mani
Well-known
As one of the people who ordered an R-D1 from Robert White exactly at the same time as they were being sent back to Epson for a rangefinder fix, i just want to deal with a couple of concerns before i green-light the order again, when the cameras come back into stock.
- what are the technical reasons that mean the camera lacks ISO50, 80 or 100?
- to hope to use a Noctilux with the R-D1 wide open in daylight/sunshine, roughly what type of ND filter would i need to take the exposure down enough to 'mimic' ISO100? (i'm not so great with the math in these cases - and i know that an exact figure is impossible because of light conditions, but a ROUGH idea)
- while i'm not wanting gadgets and gimmicks on the M8, does anyone think the Leica will deal better with everyday problems like sensor-dust? (some people seem to think this has been quite a problem for the R-D1)
- is there any indication that the R-D1s is more reliable, or has received better QC than the original R-D1 (and might therefore be a safer bet than the ex-demo models)?
Thanks for any help and advice!
//mani
- what are the technical reasons that mean the camera lacks ISO50, 80 or 100?
- to hope to use a Noctilux with the R-D1 wide open in daylight/sunshine, roughly what type of ND filter would i need to take the exposure down enough to 'mimic' ISO100? (i'm not so great with the math in these cases - and i know that an exact figure is impossible because of light conditions, but a ROUGH idea)
- while i'm not wanting gadgets and gimmicks on the M8, does anyone think the Leica will deal better with everyday problems like sensor-dust? (some people seem to think this has been quite a problem for the R-D1)
- is there any indication that the R-D1s is more reliable, or has received better QC than the original R-D1 (and might therefore be a safer bet than the ex-demo models)?
Thanks for any help and advice!
//mani
J. Borger
Well-known
-Leica M8 will have a Shutterspeed of 1/8000 and will be better suited for shooting fast glas wide open in daylight.
- Lack of lower iso has probably to do with CCD instead of CMOS and unaccaptable dynamic range (Canon 1D also had CCD and only had iso 100 at lower dynamic range .. iso 200 was also standard)
- Sensordust is a non-issue with R-D1 ..... i had to clean once (off factory-- out of the box) and did not nead to clean for 1,5 year after that (i use the camera at least 3-4 days a week and a lot at f 11 - f16)
If you plan to shoot the Noctilux wide open most of the time i would not worry at all about sensor dust .... you will not notice it!
- Nobody knows about QC isues with M8 in advance
I hope this helps
- Lack of lower iso has probably to do with CCD instead of CMOS and unaccaptable dynamic range (Canon 1D also had CCD and only had iso 100 at lower dynamic range .. iso 200 was also standard)
- Sensordust is a non-issue with R-D1 ..... i had to clean once (off factory-- out of the box) and did not nead to clean for 1,5 year after that (i use the camera at least 3-4 days a week and a lot at f 11 - f16)
If you plan to shoot the Noctilux wide open most of the time i would not worry at all about sensor dust .... you will not notice it!
- Nobody knows about QC isues with M8 in advance
I hope this helps
Jim Watts
Still trying to See.
Mani,
A x0.3ND takes the exposure down one stop from ISO 200 to ISO 100
A full table here to avoid to many maths headaches
: http://www.leefilters.com/CPTF.asp?PageID=107
A x0.3ND takes the exposure down one stop from ISO 200 to ISO 100
A full table here to avoid to many maths headaches
: http://www.leefilters.com/CPTF.asp?PageID=107
Didier
"Deed"
ISO200: It's this Sony sensor, the same as in the Nikon D70 btw, that offers no sensitivity below ISO200. Don't ask me for the technical reason.
QC: The camera is partially facured by Cosina, partially by Epson. Makes QC even more tricky. Several users reported rangefinder alignment troubles for instance.
ND filters: As Jim Watts posted, a 0.3 ND makes one stop, a 1x makes 3 stops, a 2x six stops difference. But OTOH, why use a Nocti with ND filtes at bright daylight? Because of the DOF only? Don't you have another 50 for that? My Summicron 50 has a beautiful bokeh at f2. I take my fast glass only with me for available light situations, that's mostly not at bright sunlight.
But nevertheless, I agree I would like the R-D1 had a ISO 50 and 100 setting, too.
Didier
QC: The camera is partially facured by Cosina, partially by Epson. Makes QC even more tricky. Several users reported rangefinder alignment troubles for instance.
