[Leica] RD-1 and M8 (giddy, somewhat long)

[benmarks2005 at gmail.com (Benjamin Marks)]

The following is an edited version of a post to the RFF of earlier today.
Thought it might be of interest to the LUG.

---

I am a current owner of an Epson RD-1 and a new owner of a Leica M8, now for
a little less than a week. Take the following comments with a grain of salt
as I am really enjoying the M8. I am trying to decide whether to keep the
RD-1 now that I have the M8. It is interesting -- the cameras seem to do
well with different lenses. Acceptable focusing accuracy (and by this I mean
- don't need to fiddle - just focus and shoot) is as follows.

M8 - 50/35/75/90 Summicrons, Noctilux, 75 Lux, 50 Asph, 50 Summitar
RD-1 50/35 Summicrons, 40 Nocton, 50 Asph, 50 DR, CV 28/1.9

Back/front focus with M8 (preliminary): CV 28/1.9, 135/2.8 (w/goggles), 50
Summarit, Canon 50/1.5 (screw mount)

Both cameras like a J-8 with an adapter. Oddly the M8 doesn't seem to like
the 40 Nocton wide open, jury is still out on the CV 35/1.2. The CV 15 is a
blast on the M8, as it behaves like a true wide. I will be taking the 24
Asph out into the streets at lunchtime and see what's up there on the M8.
The 50 Summitar is just plain fabulous on the M8. M8 won't mount the Dual
Range Summicron -- or rather it mounts but won't focus; in contrast my RD-1
just loves this lens - bang on focus and a really nice look. My RD-1 just
won't get along with the 75 Cron, the 75 Lux, the Noctilux, the 135/2.8 -
these lenses really challange the rangefinder baselength of the RD-1 and I
can work with them, but only by calculating focus error and then trying to
compensate in the VF with a static subject -- not really RF photography at
its best.

I have been using the M8 with the 1.25 multiplier permanently attached. It
does very well in low light with fast lenses. I have some good low-light pix
with the RD-1 and the Noctilux, but my image-to-image ability to focus is
hit and miss. The biggest difference in how it feels to shoot with the
cameras, for me, has to do with the larger buffer size of the M8; I really
appreciate the 10 image buffer on the Leica in comparison with the RD-1's 3
picture limit.

M8 at its best (ISO 160, steady support) is capable of image quality I once
could only get by moving up a negative size or two from 35mm (think Hassie
with 400 speed film). I really feel like I have moved up a level in terms of
what my Leica glass can do. At higher ISOs I might go with the RD-1 -- I am
still feeling my way with regards to noise suppression software on both
cameras. Very preliminarily, my feeling is that RD-1 at 800 is equal to or
better than M8 at 640, but the jury is really still out on this.

Build quality -- too early to tell really. I have an M2 and two M3's and a
couple of Rolleiflexes as well as some early Nikons -- now those have build
quality that has been proven by 40-50 years of service. Will either of these
digital cameras (M8/RD-1) be clicking away in 50 years? I laugh at the
thought of it, given the technological cul-de-sac we seem to be charging
down pell-mell with digital. It is frickin' insane to think that today's
digital cameras with their short product cycles, dependence on odd-shaped
specialty batteries and specialty software, LCDs and tiny flat panels and
image file compatibilty/grandfathering issues will have anything like the
durability of manual cameras machined from brass. Of course, you need
something to load into the M2, and blah-blah-blah. Rant off. Build quality
on the M8 _feels_ superior to the RD-1, but neither of these babies is a
Canon A-1, a Nikon F3 or an M3, if you get my drift.

Battery life seems marginally better on the M8 than on the RD-1.

Overall, image quality nod goes to the M8, but it is evolutionary rather
than revolutionary in the move from 6 to 10 MP, particularly at an 8x10
print size. Note that I tend to use the higher ISO as a default and noise
from the sensors may be obscuring real differences in terms of ability to
blow up images to poster-size.

I should also add that the metering on the M8 seems pretty good based on
in-camera histograms and double-checking in PS "Levels". My RD-1 has a 2/3
stop underexposure bias when set to auto. Odd, that.

RF patch in the RD-1 is tilted off of square a couple of degrees in the VF.
M8 VF is of comparable quality to M7, M6 etc. Leica really knows what they
are doing in terms of bright, contrasty viewfinders. With the RD-1 and a 50,
I have learned that I need to bump the top of the subject's head right up
against the top frame line (or even clip a little hair) to have the subject
appropriately placed in the actual frame. No such issue with the M8. Also: I
rather like the quality of the files (16-bit TIFFs) from Epson's native RAW
conversion software. I have not bothered to load the software that came with
the M8, trusting to either C1 LE (still a bit of a mystery . . . where do
those processed files go, actually? Sometimes, I can't find 'em - user
error, no doubt) or Adobe Camera RAW.

Shutter noise - same-same, but different. RD-1 is more plastic-y/spring-y;
M8 is more motor-y.

IR issue - I don't get it. At least not yet. Last night, just on a lark, I
took a close-up picture of chicken cooking on a black gas-grill. Absolutely
brimming with IR (or at least it should be- I could feel the heat on my
face). No purples. Hmm. Guess I'll have to track down someone who is dressed
in shiny black nylon to see if I can get a case of the purples.

So to conclude: deliriously happy with the purchase of the M8; but having
said that, the M8 and RD-1 seem to compliment rather than compete with each
other. I wish I understood the RF compatibility issues in a way that made
sense. Which lens works best on which camera seems a bit random. (50/1.4,
40/1.4 work great on my RD-1 when wide open; 40/1.4 has yet to blow me away
on the M8 -- does this make sense?)

Oh: and on my one quick grab shot of my sunset-drenched back yard, I noticed
no particular light falloff issues with the CV 15. Hmm. No lens detection,
no coding, no IR cut filters. Actually considering a set of IR-pass filters.
. . any recommendations?

Giddily,

Ben Marks