To go Rangefinder or not?

[nickmeertens]

I am contemplating switching from a dslr to the Epson R-D1 and would like to have some objective opinions from the members of this forum on this choice. ( I know, this might not be the right place for objectiveness, but you all can try, cant you!?)

A short history: as a teenager I learned photography on my grandfathers 1950's Zeiss Ikon SLR camera and quickly bought a used Pentax ME Super. After that 10 years went by without a camera except a little digital point and shoot. 2 years ago I came accros a Nikon F3 for next to nothing and that really got me right back into photography! I loved it but it used film and I discovered I really wanted to go digital so I sold it last year and bought a used Canon 20d. I have 10-22mm zoom, 28mm 1.8 and 50mm 1.4 Canon lenses with it and enjoy the results I get from it, but I dont enjoy the process of making photos as much as I did with the manual Nikon F3; it's less direct, less tactile, less of a craft, or so it seems. And the little viewfinder of the 20d... It leaves unable to manual focus with any accuracy.

So, now I'm contemplating selling my Canon stuff (can't afford both) and buy an Epson R-D1 and one or two lenses (to start with).

Pros I see:

• The look and feel
• Smaller
• Bright large viewfinder
• I think it fits the kind of photos (link here) I like to make
• All those lovely lenses

Cons I see:

• Quility (Control) of the camera (and getting it repaired with no known dealer in the Netherlands)
• Future of Rangefinders (when it stops working in 5 years, will I be able to buy a replacement digital RF and will my lenses be worth something?)
• Real wide angle is harder with framelines for 28/35/50 only
• I might miss the iso 3200 and low light performance of the Canon Cmos sensor
• Uncertainty on the quality of the files comapred to Canon 20d

As you can see the cons mostly have to do with uncertainty, I wish I knew someone with an Epson or any rangefinder for me to see how it feels and handles. But since I don't I can only read reviews and forums on the net and ask advice this way to try and make a choice.

So who has good advice on this subject, who knows someone (nice) in the Netherlands with an Epson, who knows where to get a good deal on one?

It has turned out to be a somewhat long post but thank you for reading this far!

Nick Meertens
Groningen, The Netherlands

 

[kanoot]

Have you used a rangefinder before? If not I would suggest getting a cheap film one to play with first. A canonet or the like will give you a feel for the focussing process and will point out some of the differences. It just seems like jumping to a $3k camera system could be a highly disappointing move if you don't like it.

 

[hth]

I would suggest that you consider a Leica M! 🙂 I mean, if you find the process of making photos very important, that is in my opinion the best way of doing it. Second hand prices have not been better and it allows you to try RF and use the M lenses the way it was meant to. The lenses will also fit the RD-1 or whatever digital RF with M mount you might get in the future.

You would "suffer" from using film and waste time scanning, but you win the possibility of printing it in a real darkroom and you can take it easier with backups.

On the other hand, you seem to do fine with your current setup, so maybe you should hang on to it for a while and see in what direction the DRF market goes?

After trying RF cameras a couple of years ago I was hooked and today I would not even consider using an SLR except for special situations. I would like to use a digital RF, but I am waiting for the market to mature a bit. I really enjoy using my film M bodies and consider the penalty for scanning worth it.

/Håkan

 

[pfogle]

firstly, to answer the question where to get one, I'd check out Robert White in the UK - known for good service and apparently will have some refurbished discounted R-D1's later this month.

since it's clear from your post that you want to have fun with you picture-taking, I would say that the R-D1 is more fun than DSLR - especially as you can experiment with good, inexpensive lenses. Also, true wide angle is available with the CV 21mm, 15mm and 12mm lenses, which equal many DSLR lenses and are much less expensive.

Personally, I have had no problems with the image quality of the R-D1 compared to the 20D, which I used to own.

Hope this helps.
Phil

 

[gustav[] pEña]

New Canons and nikons are not enjoyable. I had a Canon DSLR and I sold it very quikly. I dont understand why a camera is full of automatism and buttons. Im using right now a m4-p, canonet and a rollei 35s and for my digital work a digilux 2.

