On Feb 23, 2008, at 2:08 PM, Derby Chang wrote: >>> What lens are you fitting to the Epson RD-1? Has Cotty gotten to >>> you? ];-) >> >> I get to everyone.....eventually :) > > Yes, Mr Cottrell has gotten to me, and sooner than eventually. > > I've only had the RD-1 for a short time, but I love it so much, I fell > asleep with it last night. It came up quite "cheaply" at KEH so I > couldn't resist. The 1:1 finder is a revelation. Shooting with both > eyes > open is a totally different experience to looking through a SLR > finder. > And the quiet little "snick" of the shutter is so classy. > > Only have two lenses at the moment. The Voigt 35/1.2 which is superb, > but bulky, although I guess no more bulky than your average SLR prime, > and a Type 2 Leitz 90/2 which isn't all that suitable for the RD-1. No > 90mm framelines, and the RF baseline doesn't seem to let me focus > reliably, or that might just be me. Might need to get the Voigt 40/1.4 > as a walk around lens. > > I like the R2M as well. But hassle of scanning, and the occasional > shutter jam (which I know how to fix and avoid now) means I'll > probably > use it a lot less. > > No worthy RD-1 pics to post yet.
LOL ! Cotty's done a good job. :-) Me, although I love shooting with RF cameras, I was always more comfortable with SLRs and used my Nikon FM and Leica M4-P almost interchangeably. If Pentax would release a model with the smooth, quiet shutter of the Olympus E-1, I'd be real happy. > ... "the hassle of scanning" ... I brought home a handful of 35mm film strips from NY in January, documenting my mother's graduation from Fordham University in 1986. All typical Kodacolor 100 negatives. I finally got around to taking out the Nikon Coolscan IV and using the auto-feeder to scan them. They are old, stored in a little paper envelope only, so there was embedded dust and some scratches, I turned on the Nikon's dust and scratch removal stuff. 4 hours and 32 negatives later, the scanning job is done. The best of these look like what I get out of the K10D at ISO 400 with a little underexposure. I realize they're not the kind of negatives I would make ... my negatives scan to much better quality ... but that's still an awful lot of time and effort for the quality I see. Film is so dead. But they're priceless so what the heck. :-) G -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
