[Leica] Dodgy focus RD-1

[vroger at yahoo.com (V.Roger)]

Dear Howard:
Since my entire reason for buying a Leica mount
digital wd be to use my Canon 0.95 I think I'll join
you in waiting- vroger P.S. if you speak to Joe Yao-
give him my best regards-

Howard wrote:
On Friday, Nov 26, 2004, at 23:20 Asia/Hong_Kong, 
lug-request@leica-users.org wrote:
> Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 19:39:07 +0000
> From: Frank Dernie <Frank.Dernie@btinternet.com>
> Subject: Re: [Leica] Dodgy RD-1 focus (was Nikon's
profits tripled)
> Hii Ian,
> I suppose it could well be a duff example. Joseph
Yao said there have
> been delays in supply and Howard's R-D1 which I saw
in Hong Kong had 
a
> rangefinder which was off at infinity, and I believe
he had a long 
wait
> for a replacement, but the pictures from it seemed
great to me.
> Normally manufacturers check that their review items
are at the 
highest
> possible standard before submitting them.
> The reviewer was really enthusiastic about the
camera up to the point
> at which he was unable to reliably focus wide open.
> Perhaps I should take the plunge but haven't really
got the heart for 
a
> return saga if I am unlucky.
> Frank

Hi Luggers,
To follow up on Frank's remarks I have received a
replacement RD 1 for 
my original camera after a wait of 7 weeks. The
replacement's 
rangefinder still had misalignment at infinity. I took
it because I 
didn't want to wait any longer. It works quite well in
the close up 
range with all my lenses especially if set at f2.0
aperture or smaller 
up to 90mm (except the 90 cron - see below).  The new
RD1 focuses well 
wide open with the 35 Luxes - both Asph and non - Asph
(although my non 
- asph 35 summilux is so soft wide open that
determining whether an 
image is accurate at 1 meter is certainly in the eye
of the beholder! - 
but I love that lens for its bokeh!
:-)). My 50 Lux has its good focus moments wide open
in the close range 
- and sometimes its bad moments - depending on my
operator error. 
Please remember I  am at the tri-focal glasses stage
so I do have some 
trouble determining accurate focusing due to eye
sight.

In terms of longer lenses my 90 Elmarit works without
a problem, but 
the 90 Summicron is not accurate in the middle ranges
at all. It just 
does not focus well - period. Of course, if raked over
to infinity and 
ignore the rangefinder - it cuts beautifully clear
images on the CCD. I 
think one of the factors that needs to be considered
about the RD 1, 
and we all know about, is that the 1:1 rangefinder has
a limited 
base-line (38mm) and fast longer lenses just do not
have sufficient 
depth of field wide open to cover focusing errors.
Certainly I had a 75 
summilux that would not focus accurately with my M6HM
TTL - in my hands 
and with my eyes - despite sending the lens to Solms
to be checked and 
finally having the rangefinder replaced in the camera
- so I don't 
think we should expect focusing performance from the
RD 1 which defies 
the laws of optics. The other aspect about checking
focusing is that 
instead of waiting several hours for film to be
developed and printed 
or scanned - the instant  feed back of digital makes
it so much easier 
to verify at once whether a lens is in correct focus
or not - just 
shoot the pictures and down load the card to your
computer and look at 
the images full screen size. There is no possibility
of being confused 
about your picture taking notes several hours after
the fact!

With the help of instructions from Don Goldberg via Ed
Schwartzreich ( 
of LHSA Catalogue editing fame) - thanks Ed - I popped
the hot shoe off 
my new RD 1 (as I have done several times  with my
Bessa R2 in order to 
adjust it for perfect focusing - both close up and at
infinity) and 
proceeded to see if I could adjust the rangefinder to
produce a 
coincident image at infinity and maintain accuracy
also in close up 
focusing. In sum, after several hours and a couple of
hundred pictures 
downloaded and examined - for my camera you have a
choice: You can have 
accurate close up focusing without a coincident
rangefinder image at 
infinity and quite accurate close up focusing with
lenses of not more 
than 50mm focal length and apertures down to f1.4. In
this adjustment - 
at infinity the coincident images can be adjusted to
align horizontally 
but vertically the image in the rangefinder patch
comes close to but 
does not quite match the stationary image in the
finder. It stops just 
right of the stationary image. Alternately you can
adjust the 
rangefinder image to be perfectly coincident -
vertically and 
horizontally - at infinity but then ALL my lenses
front focus by 
several millimeters at 1 meter. So you have a choice,
especially if you 
want to shoot wide open most of the time, of either
reasonably accurate 
close up focusing and a less than perfect infinity
setting, or a 
perfect infinity and an inaccurate close up
performance. For me, I 
chose better close up performance, and will just have
to live with the 
lack of a coincident image in the rangefinder at
infinity. This pains 
me because, as you all know, I am picky about perfect
focusing. To add 
insult to injury - I was playing with Singapore Lugger
Roland Tan's 
recently acquired RD 1 - which is just two serial
numbers away from my 
camera - and its rangefinder performs perfectly - both
in the CU range 
and with perfect alignment at infinity - so I know
that the adjustment 
can be done - I just don't know how to do it!!
Until I picked up Roland's camera I thought the
rangefinder had a 
design limitation but now I'm not so sure.

Another comment: the focusing patch remains stationary
in the 
viewfinder and only the frame lines move to compensate
for parallax in 
the close up range. This means that at one meter you
are focusing not 
in the center of the image but in the upper left where
the rangefinder 
patch has remained stationary while the frame lines
have moved down and 
to the right. When you recompose after focusing this
may contribute to 
focusing error - especially when using longer high
speed lenses with 
little depth of field when wide open.

In summary, I still think Epson got much of its first
digital 
rangefinder effort right. The electronics are great,
the controls well 
thought out (for me anyway) the control of ISO speed,
white balance and 
B&W filtering indicates that photographers were
consulted in the design 
of the camera but - the rangefinder (or quality
control) is clearly 
compromised and that is too bad - because with a
better performing 
rangefinder the camera would be near to perfect as a
first effort and 
that would have been wonderful. Now I guess we will
have to wait for 
the RD2 model or see what the competition serves up
from Zeiss and 
Leica.

In the meantime I am going to stop testing and
adjusting and going to 
go out and take daytime pictures using my Panasonic LC
1 and reserve 
the RD 1 for night work with the 35 Lux Aspheric. At
ISO 1600 and f1.4 
that is a combination! And I can focus it!

Finally - I am certain Chaussers D'Image got a bum
sample and they 
should ask for another camera and run the tests again.
Bad form for 
Epson not to have checked the camera before handing it
over.


Howard ( frustrated in Hong Kong)