I guess you are goint to enjoy the manual focusing, aperture ring, compact lenses and all the qualities of a camara tha feels analog.

I dont own a RD-1 but by using my M4-P and the DIGILUX 2 I guess how it feels.


The most importan thing in life is to have fun.

 

[furcafe]

Per kanoot's suggestion, I would also recommend trying out an RF before committing to any RF camera system, digital or film. I shoot w/RFs about 95% of the time & prefer them to SLRs, but that's mainly because my primary photographic interests mesh better w/the strengths of RFs. As you probably already know, SLRs are more versatile than RFs & the 20d is a very capable dSLR. As far as your preference for manual operation, you might want to try using the 20d exclusively in manual mode or even consider upgrading to a 5d (or some other model w/a better VF) before giving up entirely on Canon dSLRs. Yes, the Canons are optimized to be used in automated mode, but those modes can be overridden.

Personally, I got an R-D1 because I'm very committed to the RF form factor (& Epson did a very good job translating that form factor to the digital world) & I already have a huge investment in Leica-mount lenses. If I was starting from scratch, I would probably have gone w/a Canon 5D or the Nikon equivalent.

As far as the pros & cons of the R-D1, I think you have a good handle on them, but only you can determine which of them are most important. For example, from what I've seen, the Canon dSLRs clearly have better ISO 1600 & 3200 performance than the R-D1, @ least w/regard to noise. However, the R-D1's noise is pretty film-like (i.e., more like film grain) & that may not be as big a problem for you as it may be for other people. Your concerns about the future of Epson's commitment to the R-D1 & quality control are certainly valid, too.

I am contemplating switching from a dslr to the Epson R-D1 and would like to have some objective opinions from the members of this forum on this choice. ( I know, this might not be the right place for objectiveness, but you all can try, cant you!?)

A short history: as a teenager I learned photography on my grandfathers 1950's Zeiss Ikon SLR camera and quickly bought a used Pentax ME Super. After that 10 years went by without a camera except a little digital point and shoot. 2 years ago I came accros a Nikon F3 for next to nothing and that really got me right back into photography! I loved it but it used film and I discovered I really wanted to go digital so I sold it last year and bought a used Canon 20d. I have 10-22mm zoom, 28mm 1.8 and 50mm 1.4 Canon lenses with it and enjoy the results I get from it, but I dont enjoy the process of making photos as much as I did with the manual Nikon F3; it's less direct, less tactile, less of a craft, or so it seems. And the little viewfinder of the 20d... It leaves unable to manual focus with any accuracy.

So, now I'm contemplating selling my Canon stuff (can't afford both) and buy an Epson R-D1 and one or two lenses (to start with).

Pros I see:

• The look and feel
• Smaller
• Bright large viewfinder
• I think it fits the kind of photos (link here) I like to make
• All those lovely lenses

Cons I see:

• Quility (Control) of the camera (and getting it repaired with no known dealer in the Netherlands)
• Future of Rangefinders (when it stops working in 5 years, will I be able to buy a replacement digital RF and will my lenses be worth something?)
• Real wide angle is harder with framelines for 28/35/50 only
• I might miss the iso 3200 and low light performance of the Canon Cmos sensor
• Uncertainty on the quality of the files comapred to Canon 20d

As you can see the cons mostly have to do with uncertainty, I wish I knew someone with an Epson or any rangefinder for me to see how it feels and handles. But since I don't I can only read reviews and forums on the net and ask advice this way to try and make a choice.

So who has good advice on this subject, who knows someone (nice) in the Netherlands with an Epson, who knows where to get a good deal on one?

It has turned out to be a somewhat long post but thank you for reading this far!

Nick Meertens
Groningen, The Netherlands

 

[Wimpler]

I'm from Belgium (near antwerpen). You are welcome to try out any camera I own. I do not own an epson R-D1 or leica, but do have quite a few other rangefinders.

