RD-1: Tool or novelty item?

[boarini2003]

Okay, a question that's been really bugging me, and I want to know the opinion of actual RD-1 users, without starting a fight on film vs. digital or anything. When I see the RD-1, I feel that it falls in a "neitheir this nor that" category. If one likes manual cameras and mechanical operation, used for the involvement and personal pleasure it gives, why not use a film camera? And on the other hand, if one needs the advantages of digital, like ease of uploading and transferring images, why not use a D70 or something similar? I mean, the RD-1's got a fake "film advance lever" and "rewind knob." To me, that's like digital cameras with fake pre-recorded "shutter sounds." It's romanticizing the classic rangefinder design and user interface. But if one likes it so much, at that price level why not get a true classic rangefinder like a Leica MP? I don't mean this as an attack, we all have our preferences. I just want to know the opinion of actual users so you can tell me what you like about it.

 

[Tom Conte]

The R-D1 captures the feeling of using film-- including the need to think about what you shoot instead of fire off a bunch of matrix-metered, auto-focused shots ratta-tat-tat-- while achieving the levels of image quality one would expect from well scanned negatives.

The advance lever is there as a power saving measure. They would have needed to incorporate a larger battery to power a shutter cocking motor/solenoid if they had not included the lever. It has an additional quality of "slowing you down."

For people candids, for some reason, people are less concerned if you seem to be shooting with an old film camera than with a wiz-bang, professional shot gun like a 1DsMkII (or any big, black DSLR tank). So the R-D1 gets the shots when others don't seem to for me.

I also have a Canon system with a 5D at its center. They have very different uses.

Tom

 

[Will]

RD-1: Tool with a novelty price. I am sure if it cost 50%more instead of 300% (or whatever %) the price of a 350D, many of us would be using one now.

I think a lot of die-hards in RFF would still perfer tradational wetprinting, and there is nothing wrong with it, but I guess many C41/mini-lab guys will be happy with a Digital R-D1..

Too bad, Cosina went to bed with Epson, if it was planned as a mass production item, it would be great!

 

[Huck Finn]

it's a tool that a number of professionals who prefer rangefinder shooting & rangefinder lenses have been using. Visit www.luminous-landscape.com & read the Epson R-D1 by Sean Reid.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Definitely a tool. Most of the RD-1 users here at RFF are using them professionally.

And the price is quite reasonable for a Digital RF, limited run.

 

[JoshRoot]

The posts above say it all. I will just add:

I want a rangefinder, I do not shoot film...ever. The R-D1 is my only option.

 

[ch1]

And to add to Josh's post.

If you're fortunate enough to have a few Leitz lenses laying around - what a great digital tool you'll have. (And I'm a Nikonian saying this!)

 

[JonasYip]

If one likes manual cameras and mechanical operation, used for the involvement and personal pleasure it gives, why not use a film camera? And on the other hand, if one needs the advantages of digital, like ease of uploading and transferring images, why not use a D70 or something similar?

??? The whole point is to have the feel of a manual camera with mechanical operation along with the advantages of digital. Which makes it a very useful tool indeed.

Note also that the film advance lever isn't "fake" (you use it to cock the shutter.... though I would actually prefer "autowind" in this case). Nor is the rewind knob, which is actually one of the better menu-traversing controls knobs I've used.

Of course, like a lot of other people here I also have a full DSLR setup for when that's necessary. And film cameras for when that's necessary. But the RD-1 is probably my favorite camera these days...

j

 

[boarini2003]

Okay guys, interesting points of view. I would love to check one out, and see it for myself. Cheers!

 

[Sean Reid]

Not only is it a tool but in some respects and for some uses it's one of the best digital cameras ever made. I use two bodies professionally.

Sean

 

[anglophone1]

I'll echo Sean's thoughts, I also use 2 RD-1s professionally.........................switching from a voigt R2 and R2a combo.
I don't really think of them as digital, just rangefinders with no film.....
While on a trip to Venice [with the RD-1s , xpan and noblex] two weeks ago ,my home was robbed and my digital SLR body taken [luckily they left behind the 2 film bodies and 8 lenses!]
On reflection I realised that I have shot about 100 frames with it since purchase in October 2005, compared to nearly 2000 on my first RD-1 purchased at the same time..................................................and 500 or so on my second acquired late January.
Not sure whether I'll replace it?
Bastards took my Mamiya Universal 6x9 and three leses though....................................I haven't used that in over 18 months but I will miss it!
Death to all camera thieves ! 😡
Clive

 

[Sean Reid]

Clive,

Very sorry to hear that. I'll send Rocko and Jonesie over to straighten dem guys out.

Cheers,

Sean

 

[anglophone1]

They also took my 1991 GMC Syclone pickup truck, one of only 3000 made , less than 20 in Europe, 0-60 in less than 4 seconds , see http://www.sytyarchives.com/faq/syhistory
drove it for four miles , blew the turbo and abandoned it...................Eur 3000 to fix.
So can you ask your friends to remove their testicles with a very blunt blade when they find them..............................thanks!
Clive

 

[Sean Reid]

Ouch!!!

