R-D1 or M8?

[photografity]

I am having a hard time deciding between a M8 or a R-D1 @ 60% of the price of the M8 :bang:

I have been researching in lots of different forums, however, most of these posting date back more than a year ago..... Also with the Nex-7 coming soon, along with the rumoured Fuji X-200, my decision gets even crazier..

I have been a long time Leica user having owned the M3, M2, M4 & M6 before "letting" it go (except a 5cm Summarit) for the SLR's......

Now..... I want to get back to the RF.... Forget a M9.... It comes down to the M8 or R-D1.....

Is there a "risk" in buying the R-D1? Should I stick with the M8??

 

[filmtwit]

M8 - slightly newer censor and not as much as crop factor.

 

[jarski]

I'd get RD1 only if it was really a bargain deal. NEX7 gives same crop sensor with 4 times more resolution.

 

[Benjamin Marks]

M8: more accurate RF mechanism

M8: more accurate RF mechanism

Also, on my samples, the RF mechanism was more accurate on the M8 than on the RD-1 as to focus distance. I had the RD-1 sent to DAG for adjustment. His assessment: for really fast lenses (50/1, 75/1.4 etc.) there was too much slop in the system to accurately focus. Best he could do was advise to always focus from near to far and bracket focus slightly. No such problems with the M8. However, the M8 did not play nicely with a fairly random selection of my lenses, which had to be adjusted/tweaked because of the M8's very flat sensor. Apparently there was an acceptable level of "slop" in the days of film as film a) has depth and b) bulges slightly in the middle. Ultimately, I got both cameras working acceptably, but I liked the M8 more.


+1 for what jarski said. You can get pretty inexpensive NEX 3, and 5 cameras that will let you use all of your Leica compatible glass with muuuuch more IQ than the RD-1 allowed. And better high ISO performance.

 

[Atom]

I have owned an R-D1 in the past and currently have an M8.2 and I'd stay with the M8. The image quality is much better in my opinion. I loved the form and function of the Epson but the over all quality is more important to me. Plus you can still have M8's fixed and even upgraded. The R-D1 is has no backing. M8 IMO.

 

[dreilly]

From what I've read about rangefinder slop in R-D1s, it's not an across-the-board issue. Many people seem to have no problem with it all. But some do, like mine. I do have to focus from near to far (or in other words, join the rangefinder image overlay from right ot left) or it won't focus accurately. People have successfully addressed the issue by sending their R-D1s to Epson Japan to have a part replaced, so it's fixable and again, not a problem with all units. Seems that a part wasn't manufactured to a tight-enough tolerance and thus there is variation. I thought I'd send mine in to get it fixed, but after 15 minutes I taught myself to do the final focusing from right to left (near to far) and it's never been an issue since. Sometimes I overshoot but just go back a bit to the left and try to hit it again.

Well that's something to watch for in an R-D1 for sure. I'm not sure how "risky" it is. Buy from a good seller who knows his camera and he/she should be able to tell if it has the slop or not. Or just make sure there is a return policy. Again, I live with it and don't consider it a handicap at all. At least for now, Epson Japan is still supporting the R-D1 with repairs and they can be arranged through Japan Camera Hunter who is on this forum (Bellamy). I really wonder how long Leica will support the M8. Probably longer than Nikon will support the D80, but I doubt for as long as they will support the M3. I think none of us are really sure about the longevity of any piece of digital photo gear. But again, Leica's probably the best bet. Though maybe there will be a Sover Wong of the R-D1 in the future, keeping it alive for decades...

As for the OP's choice, he states he wants to get back to an RF, so Nex and GXR and X-200 aren't really part of the conversation here. I get that, having just completely failed to put my R-D1 for sale since I like it so much.

Here's my thinking as a particularly subjective R-D1 owner with zero experience of the M8. I don't think the M8 is worth it. Used it's rare to find it under two grand. My R-D1 was under a grand. That's the price of a 35mm f1.2 CV lens, or about the price of the amazing 21mm Zeiss ZM biogon. This is a case where I'd say get a bit lesser body and put the extra K to a nice piece of glass. There are other things to think about. Would I get an M8 if I had the dough? Maybe, though I'd probably be wondering why I wasn't buying a D700. Yeah, it's a DSLR and it's big and heavy, but it's a full-frame sensor with amazing high-iso capabilities. The M8 is a crop sensor camera and it's only got one trick. If you like that trick (I like it enough to have an R-D1!) then that's cool...

 

[filmtwit]

If I remember right, the RD has a limit on its card size too.

 

[porktaco]

2gb limit.

RD-1 is a very nice camera for the money. if you have more money, the M8 is also a very nice camera. i was worried about the IR filter issue when i made my choice, and ended up with an RD-1. but i'm thinking about getting an M9 when they drop to M8 price levels.

 

[dreilly]

An M9 at 2k would be a different story. I'm not sure how many years that will take!