 

[nickmeertens]

Thank you for your reactions. They are very helpfull and welcome! As suggested I went out tonight to get a Canonet QL17. I must admit that it was indeed the first rangefinder I ever laid my hands on...
I've been focussing with it the last half our and find it to be very intuitive. It's a bit like the old split screen in slr's but better because you dont have to find something vetical to put the horizontal split over. The site of Robert White says the R-D1 is discontinued but that an ex-demo model is available at the end of june for 1050 pounds which seems reasonable as long as the demonstration didn't take the camera for a 2 year expedition to the amazon. Also one is for sale on the forum here for 2150$.
Someone 3 hours away mailed me he has an r-d1 which I can come and look at to see what it is like. I might just do that!
Thank you all for past and future thoughts on this subject!

 

[anaanda]

I would not buy the RD-1. I think its a cool concept but it's is a hell of a lot of money...not worth it, not even close in my opinion. I shoot with a Mamiya 6 I bought for $800..but I love film. I have a Nikon D70 I use for quick snapshots but all of my serious photography is medium format BW film.......You should check out The new panasonic L-1 , although its an SLR it has a rangefinder styled body and a Leica Lens...

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0602/06022609panasonicdmcl1.asp

 

[RML]

I'm a bit surprised no-one mentioned my name as I'm for now the only Dutchie here on RFF with an R-D1.

Nick, I'm in Amsterdam.

Anaanda's reasons are valid but no answer to Nick's questions. I, for one, can't be bothered to shoot film anymore. I hate scanning, I hate the time it wastes, and I hate the enormous amount of money shooting film gobbles up here in Holland. B&W might be OK if you shoot Lucky film and dev it yourself but otherwise shooting film is painful for my wallet.

The R-D1 gave me the rf experience, did away with the scanning, and is now saving me money. The money I spent on the R-D1 is now less than the money I would have spent over the past 12 months on shooting colour film.

I'm not concerned about QC: my camera was checked by Joseph Yao before he sent it off to me. I assume Robert White will do the same if you buy from him. After sales support might be a problem. Epson seems to have set up a rather poor after sales support, but fortunately I haven't had the need to use it over the past 12 months.

The soon-to-available Leica M8 will be available for a few years, I guess, and might be a replacement for a broken down R-D1 in the future. Perhaps other brands will produce digital rf's as well.

Super wide angle lenses usually come with external view finders. It was like that in the pre-digital age, and it still is so. My CV 15/4.5 works well with the vf of my CV 25/4. Wide angle is IMO (and most other wide angle shooters) no problem, even if there aren't any framelines in-camera for those lenses.

The iso1600 of the R-D1 is very, very good, and even better after the firmware upgrade. That one extra stop... I find I need it more often on my Eos 300D while I hardly ever need more than iso1600 with the R-D1. Longer handheld shutter times negate this need for the most part.

I find that the results from the R-D1 are on a par with anything film can offer. Colour fidelity is great (I've never seen purples better rendered than on the R-D1), noise is well suppressed all the way to iso1600, and the R-D1 faithfully renders the lens' characteristics.

Yes, the R-D1 is expensive but it does offer a lot in shooting experience, in behaviour, in user-friendliness, in lens line-up, in results, etc. For me it's the only camera I shoot: at least 99% of my shooting is done with it. The remaining 1% is with the Eos 300D and other (film) cameras, from 35mm to 120 film, B&W and colour.

 

[Sumo_du_Jour]

Your concern about low light shooting is not a big issue. The Rangefinder camera remains steady at low shutter speeds (no mirror flapping about). Coming from the world of SLR, making shots at 1/15 can be unnerving at first, but it doesn't take long till you're using low speed without a second thought.

Even this 1/4 second shot is within reason (ISO 200),

 

[nickmeertens]

I would not buy the RD-1. I think its a cool concept but it's is a hell of a lot of money...not worth it, not even close in my opinion. I shoot with a Mamiya 6 I bought for $800..but I love film. I have a Nikon D70 I use for quick snapshots but all of my serious photography is medium format BW film.......You should check out The new panasonic L-1 , although its an SLR it has a rangefinder styled body and a Leica Lens...

