r-d1 megapixel poll

r-d1 megapixel poll

  • 6mp

    Votes: 22 14.6%

  • 12mp

    Votes: 81 53.6%

  • 18mp

    Votes: 28 18.5%

  • 24mp

    Votes: 20 13.2%
  • Total voters
    151
I'm currently looking over some captures from a recent project. The 5Dii and RD1 both were in play. Honestly a bit better resolution from the RD1 would be nice (DR as well). That said it still is a strong performer at 6mp. The sort EBL used to bother me before I ever needed it longer. What I mean is now that I shoot a f1.2/50 on this camera without any trouble... the EBL seems just fine.
 
Finder said:
Pixel resolution is overrated.
Click to expand...

I agree for most applications. You might want a higher resolution for cropping purposes. IMO, the most overlooked specification on a digital camera is the Pixel Density of the sensor. I have had several 5 to 6 MP cameras that served admirably. Just my 2 cents.
 
The R-D1 is a gift, there's nothing not to rave about-
(I love those gorgeous indicator dials).

The only improvement imho would be a 24x36-sensor
with 14-18 mp … ;-)

Cheers!
Don
 
A wonderful camera that is still a serious RF contender after all these years. Unique image quality, but I did sell mine, just because I was simplifying my life. I mostly shoot pocket digitals now, like the Dlux-4.

/T
 
Does anyone think Epson is about to release another R-D? Just asking. If they do, I hope they keep the same pixel density and put in a larger sensor for a smaller crop factor.

As it is I am fine with my R-D1 as it is. It has a new skin and a viewfinder mag - addressing the two issues I had with it when I bought it. I got a good deal on it used, so for the price of a used M8 I got the R-D1, a LX3, a DP2 and a J-3 with a LTM adapter for the R-D1.
 
aizan said:
i was looking at the r-d1 (again). the only things i don't really like about it are the "film advance" lever, the indicator dial, the viewfinder magnification, and most of all the megapixel count. but other than, it says WANT.
Click to expand...

Interestingly all points, you named are exactly points, I love about the R-D1!

Especially the shutter cocking lever (making a loud motor sound unneccesary) and the wonderful x1.0 finder magnification.

I can't understand, why anybody does not like a 1:1 finder magnification, when it still displays 28mm frames, as the Leica 0.72 finder apart from preferring a specific wide angle finder.

I play with the idea of upgrading my R-D1 to a R-D1x just for the SDHC cards. A higher sensor resolution (10MP) would be a great bonus, a full frame sensor even would make thinking about this upgrade very short.

I think though, that dreaming about a FF sensor in a DRF other than the Leica M9 is just that for the foreseeable time to come - dreaming.
My biggest issue, I have with my M8.2 is, that my D3 just does sooo much better low light, that it actually makes little sense, to use it in bad light.
Film works better, than the digital Leica offerings in low light, bettered also by the R-D1 btw ;)
 
5x7 color prints from the RD1 are impeccable. 5x7 prints are big enough for me 90% of the time. So the RD1 is good enough for me 90% of the time. No gripes about megapixels here.
 
I dream from time to time: if only the R-D1 made after the ZI, we might have a nicer body with decent sensor.
The "original" is jolly good for me indeed.
I print 12x16 without crop in the good old days. The 6MP file is good enough to deliver. (I can't "see" as close as I was young^^)
 
Yes, a larger pixel count would be nice, but I agree that the density should be kept as it is - in other words the sensor size would have to go up, meaning that it will never happen.

I love the R-D1 in use and the IQ it gives, and I've had 8x10 prints made which hold their own at closer than intended viewing distances. Of course, if you are concerned about possible bigger enlargements in the future, then use something else. Who here has just the one camera? ;) :D
 
the MP count & 1.6 crop factor are precisely what are preventing me from buying what is otherwise my dream digital camera. I prefer to have a single camera system which is why I'm unloading a bunch of SLR stuff and I'd like to be able to enlarge to 11x14.
 
One of the reasons I sold my R-D1 is that for professional work I need 18 MP - which equates to ideal quality for a double-page magazine spread and is the minimum size required by my photo agency.

10-12 MP can be resampled to 18 MP - just - but the loss of quality when resampling 6 MP to 18 MP is too great.
 
mwooten said:
Others complain about the camera's "crop" factor, but the crop factor only exists when we compare the RD1 to a 35mm film camera. The RD1 is a good picture taking machine.
Click to expand...

The reason it is a valid complaint is because it uses an M mount and epson does not make any proprietary lenses.
 
I truly love my R-D1 (although I probably use my M8 more often) for all the reasons that have been mentioned. I have acceptable 11x17 prints, and after adjusting the RF carefully, have used a Nocti quite successfully on it. If I am shooting for my own pleasure rather than on some assignment, the R-D1 is my choice. Compared to the R-D1, the M8 feels like a computer, not a camera.
 
Ed Schwartzreic said:
… Compared to the R-D1, the M8 feels like a computer, not a camera.
Click to expand...

Very well chosen words and so well fitting!
The R-D1 feels much more connected and responsive due to the great manual controls.

With the M, one constantly fiddles in the menu, which interrupts the natural feel of a manual camera indeed.
And yes, the shutter cocking lever does make a difference!
 
If my R-D1s was FF like my 1Ds II dSLR, then I'd be in utter bliss with the combination.

I have absolutely zero qualms with the camera otherwise. I love the analog ergonomics and gauges, including the advance lever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom