deepwhite
Well-known
[Math - Not 100% Equals Reality]
The first things I did, when I just got my R-D1s and tried to shoot with it, are:
(1) stepping back
(2) stepping back some more
(3) stepping back further more
I KNEW my Nokton 35/1.2 would turn into 53mm on a R-D1s before I really got one. I KNEW how a 50mm lens was like, since before the 35/1.2 my everyday lense is the Heliar Classic 50/f2.
But I didn't know it's like this, when I really shoot with my new R-D1s + the Nokton 35/1.2.
I almost fell out of the window for stepping back so much when taking the first shot.
And a 35mm lens on an R-D1s is NOT a 50mm lense on a Bessa. It's just not. (I'm not a tech person so I can't find the right words. Sorry.)
[Really Using the High ISO]
The high ISO color photos taken with the R-D1s are really good. Far from perfect, as the noises are still there when viewed at 100%, but far better than those small DCs I've used, including my beloved Ricoh GR Digital II.
After seeing some ISO800 color shots I took tonight, I really hope that I've had got it one week earlier, thinking back about the nice places my girlfriend and I went to at night during the past week.
[Framelines for Reference Only. Really.]
The 35mm frameline on the R-D1s is less accurate than that on my Bessa R2A. Actually the border of the finder itself is closer to the frame of the photo taken, than the 35mm frameline.
I really need to take more shots to get used to it. The degree of inaccuracy even varies when the focusing distance is different....
[White Balance Not Balanced....]
I'm still struggling with the white balance settings. The outdoor settings are good; the jpgs look like what I see in the real world. Yet the indoor settings are nightmares. Both of them, plus the auto mode, are always off. Too green most of the time. And I love warm colors, if not true to reality. So for now I'm using one of the outdoor settings for my indoor shots. Or shoot RAW for important shots.
[I'm an RF Guy]
My girlfriend borrowed a Nikon D80 for our work. It's really fast. I can sit on the bench and take 50 shots in 5 minutes, containing 5 scenes from different distances, from the birds by my feet to the mother & child 30m away.
Then I'm bored.
It's not the DSLR. It's me. Now I know very clearly: I'm an RF guy.
I love manual focusing. I know I can do that with a DSLR too. But my RF lenses look and feel better. Much better. (Maybe there are great DSLR lenses that look and feel great too, I don't know.)
I love holding a RF camera in my hand, be it my Bessa R2A or my new R-D1s.
I love walking out of the apartment door, checking the environment, then deciding to set the aperature to 4 and ISO to 800, and ready to turn the focus ring to 2m or 5m, and then hold up the R-D1s and take a shot and put it down iike nothing ever happened. (I know I can do that with a DC, but the result are different.)
------
My first thoughts after one day with my new R-D1s.
I love films, but sometimes I just really need the digital convenience for work. And sometimes I just really want to see how my three lenses (Nokton 35/1.2, Heliar Classic 50/2, Elmarit M 90/2.8) work with a digital body.
The R-D1s is a dream-come-true to me. Thanks Epson.
But why didn't you keep going......
The first things I did, when I just got my R-D1s and tried to shoot with it, are:
(1) stepping back
(2) stepping back some more
(3) stepping back further more
I KNEW my Nokton 35/1.2 would turn into 53mm on a R-D1s before I really got one. I KNEW how a 50mm lens was like, since before the 35/1.2 my everyday lense is the Heliar Classic 50/f2.
But I didn't know it's like this, when I really shoot with my new R-D1s + the Nokton 35/1.2.
I almost fell out of the window for stepping back so much when taking the first shot.
And a 35mm lens on an R-D1s is NOT a 50mm lense on a Bessa. It's just not. (I'm not a tech person so I can't find the right words. Sorry.)
[Really Using the High ISO]
The high ISO color photos taken with the R-D1s are really good. Far from perfect, as the noises are still there when viewed at 100%, but far better than those small DCs I've used, including my beloved Ricoh GR Digital II.
After seeing some ISO800 color shots I took tonight, I really hope that I've had got it one week earlier, thinking back about the nice places my girlfriend and I went to at night during the past week.
[Framelines for Reference Only. Really.]
The 35mm frameline on the R-D1s is less accurate than that on my Bessa R2A. Actually the border of the finder itself is closer to the frame of the photo taken, than the 35mm frameline.
I really need to take more shots to get used to it. The degree of inaccuracy even varies when the focusing distance is different....
[White Balance Not Balanced....]
I'm still struggling with the white balance settings. The outdoor settings are good; the jpgs look like what I see in the real world. Yet the indoor settings are nightmares. Both of them, plus the auto mode, are always off. Too green most of the time. And I love warm colors, if not true to reality. So for now I'm using one of the outdoor settings for my indoor shots. Or shoot RAW for important shots.