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0602/06022609panasonicdmcl1.asp

Thank you Anaanda for your response. I agree it is a lot of money but it might just be worth it to me; film is not an option and wanting to regain the feeling of craft, of an mechanical instrument, there is not much else in the digital world. I agree that the Panasonic L-1 seems to offer more af that instrument feel than my Canon does, certainly with that Leica lens, but what other lenses will be available? I dont really want that zoom or olympus zooms for that matter. As for the rangefinder styled body; I dont really care for style to be honest 😎
I looked at you gallery; nice!
Nick

 

[nickmeertens]

I'm a bit surprised no-one mentioned my name as I'm for now the only Dutchie here on RFF with an R-D1.

Nick, I'm in Amsterdam.

Anaanda's reasons are valid but no answer to Nick's questions. I, for one, can't be bothered to shoot film anymore. I hate scanning, I hate the time it wastes, and I hate the enormous amount of money shooting film gobbles up here in Holland. B&W might be OK if you shoot Lucky film and dev it yourself but otherwise shooting film is painful for my wallet.

The R-D1 gave me the rf experience, did away with the scanning, and is now saving me money. The money I spent on the R-D1 is now less than the money I would have spent over the past 12 months on shooting colour film.

I'm not concerned about QC: my camera was checked by Joseph Yao before he sent it off to me. I assume Robert White will do the same if you buy from him. After sales support might be a problem. Epson seems to have set up a rather poor after sales support, but fortunately I haven't had the need to use it over the past 12 months.

The soon-to-available Leica M8 will be available for a few years, I guess, and might be a replacement for a broken down R-D1 in the future. Perhaps other brands will produce digital rf's as well.

Super wide angle lenses usually come with external view finders. It was like that in the pre-digital age, and it still is so. My CV 15/4.5 works well with the vf of my CV 25/4. Wide angle is IMO (and most other wide angle shooters) no problem, even if there aren't any framelines in-camera for those lenses.

The iso1600 of the R-D1 is very, very good, and even better after the firmware upgrade. That one extra stop... I find I need it more often on my Eos 300D while I hardly ever need more than iso1600 with the R-D1. Longer handheld shutter times negate this need for the most part.

I find that the results from the R-D1 are on a par with anything film can offer. Colour fidelity is great (I've never seen purples better rendered than on the R-D1), noise is well suppressed all the way to iso1600, and the R-D1 faithfully renders the lens' characteristics.

Yes, the R-D1 is expensive but it does offer a lot in shooting experience, in behaviour, in user-friendliness, in lens line-up, in results, etc. For me it's the only camera I shoot: at least 99% of my shooting is done with it. The remaining 1% is with the Eos 300D and other (film) cameras, from 35mm to 120 film, B&W and colour.

RML,

Thank you for those insights in using and owning an R-D1 dutchie!
You make a strong case for the Epson I must say.
I was looking at the color photographs on FurCafe's blog (he replied to this thread as well) and found the colors to be very attractive. A bit 70's Eggleston but still realistic. They seem different from other digital color photographs. Can you confirm this observation or is it FurCafe's postprocessing that produces these colors?

How is your experience with battery life on the Epson?
Also I read somewhere on the net that the msrp on the R-D1s will be 2000 instead of 3000... anyone can confirm this?
RML, seeing how you are only 2 hours away, is there anyway I could hold your Epson in the event I get to afraid to buy one unseen?

Regards, Nick

BTW, there is another Dutchie with an Epson on this forum (he mailed me offline)

 

[RML]

RML,

Thank you for those insights in using and owning an R-D1 dutchie!
You make a strong case for the Epson I must say.

I think all R-D1 users here will confirm my experiences. 🙂

I was looking at the color photographs on FurCafe's blog (he replied to this thread as well) and found the colors to be very attractive. A bit 70's Eggleston but still realistic. They seem different from other digital color photographs. Can you confirm this observation or is it FurCafe's postprocessing that produces these colors?

