Epson Digital Camera and Leica

[jack_belen]

Does the appearance on the scene now of the new Epson digital

rangefinder camera mean that the use of Leica M lenses will offer a

quality advantage over other digital cameras at that price level?

(Whatever that price level is.)

 

Thanks

[gerry_szarek]

Assuming the sensor has the same resolution as the Canon 10D you are limited to ~80 lines/mm (see www.normankoren.com for more info. Most descent lenses can do 80 in the center, the corners are where Leica should shine.

 

The other issue is how well corrected color wise are the lenses, I suspect the Leica ones are better than the competitors. This should be especially true at wide open apertures!

 

Gerry

[m_.]

I have just posted this article about the camera on the previous thread. Here it is again. <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/news/0403/04031101epsonrd1.asp">Epson Rangefinder</a>

[2yellowdogs]

Gerry,

 

You're right about any good lens doing well in the center. However, the edges - where Leica glass shines - aren't there on a 2/3 size sensor. You're always shooting in a given lens's sweet spot.

 

I still think Leica glass will show it's worth on a 6mp sensor, but the edges won't be where it happens.

[jamiew]

My initial reaction is that you will not notice much difference from the fact that it uses Leica lenses. This appears to use the same 6mp Sony chip as the Pentax *istD and Nikon D70, D100. Assuming this camera is no more than $1500 (any more and it's being marked up only because Epson figures they can ream M mount users), I want to get this with a 12/15 and one other lens to be my wide angle/ light travel setup. If it is more than $1500 then I digital rebel is way way better at this point in time.

[johnmarkpainter]

Jamie,

 

I couldn't disagree more....(and I could be wrong). You are just thinking about resolution

and not about Character and Aesthetic. My lenses have a very distinct look to them and I

think that that look will also show up on a Digital camera.

 

I have a D100...my old Nikon AI lenses look different than a new AF D Lens. Should I be

surprised?

 

jmp

[tom_swanson]

>>(any more and it's being marked up only because Epson figures they can ream M mount users)<<

 

Safe bet.

[dayton_p._strickland1]

If they follow current digital camera pricing standards they will

triple the price of the film-equivalent camera. If you shoot tons of

film or have a need to change ISO in the middle of a shoot, prefer

being able to white-balance in camera instead of post

processing or have a need for speed then it will be worth $1,500.

[m_.]

By the spec., I think it will be cheap for $1500. I imagine this is going to be a lot more.

[martin_davidson1]

I regularly use Leica R lenses on my Canon 10d, alongside Canon (some "L") and I still notice how well they perform. I use 35 Summicron R, 60 Elmarit Macro, and 135 Elmarit. They are hard to focus mind you; the DSLR viewfinder is really NOT designed to assist manual focus. But they work for me.<div></div>

[martin_davidson1]

And this...

 

Whether this will hold with M's on a consumer digicam, I dont know. But I recommend the route I took for those who want to do a hybrid.<div></div>

[christopher.]

I think its great. I also think if epsonosina prices it less than the D2, most would be smoking crack not to pick one up over the Leica.

[jamiew]

Someone mentioned using a Notilux on the new camera. From the article on dpreview it looked like there is going to be a physical linit to the sized lens you can use. I dont know the details though.. time will tell..

 

As for this comment "By the spec., I think it will be cheap for $1500. I imagine this is going to be a lot more." I need to ask what specs. This is a $500 Bessa R2 with the digital sensor from a $1000 Nikon DSLR (D70). Add in some money to cover a bit of R&D costs and you have a camera that should be no more than 1500 tops. Like i said before through.. they are gonna read the leica RF faithful... but the leica RF faithful are used to it.. and I think like it.

[jamiew]

i said read.. U meant ream

[m_.]

Jamie: If Leica M7 sells for $2400, the Epson R-D1 offers everything M7 offers (AE and manual control), I would think $1500 is not too much. This does not necessarily mean I will buy though. I am still happy with my M6.

[msitaraman]

Hmm, many will have to shell out coin for a 24mm lens as well (35 mm equiv).

 

I wonder if the viewfinder is the same as that in the Cosina/Voigtlander. If it is (i.e. the entrace pupil is the same size) the image should be quite a bit dimmer. If not, hooray!

 

Amazing too that a 1.0x finder can show a 28mm frame. Eye relief must be massive.

 

As for the effective base length of the viewfinder I think it just equates to the CV viewfinder x 1.5, which is not too bad, but not in M camera territory. This is likely sufficient with the short focal length lenses this C sensor camera is going to be used with.

 

No doubt it goes off with the ghastly clack of the CV shutter, formerly the Nikon FM 10 cheapo shutter. But I'm not complaining. These guys are innovative.

 

As for Leica itself, they have not come up with a single mechanical improvement to their camera in 40 years. Not one. Obviously, the precision mechanical engineering talent at Leica (on the M camera side) is long extinct. Since the M5, its all been grafting PCBs into the narrow spaces inside the 1964 M4 body.

 

Serves 'em right.

 

But I do love their lenses...

[patkane]

I've been hearing $2500-3000, not $1500. I'd buy one at $1500 to have such a different alternative to my 300D.

[olivier_reichenbach]

Jamie, a digital camera is much more than just a body and a sensor. There's a

lot of computer science and digital technology in there. This is one of the reasons

megapixels are only part of the whole deal. And there is much more to the Epson R-

D1 body than a Bessa R2. Just consider the LCD screen and controls, all the digital

settings on top of the photo settings, EVF, etc...

[jamiew]

Wentong.

 

If you re-read my post you will see I said that 1500 is what it should cost. The Leica M7 with AP costs 2400, but this is based on a Bessa R2, a $500 camera. The D70 is based on a $300 camera. It costs $1000 about a three time markup. I expect the Bessa could not be that cheap, so $1500 is reasonable.

 

And oliver... I have no idea what you are talking about. It's not like I said it should sell for the same as a Bessa R2.

[olivier_reichenbach]

Jamie, you said:

 

 

«As for this comment "By the spec., I think it will be cheap for $1500. I imagine this is

going to be a lot more." I need to ask what specs. This is a $500 Bessa R2 with the

digital sensor from a $1000 Nikon DSLR (D70). Add in some money to cover a bit of

R&D costs and you have a camera that should be no more than 1500 tops.»

 

You seemed to evaluate a faire price for the R-D1 by adding the cost of a Bessa R2

($500) to the cost of the sensor in a 6 meg DSLR ($1,000), plus some money for R&D,

for a total of «no more» than $1,500. I

just obeserved that there was much more in the R-D1 than just a film body and a

sensor, so the price should be much higher the $1,500.

[jamiew]

Oliver.

 

I was comparing it to a D70. I would assume that the less than $1000 difference between it and it's film SLR brother include all the other stuff that goes into a digital camera or else the thing wouldn't work. Actually in the cast of the D70 that $1000 happens to include everything. I am adding the $500 because Epson has a niche product. If it sells for more than that then either Epson has some production issues, or thye are reaming people.