Dilemma - DP1 or RD-1?

Any rangefinder shooters considering the DP1 besides me? The $800 sticker on the DP1 makes it attractive, but I can't help but wonder if I'd be happier with a used Epson RD-1 (if I could find one). I have M-mount lenses, so that cost wouldn't be factored into a comparison.

Anyone care to offer up their opinion? I am looking for a small cam with excellent IQ that I can take everywhere. Can't do that with my DSLRs.

The DP1 has a killer imager but limited glass. The RD-1 has a solid but not spectacular imager (D70), its strength is that it can use killer glass (Leica M).

Thoughts?

Even if I had the $$ to spend on an RD-1 or a Leica M8, I still would choose the DP1 for its Foveon imager. To me, the IQ is the top concern, and from recent samples I've seen on this forum from an experienced SD14 owner (who knows how to process X3F RAW), it looks really good.

Glass-wise, I'm sure Sigma did a top job on the fixed FL 28mm lens.

At least, that's my 2 cents FWIW - ; - )

Take care.

Mark T.
Ocala, FL

Thanks. Like I said, I'm torn... IQ is imager -and- glass. I think the impact you get from the Leica glass is attractive, as is the impact the X3 imager provides. These benefits are vastly different and hard to compare directly, but they're the main points to compare and contrast IMO.

I guess if you aren't an enthusiast of M glass you may not understand my dilemma.

Hi uuroni, I have an RD-1 that I thinking of selling if you are interested. Its a really nice camera but I recently got an M8 and can't really justify keeping them both. I'm not sure what they're going for used these days but if you're interested I can check into it and get back to you offline.

Let me know,
Steve

uuronl said:

Anyone care to offer up their opinion? I am looking for a small cam
with excellent IQ that I can take everywhere. Can't do that with my
DSLRs.

The DP1 has a killer imager but limited glass. The RD-1 has a solid
but not spectacular imager (D70), its strength is that it can use
killer glass (Leica M).

Thoughts?

Click to expand...

There are a few aspects of this...

1) The DP-1 seems to have pretty killer glass of its own. It has great colors, and is really sharp edge to edge even at f4. Is even the leica glass you can get for the RD-1 really going to be so much better than that?

2) Compactness. The RD-1 in the end is not really a compact enough camera to carry in all but the largest pockets, while the DP-1 is more truly portable and carryable without a case. If you're looking to get a small camera to get away from cases, that would be a consideration.

3) To me the sensor is the start and the end of all discussion. Think of it this way, would you buy even a very nice camera knowing all you could even load into it was ISO 800 film? The difference is not quite as great as all that between the two cameras, but I would bet that even adding a TC on top of the DP-1 lens you would still get better image quality than the best the D-70 sensor can record no matter what glass you are using. Glass is only as good as the film (or sensor) behind it.

--
---> Kendall
http://InsideAperture.com
http://www.pbase.com/kgelner
http://www.pbase.com/sigmadslr/user_home

Here's my thinking:

The IQ in the DP1 is stunning. But, it's only got one lens.

Support the DP1 now, do your part to make it a success (even a cash cow) now, and Sigma will get to work on the DP2, with interchangeable glass. It's the obvious next step for the DP, but they won't take it if the DP1 isn't a success.

ammca66564 said:

Here's my thinking:

The IQ in the DP1 is stunning. But, it's only got one lens.

Support the DP1 now, do your part to make it a success (even a cash
cow) now, and Sigma will get to work on the DP2, with interchangeable
glass. It's the obvious next step for the DP, but they won't take it
if the DP1 isn't a success.

Click to expand...

I agree, if anyone wants to see a DP-2 to address any sortcomings they feel the current camera has - then buy a DP-1. Or buy three or four, or at least tell other people to buy them.

--
---> Kendall
http://InsideAperture.com
http://www.pbase.com/kgelner
http://www.pbase.com/sigmadslr/user_home

Kendall Helmstetter Gelner said:

uuronl said:

Anyone care to offer up their opinion? I am looking for a small cam
with excellent IQ that I can take everywhere. Can't do that with my
DSLRs.

The DP1 has a killer imager but limited glass. The RD-1 has a solid
but not spectacular imager (D70), its strength is that it can use
killer glass (Leica M).

Thoughts?

Click to expand...

There are a few aspects of this...