 

[photografity]

Actually.... In addition to my 5cm Summarit, I am considering either the CV 28mm f2 or the CV 35mm f1.2.......

What are your preferred focal lengths (in terms of FF 35mm)?

If you tend to only shoot a 35mm or 50mm look, then a R-D1 in good serviceable condition may be a reasonable consideration.

If you shoot really fast lenses wide open such as the CV 35/1.2, or any Summilux, you will probably benefit from the longer effective base length of the RF in the Leica. The RF patch is also (IMHO) easier to see/read in the Leica.

If you shoot wider angle lenses such as an effective 21mm, you will benefit from the reduced crop factor of the Leica.

I used a R-D1S for several months before deciding I would be better served with the M8.2, of which I now have a pair and the R-D1S has been sold.

I've considered the 21mm one of my essential looks for decades. I've owned a 21/3.4 SA since 1975. I couldn't get a satisfactory 21mm look with the R-D1S, the best I could do was the Zeiss ZM 18/4 used with a CV 28mm bright line VF. I now use the CV 15/4.5 on the M8.2 with a Leitz 21mm finder. Works fine save for being slower than my Super Angulon which is slower still than a 21mm Elmarit.

The R-D1S is capable of more than adequate image quality. Some images I made with mine are still prized and regarded as serious keepers. The M8.2 is about the same but its larger files allow for some cropping of which I was hesitant to do with the Epson files.

As is so often the case, the correct answer to your query is: it depends.

 

[photografity]

I did pick up a Nex-3 @ a clearance price..... it's great to use the Leica glass at a bargain, which why I mentioned the Nex-7(still looking at that "24" mp sensor). However, after seeing some of the preview Nex-7 shots(pre-prod), I was not all impress.... Which is why I am asking for opinions here.....
I am offered a R-D1 for the same price of the Nex-7.

Also, on my samples, the RF mechanism was more accurate on the M8 than on the RD-1 as to focus distance. I had the RD-1 sent to DAG for adjustment. His assessment: for really fast lenses (50/1, 75/1.4 etc.) there was too much slop in the system to accurately focus. Best he could do was advise to always focus from near to far and bracket focus slightly. No such problems with the M8. However, the M8 did not play nicely with a fairly random selection of my lenses, which had to be adjusted/tweaked because of the M8's very flat sensor. Apparently there was an acceptable level of "slop" in the days of film as film a) has depth and b) bulges slightly in the middle. Ultimately, I got both cameras working acceptably, but I liked the M8 more.


+1 for what jarski said. You can get pretty inexpensive NEX 3, and 5 cameras that will let you use all of your Leica compatible glass with muuuuch more IQ than the RD-1 allowed. And better high ISO performance.

 

[m.galimathias]

Hm. All in all the RD1 is the better piece of engineering. You really dont need any stupid filters for the magenta-cast and the shutter appears more classical (others would say m-like). Actually the Epsons problem is rather the dinky body, which is not bad, but compared to the Leica, its ... yes... dinky. The M8 is nothing but wonderful. She has much more noise, and I guess shes louder.
If you are an film-M-user I'd stay with the classical M, because if you buy a digital crop-rangefinder, you'll always think about buying a new car (Leica M9).

 

[Gid]

They are both fine cameras. RD1 is probably the best ever digital implementation of an analogue camera - very little need to use the menu system and you can turn the screen in and shoot as if it were a film camera. High ISO of RD1 is better than the M8. RD1 output is quite special in a hard to describe way - colours, tone, B&W rendering especially with photo raw - less digital and more film like. 1:1 finder is great but less accurate and than the M8 and more prone to drift (an easy DIY fix). Short EBL can make it difficult to focus fast lenses and you are limited to three manually selected frame lines. No need for UV/IR filters, but you do occasionally get some blacks appearing as magenta, but rarely in my experience. Buffer size of RD1 limits you to 3 shots in raw, so if you like to shoot fast this may be a problem. You can, apparently, still get them serviced/repaired in Japan.

M8 feels better built, IQ straight from the camera is sharper, VF is much better (more contrasty), more stable and snaps into focus better than RD1. Longer EBL makes focusing fast lenses easier. M8 colours are very nice (if you like Kodak sensors rendering) and files stand up to a fair bit of manipulation. Leica still supports the M8, but you may find turnaround time problematic (probably quicker shipping the RD1 to Japan).

When it comes to prints on the wall there really isn't much to choose between them up to 15"x10" and maybe even 18"x12" depending on subject matter, but the M8 scales better to bigger sizes.

So there you have it, both very fine cameras and either will do a great job. I regret selling my RD1, but I am happy with my M8.2

 

[Benjamin Marks]

Agree with all of Gid's appraisals except for high ISO performance. But the RD-1 was a very well-thought out camera in terms of physical handling. Personally, I liked the manual shutter advance. At the end of the day, the M8 was a better fit for me.

