly usable back-up body....so long as it keeps working.
I guess I am a bit like Ted in that ultimately I want to go with the Leica and have that incredible sharpness. As you say iml, most of my stuff is b/w so colour isn't too much of an issue and one I'm willing to deal with on the computer if necessary. The softness of the RD1 is a concern having seen a test but then I shot some personal stuff on a D2X the other day and it just didn't stand up to my G1 for sharpness - I was quite surprised, not sure why!
I will take a drive down to Robert White and have a play around with one to see what I think. Even if it becomes a stepping stone to an M8 then at least I will end up with a perfectly usable back-up body....so long as it keeps working.
Sailor Ted
Well-known
Perhaps my Epson did go out of alignment too easily? I don't know as it's my first such camera. But from what I read here it’s far from uncommon.
Here are five examples of issues I've found in some of my shots- read many many images. If a picture is worth a thousand words here's five thousand words to make my point. Now if more then just a weak range finder is the issue I'll post my results when I get a new camera from Robert White (mine is still under warrantee and under one month old).
This sample set shows the artifacts of sensor/filter flare caused by the thick IR filter in front of the R-D1s digital sensor. On the bridge shot see the blue fringing near the top of the bridge. On the street sign shots see the blue fringing along the top bars in the exploded view. On the light bulbs you'd have to be blind not to notice : )
Here are five examples of issues I've found in some of my shots- read many many images. If a picture is worth a thousand words here's five thousand words to make my point. Now if more then just a weak range finder is the issue I'll post my results when I get a new camera from Robert White (mine is still under warrantee and under one month old).
This sample set shows the artifacts of sensor/filter flare caused by the thick IR filter in front of the R-D1s digital sensor. On the bridge shot see the blue fringing near the top of the bridge. On the street sign shots see the blue fringing along the top bars in the exploded view. On the light bulbs you'd have to be blind not to notice : )
Attachments
iml
Well-known
Every RF from every maker has the potential to go out of alignment, but I doubt very much the Epson is more pronounced in this respect than anything else. The main issue to date has been new cameras being shipped with the RF out of alignment, not the RF easily falling out of alignment once it is correctly set.
As for your images. The blue fringing on the first two images is quite unlike anything I have ever seen from my camera, I have had no fringing effects like this at all. Maybe try a different lens, it may not be down to the camera. I don't know how you can assume it's a product of the IR filter. The third image probably needs to be underexposed by a third of a stop or so and then gently fixed in raw processing (this would be a tricky image for any camera, film or digital, and the Epson meter does need experience, it's taken me a while to get a consistent sense of when it is likely to go wrong). The flare around the fluorescent lights in the last 2 images seems to me to be unsurprising, a very common artefact with many cameras. Since I rarely shoot fluorescent lights in the frame it would not be an issue for me.
My advice to Simon would be to try an R-D1s, but if he knows he really wants an M8, there's no point hanging around, he might as well just go for it.
Ian
As for your images. The blue fringing on the first two images is quite unlike anything I have ever seen from my camera, I have had no fringing effects like this at all. Maybe try a different lens, it may not be down to the camera. I don't know how you can assume it's a product of the IR filter. The third image probably needs to be underexposed by a third of a stop or so and then gently fixed in raw processing (this would be a tricky image for any camera, film or digital, and the Epson meter does need experience, it's taken me a while to get a consistent sense of when it is likely to go wrong). The flare around the fluorescent lights in the last 2 images seems to me to be unsurprising, a very common artefact with many cameras. Since I rarely shoot fluorescent lights in the frame it would not be an issue for me.
My advice to Simon would be to try an R-D1s, but if he knows he really wants an M8, there's no point hanging around, he might as well just go for it.
Ian
Last edited:
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
I want to second Ted's recommendation of going with the M8. Disclosure: I own neither and have no plans to own either in the near future. But that's purely economic.