ND filters: As Jim Watts posted, a 0.3 ND makes one stop, a 1x makes 3 stops, a 2x six stops difference. But OTOH, why use a Nocti with ND filtes at bright daylight? Because of the DOF only? Don't you have another 50 for that? My Summicron 50 has a beautiful bokeh at f2. I take my fast glass only with me for available light situations, that's mostly not at bright sunlight.
But nevertheless, I agree I would like the R-D1 had a ISO 50 and 100 setting, too.
Didier
mani
Well-known
Thanks for all the information - very useful stuff here!
i'm actually smiling to myself at the suggestion that i take my 'other' 50mm lenses with me - my other half will love that idea! But seriously, i have to pace my buying - and i'm only at the beginning of the journey: i have the Nocti, and i've looked at a couple of Summilux 75's without finding the ideal example i'm after, and as soon as i get the body i intend to add the VC 12mm to the (small) collection.
In essence, i want to use lenses that give me the chance to stretch my photography in ways that aren't available in compacts, and directions that i never even thought about when i was using my old Olympus OM1 kit.
At the same time, as i've expressed elsewhere, the (possibly overstated) quality control concerns, together with the lack of lower ISOs has given me many reasons to weigh this purchase against the Leica M8 instead.
Thanks again!
i'm actually smiling to myself at the suggestion that i take my 'other' 50mm lenses with me - my other half will love that idea!
But seriously, i have to pace my buying - and i'm only at the beginning of the journey: i have the Nocti, and i've looked at a couple of Summilux 75's without finding the ideal example i'm after, and as soon as i get the body i intend to add the VC 12mm to the (small) collection. In essence, i want to use lenses that give me the chance to stretch my photography in ways that aren't available in compacts, and directions that i never even thought about when i was using my old Olympus OM1 kit.
At the same time, as i've expressed elsewhere, the (possibly overstated) quality control concerns, together with the lack of lower ISOs has given me many reasons to weigh this purchase against the Leica M8 instead.
Thanks again!
Ronald M
Veteran
.3 ND is one stop .6 ND is two stops .9 is 3 stops.
1.0 is two stops brighter than 2.0.
200 iso will require 1/800 at f 8 in sunlight , 1/8000 at 2.8.
I think you are going to have trouble with 1.0 in sun.
1.0 is two stops brighter than 2.0.
200 iso will require 1/800 at f 8 in sunlight , 1/8000 at 2.8.
I think you are going to have trouble with 1.0 in sun.
Steve L
Established
Lower ISO in digital isn't always helpful....a sensor has a lowest-noise"sweet spot" at a certian ISO (amplification factor), and ISO's below that usually provide decreased dynamic range, as the sensor does not actually run at that low an amplification factor and the low ISO is achieved by faking it electronically (I think by overexposing and then cutting density in software, but I'm not sure I remember this exactly).
rvaubel
Well-known
Mani
You need at least three stops to shoot the Noctilux wide open. Without an ND filter but at 200 ISO and 1/2000 sec exposure, the maximum F# I can achieve is F4.0 on a bright day. With a .9 ND filter rhat would translate to F1.4 with an equivelent ISO of 25! I use my Canon 50mm F1.2 like this but not very often. Extremely narrow DOF looks a little strange, in bright sunlight because the human eye never sees real life like that. I use a huge 77mm filter with step up or down rings so I can use the same filter on all my lenses. Since a good filter (a must with good glass) is very expensive, having to buy only one is a plus. Ditto for polarizing filters.
Dust on the sensor is a non issue. However, you will probably have to clean it out of the box, but thats true of every digital camera I've ever owned.
The RD-1 is a great camera but only you can decide whether to wait for the Leica. I'm glad I didn't.
"a bird in the hand...."
Rex
You need at least three stops to shoot the Noctilux wide open. Without an ND filter but at 200 ISO and 1/2000 sec exposure, the maximum F# I can achieve is F4.0 on a bright day. With a .9 ND filter rhat would translate to F1.4 with an equivelent ISO of 25! I use my Canon 50mm F1.2 like this but not very often. Extremely narrow DOF looks a little strange, in bright sunlight because the human eye never sees real life like that. I use a huge 77mm filter with step up or down rings so I can use the same filter on all my lenses. Since a good filter (a must with good glass) is very expensive, having to buy only one is a plus. Ditto for polarizing filters.
