R-D1 while M8 is Repaired

[xalo]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I tried out my 90 Elmar-C and it couples just fine. I wonder what gives.

 

John,

Nice pic you took with your new RD-1. As to the 90mm, my Rokkor (same as your Elmar) and an early Elmarit (1960) work fine and even focus quite accurately. No coupling issue at all. Not sure about the coupling 'plate' for later 90 models, but will check.

Btw, even then Tele-Elmar 135 mounts fine and and is very sharp, but anything else than infinity focus is hit and miss...

Alexander

[lct]

I have no coupling issues with any of my 90s (Summicron pre-asph, Elmarit v1, "Thin" Tele-Elmarit, Elmar, Macro-Elmar) but focusing accuracy is another story due to the short base length of the rangefinder. To get good hit rates, better stop down under f/2.8 or use a magnifier. No problem at infinity though.

[johnloumiles]

Thanks Xalo and lct for your input. Well I don't know if there is much else to be said on this subject but I would like to say I really liked vibe and info being shared in this thread as opposed to others in the forum where the post goes off the rails fairly rapidly.

[lct]

Hehe yes less derailments about discontinued non-Leica cams here, i wonder why.

[xalo]

Unlike most M lenses where a helicoid directly moves against the RF cam, some of the longer lenses like the 90s use a different system whereby it is a little 'plate' that pushes against the RF cam. It may be that the position of that 'plate' (not sure of the correct terminology) is not 100% compatible with the RF cam of the Epson RD-1.

 

Hi,

 

An update re/the Elmarit 90 (latest, E46 filter): I checked and it's also the helicoid that directly pushes against the Epson's RF cam. But, in comparison, the helicoid is of a larger diameter than the one of the 50/2 for instance, and situated closer to the inner wall of the lens mount. It therefore seems to push against the upper edge of the RF cam's disk, which has a little play; either it gets stuck there (the cam slips off) or pushes against the cam at a strange angle that blocks its action as soon as one tries to focus reasonably fast. Perhaps that's adjustable — might ask a dealer.

 

Besides, this thread made me re-try my 50/2 on the RD-1. Very carefully focussed, it seems not too far off and just beautiful. Anyway, nothing beats user error. Will take this focal length out more often.

 

Cheers,

Alexander

[Me Leica!]

This thread has been very interesting to me. Before, I was not at all interested in R-D1, only Leica, but this thread made me very curious.

 

Yesterday I found used R-D1 in same place as I tried M9 (different thread on M9 forum) and played with it for a bit. It is a bit bigger than Leica, but feel good to hold. Controls are at first very confusing, but once you can understand them they are not difficult. Shutter sound is kind of strange, too. It is not "loud", but it is "noticeable". But that's OK, if I want stealth camera I get Fuji x100.

 

What is same as Leica, is joy of using rangefinder system. Plus the dials on top plate are quite fun and easy to understand.And of course R-D1 has M mount so we can use those great lenses. I tried it with 50mm summicron...mmmmm.

 

Until now I thought that R-D1 is some kind of novelty camera, "OK, it was first digital RF, but as soon as M8 appeared then everyone forget it". But I look around online and see some very positive comments, and even that R-D1 is decent at high ISO, even up to limit of 1600...which M8 is not.

 

Plus, it is less than half price of the M8 and 8.2 in the same store. I am definitely tempted to try it out as alternative to Leica RF.

 

Thanks for this thread (although it was not made for me, it is useful:D

[menos I M6]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Until now I thought that R-D1 is some kind of novelty camera, "OK, it was first digital RF, but as soon as M8 appeared then everyone forget it". But I look around online and see some very positive comments, and even that R-D1 is decent at high ISO, even up to limit of 1600...which M8 is not.

 

The R-D1 had a really unlucky history in marketing.

Seen from Today's viewpoint, it's very only limitation in regards to Today's (!) digital RFs is the aging sensor (mainly it's limitation in print size due to only 6MP and the higher crop factor to APS-C format).

 

Even by Today's standards this ancient sensor stands it's own in high ISO capabiliites and tones, compared to the M8 sensor.

The M9 sensor improved a lot in those two points, that I would say, that it matches or slightly betters the R-D1 quality (pushed both files to ISO3200 and they are pretty much on par).

 

The R-D1 still has a following as of this quality and it's unique ergonomics, different from the Leica M, but not in a bad way, just "different".

 

Many (myself included) hoped for a long time, that EPSON would bring themselves, to give the go ahead of a full frame followup to the R-D1 with improved RF and refined ergonomics (cleaning up the design of the Cosina centric base further).

 

I bet, it would have a strong going next to a M9, if it performs in the same class. I understand though that with the track of the R-D1 project no manager at EPSON is willing to bet his white collar on a new RD - Japanese corporate people can be very, very conservative.

 

I loved my R-D1 and shot it mostly as a standard speed @ ISO1600, often pushing the files further to ISO3200 and ISO6400. Occasional low light shots could be even processed to ISO12800 (!) - mind you, this was before 2010, there was no Lightroom 3 with the very powerful noise handling and clean processing back then!

