This form factor thing is hard to adapt to.

[LCT]

In fact the R-D1 is more than a digital M3 for those who don't need the 90mm and 135mm frames of the latter. The widest frame in the M3 finder is 50mm where it is about 40mm (28x1.5) in the R-D1's. Also the 1:1 VF magnification is definitely superior to 0.91x for those who like shooting both eyes open.

 

[mobilexile]

Funny these days I don't know any professionals who prefer film anymore. I do know a few artists who prefer film.

It's funny, just a few years ago they were raving about digital and how they had come to love the convenience. Then the hard drives started stacking up. They eventually gave way to servers (read $) and increased work in the file management arena. Now they gripe about digital.

When it comes to working color with separators / retouchers on the back end of production, digital is the worst. You don't have the constant of a chrome to reference. It makes for more rounds of adjustment (read $) and, in the end, often makes digital more expensive.

I should correct my earlier statement. Not all pro shooters I know prefer film. I know a few who lean toward digital.

 

[Tuolumne]

It's much easier to handle if you just don't think about it too hard. I think about it in terms of the frame in the view finder: What lens do I need to use to get that frame? It really doesn't matter to me what is printed on the lens.

/T

 

[tomasis]

good name for rd1 🙂 digital m3 indeed.. I dont think 28mm framelines are wide enough to be another choice beside 35mm. If one wants wider than 35mm framelines of rd1, better purchase external vf so that is why rd1 reminds me much of M3.