Dust on the sensor is a non issue. However, you will probably have to clean it out of the box, but thats true of every digital camera I've ever owned.
The RD-1 is a great camera but only you can decide whether to wait for the Leica. I'm glad I didn't.
"a bird in the hand...."
Rex
mani
Well-known
I had a feeling it might be difficult...
Anyways, right now i have no intention of waiting for the M8 - after much reflection i decided to go for the R-D1, and my only worries were those of reliability and support. Therefore it was a bit of a shock to get the mail from a (very apologetic) Matt at Rob White telling me that the camera i'd just ordered was on it's way back to Epson!
All the same, i'm still hopeful that i avoid one of the (probably minority) lemons - and i also want to repeat (as i've stated elsewhere), Robert White have been really helpful and patient all the way through. I'm sure they're sick to death of my incessant questions, but they never show it.
Anyways, right now i have no intention of waiting for the M8 - after much reflection i decided to go for the R-D1, and my only worries were those of reliability and support. Therefore it was a bit of a shock to get the mail from a (very apologetic) Matt at Rob White telling me that the camera i'd just ordered was on it's way back to Epson!
All the same, i'm still hopeful that i avoid one of the (probably minority) lemons - and i also want to repeat (as i've stated elsewhere), Robert White have been really helpful and patient all the way through. I'm sure they're sick to death of my incessant questions, but they never show it.
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
I have found focussing the Noctilux wide open a little hit-and-miss with the RD1. It can be done, but predictable, accurate focus of this lens is really beyond the technical abilities of the RF on the RD1. You want an M3 or an M6/M7 0.85 to really nail it. Another way of saying this is that the available depth of field at f1 is simply beyond the error tolerance of a rangefinder with this baselength (you can focus, rock back and forth two centimeters or so and not notice a change in the RF image). The error is worse up close (1m) than at 3m. Others may have had different experiences.
I'd echo what the others have said about chip sensitivity. ND filter numbers are logarythmec (sp?) 0.3 = 1 stop. Just add 'em up.
I have never cleaned my sensor in a year and a half and have had no noticeable problems with sensor dust. Then again, I may be less sensitive than others to this problem.
The M8 will probably have a more robust, accurate rangefinder than the RD1. Of course, it hasn't been released yet and will cost a lot of money when it is. Personally I use a 50/2 lens on my RD1 most of the time and a used Summicron can be had quite reasonably these days.
My impression is that the RD1s is the same sensor and body as the RD1 but with a firmware upgrade. I don't think the QC will be fundamentally any different on it than on its nominal predicessor.
Having written all of the above, I have to say, I love mine. I just shot a friend's wedding with it and 9x13 prints on 11x14 paper are chugging out of my Epson 3000 (Cone quad inks) as I type. My digital work is with the RD1 and a Canon 5D and I will be the first to argue that pure resolution numbers don't really tell the full story. I am very, very happy that I haven't waited for the M8. I didn't even take the Canon to the wedding I just shot.
Good luck in your choice!
Ben Marks
I'd echo what the others have said about chip sensitivity. ND filter numbers are logarythmec (sp?) 0.3 = 1 stop. Just add 'em up.
I have never cleaned my sensor in a year and a half and have had no noticeable problems with sensor dust. Then again, I may be less sensitive than others to this problem.
The M8 will probably have a more robust, accurate rangefinder than the RD1. Of course, it hasn't been released yet and will cost a lot of money when it is. Personally I use a 50/2 lens on my RD1 most of the time and a used Summicron can be had quite reasonably these days.
My impression is that the RD1s is the same sensor and body as the RD1 but with a firmware upgrade. I don't think the QC will be fundamentally any different on it than on its nominal predicessor.
Having written all of the above, I have to say, I love mine. I just shot a friend's wedding with it and 9x13 prints on 11x14 paper are chugging out of my Epson 3000 (Cone quad inks) as I type. My digital work is with the RD1 and a Canon 5D and I will be the first to argue that pure resolution numbers don't really tell the full story. I am very, very happy that I haven't waited for the M8. I didn't even take the Canon to the wedding I just shot.
Good luck in your choice!
