dagimage2
Member
I got a refurb RD1 from Epson about a month ago and it arrived, as expected, with the rangefinder out of whack. I adjusted the infinity alignment myself, and it looked to me like that had fixed the focus both near and far. When I shoot a focus chart, it looks like the sharpest focus seems to be where I expect it to be. But all my images still look a little soft to me.
The problem is, I don't have a sense of how images are supposed to look straight out of this camera. So I can't tell if the rangefinder needs more adjustment, or if it's a problem with my lenses, or maybe some issue with the sensor in this unit (which was well used before it was "refurbed"), or if I just need to increase the sharpening at the raw conversion step. Or even if I need to try a different raw converter (I'm using ACR now.)
So far, I've only been able to do a subjective comparison with the results I was getting from my D100 -- but I sold that before I got the RD1, so I can't do any direct comparisons. But it looks to me like the unsharpened raw images from the D100 are sharper than what I'm getting from the RD1.
So I'm wondering if someone would be willing to post an example of what a correct, in-focus image from the RD1, without any sharpening applied, would look like. I'd love to see a crop, at 100% resolution, of a focus chart or an image with fine detail, either of a jpeg with in-camera sharpening turned off, or a raw file with no sharpening applied at conversion. That should give me a benchmark with which to compare my own results. (Oh, and please let me know which raw converter you are using, so I can try using that.)
Many thanks. And I just want to say, this forum has been an immensely useful resource for me, so thanks to all the contributors.
_Dave
The problem is, I don't have a sense of how images are supposed to look straight out of this camera. So I can't tell if the rangefinder needs more adjustment, or if it's a problem with my lenses, or maybe some issue with the sensor in this unit (which was well used before it was "refurbed"), or if I just need to increase the sharpening at the raw conversion step. Or even if I need to try a different raw converter (I'm using ACR now.)
So far, I've only been able to do a subjective comparison with the results I was getting from my D100 -- but I sold that before I got the RD1, so I can't do any direct comparisons. But it looks to me like the unsharpened raw images from the D100 are sharper than what I'm getting from the RD1.
So I'm wondering if someone would be willing to post an example of what a correct, in-focus image from the RD1, without any sharpening applied, would look like. I'd love to see a crop, at 100% resolution, of a focus chart or an image with fine detail, either of a jpeg with in-camera sharpening turned off, or a raw file with no sharpening applied at conversion. That should give me a benchmark with which to compare my own results. (Oh, and please let me know which raw converter you are using, so I can try using that.)
Many thanks. And I just want to say, this forum has been an immensely useful resource for me, so thanks to all the contributors.
_Dave
Chicagobob
Beginner!
Lens?
Lens?
What lens are you using? Comparing shots taken with the same lens, ASA, f-stop, etc would be best. Shoot a glass of water at 1m, compare with others---then???
Bob
Lens?
What lens are you using? Comparing shots taken with the same lens, ASA, f-stop, etc would be best. Shoot a glass of water at 1m, compare with others---then???
Bob
dagimage2
Member
Actually, what I'm really asking is for an example of the best native sharpness one can expect from the RD-1, without any sharpening applied. By comparing this with my own results, I can see if I'm getting acceptably close -- and so just need to adjust how I apply sharpening to the images -- or if my images are really softer than they should be, which would mean I would need to try to isolate the other variables to locate where my issue is. I know this isn't very scientific, but I'm trying to figure out if I'm in the ballpark first.
I know that my lenses are not necessarily the sharpest, but I've been happy with them with film. I'm not a perfectionist about this stuff -- the feel of an image is more important to me than crystal clarity. But I might consider trying to get new lenses if I think the camera can make sharper images than my lenses can.
I know that my lenses are not necessarily the sharpest, but I've been happy with them with film. I'm not a perfectionist about this stuff -- the feel of an image is more important to me than crystal clarity. But I might consider trying to get new lenses if I think the camera can make sharper images than my lenses can.
Chicagobob
Beginner!
Gallery?
Gallery?
You could browse through the RRF gallery, noting the R-D1 pictures??
Bob
Gallery?
You could browse through the RRF gallery, noting the R-D1 pictures??
Bob
pfogle
Well-known
One area of ambiguity in your request is that the RAW converters usually apply some sharpening by default.
I've upload a couple of full-size jpgs to my website: use the links below.
The shot is from the CV28mm f1.9 taken at f5.6
Both are converted to medium jpg, one with no sharpening, the other with default sharpening (level=35, soft look).
Unsharpened (link)
Sharpened (link)
Hope this helps.
cheers
Phil
I've upload a couple of full-size jpgs to my website: use the links below.
The shot is from the CV28mm f1.9 taken at f5.6
Both are converted to medium jpg, one with no sharpening, the other with default sharpening (level=35, soft look).
Unsharpened (link)
Sharpened (link)
Hope this helps.
cheers
Phil
vicmortelmans
Well-known
Maybe your lens is is not bad an sich, but needs maintenance. I read a report a while ago on how an old lens with no visible dust, fungus or fog had a massive flare problem, which was solved by disassembling and cleaning lens element surfaces...
Groeten,
Vic
Groeten,
Vic
LCT
ex-newbie
Depends on the lens and the raw converter of course.
Current Elmar 50/2.8, iso 200, f/8 or f/11, Epson raw plug-in
Jpeg compression level: 9 in PS Elements 2.0
Sharpening by Fred Miranda's Nikon CS Pro, medium setting
Before sharpening:
http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/EPSN0447.jpg
After sharpening:
http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/EPSN0447-after.jpg
Current Elmar 50/2.8, iso 200, f/8 or f/11, Epson raw plug-in
Jpeg compression level: 9 in PS Elements 2.0
Sharpening by Fred Miranda's Nikon CS Pro, medium setting
Before sharpening:
http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/EPSN0447.jpg
After sharpening:
http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/EPSN0447-after.jpg
Joe Mondello
Resu Deretsiger
I've noticed that RAW conversion with Epson PhotoRAW yields much sharper images than JPGs right from the camera.
Other than that, there have been discussions here recently about the fact that some RF lenses back-focus or front-focus more than others especially close up and wide open.
Other than that, there have been discussions here recently about the fact that some RF lenses back-focus or front-focus more than others especially close up and wide open.