1) The DP-1 seems to have pretty killer glass of its own. It has
great colors, and is really sharp edge to edge even at f4. Is even
the leica glass you can get for the RD-1 really going to be so much
better than that?

Click to expand...

Yes. Also, the 28mm FOV screams "I'm a landscape camera", and that's not what I'd want to use it for. f4 is slow for the style of shooting I want to do.

Kendall Helmstetter Gelner said:

2) Compactness. The RD-1 in the end is not really a compact enough
camera to carry in all but the largest pockets, while the DP-1 is
more truly portable and carryable without a case. If you're looking
to get a small camera to get away from cases, that would be a
consideration.

Click to expand...

You would be really surprised. I have an R3A, the film cousin to the RD-1. It's plenty small for my requirements. Besides, everyone knows you wear a rangefinder on your neck...

Kendall Helmstetter Gelner said:

3) To me the sensor is the start and the end of all discussion.
Think of it this way, would you buy even a very nice camera knowing
all you could even load into it was ISO 800 film? The difference is
not quite as great as all that between the two cameras, but I would
bet that even adding a TC on top of the DP-1 lens you would still get
better image quality than the best the D-70 sensor can record no
matter what glass you are using. Glass is only as good as the film
(or sensor) behind it.

Click to expand...

I dunno, I've taken some stunning shots with my D70 - shots that have earned me money. We get caught up in what's new, but the D100, D70, D50 were -really- good cameras. Also, quite a few would argue that the lens is the start and the end of the discussion.

This guy has done some nice work with the RD-1

http://takahashi-design.com/blog/archives/60_creation_tools/79_epson_rd1s/

This is a good debate, but I think we fall on opposite sides of it.

Kendall Helmstetter Gelner said:

--
---> Kendall
http://InsideAperture.com
http://www.pbase.com/kgelner
http://www.pbase.com/sigmadslr/user_home

Click to expand...

Am in the very same boat as you and Ive decided to wait and see just how good this sensor is in a more thorough comparison as I want to "crop" the sensor to 35mm.You can still buy the epson new from Japan,a second hand one in excellent nick is going to cost more or less the same as a new DP1.Personally I use a 50mm almost exclusivly but Im prepared to go to 35mm as I do use this lens quite a lot as well. Ironically to get a 35mm view on the epson Id have to buy a 28mm and this is an influence on my thoughts as well.Its a tricky choice.

It may be of help to you in wading through the plethora of compliments on the foveon sensor that the majority of them come from people obsessed with the overal quality of the image(no bad thing)personally my interest comes from a search for colour fidelity,a few pixels either side make little difference to me.Hope this helps.

I own an R-D1 and am considering ADDING a DP-1. Don't see a time that I could replace it entirely, unless I choose to move my 35mm shooting back to film (in which case I'd buy an M6). Main reason is that I rarely use 28mm (I prefer 35 or 40 as a single lens solution) and I need low-light performance. Being able to use f/1.2 lenses on my R-D1 coupled with its decent noise-handling is its killer app for me. The push tests done on the DP1 are interesting but even with that push its still 3 stops slower than the DP1 at its fastest with an f/1.2 lens.

On the downside the R-D1 is big, and the build quality variable, and its longevity is questionable. Part of me would like to sell it now to pay for the D-P1 but I enjoy the flexibility of a digital rangefinder. Off on holiday next week and if I end up not using it and sticking with my film RFs then maybe it will go but for now I think I'll sell my Ricohs (GR1V & GR-D) to fund the DP-1.

you may want to wait a little while until the DP-1 is out and try it. The glass might just impress you

Hi,

I don't have a DP1 (does anyone yet?) but I do have a R-D1. I also have a 20D and GRD. Except for sport (20D) I use my R-D1 99% of the time. It has 'soul' and is a joy to use. It is unique (except for the M8) and there is a joy in using such an 'analogue' device. Before I used one I would not have thought that possible.

For those that have not used one, it is very difficult to even begin to debate it's finer points against a camera that is barely released and many years newer. I waited and waited for a DP1 then went back to film with a R3a and then found a RD-1.

So I will only talk about the camera I have used...

Firstly, don't fall into the trap of comparing this to a D70 in IQ. BTW, apparently the sensor is the same as a D100, not D70 and to some that is significant. The high ISO performance is the equal of my 20D with the 'sweet' spot being 800 iso. This is no 'D70'! Epson certainly have a very different set of software and electronics in operation here. The proof is in the images.