Ben Marks
Last edited:
rvaubel
Well-known
Benjamin Marks said:
Focusing ANY rangefinder with a fast lens is hit or miss. The reason has more to do with head motion than anything else. With a DOF of 1/2'' the slightest sway of the body or bob of the head can cancel the baseline length advantage of the best Leica. In fact I try to use the natural motion of my body to capture that moment when everything "appears" to be in focus. But really, its all luck. A 25% return on your investment @ F1.4 is doing good.
Rex
LCT
ex-newbie
Depends on the rangefinder of course.rvaubel said:
At f/1 with a 50mm lens we are at the very limit of the R-D1 accuracy.
Best,
LCT
mani
Well-known
Guess i better not mention my secret ambition to try the Summicron 90 f/2 with the camera, in that case...
Mark Norton
Well-known
You're certainly going for the heavy-weight lenses there - the Noctilux, the 75 Summilux and the 90 Summicron are all big lenses and that's the price to pay for the extra speed. I've intentionally stayed a stop slower, 50/1.4, 75/2 and 90/2.8 because the lenses are rather more compact but there's no denying that extra stop gives you something in terms of speed and DoF control.
I like your idea about stretching the boundaries of photography by going faster and wider, using the 12mm lens would be very interesting.
I like your idea about stretching the boundaries of photography by going faster and wider, using the 12mm lens would be very interesting.
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
rvaubel said:
Rex: I'm sure you're right on the physics/optics. My practical experience differs though. I can focus a 50/1.4 lens quite reliably on a Leica 0.72. I really don't give it a second thought. Even the shorter baselength of the RD1 is not a problem. At f1 though, or for the faster long primes (75/1.4, 90/2) it's a challenge with a short baselength RF.
Ben
P.S. anyone know what's up with image attachments? Wanted to attach an example. Tried. Couldn't.
J. Borger
Well-known
I can only echo that using my 75 lux withthe R-d1 is hit and miss.
Almost impossible to focus accurate in a systematic way close-up at f1.4.
If i use that lens at all it is backed up to about 1,5 meter an/or stopped dpwn to f2. Both make a great diference in getting the shots in focus .... but that was not what the 75 lux was intended for.
So 75 lux & R-D1 is not a good combo in my opinion.
Almost impossible to focus accurate in a systematic way close-up at f1.4.
If i use that lens at all it is backed up to about 1,5 meter an/or stopped dpwn to f2. Both make a great diference in getting the shots in focus .... but that was not what the 75 lux was intended for.
So 75 lux & R-D1 is not a good combo in my opinion.
LCT
ex-newbie
Hi Mani, to focus accurately such a lens at wide aperture you would need a rangefinder with an effective base length of about 62mm when that of the R-D1 is only 38.2mm.mani said:Guess i better not mention my secret ambition to try the Summicron 90 f/2 with the camera, in that case...
No problem at f/3.5 and slower apertures though.
Best,
LCT
rvaubel
Well-known
LCT said:Hi Mani, to focus accurately such a lens at wide aperture you would need a rangefinder with an effective base length of about 62mm when that of the R-D1 is only 38.2mm.
No problem at f/3.5 and slower apertures though.
Best,
LCT
Hey, what a minute. I use my Nikkor 85mmF2 wide open, all the time. Look at my gallery. Sure only about 1/3 of the photos come out, but digital film is cheap. I Luuuvv using lenses that are faster than I'm supposed to on the RD1. I don't suppose I'd go as far as using the 75mm Sumilux wide open (very much, that is)
I guess the point is that shooting wide open is a statistical game anyway. It doesn't matter how long your baseline is when shooting in the real world because everything is moving. Unless your camera is on a tripod and your model is dead, its just the luck of the draw.
Rex
fgianni
Trainee Amateur
J. Borger said:
On static subjects I can get more than 60% shots in focus with My RD-1 + 75 Lux wide open.
To be fair it does not seem to make much difference to me if the subject is at 1 m or 3 m
Of course with moving subjects it is quite different.
If you look at my gallery 2 of the portraits have been taken with the Lux wide open, and 2 at f2.0
Last edited:
mani
Well-known
Thanks all for the comments and excellent information.
I must confess that some of the plans i have for the camera are probably impossible or possibly better executed with another camera altogether. All the same, i'm interested in seeing what it can do - or rather what i can try to achieve with it, given my lamentable photographic limitations...
I must confess that some of the plans i have for the camera are probably impossible or possibly better executed with another camera altogether. All the same, i'm interested in seeing what it can do - or rather what i can try to achieve with it, given my lamentable photographic limitations...