My rationale is this, Tangier: You are a PRO. Once you get an RF in your hands, with some good glass, you will be wanting to use it for some of your pro work. For that, I imagine that some of your clients will require more than 6MP files, and if you can get to their minimum requirements (as silly as they might be) by up-resing, that's just a lot of extra work on your part.
The 10MP resolution and the overall quality of the M8 sensor/system would be reason enough for me to make that choice. I do understand that lots of people have had no (or little) problem with RD-1 RF alignment, but for me there would always be niggling doubts in the back of my mind. Not to mention ongoing service and support that Epson doesn't seem likely to want to provide. JMO
Earl
My rationale is this, Tangier: You are a PRO. Once you get an RF in your hands, with some good glass, you will be wanting to use it for some of your pro work. For that, I imagine that some of your clients will require more than 6MP files, and if you can get to their minimum requirements (as silly as they might be) by up-resing, that's just a lot of extra work on your part.
The 10MP resolution and the overall quality of the M8 sensor/system would be reason enough for me to make that choice. I do understand that lots of people have had no (or little) problem with RD-1 RF alignment, but for me there would always be niggling doubts in the back of my mind. Not to mention ongoing service and support that Epson doesn't seem likely to want to provide. JMO
Earl
Sailor Ted
Well-known
Ian,
Three different lenses were used in these photos:
12mm CV
21mm Zeiss
35mm Summicron (Leica)
According to Rex (WOOF!) here at RFf the fringing in the first photo (signs) is due to the thick filter Epson placed in front of their digital sensor and is the reason Leica did not place a thick filter in front of theirs. As to the third shot I bracketed it and have another shot that is exposed as you suggest- I'll have a look and post the result. As to the light bulb this too is due to the thick filter in front of the digital sensor and is also the reason Leica choose not to place a thick filter in front of their digital sensor. I for one am glad of Leica's decision.
Ted
Three different lenses were used in these photos:
12mm CV
21mm Zeiss
35mm Summicron (Leica)
According to Rex (WOOF!) here at RFf the fringing in the first photo (signs) is due to the thick filter Epson placed in front of their digital sensor and is the reason Leica did not place a thick filter in front of theirs. As to the third shot I bracketed it and have another shot that is exposed as you suggest- I'll have a look and post the result. As to the light bulb this too is due to the thick filter in front of the digital sensor and is also the reason Leica choose not to place a thick filter in front of their digital sensor. I for one am glad of Leica's decision.
Ted
Last edited:
iml
Well-known
How does Rex know this for sure? As I say, in 4 months I've never had any such fringing issues. I think you're jumping to conclusions a bit. If an IR filter in front of the sensor *caused* this sort of fringing, I would expect Leica to have removed the filter completely from the M8, and other manufacturers of high quality digital cameras to do the same. And I would expect to see signs of this fringing in my digital images, all of which are taken with cameras which do have an IR filter in front of the sensor.
The blue fringing in your first two examples doesn't look to me to be the same artefact as the haloing around the fluorescent lights in the last two, or the exposure issue in the middle one. It could easily be down to the lens used in that shot, or something entirely different.
I wouldn't get too excited about Leica's fix for the M8 either. They may be recommending IR filters in front of the lens for the M8, but I'm willing to bet good money that if they ever make another digital M it won't have the same requirement, it'll be filtered at the sensor.
Ian
The blue fringing in your first two examples doesn't look to me to be the same artefact as the haloing around the fluorescent lights in the last two, or the exposure issue in the middle one. It could easily be down to the lens used in that shot, or something entirely different.
I wouldn't get too excited about Leica's fix for the M8 either. They may be recommending IR filters in front of the lens for the M8, but I'm willing to bet good money that if they ever make another digital M it won't have the same requirement, it'll be filtered at the sensor.
