Robert White being trained in RD1s adjustment

[wintoid]

I've had my RD1s since July and have always had a nagging doubt that it wasn't focusing quite as well as it might. I had a day off yesterday, and took the time to try to test the focus. My camera is consistently back focusing. It's not bothered me most of the time as I always like to settle around f/4.0 but I'd like it to be right before my warranty expires.

So I called Robert White, from whom I bought the camera. I was told that there's a service center they can send them to for adjustment, but that Robert White are waiting to be trained in how to do so themselves. I thought that might of interest to some people on this forum.

 

[garethc]

Good stuff.

During my last conversation with them (during the M8 'news') they seemed surprised when I told them just how many people seem to have focusing issues with their R-D1's. I think they honestly believed that 90% were fine but I told them that, in my opinion, many people have had problems and many more put up with a little inacuracy rather than ship their item for repair.

I also understand that Robert White has been the single biggest seller of R-D1's (at least in Europe). I will be sending mine off for 'minor work' soon.

 

[Didier]

90% sounds very optimistic in favour of Epson.

A friend of mine has a R-D1 and was very happy with it. He said he's camera would work well after he heard of my troubles. I checked his Epson quickly and noticed the rangefinder was strongly disaligned vertically at infinity. Did neither check the sensor if tilted or not, nor check the close focus accuracy. The guy just didn't know enough about a RF to estimate whether it's adjusted or not. This will be the case for many R-D1 users I guess.

It's good RW will do that theirselves soon. My R-D1 is on the way to them.
Didier

 

[garethc]

Yes, lack of knowledge is part of the problem. The R-D1 is my first ever RF camera and while I have a feeling it is pretty much correct I also think I would send it to be looked at if it didn't mean shiping it abroad.

 

[Bill58]

I'd really luv to get one but not being a techie, being stuck in the "middle of Siberia" (Korea), and given all the problems I've read, I'll stick w/ my film RFs for the forseeable future.

 

[Terao]

Good to hear that as I'm just up the road. Rangefinder adjustment appears to be (literally) a dying art form unless you own something from Solms...

 

[B&W Norway]

90% sounds very optimistic in favour of Epson.

A friend of mine has a R-D1 and was very happy with it. He said he's camera would work well after he heard of my troubles. I checked his Epson quickly and noticed the rangefinder was strongly disaligned vertically at infinity. Did neither check the sensor if tilted or not, nor check the close focus accuracy. The guy just didn't know enough about a RF to estimate whether it's adjusted or not. This will be the case for many R-D1 users I guess.

It's good RW will do that theirselves soon. My R-D1 is on the way to them.
Didier

Do you know how many meters it is to the closest point at infinity (the start point were infinity starts)?

 

[Didier]

Do you know how many meters it is to the closest point at infinity (the start point were infinity starts)?

Difficult to say as it's an exponential curve. To be shure focus a point very far away (at least 1km), with a 50mm lens preferably. The lens must be in the infinity position and the images in the RF must be congruent - take care your eye is in the middle of the viewfinder. Checking close focus is different. Take a 50mm/f2 lens, focus it to minimum (or not more than 1m), aperture wide open, and put a newspaper on a table. Focus a headline from a 45° or lower angle, remember the headline, check the image in the computer whether the line is sharp or if the sharpness is before/after that line. You can do it with a ruler instead of a newspaper, too. See that thread for details.

Didier

 

[Jim Watts]

Do you know how many meters it is to the closest point at infinity (the start point were infinity starts)?

Normally accepted as being 1000x the focal length. So for a 50mm lens it would be a minimum of 50 metres approx 165 ft.

 

[tmessenger]

Difficult to say as it's an exponential curve. To be shure focus a point very far away (at least 1km), with a 50mm lens preferably. The lens must be in the infinity position and the images in the RF must be congruent - take care your eye is in the middle of the viewfinder. Checking close focus is different. Take a 50mm/f2 lens, focus it to minimum (or not more than 1m), aperture wide open, and put a newspaper on a table. Focus a headline from a 45° or lower angle, remember the headline, check the image in the computer whether the line is sharp or if the sharpness is before/after that line. You can do it with a ruler instead of a newspaper, too. See that thread for details.