 

[sevres_babylone]

I went from the R-D1 to the M9. Focusing is faster on the Leica, and since you are coming from Leica bodies this may be more of an issue for you than it is/was for me.

I have been printing a lot lately, and have been impressed with the quality of the Epson files. I am not making large prints, and rarely printed beyond 8x12 anyway. You can do searches here on people who did make larger prints on the Epson, if that is an issue for you.

Risks. I had shutter problems with both of my R-D1 bodies. Steve in L.A. was able to fix one of them, but not the other.

The 2gb maximum is not a big deal, in my opinion.

 

[brbo]

R-D1 or M8?

Neither. Just wait for Fuji. Coming 2012. 🙂

Todays news:

Meanwhile, company president and CEO Shigetaka Komori said it will create a mirrorless, interchangeable lens camera built around a larger sensor with ‘resolution and low noise [that] will surpass the 35mm full size sensor.’

And I just bought M8.2 yesterday. In fact, I'm glad I didn't know of Fuji's mirrorless interchangeable lens camera plans. That would be one long long wait for me...

 

[krötenblender]

I think, I can agree with all the technical aspects posted so far. I don't have a M8, but a R-D1 and a M9 and some other stuff, and I think, the R-D1 is the camera, that I have the most fun shooting with.

So if you are not a pro who has to make very large prints, if you don't need to crop extremely (depends on your shooting style, I guess), you can consider all the technical aspect as secondary.

If you have the opportunity to test the cameras before buying, especially the R-D1, give them a day and see, what is more fun to use to you. Because that is the camera, that you will likely use more often to produce good images. It is always said, that the camera does not matter that much, but if you ask, you mostly got technical arguments presented.

To a certain extent, you should consider them, but they are not the most essential part of cameras which are so similar. It is the handling and the feeling, that give you the ability to make good images. If you are feeling "disconnected" from your camera, you won't get any good shoots. But if you feel, that your camera is a really good companion to you, you will make your best photos with it. Both, the M8 and the R-D1 can be such a good companion, but you have to try and see, which one it is for you. For me, it would be the R-D1.

 

[fotomeow]

I had the RD1s and the M8 upgraded x 3: SOLD THE M8. Sorry guys, I probably woke up on the wrong side of the bed today, but if you want a money pit, buy the M8. And sell me your RD1 for $500.

Re: prior posts: there is service for the RD1s, GOOD service support for a very reasonable price in Japan, as well as DAG/Steve's, etc.

Of note, many people diss the RD1s IQ based on the 6 MPs alone. I have had it explained to me that the size of each of the 6 million pixels was larger than your average size pixel in a sensor, so that the IQ was actually higher than a 6 MP sensor. I just did a Google search, and could not find data on this though. Higher ISOs on the RD1 are not as clean as CMOS sensors, but you will actually get some nice digital grain on the RD1.

All 4 of your main controls (SS, f, ISO, Exp comp) on the RD1s are at your finger tips, changed manually, rather than getting lost in submenus in the M8, and then missing the decisive moment b/c you were d*cking around with the crap-for-brains electronics of the M8. And the NOISE the M8 makes when taking pics is horrendous. Compared to the quite "click" of the RD1 shutter.

yes, the RD1 has drawbacks: the 2 GB card limit? buy a few of them for $8 each (yes, only $8 from a major brand): do you really need to take 100 pics of the same thing? If so, buy a dSLR. The limited memory will help focus on the image taking, like a film camera, and will redevelop your confidence in getting it right the first time.

I have never had focus or shutter problems with the RD1. In fact, the RD1 VF magnification is 1.0! much larger than the 0.72 on the M8. IOWs, higher focussing accuracy for 50mm+.

Thank you for allowing me to express my opinionated view.

Disclaimer: Despite my M8 bashing, I did by an M9. Ridiculous price? Of course it is! I just wanted something FF that would allow a 35 Lux to act like a 35 Lux, rather than a 50mm Lux (with 1.5 crop factor). I bought the M9 new with 2 year warranty, and extendable to 3 years, so I wont be pouring money into it, like I would if I bought a used M8 w/out warranty. E.g, you can buy an M8 used, out of warranty, have the sensor go bad, and then fork out ANOTHER $2k (in addition to the $2k you had bought it for) to fix the sensor. So then you are in $4k for the M8, which takes the short bus to school, when you could have just bought and RD1 for $1k in the first place.
In any case, good luck to you, and let us know what you decide!

 

[Joe AC]

I'm actually in the same predicament. I was in the market for an M8.2
Then I heard about the Fuji. I'm going to wait for the x300. I hope I don't have to wait to long.

Joe

 

[Benjamin Marks]

Even though I am not in the market for an RD-1, it is a testament to the camera's qualities that eight years after its introduction, you can still have a discussion about whether it is a suitable camera. Its DSLR contemporaries were the Canon digital rebel and the Nikon D100. You don't really see those cameras discussed in ANY capacity these days.

Ben