Danno_photoguy Posted October 20, 2009 Share #1 Posted October 20, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) It is clear that the M9 (and the M8) are superior to the RD-1, but I was wondering if anyone has a direct comparison between the M9 and the RD-1 files. I (like so many) am waiting for my M9 and I was trying to imagine the difference that it will make. Don’t get me wrong, I have really enjoyed my RD-1, but it just can’t deliver large size prints and I am looking forward to using some of the lenses that I put into semiretirement with the RD-1. Apologies in advance to those that may view this to be a silly request. Thanks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 20, 2009 Posted October 20, 2009 Hi Danno_photoguy, Take a look here RD-1/ M9 Comparison request. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Shootist Posted October 20, 2009 Share #2 Posted October 20, 2009 Ther are M8 & M9 DNG files floating around on the internet. Get some and do the comparison yourself. You will find there is no comparison. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 20, 2009 Share #3 Posted October 20, 2009 It is clear that the M9 (and the M8) are superior to the RD-1... Depends on what. The R-D1 is the only digital M3 available so far. It is even better than the M3 in that it allows shooting both eyes open thanks to its 1:1 viewfinder and it does not need additional VFs to cover the 40mm FoV. Now if you're after FF and/or larger prints than A4 it's not the right tool obviously. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted October 20, 2009 Share #4 Posted October 20, 2009 The R-D1 is the only digital M3 available so far. Actually, it is a digital Bessa, viewfinder magnification notwithstanding. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
biglouis Posted October 20, 2009 Share #5 Posted October 20, 2009 It is clear that the M (and the M8) are superior to the RD-1, but I was wondering if anyone has a direct comparison between the M and the RD-1 files. I (like so many) am waiting for my M and I was trying to imagine the difference that it will make. Don’t get me wrong, I have really enjoyed my RD-1, but it just can’t deliver large size prints and I am looking forward to using some of the lenses that I put into semi retirement with the RD-1. Apologies in advance to those that may view this to be a silly request. Thanks I can show you the difference in quality between an R-D1 file at iso800 and a Leica M8 file at iso640. The R-D1 is superior in terms of noise but of course it is half the pixel density of the M8. If you look at my "Luxurious" album you will see some embarrassingly good low light images from the R-D1. I personally regret selling mine but on the other hand I couldn't have afforded my M8 without releasing the capital tied up in it. LouisB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
j. borger Posted October 20, 2009 Share #6 Posted October 20, 2009 Up to A3 i see no differences in prints from R-D1 and M8. At A3+ i am hard pressed to see the differences. M9 will not make a diffrence at those sizes i assume. So it all depend on what you consider large prints and what the content of your prints is? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 20, 2009 Share #7 Posted October 20, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Actually, it is a digital Bessa, viewfinder magnification notwithstanding. Why 'notwithstanding'? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted October 20, 2009 Share #8 Posted October 20, 2009 The R-D1 is no M3. The M3 is a legend, the R-D1 is a footnote. History has judged. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 20, 2009 Share #9 Posted October 20, 2009 The R-D1 is no M3. The M3 is a legend, the R-D1 is a footnote. History has judged. Too soon for history. I own both and prefer the R-D1 personally. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danno_photoguy Posted October 21, 2009 Author Share #10 Posted October 21, 2009 Thanks to all for the comments, it is clear that there are still some RD-1 fans. I am still longing for my M9; hope that I can use my Noctilux and 135 again. I would like to see the same subject captured with the same lens with each camera, guess I will just have to wait until I can take them myself. Thanks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted October 21, 2009 Share #11 Posted October 21, 2009 Too soon for history The M3 is a legend, the R-D1 is a footnote. History has judged. .........carstenw is on his way to the registrars office to change his name to History Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 21, 2009 Share #12 Posted October 21, 2009 Thanks to all for the comments, it is clear that there are still some RD-1 fans. I am still longing for my M9; hope that I can use my Noctilux and 135 again. I would like to see the same subject captured with the same lens with each camera, guess I will just have to wait until I can take them myself... Forget the R-D1 if you intend to use fast 135mm lenses. The base length of its rangefinder is too short for that. I would not expect high hit rates at f/3.4 with the M9 either unless you use a magnifier or the Elmarit 135/2.8 with goggles. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted October 21, 2009 Share #13 Posted October 21, 2009 .........carstenw is on his way to the registrars office to change his name to History Cameras are usually more popular when they are released, not years after. Most cameras are forgotten within a couple of years, except possibly for their small fanbase. The R-D1 was a neat camera, but it is already all but forgotten. I would have bought one at the time if Epson hadn't demanded Leica-like prices for it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coup de foudre Posted October 21, 2009 Share #14 Posted October 21, 2009 Cameras are usually more popular when they are released, not years after. Most cameras are forgotten within a couple of years, except possibly for their small fanbase. The R-D1 was a neat camera, but it is already all but forgotten. I would have bought one at the time if Epson hadn't demanded Leica-like prices for it. Carsten, you are speaking of what you know not! in historical terms, it is near impossible to to compare a film camera to a digital camera -- period. a digital camera has far less shelf life and that's a fact. the Epson R-D1 has had amazing longevity for a digital camera and it is far from merely a footnote simply because you never had one. it is still going quite strong and is possibly one of the best, most organic cameras ever made. it is a joy to use in every sense of the word. i own an M8 as well and will sell it without regret when i move to the M9/10. the same cannot be said for my R-D1. i will keep that camera for as long as i can and love every minute of using it. the high ISO on the R-D1 blows the M8 and, yes, even the M9 out of the water. there is just no comparison at 1600. i still pull it out when the light gets low and enjoy