eric.schmiedl
Member
My day-to-day cameras right now are an Olympus XA (in the pocket all the time! but focusing has gotten very stiff from dust&dirt getting into the works), Nikon F3, and for the moment a Widelux F7.
Unfortunately, film sucks. All that time developing, and I still have to spend hours scanning to get it into my digital library. I used to carry a Nikon D70 but the lens mount was ripped from the body when the works (with a 17-35/2.8 attached!) fell onto the pavement as I was getting out of a taxi after shooting an assignment. I'm probably going to buy a Fuji S5 for professional work.
But I stil want a camera I can sling over my shoulder and just carry around. Not to mention something where I can mount a fast lens (CV 35/1.2!) and shoot at parties or other nocturnal occasions without having to do the frame->focus->mirror up routine of the F3 or the [more convenient] double-tap mirror-up on a D200/D2Hs. But most of all I just love the feel of a rangefinder and particularly the viewfinder. The feel is why I love the Widelux so much, not just the panoramic format, and its viewfinder doesn't even have a rangefinder --the lens is fixed infinity focus.
Yeah, I know the R-D1 is discontinued. No, I don't mind buying on eBay, and Epson is capable of repairing them for the next 6 years.
My question to you guys-- is the R-D1 tough enough to get knocked around and otherwise mildly abused? How is the low-light high-ISO performance? Is it worth the ~$1800 going rate plus $1264 for a 28/1.9 and a 35/1.2?
Unfortunately, film sucks. All that time developing, and I still have to spend hours scanning to get it into my digital library. I used to carry a Nikon D70 but the lens mount was ripped from the body when the works (with a 17-35/2.8 attached!) fell onto the pavement as I was getting out of a taxi after shooting an assignment. I'm probably going to buy a Fuji S5 for professional work.
But I stil want a camera I can sling over my shoulder and just carry around. Not to mention something where I can mount a fast lens (CV 35/1.2!) and shoot at parties or other nocturnal occasions without having to do the frame->focus->mirror up routine of the F3 or the [more convenient] double-tap mirror-up on a D200/D2Hs. But most of all I just love the feel of a rangefinder and particularly the viewfinder. The feel is why I love the Widelux so much, not just the panoramic format, and its viewfinder doesn't even have a rangefinder --the lens is fixed infinity focus.
Yeah, I know the R-D1 is discontinued. No, I don't mind buying on eBay, and Epson is capable of repairing them for the next 6 years.
My question to you guys-- is the R-D1 tough enough to get knocked around and otherwise mildly abused? How is the low-light high-ISO performance? Is it worth the ~$1800 going rate plus $1264 for a 28/1.9 and a 35/1.2?
Uwe_Nds
Chief Assistant Driver
Eric,
Remember though that the 35/1.2 becomes the equivalent of a 50something lens on the R-D1.
Even the 28 becomes a 42mm - near normal lens.
I had the opportunity to fiddle around with an R-D1 this weekend. As I am left-eyed, I could not overlook the 28mm framelines because of my nose keeping the left eye away from the camera. Right eye was no problem, but I can't get used to it.
Best regards,
Uwe
Remember though that the 35/1.2 becomes the equivalent of a 50something lens on the R-D1.
Even the 28 becomes a 42mm - near normal lens.
I had the opportunity to fiddle around with an R-D1 this weekend. As I am left-eyed, I could not overlook the 28mm framelines because of my nose keeping the left eye away from the camera. Right eye was no problem, but I can't get used to it.
Best regards,
Uwe
kshapero
South Florida Man
Give it a try. Way things are going if it does not work out fo you, you would have no problem selling it.
abumac
Well-known
R-D1s with Zeiss 25, jpg by 1600 ASA, no noise reduction.
It is a really great avaible light camera.
It is a really great avaible light camera.
abumac
Well-known
Another couple of fotos, same camera, same lens, same ISO.
thegadsby
RD-1 M6 M4-P Hexar RF M2
Low Light camera
Low Light camera
I say go for it My RD1 is a good reliable workhorse its very well put together and seems as solid as my Hexar RF and Leica M cameras.
The low light performance is good and the resulting files are nice and neutral.
Dont get bogged down by the 1.5 x factor I use mine with a 35/2 series 4 summicron as the standard lens and just use the mechanical zoom to frame the view ( i.e. walk backwards and forwards till I get the picture framed!!)
Also dont get hunk up on reliablity my RD1 is still working OK whilst my friends very expensive Digital SLR is not after a wet and miserable day at an air display that left us all totally drowned.!!
Wish you well
John
Low Light camera
I say go for it My RD1 is a good reliable workhorse its very well put together and seems as solid as my Hexar RF and Leica M cameras.
The low light performance is good and the resulting files are nice and neutral.
Dont get bogged down by the 1.5 x factor I use mine with a 35/2 series 4 summicron as the standard lens and just use the mechanical zoom to frame the view ( i.e. walk backwards and forwards till I get the picture framed!!)
Also dont get hunk up on reliablity my RD1 is still working OK whilst my friends very expensive Digital SLR is not after a wet and miserable day at an air display that left us all totally drowned.!!