Didier

I see people taking about close focusing problems but do not mention the finder patch parallax error. At 1m the finder patch in not in the center of the frame but the lens is ! You have to compensate for this, if you don't you will always get front focusing close in.

Tim

 

[Adam-T]

I *****REALLY****** Hope that RW will be trained in RD1 RF tuning, their service in general is first class and i`d rather Pay them to set up my RF than have Epson Balls it up for free ! .. Mine is still in Epson Paris being tuned, after Didier`s experience, I don`t hold much hope 🙁 .. the Loaner they sent me is bang on but it`s very tatty so there`s no way I`d keep the thing so I`m hoping they can actually get mine RIGHT ! . Epson never should have tried to take on servicing of these cameras, they should have appointed a service centre such as RW from the beginning to undertake ALL repairs to RD1s .....
As a side note, at least Epson are loaning cameras to those in repair which is a lot more than Leica are offering when the M8s have to go back for the banding & ghosting issues! .

 

[Didier]

I see people taking about close focusing problems but do not mention the finder patch parallax error. At 1m the finder patch in not in the center of the frame but the lens is ! You have to compensate for this, if you don't you will always get front focusing close in.
Tim

Damned, that's one issue more 🙁
You are right this makes things even more complicate 🙁 🙁 🙁...
D.

 

[fgianni]

It is indeed good news, since the RF calibration seems by far the most common issue with R-D1 cameras.

 

[jlw]

I see people taking about close focusing problems but do not mention the finder patch parallax error. At 1m the finder patch in not in the center of the frame but the lens is !

Not sure what the issue is here. The RF patch stays fixed in the center of the viewfinder regardless of distance, so it always has the same physical relationship to the camera lens.

It's only the bright frame lines that move in the viewfinder, to compensate for parallax. This is done simply by shifting the frameline mask diagonally. I can't see how this would cause a focusing error.

C-V Bessa RFs work exactly the same way, and there have been no reports of this type of problem with those.

 

[Adam-T]

I`ve handled 5 bessas and only two of them had the RF patch aligned perfectly, I guess that maybe it`s less complained about because the cameras didn`t cost £2000 when new ???? .. also they didn`t have Epson messing the things up along the way 🙁

 

[B&W Norway]

Thanks Didier and Jim

I find it a bit difficult to focus in 45˚ angle, because the path is splitting the object being focused on…if you se what I mean

The rangfinder has one angle and the path another in 45˚ angle. But it seems ok in an 0˚ angle

Is this normal?

 

[tmessenger]

"The RF patch stays fixed in the center of the viewfinder regardless of distance"

Yes exactly and that's the problem, the center of frame lines indicate the center of the lens. As the frame lines shift at close focus to compensate for parallax error the finder patch does not move with the frame lines. The finder patch is as in the drawing, it's now above the point of the lens center. This is not an issue if the focal point is a flat plane but when it slopes away from the center point it is a problem. The finder patch lens is now focusing on a point above and further back then what the lens center is focusing on. This is all ok if the lens has enough DOF to compensate but the problem becomes real apparent when you are trying to close focus a longer fast lens like a 90mm. I think the only thing that can be done is focus on a point then move that point into the center of the frame lines.


"so it always has the same physical relationship to the camera lens".

The relationship changes because the finder patch lens moves to re-triangulate as the focal distance changes. The finder and finder lens are there own entity they are just trying to represent what the lens is seeing.

This is the limitation of this mechanical design, you just have to be aware of it.

Regards,

Tim

 

[Didier]

Thanks Didier and Jim

I find it a bit difficult to focus in 45˚ angle, because the path is splitting the object being focused on…if you see what I mean. The rangfinder has one angle and the path another in 45˚ angle. But it seems ok in an 0˚ angle. Is this normal?

Yes that's normal. This needs some experience and happens everytime when the focused line or object is strongly dimensional, I mean not in a rectangular plane to the optical axe. The splitting image has a different angle compared to the viewfinder, so the line converges differently. In such a case, like when focusing a newspaper headline at 45°, check that the letter you're focusing is "crossed" in the middle (split view/vf view).

Didier