Just received my Voightlander 35mmf2.5 Color Skopar in the mail this morning. These are my first shots with this combo.
Yes, many people (including myself, of course) love the looks of the R-D1. It's a lot less expensive than a new Leica M9, but actually it's not cheap. The NIB units are posted for around $1200~$1500 for the body only in ebay or amazon. I paid $1200 for my used one although it did include a very nice CV40f1.4The rd1 is very flashy piece of gear! Even though it's ten years old, it's even more luxurious showing off that a leica! Remember when i spot some on the Streets (back in the day) it looks freaking expensive!
Great shots! I too have noticed that the R-D1 handles ISO 1600 quite well.literally just got mine yesterday. only time for a few local snaps, but im really liking the experience and am surprised by the results with my old leica summarit 50/1.5 (80mm adjusted). btw, last one is max iso of 1600/ss 1/30@f 2.
6mp sounds bad...but too many people today never shot film, especially 30-40 years ago. Move up from Panatomic-X to Tri-X and the grain really showed; move up to something like 2475 Tech Pan and you got grain the size of your thumb joints. And we printed them large...and we liked them.I went to visit a young guy who I became friends with a while back. He's a professional photographer but not a gear head. He was not familiar with the Epson but just loved it when I showed it to him. Obviously, for his work, the 6mp sensor wont work because he prints large photos, but he was very impressed with the B&W as well as the color rendition of the R-D1/CV35mm combo.
6-8 mp cameras sounds bad but I think its simply what has been fed to the general public in continuation of the rate race that started long ago. I started an RD-1 image thread on the sister site Leicaplace a while back with three images. All of them have been enlarged to 8x10 and one to 11x14.6mp sounds bad...but too many people today never shot film, especially 30-40 years ago. Move up from Panatomic-X to Tri-X and the grain really showed; move up to something like 2475 Tech Pan and you got grain the size of your thumb joints. And we printed them large...and we liked them.
The nicest digital files I've ever gotten out of a camera came from a cr@ppy M8 that I owned for years. I'm not trading my current Olympii for an RD-1 or an M8, but there is nothing wrong with what comes off the sensor, at least the raw files. JPG processing is another matter, but that's not how I use the cameras.
Yup. Even then, mpix count is really all not that important anymore. Its how the sensor handles noise at high ISO. I personally would have no problems choosing a 10mp camera that produces clean files at 128000 ISO over a 40mp camera that starts showing noise at 1600iso.the only time it really matters for most of us is high iso/low light photography or other exteme lighting situations.