[Leica] NOW R-D1 vs Fuji 400/800

[richard-lists at imagecraft.com (Richard)]

My experience with comparing my R-D1 with the M7/Nikon LS-40000/"Provia 
slides" full color managed workflow is that R-D1 offer the convenience and 
quality of digital. Meaning that the color is pleasant with nice and smooth 
gradation. Blowing up to 11x14 looks pretty good too, and in some cases, 
better than the M7. However, 6MP has less resolution than Provia scans and 
that's that. Most of the time it does not matter, but fact is fact.

I don't mind that I can't focus my 90/2AA accurately on the R-D1. I just 
don't use it. I do mind that the shutter is awfully loud, the frame lines 
are much less accurate, especially the bottom line, and the AE meter is not 
as good as the M7. Other than that, it's a fine (albeit expensive) camera.

Of course currently mine is in the Epson shop since the battery gauge 
refuses to move beyond the half full position. It does seem to be 
relatively common to hear people sending their R-D1 for repairs, so it is 
definitely a cause for concern :-(

At 02:02 AM 2/13/2005, Simon P-J wrote:
>...With my two respective digital workflows (R-D1 Raw or Polaroid SS 4000 
>into
>Photoshop CS and Epson 1280) I have to conclude that I can do much better
>with the R-D1 (at prints up to 14 x 11). By comparison, the SS 4000 combined
>with the Fuji films give some unpleasant noise/grain effects and limited
>dynamic range even on quite low contrast negatives. I'm sure a more
>up-to-date scanner would make a difference, but I wonder whether it would
>make enough difference for me to prefer it to the R-D1 output.
>
>I have had no problems focusing anything on my R-D1 at any distances -
>including 35 'lux, Noctilux, 75 'lux, and 90AA. I've been very pleasantly
>surprised that my proportion of in focus shots is similar to what I'd expect
>with M's when shooting people moving around in low light at relatively slow
>shutter speeds. I like the bright viewfinder and the 1:1 view. The very
>conservative frame lines play a nice psychological trick in that they at
>first exaggerate the effect of the 1.53 crop factor and then when you see
>that the actual shot covered quite a lot more it makes it seem that the crop
>factor is not so bad after all. The rangefinder patch itself is very far
>from M standards, having much less contrast, clarity and snap, and being
>very sensitive to the angle at which you peer through it. Nonetheless, for
>somebody experienced with rangefinder focusing it seems that it's perfectly
>possible to get it to work well enough even on the more difficult lenses.
>
>The worst and most un-M-like feature of the R-D1 is its shutter release,
>which has little feel and which has some confusing 'rules' that I haven't
>got to grips with. I don't think the shutter will fire unless you have
>already activated the meter by a half pressure on the release. So sometimes
>an immediate full pressure on the release results in nothing happening. And
>then, of course, there's also the fact that after every 3 seconds or so of
>rapid RAW shooting the buffer clogs up for a couple of seconds. All of which
>means that I find that about 10 percent of my attempts at the shutter
>release are frustrated. I get that shot a second or two after I wanted. Very
>un-M-like.
>
>However, I do find that the shortcomings of the shutter release are off-set
>in practice for the kind of photography I do most of the time (indoor
>available light of family and friends) by the fact that I feel free to make
>many more exposures than I would with film. Given the fact that the main
>factor that ruins shots of people at 1/15th to 1/60th is subject motion, I
>don't mind trading off a few moments missed due to the shutter release for
>the extra moments that I have a go at. Having said that, I wouldn't want to
>use the R-D1 for anything where specific moments really mattered, such as
>weddings.
>
>My first R-D1 (under 2000 serial#) had to be replaced because it started
>shooting about 20 percent black/blank frames. The replacement (over 3500
>serial#) has worked perfectly so far - both electronics and rangefinder.
>They obviously did have some serious quality control problems with the early
>batches.
>
>Simon.

// richard (This email is for mailing lists. To reach me directly, please 
use richard at imagecraft.com)