The 'Epson' colour is something special - I call it 'old school colour film'. It can be seen in the images and if you want to replicate the film look in a digital sense, this camera comes closest of anything I have used. But that is, off course, a subjective thing

I now have a range of good, well priced glass from voigtlander cosina that is as sharp as any L Canon prime, and several Russian lens that have a certain charm and flavour. And if you have the money, Leica lenses' speak for themselves. Don't under estimate the flexibility of changing lenses! And when I want that low light performance on goes the F1.4 Nokton.

Someone in the thread mentioned that sensor and glass is the only thing that matters. I can see where you are coming from but I must disagree. If a camera makes you want to take images and gives you great enjoyment whilst doing so, that's worth more to me.

Now some images,



Russian Jupiter 9 - a $100 85mm F2



40mm F1.4 Nokton



40mm F1.4 Nokton @ 800 iso



40mm F1.4 Nokton @ 400 iso



40mm F1.4 Nokton @ 800 iso



40mm F1.4 Nokton @ 1600 iso



40mm F1.4 Nokton @ 800 iso



21mm F4 Color Skopar @ 400 iso

Hope this helps.

Cheers,

John

--
http://johnmcd.zenfolio.com/

And can only agree with everythig you said.

Actually it's the R-D1 ergonomics and low light performace that stopped me upgrading to an M8 (at least for the time being).

With the R-D1 I can shoot all day without even looking at the LCD, and image quality goes well beyond the sensor quality, Epson has very little experience in building cameras (but probably the R-D1 was designed mostly by CV), but they really know about colour, and it shows.

All the controls and indicators clearly laid out in the top plate, and a spectacularly bright 1:1 viewfinder, makes it the ultimate digital image taking machine, Leica should have copied a bit more of the R-D1 ergonomics for their M8.

On the other hand quality control is patchy, and longevity is extremely dubious, so I would be very reluctant in getting an used R-D1 now, unless it's very cheap.

The entire production of 10000 has been sold now so there is no way of getting a new one either.

However deciding between the R-D1 and the DP1 depends on many factors.

The DP1 has superb IQ in good light and is really pocketable, but it's an autofocus camera instead of RF, has a slow fixed lens, and the performace in bad light isn't as good as the Epson.

The R-D1 has very good IQ under every lighting conditions, intechangeable lenses with very fast glass available, and hundreds of lenses to chose from (even cheap FSU glass can give excellent results), RF focusing, but is not pocketable, and less sharp in good light.

The availability of so much different glass, gives you the ability of changing the drawing of an image, in a way that no other system can match, every M system user knows how different the same picture can look taken with two different lenses even with the same focal lenght.

Certainly a 50mm summicron Asph, and a 3.5 50mm heliar give extremely different outputs despite being both superb lenses, and if you prefer a lower contrast, the drawing of the super cheap I61-LD is very good as well.

I see the two cameras complementing each-other rather than competing.

--
Ian Gianni

dmaclau said:

you may want to wait a little while until the DP-1 is out and try it.
The glass might just impress you

Click to expand...

I think this might be something to consider.

Sigma knows how to make lenses.

The DP1 lens is a purpose built lens, and so far the results look excellent.

And yes, I do have rangefinders and some CV and Contax lenses.

Richard

My small gallery: http://www.pbase.com/richard44/inbox

I was seriously thinking of buying the DP1 but your results from the Epson have knocked me out, I often thought about buying one but the financial situation made me go for the Ricoh GRD, I use it all the time, interchangable lenses too, I will have to start saving up and do some more street busking(I'm not kidding I am jazz clarinetist and have done a lot of busking in the past to get some cash, Stranger On The Shore is proftable!).

confused Barrie

Sent it to the email addr you have for your login here.

Thanks for posting the 40/1.4 images! I have the 40/1.4 S.C. Nokton and love it. Glad to see it does well on the RD-1.

Looks like a really cool camera that Epson. Bit too difficult to use for me but I really like it.

O.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ollivr/
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/ollivr/popular-interesting/

With any other digicam, you have to open a menu in the chimp screen, and find the right thing among countless options, half of which you'll never need.

With the R-D1 all essential controls and indicators are clearly laid out on the top plate, except for formatting the SD card, you may not need to turn on the screen ever.

--
Ian Gianni