Without exactly knowing which colours furcafe had in front of him I can't judge whether his colours are post-processed or not. I can, however, say that the colours on my photos are as close tp what I saw in real life as anything I ever saw on film.

Check my _blog_ and my _photo portfolio blog_ for photos. Most photos since June 2005 are shot with the R-D1. I hardly shoot anything else nowadays.

How is your experience with battery life on the Epson?

Some have said that they think battery life was reduced after the firmware upgrade. I don't have that experience personally. I get about 2 cards out of a original Epson battery. The generic ones don't last that long in my experience. Perhaps only a card, if lucky.

Also I read somewhere on the net that the msrp on the R-D1s will be 2000 instead of 3000... anyone can confirm this?

I have no idea what msrp stands for.

RML, seeing how you are only 2 hours away, is there anyway I could hold your Epson in the event I get to afraid to buy one unseen?

Sure we can meet some day.

BTW, there is another Dutchie with an Epson on this forum (he mailed me offline)

I didn't know that either but Geo contacted me as well.

 

[nickmeertens]

MSRP = Manufacturer's suggested retail price 🙂

 

[RML]

Yes, the price of teh R-D1s seems to be lower but availability of the R-D1s is for now anyone's guess in Europe.

Robert White is selling the R-D1 for a tremendous price. Add the free firmware update and you're set to go. Contact RW to see if he has the R-D1 in store and at what price. In Holland prices are still 3000 euro. Stelletje afzetters. 😛

 

[nickmeertens]

This Just In

This Just In

Robert White is expecting the R-D1S in a couple of weeks and hopes to sell it for 1200 GBP plus VAT... This thing is getting better and better!

 

[boilerdoc2]

I'm on R White's list let me know as soon as the RD-1s is available. Will order my second one. Supposed to be this week. It is a hugely fun camera and a seriously good one as well. The upgrades are very helpful and the smallness and 'stealthiness' of an RF digital is very very nice. Get it! If you don't like it let me know!
Steve

 

[furcafe]

I take it you're looking @ these R-D1 pix:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/furcafe/tags/seikoepsonrd1/

It's probably a combination of both the R-D1's color rendition & my postprocessing. A lot of the colors may appear highly saturated because I've primarily used my R-D1 in situations where I would have used high-speed C41 film (e.g., NPZ/Pro 800Z), i.e., low-light & nightlife shooting in bars, etc. that tend to have garish mixed lighting (tungsten, neon, & streetlights all in 1 shot). IMHO, the R-D1's "natural" color rendition, based on the standard JPG settings (which are visible on the LCD screen preview) resembles the old-school Kodak color films like Gold 100 & many of the Ektachromes (heavier on the reds & yellows); I think 1 of the major reviewers (Reid, Reichmann, Lifson?) has voiced a similar opinion. However, I shoot raw & convert using Adobe Camera Raw in Photoshop & tend to prefer the old Kodak look, anyway, & my postprocessing certainly reflects this preference.

I was looking at the color photographs on FurCafe's blog (he replied to this thread as well) and found the colors to be very attractive. A bit 70's Eggleston but still realistic. They seem different from other digital color photographs. Can you confirm this observation or is it FurCafe's postprocessing that produces these colors?)

 

[anaanda]

Thank you Anaanda for your response. I agree it is a lot of money but it might just be worth it to me; film is not an option and wanting to regain the feeling of craft, of an mechanical instrument, there is not much else in the digital world. I agree that the Panasonic L-1 seems to offer more af that instrument feel than my Canon does, certainly with that Leica lens, but what other lenses will be available? I dont really want that zoom or olympus zooms for that matter. As for the rangefinder styled body; I dont really care for style to be honest 😎
I looked at you gallery; nice!
Nick

Hi Nick,
Again it's only my subjective opinion. I would love to own the RD-1 but I can't justify the cost . It would be worth it if I really wanted it. It ultimately comes down to the individual. If you enjoy it than it is worth it!...I can understand not wanting to deal with film. I just happen to like developing film. You seem like you will be an owner of this camera soon!