every minute of shooting with it. if you had ever actually used the camera, i might have some respect for what you have to say on this matter. as you have not, i do not. cam Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coup de foudre Posted October 21, 2009 Share #15 Posted October 21, 2009 Thanks to all for the comments, it is clear that there are still some RD-1 fans. I am still longing for my M9; hope that I can use my Noctilux and 135 again. I would like to see the same subject captured with the same lens with each camera, guess I will just have to wait until I can take them myself. may i ask what is keeping you from using the Noctilux on the R-D1? i honestly still prefer mine on the R-D1 to the M8 -- pat of that, i admit, is the superior low light capability of the Epson. it is also more filmic and has a gentler draw/fall-off than the M8. the R-D1 and the Noctilux is possibly my favourite combination to date. as for the 135, i use it on my R-D1 -- albeit with a magnifier. i have an old beater one, so i doubt it would be very sharp at f/3.4 on any camera. if i am careful with focusing, however, i can get some very fine shots. and, although i do have external finders, i usually just use the focus patch on the R-D1 to judge what i will get. it seems silly to have lenses you love and not use -- why? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danno_photoguy Posted October 21, 2009 Author Share #16 Posted October 21, 2009 Thanks for the questions; they challenge my thinking/practices. I have found the Noctilux and my 135 harder to focus on the RD-1 than on my M6’s. Part of this is of course the base length; part may also be due to the less than perfect viewfinder alignment. I sent it off and the viewfinder alignment was improved, by still not a good as on the M6. Be it for good reason or not, I just got use to using my 35 Lux on the RD-1 near 90% of the time. Funny that (base on some of the postings in this forum) it may now be harder to use my 35 Lux on the M9, if I ever get it. Although I use the 1.25X on the M6, I have not used a magnifier on the RD-1; that may be part of the story as well (although it already has a higher mag than my .58 and .72 M6's). Thanks for the push, I will pull it out this weekend and see what I can do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted October 21, 2009 Share #17 Posted October 21, 2009 the Epson R-D1 has had amazing longevity for a digital camera and it is far from merely a footnote simply because you never had one. it is still going quite strong and is possibly one of the best, most organic cameras ever made. it is a joy to use in every sense of the word. You have completely misunderstood my comment, which has nothing to do with the strengths or weaknesses of the R-D1, only the fact that it is more or less forgotten, apart from a few strong fans such as you. No one talks about it, except lct and you, and occasionally Sean Reid, and possibly one or two other people. You don't hear anything about it. It was a one off, with a minor followup, and was then forgotten and silently dropped. Epson made no other similar cameras, and there are none planned. The price was much too high, the resolution too low, and the sensor did not make the most of the lenses, with a high crop factor and much stronger vignetting than the M8 even without lens recognition on. There was even some IR sensitivity. Personally, I always thought it was a neat camera, and if it had ever been priced reasonably, I probably would have owned one. Still, calling the R-D1 a "digital M3" is like calling a Honda Accord a "modern Duesenberg". There is simply no comparison. The M3 changed the world forever. The R-D1's only claim to fame is to be the first digital rangefinder, and its penetration is so low that most people who recognize an M3 still have not heard of the R-D1. I am not trying to put it down, just to put its historical importance into perspective. When future historians talk about the transition of rangefinder to digital, there will be a very fat chapter on the M8 and M9, and a footnote about the R-D1 actually being the first to market. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coup de foudre Posted October 21, 2009 Share #18 Posted October 21, 2009 Thanks for the questions; they challenge my thinking/practices. I have found the Noctilux and my 135 harder to focus on the RD-1 than on my M6’s. Part of this is of course the base length; part may also be due to the less than perfect viewfinder alignment. I sent it off and the viewfinder alignment was improved, by still not a good as on the M6. Be it for good reason or not, I just got use to using my 35 Lux on the RD-1 near 90% of the time. Funny that (base on some of the postings in this forum) it may now be harder to use my 35 Lux on the M9, if I ever get it. Although I use the 1.25X on the M6, I have not used a magnifier on the RD-1; that may be part of the story as well (although it already has a higher mag than my .58 and .72 M6's). Thanks for the push, I will pull it out this weekend and see what I can do. the 35 Lux (pre-asph) was glued to my R-D1 as well, so not to worry! and i have the asph on my M8 -- so incompatibilities with the M9 may be greatly exaggerated... Yanidel (on this forum) loves the 35 Lux as well so i'm sure he'll have plenty to say when he gets the M9. here was a sample shot he took. the Noctilux is gorgeous on the R-D1 but, i do admit, i probably wouldn't have thought so if i didn't have the 1.3X magnifier by Japan Exposures on my camera... i honestly think this made a world of difference between what i am able to get on the Epson versus some other people's experiences. i really try to be anal about nailing focus (when i have the luxury of time) as i like to shoot wide open. the Noctilux may focus differently on the R-D1 regardless. use it, learn it, and i think you may find yourself loving it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 21, 2009 Share #19 Posted October 21, 2009 ...calling the R-D1 a "digital M3" is like calling a Honda Accord a "modern Duesenberg". There is simply no comparison... There are comparisons where people do them, Carsten. Respecting what they say is the least politeness if you ask me. As far as i'm concerned, i compare my M3 DS, whis is my favourite film M, to my Epson bodies, which are my favourite RFs ever. Just speaking by experience and sharing modestly my point of view. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coup de foudre Posted October 21, 2009 Share #20 Posted October 21, 2009 Carsten, we agree to disagree. as for their not being a strong fan base for this camera -- that's just nonsense! this is a Leica forum, non? not very welcoming to R-D1 users, i assure you. so you assume they don't exist simply because they're not here... whatever. and there is some justification in likening it to the M3. it was revolutionary. it was the first digital rangefinder. period. no mere footnote, it was the FIRST. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.