[I'm an RF Guy]
My girlfriend borrowed a Nikon D80 for our work. It's really fast. I can sit on the bench and take 50 shots in 5 minutes, containing 5 scenes from different distances, from the birds by my feet to the mother & child 30m away.
Then I'm bored.
It's not the DSLR. It's me. Now I know very clearly: I'm an RF guy.
I love manual focusing. I know I can do that with a DSLR too. But my RF lenses look and feel better. Much better. (Maybe there are great DSLR lenses that look and feel great too, I don't know.)
I love holding a RF camera in my hand, be it my Bessa R2A or my new R-D1s.
I love walking out of the apartment door, checking the environment, then deciding to set the aperature to 4 and ISO to 800, and ready to turn the focus ring to 2m or 5m, and then hold up the R-D1s and take a shot and put it down iike nothing ever happened. (I know I can do that with a DC, but the result are different.)
------
My first thoughts after one day with my new R-D1s.
I love films, but sometimes I just really need the digital convenience for work. And sometimes I just really want to see how my three lenses (Nokton 35/1.2, Heliar Classic 50/2, Elmarit M 90/2.8) work with a digital body.
The R-D1s is a dream-come-true to me. Thanks Epson.
But why didn't you keep going......
kshapero
South Florida Man
Good luck with your new rig. Like to hear about how the 90 works for you. I am still struggling with it.
noimmunity
scratch my niche
It's great to get a sense of what works for oneself out of a sea of conflicting messages and too many choices.
If I were to only take one camera, it would always be a film camera. But I like using the RD-1 in tandem with a film camera, and it is the only digital body I can afford that allows me to use my M and LTM lenses.
Will the RD-1 be suitable for your work?
The RD-1 framelines only cover 85% of the actual area (I forget at what distance). WB for tungsten and flourescent requires some tweaking (auto won't cut it).
There is a lot of good information here, so take some time to look up past threads...
If I were to only take one camera, it would always be a film camera. But I like using the RD-1 in tandem with a film camera, and it is the only digital body I can afford that allows me to use my M and LTM lenses.
Will the RD-1 be suitable for your work?
The RD-1 framelines only cover 85% of the actual area (I forget at what distance). WB for tungsten and flourescent requires some tweaking (auto won't cut it).
There is a lot of good information here, so take some time to look up past threads...
Johnmcd
Well-known
I agree with your feeling for the camera. It's the camera that I use when I just want to enjoy taking photos and not surprisingly that's how I take my favourite shots. For some reason though my 40mm Nokton never seems as wide as the 60mm equivalent that it should be so I use it quite comfortable as my standard lens. Cheers - John
Ron (Netherlands)
Well-known
Just found my R-D1s in the mail which I bought last week from a fellow community member. Anyone a pdf with userguide in English (the hyperlink at epson.com doesn't work)?
In the mean time found another link which works: http://www.richcutler.co.uk/r-d1/r-d1_links.htm
thanks
In the mean time found another link which works: http://www.richcutler.co.uk/r-d1/r-d1_links.htm
thanks
Last edited:
deepwhite
Well-known
Day 2. Still struggling with the white balance, framline and the "logic" of a 35 on an R-D1s.
Yesterday I found that it's very easy to set the white balance right in Photoshop with Camera RAW (still can't find Epson RAW in the PS format chooser list in the "open" window), if the RAW shot was taken with auto WB setting. Yet I can't afford doing that for every not-for-work shot I take, so I did some tweaking and now it looks a bit yellow.
Which I'm really used to, while most of the past 30 rolls of film I used were Kodak E100VS, E100GX or E100G. They've been a bit yellow with low-light indoor shots.
Better warm than freaky green or deadly white I guess, if I can't get it right in JPGs.
I'm finding some "rules" for the inaccuracy with the 35mm framline. I'll post it when I got a better idea.
Today I found a new thing. Or old info, since Mr. Sean Raid has already reported it in his review: the sensor of the R-D1s (or that in most DSLRs) can't take the same contrast range like films.
Therefore, with low-light shots, it's ok to give the film setting one step of contrast boost, while with outdoor shots, it's often safer to set the contrast at default. I'm setting the user button to film settings, so that I can switch between indoor and outdoor quickly.
And the ISO 800 is really usable. I set it the moment I walked into the museum and then forgot about it (really forgot, not saying forgot just to be cool). Every shot is good. I remember some member here said, the noise of high iso of the R-D1s is just like the Ricoh GR Digital I/II, that, instead of invisible, it "blends" into the picture very well.
Yet with the GRD2, if I set the ISO above 800, the color tone always changes to a way I don't like. Also the gain of shutter speed it gives me doesn't seem like that from a real ISO 800. Not so with the R-D1s.
Still loving the R-D1s and regretting not buying it one week earlier.