Ian
Last edited:
Sailor Ted
Well-known
Ian,
The ghosting and flare has something to do with how close the lens gets to the sensor in a DRF and the acute angle of the light passing through the filter before reaching the sensor. This is why you won't find this issue on a 5D or DSLR. It's very much a DRF thing and was part of what Leica was talking about when they stated a DRF was not possible given the current state of technology. With the introduction of the R-D1 not to mention the markets overwhelming shift to digital Leica's hand was forced with the M8. That said I feel they made the best set of choices in regard to image quality they could given the current state of technology. As to my (and your) Epson? They are fine cameras but this artifact is not by any means a rare occurrence. It's well understood by engineers who have and are working to develop DRF technology.
Ted
The ghosting and flare has something to do with how close the lens gets to the sensor in a DRF and the acute angle of the light passing through the filter before reaching the sensor. This is why you won't find this issue on a 5D or DSLR. It's very much a DRF thing and was part of what Leica was talking about when they stated a DRF was not possible given the current state of technology. With the introduction of the R-D1 not to mention the markets overwhelming shift to digital Leica's hand was forced with the M8. That said I feel they made the best set of choices in regard to image quality they could given the current state of technology. As to my (and your) Epson? They are fine cameras but this artifact is not by any means a rare occurrence. It's well understood by engineers who have and are working to develop DRF technology.
Ted
iml
Well-known
Sailor Ted said:
Yes, I know the issues with making a digital RF (hence the vignetting for example). I just don't think you can point specifically to this blue fringing as an example of it. You're assuming far too much.
Ian
Sailor Ted
Well-known
iml said:
Actually Ian I'm not- you are. Vignetting is only one part of the trade off. Color fringing, ghosting and flare are sadly also part of this story. Sorry
Also no hard feelings and a very nice gallery you have I might add : )
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
Knowing, and admiring your photos. I say consider the Voigtlander R4A with a wide lens.
iml
Well-known
Sailor Ted said:Actually Ian I'm not- you are. Vignetting is only one part of the trade off. Color fringing, ghosting and flare are sadly also part of this story. Sorry
Jeez, you make so many assumptions. If fringing was so common it would happen to me too, and to every other Epson user, on a regular basis. If my images fringed like yours I would send my camera back and get a refund. But they don't, I have never experienced anything like the blue fringing in your example. In addition, halo around fluorescent lights is not the same artefact as blue fringing, and a scene with mixed exposure requirements is a different issue again. Ergo, your one-size-fits-all explanation is unlikely to be the cause of the problem here.
I think you should just buy an M8 and be happy.
Ian
Sailor Ted
Well-known
iml said:
This is caused due to the extreme backlit nature of the shot and is a result of the thick filter in front of the digital sensor. I have seen it in only a few images out of going on 1400+ images now but then again I have taken very few such images.
Relax neither the R-D1 nor the M8 are perfect. It's OK- really. It’s not like you’re learning for the first time that Santa isn’t real- is it?
Ben Z
Veteran
OurManInTangier said:
I had been decided on buying an M8 but now that I know I'd need IR filters for every lens and that my wide lenses can't be coded (they are Voitlander) so I'd need to correct cyan corners in every shot, I decided to wait for the next version of the camera which I feel is inevitable in a short time if Leica hopes to sell more than 4 figures of these babies because I really think they won't find more than that many people willing to redefine what's reasonably acceptible in a $5000 camera.
However I already have a passle of M lenses, which is why I just pulled the trigger on an RD-1 refurb. If I didn't have those lenses I would not have bought the RD-1 either. I have a Canon 20D which is excellent, and soon when the 5D is replaced I believe refurbs will be in the same price range as the RD-1. True it's a brute by comparison but SLRs are more wide in their applicability and (at least for me) gone are the days when I can afford more than one camera system due to the high cost of digital bodies.
iml
Well-known
Sailor Ted said:
I give up. Keep on assuming.
Ian
(Completely relaxed, btw, and doesn't believe in Santa or that anything is perfect, certainly not a camera)