 

I used the EPSON pretty much as I shoot TriX 400 @ ISO3200 as a standard (no, it is not as grainy, as many people tend to believe - it is a very nice, clean film with a fine grain as a underlying structure).

I still have my R-D1, although not used recently - I just can't help myself, selling it ;-)

 

Here is one of my favorite shots during a conversation with the R-D1 and my back then all time favorite lens, a 50 Lux ASPH:

 

_EPS3778 by teknopunk.com, on Flickr

 

Times changing is a strange thing, I don't like the 50 Lux ASPH nowadays, but when looking back through these R-D1 photographs, …!

[Me Leica!]

I also wanted to ask, with the R-D1, is there any difference if you use a coded (6-bit) lens against one that is not coded? I do not really care so much about exif data and so on but are there problems with vignette, falloff, etc?

 

Edit : Nice picture, Menos!

[lct]

The R-D1 cannot read any code so coding your lenses will do no difference whatsoever. One of its weaknesses is the quality of its offset microlenses which are less efficient than those of the M8, resulting in more vignetting with some wides like CV 15 or 21.

[menos I M6]

I also wanted to ask, with the R-D1, is there any difference if you use a coded (6-bit) lens against one that is not coded? I do not really care so much about exif data and so on but are there problems with vignette, falloff, etc?

 

Edit : Nice picture, Menos!

 

Thanks … as the LCT wrote, the micro lenses are different.

This not only results in different behavior regarding light falloff and edge performance, but it also introduces some very weird behavior with certain lenses.

 

For example looked my 35 Cron ASPH like s…t on the R-D1, producing the most ugly coma flare around bright light sources and ghosts from light sources near the frame border, I ever saw.

 

To be fair, the 35 Cron ASPH shows this exact behavior (tested several samples regarding this) on film too, but in a very, very mild fashion.

 

On the M8 and M9 this behavior is strongly reduced, leaving mostly only the ugly triangular shaped ghost, when shot into bright light sources.

 

By contrast, the wider and as fast 28 Cron ASPH has been the most beautiful lens, I ever used on the R-D1, showing none of these issues.

I truly loved the 50 Lux ASPH back then on the R-D1, which has been just exceptional.

 

I will dig my R-D1 out, charge batteries (stored them at half charge) and shoot a little soon - fell in love with those B&W files again.

[steveclem]

Is the RD-1 (x) still a viable option for Leica glass? I've had my interest ignited due to the layout of it's analogue controls and the fact it accepts M series as well as other M mount lenses. I've been chewing over getting a used M8 but the price of an Epson seems very attractive for an 'older' camera body. I understand you can get software updates and although at 6mp it has it's limitations I for one won't be using giant blow ups for any reason I ask myself if I really need 10.1 mp etc? I will not be needing 1/8000 sec. or 32 sec for my needs but just a RF camera I can have a play with while I assess if I can adapt to the format from the SLR usage I've got used to over the years. I could buy an M8 and re-sell if it's not to my liking, could I do the same with the Epson? I looked here from a post in RFF but have no idea if this is a current price for an entire kit-if true it sounds like a bit of a deal really.

Apologies for hijacking this thread and bringing different camera manufacturers into the Leica house but I thought I'd look for the forums responses here firts.

It would be great to hear your views.

Steve

[stefano60]

hello,

 

i had posted a few months ago on this thread, mentioning that i used to have an RD-1 prior to switching to an M8.

i actually recently bought another RD-1 .... i really missed it. i still have my M8, and i find that it is a great back-up/complementary camera to it.

thanks to the different crop factor, i have a lot more 'range' from my lenses now, in fact doubling my options.... the 15 is about 20 on one and 23 on the other, the 40 is 52 or 60, the 50 is 65 or 75 ... etc. ....

the image quality is, in my mind, quite comparable and the high ISO performance is probably better from the epson.

 

get one, you will not regret it; if/when you feel like switching to an M8 you will not have a hard time selling it, they are getting harder to find in good shape and they also have a 'cult' following.

[steamboat]

You're probably going to do great with the R-D1. Me? My M8.2 is in for repairs. I foolishly borrowed an M9 to replace it. Less than a day and the M9 is growing on me. Fast.

[xalo]

For example looked my 35 Cron ASPH like s…t on the R-D1, producing the most ugly coma flare around bright light sources and ghosts from light sources near the frame border, I ever saw.

 

Recently I took the RD-1 out again with the CV 28/1,9 & tight hood after dark and found a similar behavior with city lights, without a filter (even the best ones can create ghosting etc. - which I found out late). The 28/1,9 is rather known for flaring, but now I wonder how much the interaction with the sensor is playing a role; I had seen similar things with my Leica 35/2 iv (with a filter).

Anyone with similar observations - and perhaps remedies (other than not including light sources in the frame ) ?

Cheers

Alexander

[lct]

Yes removing any filter, avoiding prone-to-coma lenses, enhancing those artefacts for their artistic value and... not including any light source in the frame especially those on edges of the latter.