Why not a new Epson?

[SciAggie]

I'm fairly new to rangefinders so this may seem like a dumb question; since the RD-1 is so well regarded, why is it no longer being produced? Why not continue with a new version and upgraded electronics?

 

[hub]

Without having the facts really, one can speculate that it didn't sell well enough for Epson to continue the venture. That's usually why a company stop a product: because it does not bring enough revenue.

To be able to compete, I would see the RD-1+1 needing something like a 12Mpix sensor in APS-C or an upgrade to a full frame, preferably not from Kodak.
Could Epson invest in the R&D and still have the camera properly priced? I'm not sure.

 

[rxmd]

I'm fairly new to rangefinders so this may seem like a dumb question; since the RD-1 is so well regarded, why is it no longer being produced?

It seems that it's well regarded only since it has been discontinued. Before, people would complain about misaligned rangefinders and what they considered bad service and about all the ways in which it's not like a Leica.

 

[CameraQuest]

I'm fairly new to rangefinders so this may seem like a dumb question; since the RD-1 is so well regarded, why is it no longer being produced? Why not continue with a new version and upgraded electronics?

Because they lost their butt on it the first time with unbelievably inept marketing. A great camera for its time, but Epson won't likely go back there again.

Stephen

 

[SciAggie]

This is all interesting. A common theme in today's threads seems to be poor marketing by companies such as Kodak and Epson. It's a shame. I would think an upgraded version of a camera like the Rd-1 could provide an affordable alternative to the M9. Perhaps that is where the X100 will end up eventually.

 

[rxmd]

This is all interesting. A common theme in today's threads seems to be poor marketing by companies such as Kodak and Epson. It's a shame. I would think an upgraded version of a camera like the Rd-1 could provide an affordable alternative to the M9. Perhaps that is where the X100 will end up eventually.

Not to discourage you from dreaming, but this is where in most of those threads we enter wishful thinking territory.

Another common theme in those threads seems to be "there is no market" or "low sales figures", but those voices seem to be easily ignored.

 

[FrozenInTime]

I have a theory for a RD1 replacement ... which some will laugh off, but here goes anyway:

It would be possible for Ricoh's GXR and APS-C M-lens module to be a bona fide optical rangefinder 😱 and for half the price of the RD1.

There's a clue in the interview here: http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/ricohs_leica_lens_module_for_gxr_exclusive_interview_news_305582.html?aff=rsn

Here's the interesting bit:

The use of a focal plane shutter though will require a new solution for live view operation.
The shutter is not exposed and so can not relay information to the rear LCD screen.
Mr Saiki told AP that Ricoh does have a solution for this, but he would not be drawn on what it was.
He would say, however, that it would not involve a time consuming process and that the camera would remain very effective as a tool for street photographers.


This means there can be no live view EVF.
So it got me thinking how could they do it ?

If the camera includes a cam as part of the lens mount then they can display a distance scale - as a projected scale on a optical viewfinder - similar to the GR1 film cameras.

One stage beyond this - is to transfer that distance measurement on to a a traditional optical rangefinder mirror.
The electronics are very straightforward :
The lens/mount cam moves a potentiometer producing a voltage proportional to focus distance, which is send over the existing EVF contacts to the new clip on optical viewfinder.
A similar potentiometer reads the position of the rangefinder mirror and a motor is used to drive the two voltages equal. This is probably all digitized.

So the GXR gets a bolt on genuine optical rangefinder - that slips on to the hot shoe.
It's not linked by a mechanical cam like traditional rangefinders, but the end result is exactly the same.

Attached is a crude photoshop mock up.

Probably pure fantasy : but there's no technical reason why it would not work.
Maybe not accurate enough to focus a Noctilux full open, but back to the AP interviewn the camera would remain very effective as a tool for street photographers

 

[back alley]

i love the rd1 but it's not perfect.

epson recently release the rd1x and it doesn't seem to be selling very much...anyone know someone who has bought one?

for a completely redone rd1 it would mean a major overhaul to the present body.
no one would accept a 6mp camera today.
i like the rd1 because i print small and i love the colours it produces...nothing like i ever achieved on film before.
also because i am a poor (as in not much money) photographer 😉

i bought 2 bodies, an rd1 and an rd1s for less thaan what an m8.2 goes for now.
i had one overhauled for less than 300 bucks and will soon send in the other...it has been more than worth it to me.

i would only switch to a full frame digital rangefinder if i could afford it (as in a lottery win).

 

[Leigh Youdale]

Whatever the past history of the RD-1, companies have a tendency these days to concentrate on their core business and core product competencies. Diversification is not fashionable in business at the moment. It's not hard to understand why Epson would regard a new digital camera as a high risk fringe product line and prefer to focus on what they do best.
Also, who would build it for them? Not Cosina with a huge amount of their core business tied up in OEM lens manufacture for the giants!

 

[gekopaca]

This year Epson said that they will certainly come back in photographic world, but certainly not with a R-D2 I guess.

 

[Mr_Flibble]

I fear it'll be another P&S design 😉

 

[Rob-F]

To be able to compete, I would see the RD-1+1 needing something like a 12Mpix sensor in APS-C or an upgrade to a full frame, preferably not from Kodak.

They wouldn't need all that to compete for my business. Judging from results I see on the web, I could live with the 6MP sensor and the 1.5x crop factor. There is an advantage to a modest pixel count: it allows larger, better performing individual receptors, with better dynamic range and lower noise. The R-D1 is much better at high ISO than is the M8. OK, a modest increase to maybe 7.5MP would be good, if it can be done without sacrificing the performance of the present R-D1. A 1.3 or 1.4 crop factor would be welcome. But I don't have to have these things.

Here's what I would like. I want the finder magnification reduced, and more framelines added, so I can use my wide angle lenses. People complain they can't even see the 28mm frame if they wear glasses. IMO, with a 1.5 crop, there's no reason why there can't be visible, usable framelines added for 21mm and 24mm lenses. I'd say this can be done with a finder magnification of around .6. It could even be done at .65, but I'd like it more comfortable when wearing glasses.

I think the R-D1 has proven to us that megapixels aren't everything. The finder enhancements are more important to me.

 

[back alley]

i wonder if the finder from an r4* could be exchanged with the rd1?

 

[smile]

or an upgrade to a full frame, preferably not from Kodak.

why not????