Wish you well
John
chrisso
Established
I've seen some great low light pictures.
However, trying to use it that way myself I've had big problems seeing the focusing images in the viewfinder.
Also, I haven't found the RD-1s that great for 'slinging over your shoulder'.
The focusing adjustment is fragile, mine is almost permanently out. I also managed to smash the viewfinder glass.
I'm not rough on cameras. I've slung an M6 over my shoulder for over ten years and it's still working perfectly.
It's certainly a groovy little camera, but in my opinion it's definitely NOT 'tough enough to get knocked around and otherwise mildly abused?'
However, trying to use it that way myself I've had big problems seeing the focusing images in the viewfinder.
Also, I haven't found the RD-1s that great for 'slinging over your shoulder'.
The focusing adjustment is fragile, mine is almost permanently out. I also managed to smash the viewfinder glass.
I'm not rough on cameras. I've slung an M6 over my shoulder for over ten years and it's still working perfectly.
It's certainly a groovy little camera, but in my opinion it's definitely NOT 'tough enough to get knocked around and otherwise mildly abused?'
abumac
Well-known
with Leica 1,4/35 from Leica, 1600 Asa, Raw
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
This type of question always reminds me of the comment often attributed to Marty Forscher, who repaired staff cameras during the glory years of Life magazine. He noted that some photographers could check out a camera and take it around the block, and it would come back looking as if it had been through a war. Others could check out a camera, take it to a war, and it would come back looking as if it had only been around the block!
In other words, it isn't entirely about the camera. Some of it has to do with you, and some of it has to do with luck. I tend not to be hard on cameras, and I've also been pretty lucky about not having them damaged. That said, I sling my R-D 1 over my shoulder and lug it around wherever without a second thought; I stuff it down into a corner of a non-padded bag full of heavy DSLR gear with no worries; I carry it and a couple of lenses in a little waist bag that gets bounced and jostled around with my every movement and have had no problems.
No, it's probably not as tough as an M Leica, but no camera is immune to bad-luck abuse. (Walk through a doorway with your Leica slung over your shoulder, and a relatively gentle bump against the doorframe at just the wrong spot on the upper-right-front corner near the rewind crank can fracture the RF prism; this blacks out your viewfinder and is expensive to fix. Whether the bump happens on that expensive "wrong" spot or another spot is just a matter of how lucky/unlucky you are that day.)
So, I'd say think about your experience with your other cameras. Are you more the "been through a war" type of photographer, as in the first part of the Forscher anecdote? Or are you more the "around the block" type, as in the second part?
If you tend to have fairly good luck avoiding camera damage, an R-D 1 should be fine for you. And if you tend to have fairly bad luck, you probably would be better off sticking with cheap/disposable/expendable equipment, because bad stuff can happen to any camera.
As to the other part of your question: An R-D 1 with a fast lens is a great combination for low light. The 1:1 viewfinder makes it easy to watch for subject matter, the RF is bright, and the images have a well-controlled, natural-looking noise signature, as in abumac's example picture above.
In other words, it isn't entirely about the camera. Some of it has to do with you, and some of it has to do with luck. I tend not to be hard on cameras, and I've also been pretty lucky about not having them damaged. That said, I sling my R-D 1 over my shoulder and lug it around wherever without a second thought; I stuff it down into a corner of a non-padded bag full of heavy DSLR gear with no worries; I carry it and a couple of lenses in a little waist bag that gets bounced and jostled around with my every movement and have had no problems.
No, it's probably not as tough as an M Leica, but no camera is immune to bad-luck abuse. (Walk through a doorway with your Leica slung over your shoulder, and a relatively gentle bump against the doorframe at just the wrong spot on the upper-right-front corner near the rewind crank can fracture the RF prism; this blacks out your viewfinder and is expensive to fix. Whether the bump happens on that expensive "wrong" spot or another spot is just a matter of how lucky/unlucky you are that day.)
So, I'd say think about your experience with your other cameras. Are you more the "been through a war" type of photographer, as in the first part of the Forscher anecdote? Or are you more the "around the block" type, as in the second part?
If you tend to have fairly good luck avoiding camera damage, an R-D 1 should be fine for you. And if you tend to have fairly bad luck, you probably would be better off sticking with cheap/disposable/expendable equipment, because bad stuff can happen to any camera.
As to the other part of your question: An R-D 1 with a fast lens is a great combination for low light. The 1:1 viewfinder makes it easy to watch for subject matter, the RF is bright, and the images have a well-controlled, natural-looking noise signature, as in abumac's example picture above.
Last edited:
eric.schmiedl
Member
chrisso said:
Uh oh. Here I thought the R-D1 used the Voigtlander VF/RF, which is supposed to be as bright as it gets... as someone who's been shooting mostly with really old, very dim RF patches, I HATE DIM RANGEFINDERS
Is this normal?
eric.schmiedl
Member
Uwe - Yeah, I know about the crop factor. I've shot Nikon digital for years and dealt with it; I'm not worried. (I don't *like* it, but I can live with it.)
