epson rd-1

[ike k]

Anyone in the forum has use this camera yet? I read the review on lumnious landscape and

just curious on more people's experience with this camera, thanks all!

[joshroot]

How about searching? There have been a number of threads about the RD-1. Plus photo.net has a short review that is linked to from the front page (right hand side).

[ben marks]

I purchased one last week from B&H and I have spent the last week testing it with lenses from 25mm to 135 of various brands. The 50/2 Summicron and 90 Apo Asph can deliver jaw-dropping image quality, even on a 6.1 MP sensor. This is subject to a technical caveat detailed below.

 

Still to test are a Leica 24/2.8, 90/2.8 and 35 Summaron, a C/V 21/4 and 15/4.5, but I will be holding off any more snaps until the resolution of the following problem.

 

Not surprisingly, given the baselength of the rangefinder, lenses 75mm and longer are hit-or-miss close and wide open. But what surprised me is that the rangefinder in my sample is also out of allignment - it has about an inch of back-focus that can even make focussing with a 50/2 lens difficult when used for portraiture. (E.g. Focus on a ruler laying on the table at an oblique angle, focus on a chosen mark and then review the results to see where focus actually is--in my case an inch or so behind my best attempt to focus). I have repeated my results with several lenses. So off to Epson it goes tomorrow to get the RF tweaked. I hope they are up to it. Someone on the LUG whose R-D1 had a much worse back-focus problem than mine said that they just replace the camera. Hmmm.

 

Now with wider lenes, the back focus isssue doesn't matter so much, as long as you are not near the close focussing limits. With a 24, 28, 35 and so on you might as well be zone focussing anyway for objects in the middle of the focussing range. I have made very sharp pictures with the longer lenses (and even an acceptable image with a 50/1 wide open). But it took me a couple of tries to hit focus (this is when I started to investigate the back-focus problem . . . snapshots of rulers and mearsuring tapes and all of that). A 50 is my favorite focal length (even with the crop factor) so good performance with a wide-open 50 is a must for me.

 

Now, having said this, it isn't all buyer's remorese over here. Image quality on the camera is very nice. The RAW files have plenty of data to tweak. I found the 1600 setting quite usable with noise that is certainly better than the grain of film at a comparable sensitivity. I don't print larger than 11x14, so the 6.1 MP sensor is fine for now.

 

I would be happy to post sample pics if folks are interested. I never know what people can tell from those images at web resolutions anyway. Suffice it to say that I can count my daughter's (well defined) eyelashes in a portrait done with a 50 Summicron at about 4 feet. With the rangefinder wonky it takes a couple of tries, is all.<div></div>

[larry_kincaid1]

From the images I've seen, it looks like a digital camera of 6 megapixals or greater would benefit from Leica lenses. I can wait until they fix all the problems and perhaps up it to 8 or 10.

[ben marks]

Here is a snapshot at 1600 with the Noctilux at f1 handheld at 1/60. Note that I thought that I was focussing on the baby's closed eyelids (focus is actually on the cabling of grandmom's sweater.<div></div>

[ben marks]

Last one, I promise. This was taken with the C/V 35/1.2 at f2. I chose the best focus from a series of these.<div></div>

[fotografz]

Just used it along side the M7s for a wedding for the first time. Even tried a 75 Lux on it by

framing just outside the 50mm frame lines.

 

Interesting stuff at ISO 1600 when you set it plus 2 stops compensation (see sample

below). Also used a SF20 flash on A and set higher ISOs to get fill flash effects at higher

ISOs with wide open lenses.

 

Anyway, I like it... so it's in the wedding bag to stay.<div></div>

[paulr]

<a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00BJ6l">DAH Review</a> and other comments regarding the RD-1

[kevin m.]

"Now with wider lenes, the back focus isssue doesn't matter so much..."

<p>

Incorrect. It matters more.

<p>

The depth of field of wide angle lenses will tend to mask an out-of-adjustment rangefinder, but their shallow <i>depth of focus</i> will show up any misadjustment in the flange focal depth (the distance from the lens mount to the film rails) a.k.a. "back focus."

<p>

Conversely, longer lenses will show up rangefinder problems, but tend to mask misadjustment in the flange focal depth, as they have greater depth of focus.

[ed_schwartzreich]

Just a reminder. If you get no satisfaction from Epson about the focus issues, DAG knows how to fix it.

 

Ed

[ben marks]

Thanks, I do have that in the back of my mind. Thing is, I'd like not to blow the warranty on the camera if I can help it. If Epson isn't competent to do an RF adjustment, then DAG is definitely on my list.

[watts]

<i>The depth of field of wide angle lenses will tend to mask an

out-of-adjustment rangefinder, but their shallow depth of focus

will show up any misadjustment in the flange focal depth (the

distance from the lens mount to the film rails) a.k.a. "back focus."

</i><br><br>That's true but the RD-1 doesn't suffer from any

back focus issues - apparently, just misaligned rangefinders.

<br><br>Having owned and used one since early November, I

would be happy to recommend the RD-1. It's been pretty fautless

for me - certainly as far as focussing goes (for example, I now

routinely use my Noctilux wide-open with the RD-1) - though it's

not without it's idiosyncrasies.<br><br>A significant annoyance

for me is the way that the LCD preview operates. Firstly, it

doesn't come on automatically after taking a shot. Secondly, you

have to wait for the image to write to the card before you can view

the preview. Whilst I try to avoid 'chimping' all the time, one of the

obvious advantages with digital is the ability to check framing

and exposure on the spot, and the RD-1's implementation of this

feature is far from ideal. Compounding this is the fact that the

RD-1 always defaults to a 'bare' preview each time the camera is

turned on (i.e. it doesn't remember that you have previously been

using the histogram overlay or other 'custom' view).<br><br>The

second major annoyance I have with the RD-1 is that the shutter

release doesn't have priority in the way that, for example, a

Canon DSLR shutter release has. If you are viewing a preview

on the LCD, the shutter release requires two depresses in order

to fire - one to turn off the LCD preview, the other to fire the

shutter. Similarly, if the RD-1 goes into standby mode, the

shutter release becomes unresponsive and you have to wait a

second or two for the camera to spark back into action before

you can take the shot. The power save mode can be set to 20

minutes but I have still been caught out when taking a shot. For

me, the RD-1 should, as far as possible, always prioritise the

shutter release so that when I press it, the shutter fires. It is very

'un-Leica' to press the release and find that nothing is

happening.<br><br>As far as build quality goes, the RD-1 is

perfectly decent though not up to Leica standards. I recently

picked up one of my Leica M bodies after not having used one

for some months, and the Leica (with motor M attached) simply

feels much more solid in the hand. The Leica rangefinder is

also noticeably more refined than the RD-1 equivalent but

looking through a 0.72x finder does seems like rather a

backward step after having used a 1.0x finder for three months.

<br><br>All in all, the RD-1 works for me. You can argue the

merits of Leica v. RD-1, 35mm chrome v. 6MP digital, etc. and

the answers aren't necessarily black and white. The bottom line

for me, however, is that though I have the option of using a Leica

M6/M7 and/or a Canon 20D at any time, 90% of the time lately I

am choosing to use the RD-1 and a trio of M lenses (24, 35 and

50).

[mike_elek]

I thought "back focus" referred to issues (real or imagined) with autofocus lenses.

[chiswick_john]

"I thought "back focus" referred to issues (real or imagined) with autofocus lenses." backfocus (and front focus) is connected to any camera system where the actual plane of focus is not the same as the focusing point as seen through the VF. This can be present with AF systems, RF systems or ground glass focusing systems if the cameras or lenses (not with ground glass focusing systems) are not calibrated correctly.