ampguy
Veteran
No problems here
No problems here
I've used 2 different German 75/1.4 luxes on 2-3 different RD1 and RD1s bodies. All focus as easy and as well as on my M8 and M6 (.72).
The key is to having a proper diopter in place if needed, which is easy for RD1s since they use easily found Nikon ones. M ones are a bit harder and pricier to find.
No problems here
I've used 2 different German 75/1.4 luxes on 2-3 different RD1 and RD1s bodies. All focus as easy and as well as on my M8 and M6 (.72).
The key is to having a proper diopter in place if needed, which is easy for RD1s since they use easily found Nikon ones. M ones are a bit harder and pricier to find.
Ben Z
Veteran
The RD1 was a nice camera and made nice images, but I could never stand having to carry and use auxiliary viewfinders for lenses with an effective focal length shorter than 42mm. That alone was a deal-breaker, and I sold mine the moment my M8 came. I'd bought it as a refurb and didn't lose a dime on it after using it more than a year. Someone got a great camera and I'm sure is still enjoying it (I'd upgraded the firmware to RD1-S).
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
Well I took that route and have been happy with the results. BUT, there is also a trade-off of downsides. I did not find the RF baselength or roller-cam mechanism to be accurate enough to focus fast or long lenses reliably on the RD-1.
When I traded up, I got higher IQ, longer battery life and a slightly larger chip. The M8, had its own problems though (magenta cast needing expensive IR filters), seemingly random agreement with some lenses (50/2, 35/1.2, 75/2, 50/1) and disagreement with others (50/1.4, 75/1.4, 90/2, 135/2.8) requiring about half my lenses to be re-tweaked by Don Goldberg. When it worked, the RF was much more accurate than the RD-1 (which also had been back and forth to Don to have the RF adjusted as much as he could). The M8's Auto-WB was wonkier, sometimes changing color casts in between frames. I liked the RD-1's one-color, one-bw mode when shooting RAW+JPG. All in all, I am happy that I made the switch to the M8. If the M8 had not come along, I probably would have been able to live with the RD-1's limitations just fine.
My recent experience with an Oly digi-Pen makes me think that the right path for Leica is to ditch the RF and go with a TTL video-solution. So many of the M8's problems would be solved by approaching the problem in this way and you could continue to use all that legacy Leica glass . . .
When I traded up, I got higher IQ, longer battery life and a slightly larger chip. The M8, had its own problems though (magenta cast needing expensive IR filters), seemingly random agreement with some lenses (50/2, 35/1.2, 75/2, 50/1) and disagreement with others (50/1.4, 75/1.4, 90/2, 135/2.8) requiring about half my lenses to be re-tweaked by Don Goldberg. When it worked, the RF was much more accurate than the RD-1 (which also had been back and forth to Don to have the RF adjusted as much as he could). The M8's Auto-WB was wonkier, sometimes changing color casts in between frames. I liked the RD-1's one-color, one-bw mode when shooting RAW+JPG. All in all, I am happy that I made the switch to the M8. If the M8 had not come along, I probably would have been able to live with the RD-1's limitations just fine.
My recent experience with an Oly digi-Pen makes me think that the right path for Leica is to ditch the RF and go with a TTL video-solution. So many of the M8's problems would be solved by approaching the problem in this way and you could continue to use all that legacy Leica glass . . .
DrTebi
Slide Lover
I have a Leica M8, and really like it for it's sharp and detailed images. But recently I started experimenting with analog rangefinders, and am thrilled. To me, film just has more character, more depth. And what I am especially pleased with is how little, if any, color adjustments I have to make to scans from negative film.
What I didn't like about the M8 was exactly that--getting the white balance right. Unless I used manual white balance, I had to make adjustments to about ever other photo I shot, and adjusting colors is no fun. The firmware upgrade helped, but still, film gets it much better every time without having to fiddle with the menu. I also don't like the dependency of battery life. Carrying two batteries was an absolute must when going on hikes.
Another big problem with the M8 was sensor dust. It ruined a whole set of 70 pictures or so on one trip, I didn't realize the sensor was that dirty. Cleaning helped of course, but it seems that I could never get rid of every spot on there. Funny thing I noticed recently: The sample pictures of the M8 on dpreview.com have a big sensor dust spot on almost every picture!
The infamous magenta hue is another big issue. I do have the Leica filters that are supposed to fix it--but they don't. They help, but in a very recent shoot my girlfriends clothes have a magenta hue in every image. I simultaneously shot with an old Voigtlander analog camera, and guess what, perfect black on every shot.
For now the M8 will collect dust, and may end up on eBay, while I will keep shooting with the Yashica Electro 35 GSN, and a Hasselblad Xpan which is due to arrive tomorrow. Yes it is a lot of trouble (well, actually mostly a time issue) scanning negatives, but I think it's well worth it. I also realized that now I am taking much more care when taking pictures, as I don't shoot "for free" anymore--my shots have improved a lot, and I feel more connected to the photos I take.
I don't want to start a debate about digital vs. analog, but I thought my experience with the M8 would be an input worth something...
What I didn't like about the M8 was exactly that--getting the white balance right. Unless I used manual white balance, I had to make adjustments to about ever other photo I shot, and adjusting colors is no fun. The firmware upgrade helped, but still, film gets it much better every time without having to fiddle with the menu. I also don't like the dependency of battery life. Carrying two batteries was an absolute must when going on hikes.
Another big problem with the M8 was sensor dust. It ruined a whole set of 70 pictures or so on one trip, I didn't realize the sensor was that dirty. Cleaning helped of course, but it seems that I could never get rid of every spot on there. Funny thing I noticed recently: The sample pictures of the M8 on dpreview.com have a big sensor dust spot on almost every picture!
The infamous magenta hue is another big issue. I do have the Leica filters that are supposed to fix it--but they don't. They help, but in a very recent shoot my girlfriends clothes have a magenta hue in every image. I simultaneously shot with an old Voigtlander analog camera, and guess what, perfect black on every shot.
For now the M8 will collect dust, and may end up on eBay, while I will keep shooting with the Yashica Electro 35 GSN, and a Hasselblad Xpan which is due to arrive tomorrow. Yes it is a lot of trouble (well, actually mostly a time issue) scanning negatives, but I think it's well worth it. I also realized that now I am taking much more care when taking pictures, as I don't shoot "for free" anymore--my shots have improved a lot, and I feel more connected to the photos I take.
I don't want to start a debate about digital vs. analog, but I thought my experience with the M8 would be an input worth something...
MCTuomey
Veteran
my two cents
i liked my RD-1. i like my M8 for its greater resolution, file quality, better meter, milder crop factor, and longer batt life (rough order of importance). i'm sure i'd like an M9 too, but it's just too much money for the trip. the M8's nits that get mentioned - shutter sound, frameline inaccuracy, auto WB, IR sensitivity - aren't troubling to me.
i take my M8 most everywhere i can, just like i did the RD-1. so the M8 didn't change how and where i shoot. prints do look better to my eye, but nothing dramatic. i can be happy with either camera, really.
i liked my RD-1. i like my M8 for its greater resolution, file quality, better meter, milder crop factor, and longer batt life (rough order of importance). i'm sure i'd like an M9 too, but it's just too much money for the trip. the M8's nits that get mentioned - shutter sound, frameline inaccuracy, auto WB, IR sensitivity - aren't troubling to me.
i take my M8 most everywhere i can, just like i did the RD-1. so the M8 didn't change how and where i shoot. prints do look better to my eye, but nothing dramatic. i can be happy with either camera, really.