Rd-1

Sorry, Joe. I didn't know your last name is Blow. :)

Let me rephrase: "not just by any fonddler".
 
The issue I have with this camera concerns the use of a sensor with a 1.5 "crop factor". In other words your lens size has to be multiplied by 1.5. So if you use Leicas two most popular lens sizes, 35mm and 50mm, those same lenses behave as a 52.5mm
and a 75mm. Now I can shell out several thousand dollars to buy a 21mm (which equates to a 31.5mm) or the 28mm (becomes a 42mm) leica lenses. Add those prices to the 3000.00 + price of the body (anticipated) and you have a very expensive kit. That would make the Leica Digilux 2 price seem very reasonable (I have used this camera and it is very nice).
One good thing that will come out of using a smaller sensor size is that it might improve some of your lenses performance. Erwin Putts has reviewed several CV lenses compared to thier Leica counterparts. Without fail he always mentions the fall off in sharpness and in light at the corners and edges, but he says in the center, performance is very good. The 1.5 crop factor of this camera sensor actually frames the image only from the center of the lens thus negating some of the fall off and improving image quality (so stock up on those CV 12mm-21mm lenses if you are buying this camera).
I think that for as basic as this body is, with center weighted metering only, manual advance to the next frame???, 2-3 sec pause between frames, etc., they could have put a full sized sensor in it for this weighty price. I mean this is the same basic price of a full sensor Canon, or the new Kodak sln DSLR 14 megapixel.

Todd
 
Todd.Hanz said:
I think that for as basic as this body is, with center weighted metering only, manual advance to the next frame???, 2-3 sec pause between frames, etc., they could have put a full sized sensor in it for this weighty price. I mean this is the same basic price of a full sensor Canon, or the new Kodak sln DSLR 14 megapixel.
Click to expand...
A full-size sensor would be wonderful. I wonder if the Leica digital R9 and digital M will be full-size sensor. I think it's becoming clearer that physics is intervening on pixel density, and larger sensors of the same resolution give superior results.

But I heard some clarification this morning from Joseph Yao in Hong Kong, one of a group that were able to use an early production sample of the camera. He said the RD1 does have a RAW buffer, and that the 2-3 second delay refers to the time for a review image to appear on the LCD. The camera is able to take another picture immediately. That the camera requires manual recocking of the shutter may be a benefit here, as this puts a limit on how fast the buffer can be filled!
 
It seems the only selling point of it is a 6M digital camera w/. using Leica Lens capacibility. As a 6M digital camera using Nikon D70 sensor is too expensive. The 1.5 crop factor is also most likely a disadvantage rather than an advantage. (don't like DSLR, the 1.5x factor may be sometimes regarded as advantage of having longer tele) And it also lack all the convenience the DSLR has. So I think the price would the key point whether Epson could attract their target customer.
 
Don't get me wrong, 6.2 megapixels can produce outstanding images, rivaling 35mm and close to medium format quality. Here are some examples from my Fuji S2 DSLR, Tamron 90mm SP:
 
A 6mp sensor is not a problem, and I don`t care about the x1.5 crop factor, you`ll get used to it....
It misses the convenience of a DSLR Designer says, isn`t that the whole point?
It`s supposed to feel as a regular Bessa R , only being digital! It`s too expensive , but it`s a step in the right direction,as a 1st generation camera that pretty normal, and improved and cheaper version will (hopefully) probably follow....
 
Of course this is a niche product without direct competition. Not a dSLR, not a mainstream product, but rather just what many RF fans have asked for. The whole point is preserving the RF experience in a digital camera. We knew that would make it more expensive.

I would never presume to tell a company their product is too expensive; that's their business, not mine. I can only decide whether or not it's worth the cost to me.

If the RD1 is successful, higher production quantity and emerging competitors should make it more affordable.
 
todd, gorgeous couple-shot

did you use a seamless backdrop?
how did you get the high-key effect?

very nice
 
The comments concerning the need for a full sized sensor, and the complaints about the anticipated price of the RD-1 are contradictory.
The current price on a full sized CMOS, or CCD sensor would put this camera further out of reach. As it is the price, and market segment (ie. RF users) will restrict the number of potential buyers.
The technical issues concerning the proximity of the rear elements of the lens to the sensor would (currently) limit the sensor size.
As noted in the user reports of the pre-production body, short focal length lenses produced CV at the edges of the frame. (I'm surprised that the image sharpness at the edge of the frame didn't degrade also.)
The real advantage of this camera seems to be a way to use those great Leica lenses on a digital body. This represents a real challenge.
It will be interesting to see more complete test results, and to see if this camera really sells.

Martin
 
mfs,
I agree with your statements above as to the technical "reasoning", but as far as pricing goes (and until release time nobody really knows) it would appear that the only viable selling point to this camera is the ability to use your Leica lenses ("M" or screw mount w/ adapter). Is that enough of a selling point to validate a $3000.00+ price tag? Only the market can determine that, and RF cameras are a very narrow slice of that market.
I am not complaining about this camera, it's price or it's quality, you really cannot do that until you have used it, it will fill a niche and be another tool to create fine images with.
It will be interesting if Leica follows the lead here, and if the value of a Leica digital body will be similar to the value of say an M3 today. It has been my experience with DSLR's that they are much like a new car, as soon as you drive them off the lot they depreciate, alot!

Todd
 
rsilfverberg,
thanks, we used a piece of white muslin we bought from a cloth store because of size, for the back drop. The floor is actually 4x8 sheets of a masonite-like material from a home improvement store used for shower walls, one side is a semi-glossy white which reflects light back up to the subject, the seam between the two is controlled by lighting ratios and sometimes a little Photoshop thrown in, tricks of the trade ;)

Todd
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom