What is it about this Camera??

[furcafe]

LOL. As the saying goes, the perfect is often the enemy of the good.

PS -- Here, for the first time anywhere on the Internet, are some actual comparison pictures!!! The first, taken by me yesterday evening, is an example of the type of photo you can make right now with an R-D 1. The second is an example of the type of photo you can make right now with a Leica Digital M...

 

[ulrik]

My consumer advise is as follows:

Buy an R-D1, use it, post your experiences in a friendly and constructive forum. If you don't like it, sell it.

or

Don't get an R-D1, don't read threads about the camera obviously upsets you; ignore that it even exists.

It is a great tool for some people, a toy for others, and a thorn in the eye for people who secretly desire it.

It should be clear what to expect from this camera from reading the threads here.

 

[sevres_babylone]

PS -- Here, for the first time anywhere on the Internet, are some actual comparison pictures!!! The first, taken by me yesterday evening, is an example of the type of photo you can make right now with an R-D 1. The second is an example of the type of photo you can make right now with a Leica Digital M...

While the one on the left is quite beautiful, the one on the right definitely has that Leica glow.

 

[ch1]

I don't get particularly emotional about the R-D 1. I do get emotional about people seeming to imply that I'm an idiot or an injudicious consumer because I chose to buy a camera that they have heard is unreliable and overpriced.

I had "heard" all those things, too; I did my own research, made my decision, and haven't regretted it.

Sorry that my original answer sounded so intemperate, but it really is very tedious constantly having my good judgment attacked by people whose knowledge of the R-D 1 consists solely of Internet hearsay.

PS -- Here, for the first time anywhere on the Internet, are some actual comparison pictures!!! The first, taken by me yesterday evening, is an example of the type of photo you can make right now with an R-D 1. The second is an example of the type of photo you can make right now with a Leica Digital M...

Cute but irrelevant.

There is nothing wrong with purchasing a RD-1 if you desire a digi RF today (or since it has been available).

However, your own guru, Sean, said it was (paraphrase here) "admittedly a rare camera".

What makes it "rare" is that very few people have purchased one!

I can well afford to purchase a RD-1 if I choose to do so. I am not averse to the camera because of its cost.

Simply stated, it is only a 6mp digi with a very troubled QC record (which, I'll say it again - you here on RFF have helped create!). It costs well over USD 2000. I don't think it's worth it - particularly now when the DigiM is within months of introduction.

As any basic market lesson will tell you "product pioneers" often accept flaws and frustrations that "adopters" will not even at much higher price points. You who have this camera are the "pioneers" of digiRF. You deserve our thanks for that - but please don't try to convince later buyers of the quality of this camera - you, yourselves, have documented its shortcomings!

I'm not trying to be harsh or "troll" here - but I do not think Epson will sell many more of these cameras and I would not buy one!

 

[Dougg]

Cool, George; I respect your opinion but do not share it. I won't get one either... since I'm just not prepared to get ANY serious digital camera at this point, but if I were then the Epson would be my choice if only for its user interface. Besides I have nice lenses that would fit it... 🙂

 

[jlw]

Simply stated, it is only a 6mp digi with a very troubled QC record (which, I'll say it again - you here on RFF have helped create!). It costs well over USD 2000. I don't think it's worth it - particularly now when the DigiM is within months of introduction.

I suspect you may be jumping the gun a bit there. All I recall hearing from the rumor mill was that Leica hopes to show the digital M at Photokina 2006 (which opens September 24.) Veteran Photokina-watchers know that a lot of products announced or displayed there often don't actually appear on the market for months, if not later. (For example, Bronica's VX-1 compact 35mm rangefinder camera, with its line of tiny interchangeable leaf-shutter lenses, looked great when it was shown at Photokina 1982, but actual deliveries didn't take place until... well, uh, we're still waiting for that one!)

As any basic market lesson will tell you "product pioneers" often accept flaws and frustrations that "adopters" will not even at much higher price points.

Very true -- which makes me wonder why you are so eager to spend twice as much money on a Leica Digital M! After all, because of its very long gestation period, its 10-megapixel sensor will already be obsolete in terms of size and pixel count by the time the camera actually reaches the market (whenever that is.) And of course Leica actually has very little experience in electronic cameras, other than licensing their name to be put on ones made by Panasonic -- remember all the problems with the early R4s? -- so their first attempt at an in-house digital RF might not be exactly bug-free. Wouldn't it really be more prudent to wait for the Digital M Mark II?


Okay, kidding aside, I suspect our disagreement (or debate or discussion or whatever) stems from our different reasons for being interested in this type of camera. You've previously posted that you're happy using film, you're in no hurry to take up digital, and that your interest in a digital RF is as a way to exercise your collection of Leica M lenses. For that purpose it certainly makes sense to wait until Leica offers its own platform for them; otherwise, you won't be fully confident that they're performing at their best in the digital medium.

I, on the other hand, had to get away from film for productivity reasons, and the only reason I'm interested in using a digital RF camera is that it's the most effective way for me to make pictures, which is what I really care about. For me, it would get extremely frustrating to think, "I won't take any pictures now -- I'll wait until a better camera becomes available, and then start taking pictures."


I also agree that it's going to be difficult for Epson to sell more R-D 1s now that everybody in the RF marketplace has been convinced not only that the Leica Digital M is imminent, but that it's sure to be vastly better.

That this pre-emptive strategy should be successful for Leica would be no surprise, since it's exactly the same strategy that Microsoft uses to such good effect. It's known in the computer trade as "F.U.D." (fear, uncertainty, doubt) and consists of saying to the consumer, "Don't take a chance on buying our competitor's current, shipping product. We've got a product coming that will be much, much more fully featured, and it's going to be available real soon now..." Then, once you've used F.U.D. to starve your competitors out of the marketplace, you're free to deliver whatever buggy crap you want on whatever schedule you like!

 

[Flinor]

Sean, jlw, you both are much more eloquent than I am. Thanks.

 

[Flinor]

One last thought. I've been using Leicas for many years. Their history of bug free new products isn't exactly wonderful.

 

[Terence T]

2 reasons why I like my R-D1... it's relatively small size as compared to my DSLR and it's digital. I shoot mostly from the hip with this cam, with a CV 15mm attached, it makes for a wonderful tool for candid shots. Unless another digital RF is introduced at a price level comparable to the R-D1 and has better features, I'll stick to my trusty Epson.

Some pics if you're interested, the b/w ones are from the R-D1 while the rest are from my 1DmkII, can be found HERE.

 

[jlw]

...only a 6mp digi...

It's time for... FUN WITH MEGAPIXELS!

Hey, kids, did you ever stop to think that pixels have to cover the image area in two dimensions? That means that if Sensor A has N times as many pixels as Sensor B, you won't be able to print a good picture that's N times bigger... only the square-root-of-N times bigger.

Let's see how that works by comparing a camera with a boring, obsolete ol' 6.1-megapixel sensor to one with a spiffy new 10.2-megapixel sensor.

(No, not those two cameras; let's use the Nikon D100 and D200...)​

Okay, the D200's sensor has (10.2/6.1) or 1.672 times as many pixels as the D100's sensor. But remember, those pixels have to cover two dimensions. So the linear increase is the square root of 1.672, or... don't reach for that slide rule, I've got a calculator right here... 1.293.

So, if the largest print you find acceptable from a D100 is, say, 8x10 inches, that means the D200 will let you make an equally acceptable print that's 10.34 x 12.93 inches. Golly, that's almost enough to let you jump up to the next larger standard size of mat!

That alone has got to be worth an extra couple of thousand dollars, don't you think?...no?

 

[pfogle]

2 reasons why I like my R-D1... it's relatively small size as compared to my DSLR and it's digital. I shoot mostly from the hip with this cam, with a CV 15mm attached, it makes for a wonderful tool for candid shots. Unless another digital RF is introduced at a price level comparable to the R-D1 and has better features, I'll stick to my trusty Epson.

Some pics if you're interested, the b/w ones are from the R-D1 while the rest are from my 1DmkII, can be found HERE.

Wow... what an awsome website! Those pictures are great - I feel quite humbled. In the light of the context it seems trite to say that I use the same gear 🙂

 

[RML]

What makes it "rare" is that very few people have purchased one!

What makes it rare is that it's the only one of its kind.

I don't think it's worth it - particularly now when the DigiM is within months of introduction.

Well, that's an honest statement but still your own opinion. And you say the dM will be here in a few months. We still have to see about that. If every time I had waited for the better pc, I would still not be online today.

As any basic market lesson will tell you "product pioneers" often accept flaws and frustrations that "adopters" will not even at much higher price points. You who have this camera are the "pioneers" of digiRF. You deserve our thanks for that - but please don't try to convince later buyers of the quality of this camera - you, yourselves, have documented its shortcomings!

Documented for some specimen of this camera. Not mine. And I reckon there are plenty of other users out there who had no notable problems or issues.

but I do not think Epson will sell many more of these cameras and I would not buy one!

Well, what Epson does, is Epson's business, so I won't go into that. However, if you've already made up your mind about not buying the R-D1, why keep nagging about how bad you think it is? Your opinion is based on nothing but hearsay, not on actual experience. And the hearsay is because problems tend to be exclaimed loud and wide while good things hardly ever get the same attention. Yes, the R-D1 is expensive. Yes, some specimen had QC problems. Yes, it's not a camera for everyman. But who the f*ck are you to tell me (and other users) time and time again that I am a silly fool for shelling out what I did and use this camera?

 

[Terence T]

R-D1 users... don't forget about the upcoming firmware update on Jun 1 to turn your camera into a R-D1s!

Should be available on the Epson site once it comes out, according to the email I got from Epson.

 

[LCT]

R-D1 users... don't forget about the upcoming firmware update on Jun 1 to turn your camera into a R-D1s!...

Do you know how we can revert to the previous firmware if we don't like the new one?
Just curious.
Best,
LCT

 

[JonasYip]

Seems like you've gotten some reasonable feedback here already, but thought I'd speak up as another RD-1 owner with a fault-free camera, no worries about it being "outdated", and who didn't think it was ridculously expensive. Well, it was expensive, but worthwhile for me, which is all that really matters.

As others have pointed out, people don't usually make a lot of noise about the problems they aren't having, so you can't always rely exclusively on what you read on message boards.

All in all, the RD-1 is one of my favorite cameras *ever*... and I have a lot of cameras.

j

 

[Terence T]

Wow... what an awsome website! Those pictures are great - I feel quite humbled. In the light of the context it seems trite to say that I use the same gear 🙂

Hey thanks 🙂

The prints will be on show if anyone "happens" to be in Singapore from Jun 8-18. Drop me an email if anyone needs details.

 

[rvaubel]

Terence T
Thanks for the update on the firmware. This should eliminate most of the little annoyances (sp?), especially the double shutter thing, that we learned to live with on the original. The RAW+JPEG enhancement will be welcome also.
Took some pictures with my new 21mm Kobalux today at the San Francisco De Young Museum. Still having fun NOW with my R-D1, the ONLY "M" mount digital rangefinder.

Eat your heart out, George

Sincerely,
Rex

 

[eyeman]

I loved the R-D1, but unfortunately was not able to find a body that functioned well. After looking at seven different bodies and owning two for a short period of time I ultimately gave up on this camera. I experienced all of the usual QC issues from misaligned framelines and vertical adjustment problems to even having a body with a misaligned sensor. Epson's customer service was excellent and I never had a problem returnig a camera to them but it is truly a shame that there is no factory service or factory authorized service to support these cameras. And yes, Leica might have issues with the first few units of the Digital M that arrive here but at least one can have the camera serviced by Leica should the need arise.

There is certainly a magical quality to the files that come out of this camera when combined with Leica glass, but for now, I have packed away my lenses and purchase the Nikon D200, MB 200 grip and 35mm f2. There may not appear to be much of a difference in resolution between the 6mp and 10mp sensors, but to my eye the difference between the R-D1 and D200 is substantial.

eyeman

 

[varjag]

Last Friday I had an opportunity to play with an R-D1 demo unit. In short, it looks and feels far better in real life than on the photos. The 1:1 finder is excellent, and the camera feels and operates like a film body. The latter somehow doesn't let it look obsolete, unless you convince yourself that one can't live with 6 megapixel image anymore.

 

[iUser]

It's time for... FUN WITH MEGAPIXELS!

Hey, kids, did you ever stop to think that pixels have to cover the image area in two dimensions? That means that if Sensor A has N times as many pixels as Sensor B, you won't be able to print a good picture that's N times bigger... only the square-root-of-N times bigger.

Let's see how that works by comparing a camera with a boring, obsolete ol' 6.1-megapixel sensor to one with a spiffy new 10.2-megapixel sensor.

(No, not those two cameras; let's use the Nikon D100 and D200...)​

Okay, the D200's sensor has (10.2/6.1) or 1.672 times as many pixels as the D100's sensor. But remember, those pixels have to cover two dimensions. So the linear increase is the square root of 1.672, or... don't reach for that slide rule, I've got a calculator right here... 1.293.

So, if the largest print you find acceptable from a D100 is, say, 8x10 inches, that means the D200 will let you make an equally acceptable print that's 10.34 x 12.93 inches. Golly, that's almost enough to let you jump up to the next larger standard size of mat!

That alone has got to be worth an extra couple of thousand dollars, don't you think?...no?

lol, well put.