Hope they get em'.

Best,

Sean

 

[Toby]

I would have to say the lack of back up has always made me cautious of choosing professional options that were off the beaten track. I accept that the RD-1 is an excellent camera but if it was to go wrong you have nothing like the safety net you do with mainsteam products. I once had a pentax 6x7 break down on me whilst shooting in Israel and took it to a pentax repair shop in Tel Aviv only to find that they didn't even import the camera to Israel so any parts had to be shipped from Japan and this would take weeks. In other words the project I was shooting was over. Whatever you say about canon or nikon if one breaks down there is a professional support network to help you. I would never depend on an RD-1 in the same way and so could neverhave it as a professional mainstay however good it is.

 

[anglophone1]

Which is why I still pack a Bessa R2:
Not only as back up ............................., it has 90mm frame lines, and gives "full frame" 12mm for the odd time I need it .

The beauty of a RF system is I can get 2 Rd1s an R2, six lenses ,aux finders, an xpan and 2 lenses +8 filters, a vivitar 2500 flash, 2 tiny slave flashes, gossen digiflash meter, leitz mini tripod , batteries, cards, film ,...................................all into a Billngham Hadley.
Add an additional pouch on the side..................a Noblex too.

Great for carrying on the plane, wouldn't dream of trying to actually work out of it though.................................. 😉
Clive

 

[ian_watts]

The advance lever is there as a power saving measure

I doubt that this is the reason for the advance lever at all. Cocking the shutter uses negligible power. I daresay that the advance lever is there for no other reason than the Bessa body which the RD-1 is based upon has an advance lever. Rather than re-engineer the body to incorporate a motor to cock the shutter (which may also require using a different shutter assembly) it was presumably easier for Epson to just work around a manually cocked shutter. Personally, I never found it an issue when I owned an RD-1 (in any case, the buffer is too small too keep up with a 'motorised' shutter).

 

[Tom Conte]

I doubt that this is the reason for the advance lever at all. Cocking the shutter uses negligible power. I daresay that the advance lever is there for no other reason than the Bessa body which the RD-1 is based upon has an advance lever. Rather than re-engineer the body to incorporate a motor to cock the shutter (which may also require using a different shutter assembly) it was presumably easier for Epson to just work around a manually cocked shutter. Personally, I never found it an issue when I owned an RD-1 (in any case, the buffer is too small too keep up with a 'motorised' shutter).

Without additional information about power consumption, etc, I really can't argue with you.

You are of course correct that the R-D1 is built on the Bessa R3A frame. In light of that, yes, the shutter is not designed to be motor-driven without an attachment.

In support of my theory, however, I would like to point out that the single cell battery they found room for barely seems adequate for powering the camera, much less a motor drive to recock the shutter.

But again, without far more information about the design, I cannot back up my statement beyond conjecture.

Tom

 

[ch1]

I have just two questions regarding the RD-1:

1) Is it worth the US$2500 (espescially given the QC issues I've read here). [Corollary query: Why is this 6mp camera so expensive?]

2) Would it's current users (assuming they will be able to afford it) stick with it after the Digital M is released?

 

[J. Borger]

I have just two questions regarding the RD-1:

1) Is it worth the US$2500 (espescially given the QC issues I've read here). [Corollary query: Why is this 6mp camera so expensive?]

2) Would it's current users (assuming they will be able to afford it) stick with it after the Digital M is released?

For QC .. keep in mind there are also people around that have no issues with the camera. The silent majority perhaps.

I paid Euro 2900, for it and invested a lot of additional money in Leica glas.
I paid a similar amount for a Conon D30 years ago . And about half of that amount for a Coolpix 990 P&S when it came out. Not to mention twice that price for a Canon 1D and triple that price for a Canon 1Ds ....... From all these cameras i like the Epson best ..... i still have a 1Ds sitting on the shelf as a "back-up" (near worthless at the moment given the price i paid for it 2,5 years ago).
But all my Eos stuf goes to ebay when the Digital M hits the shelfs. The Epson will be my 2nd body than ... ....

Seen in this history i find the Epson the best investment i ever made in a camera.
It is the most pleasant camera to use and gives me the files/ pictures i like best from all cameras mentioned ... not bad for an only 6mp camera 😉 .

I could not live without it and am very happy there is a R-D1s available if my R-D1 fails ... i was already thinking of switching to film if there would be no digital rangefinder in the future. For me there is no way back to a digital SLR .
What a joy to have a high quality camera in the pocket of your coat .. instead of carrying a 6 pound back-pack filled with a 1Ds and some L glass.
I do not feel comfortable anymore to use these huge cameras in an urban environment. Yes that little Epson sure changed my photography!

In my opinion the price of the Epson is only high in comparisson to film rangefinders. But the same is true for any DSLR compared to a film SLR.
The price might also sound steep compared to other DSLR's ..... but that comparison is also not fair .. we are talking a very diferent and unique camera here.
For beeing what it is: the only Digital RF on the market for ove a year now, i think the price of the Epson is not outrageous but very fair!