Yesterday I found that it's very easy to set the white balance right in Photoshop with Camera RAW (still can't find Epson RAW in the PS format chooser list in the "open" window), if the RAW shot was taken with auto WB setting. Yet I can't afford doing that for every not-for-work shot I take, so I did some tweaking and now it looks a bit yellow.
Which I'm really used to, while most of the past 30 rolls of film I used were Kodak E100VS, E100GX or E100G. They've been a bit yellow with low-light indoor shots.
Better warm than freaky green or deadly white I guess, if I can't get it right in JPGs.
I'm finding some "rules" for the inaccuracy with the 35mm framline. I'll post it when I got a better idea.
Today I found a new thing. Or old info, since Mr. Sean Raid has already reported it in his review: the sensor of the R-D1s (or that in most DSLRs) can't take the same contrast range like films.
Therefore, with low-light shots, it's ok to give the film setting one step of contrast boost, while with outdoor shots, it's often safer to set the contrast at default. I'm setting the user button to film settings, so that I can switch between indoor and outdoor quickly.
And the ISO 800 is really usable. I set it the moment I walked into the museum and then forgot about it (really forgot, not saying forgot just to be cool). Every shot is good. I remember some member here said, the noise of high iso of the R-D1s is just like the Ricoh GR Digital I/II, that, instead of invisible, it "blends" into the picture very well.
Yet with the GRD2, if I set the ISO above 800, the color tone always changes to a way I don't like. Also the gain of shutter speed it gives me doesn't seem like that from a real ISO 800. Not so with the R-D1s.
Still loving the R-D1s and regretting not buying it one week earlier.
Last edited:
deepwhite
Well-known
Sorry, I'm not a native English speaker. What does this sentence mean?
Ron (Netherlands)
Well-known
Any idea for a nice cameracase?
mobilexile
Well-known
Luigi's cases are divine. Spendy but worth every penny.
I tried the Epson OEM case but didn't care much for it.
I tried the Epson OEM case but didn't care much for it.
pphuang
brain drain...
Not many choices - I agree, Luigi's are the best (but expensive). Get it with the built in handgrip (the real one, not the "bulge") and the back flap - you won't be disappointed
kshapero
South Florida Man
I have a brand new black leather case from Mr Zhou, I would sell but I can't remember what I paid for it.
Didier
"Deed"
I can't understand your white balance issues. I had some troubles at some places with a lot of neon light, but otherwise I can use the auto wb setting most of the time. Yesterday night for instance I made pictures in the EURO2008 fanzone here in Zurich, and in several bars. The artificial lights were mixed, the colors look good even on the jpg's.
For me, beside the questionable rangefinder built quality, the strange metering pattern is my biggest concern with that camera, because it affects the shooting style. It's not center weighted, but center-to-bottom-left weighted, very strange.
Didier
For me, beside the questionable rangefinder built quality, the strange metering pattern is my biggest concern with that camera, because it affects the shooting style. It's not center weighted, but center-to-bottom-left weighted, very strange.
Didier
Ron (Netherlands)
Well-known
just took a first tryout pic last evening with the sun shining through the trees in my little garden (VC 40, 1.4)
LCT
ex-newbie
Auto white balance?
italy74
Well-known
Deepwhite
I don't know anything about the camera, but, while reading the specs, I noticed a 1.x viewfinder. I guess it could be the responsible for your "further go back" impression. If you look at Leica website, they suggest a .58x for landscapes and wider views, a .72x for common use and a .85x for "tele" use. They have a direct comparison of it in the Leica a la carte website. From what I read, you should be quite advantaged with longer lenses rather with shorter ones.
I don't know anything about the camera, but, while reading the specs, I noticed a 1.x viewfinder. I guess it could be the responsible for your "further go back" impression. If you look at Leica website, they suggest a .58x for landscapes and wider views, a .72x for common use and a .85x for "tele" use. They have a direct comparison of it in the Leica a la carte website. From what I read, you should be quite advantaged with longer lenses rather with shorter ones.
Ron (Netherlands)
Well-known
Yes auto white, intend to keep it that way unless in a room with neon lights,
further, I have the camera now only one day and already love it: it is really intuitive so even without a guide you can find almost all funtions very easy, even the menu; and as far as I experience the white balance and light meter do their work very well!
cheers
Last edited:
italy74
Well-known
Here's the link: choose your language and then configure your M7 until step 7/9: there is the explaination about viewfinders and they show the difference
http://www.leica-a-la-carte.com
http://www.leica-a-la-carte.com
LCT
ex-newbie
Perhaps it's me or my monitor but don't you see some green cast in your pic above? If so, i would try manual WB instead or i would shoot raw preferably. YMMV.
Ron (Netherlands)
Well-known
LCT
ex-newbie
Then forget what i said please.