Abu - 1600, no NR? You have gotta be kidding me. Those look awesome. Got any 100% crops?
Abu - 1600, no NR? You have gotta be kidding me. Those look awesome. Got any 100% crops?
RichC
Well-known
It does; it is!eric.schmiedl said:
Can't say I've had any probs focusing in low light - other than those any camera with a coincident focusing patch would have in low-light conditions (i.e. the scene's dark or not well lit!)
Uwe_Nds
Chief Assistant Driver
eric.schmiedl said:
Eric,
Not so much about the crop factor, but what turned me off the camera was that I could not properly see the 28mm framelines which rendered this focal length - for me - useless, leaving me with only the 35 and 50 mm.
Best regards,
Uwe
M4streetshooter
Tourist Thru Life
I use the R-D1s all the time as my main camera. I use 1600 everynight and noise is present but not in the way.....It's actually a different kind of noise than my %D gives...it's more photographic but in asny case, if it bothers you...just use Noise Ninja...and your clean again...as far as dependability...it's a winner....I am maybe one of the lucky ones...I always complain about the rangefinder but using the camera....it's a pleasure....I rate it many times better than my M-8's...that got returned....for a digital RF...it's as good as it gets....atleast for the moment.....don
R
RML
Guest
The R-D1 has been my main camera for 2 years now. It resides in an unpadded messenger bag most of the time when I commute, go into town or otherwise go out. I bring it everywhere. I've shot it in blistering heat and similarly blistering cold. I've used it in rain and dusty windy situations.
The high iso results are fabulous. I have no qualms about shooting it at iso800 most of the time. And shooting it at iso1600 at night is perfect.
Like JLW said, if you're the "been thru war" photographer, the R-D1 may not be the toughest camera. But if you take reasonable care, don't use it to ward of bears or Hell's Angels, don't need it to hammer a nail in, and don't let it swim with the fishes, I'd say the R-D1 is one tough cookie.
The high iso results are fabulous. I have no qualms about shooting it at iso800 most of the time. And shooting it at iso1600 at night is perfect.
Like JLW said, if you're the "been thru war" photographer, the R-D1 may not be the toughest camera. But if you take reasonable care, don't use it to ward of bears or Hell's Angels, don't need it to hammer a nail in, and don't let it swim with the fishes, I'd say the R-D1 is one tough cookie.
triplefinger
Well-known
I really love mine for low light and my 40 'cron lives on it most of the time. in VERY low light sometimes things get wierd, but 98 percent of the time... GREAT.
regarding toughness: I dropped mine down a flight of stairs and cringed when it hit the tile at the bottom. it still worked but required the RF to be re-aligned. now it has a couple battle scars and looks even BETTER!
regarding toughness: I dropped mine down a flight of stairs and cringed when it hit the tile at the bottom. it still worked but required the RF to be re-aligned. now it has a couple battle scars and looks even BETTER!
eric.schmiedl
Member
Even the 30 year old rangefinders I use can focus in lower light than anything but maybe a Hexar AF (infrared multibeam focus...). The newer Nikon pro cameras I use (D2Hs, D200) have decent low-light performance, but it's nothing to write home about. And let's face it, with that kind of light it's tripod and/or Nikon + SB-800 and/or PocketWizard + White Lightning timeRichC said:
Joe Mondello
Resu Deretsiger
Here's a set I took at a birthday party for a photographer friend recently.
All of these are with a 1963 50/2 Summicron DR wide open at ISO 800 or 1600. No NR applied other than whatever LightRoom does on its own.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/musicandlight/sets/72157600025383819/
HTH
All of these are with a 1963 50/2 Summicron DR wide open at ISO 800 or 1600. No NR applied other than whatever LightRoom does on its own.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/musicandlight/sets/72157600025383819/
HTH
eric.schmiedl
Member
What's going on with the camcorder?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/musicandlight/433161767/in/set-72157600025383819/
I'm not sitting at my calibrated monitor, so judging color in the photos you guys posted is tough. How does the R-D1's color (particularly skin tones) compare to the SLRs you guys have used -- the 5Ds, S5s, D200s, etc.?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/musicandlight/433161767/in/set-72157600025383819/
I'm not sitting at my calibrated monitor, so judging color in the photos you guys posted is tough. How does the R-D1's color (particularly skin tones) compare to the SLRs you guys have used -- the 5Ds, S5s, D200s, etc.?
eric.schmiedl
Member
So I took a look at what this camera is going for on eBay...
$2000?!
That's more than a Fuji S5 or a Nikon D200! And the R-D1 is a three-year-old 6mp digital camera that's more or less useless for lenses beyond 75-90mm and seems to give best results when shot in or converted to black-and-white. The S5 and D200 are almost brand-new 8 and 10mp pro bodies with all the bells on and d*mn good sensors...
$2000?!
That's more than a Fuji S5 or a Nikon D200! And the R-D1 is a three-year-old 6mp digital camera that's more or less useless for lenses beyond 75-90mm and seems to give best results when shot in or converted to black-and-white. The S5 and D200 are almost brand-new 8 and 10mp pro bodies with all the bells on and d*mn good sensors...
Last edited: