Is the RD-1 headed for a nosedive?

[tbarker13]

Obviously we've talked a lot about how the M8 and M9 will be impacted by the arrival of the Fuji Xpro-1.
But I really wonder how the Epson RD-1 will fare. Let me say right up front that I love the RD-1 when I owned it. Liked it better than the M8 in some regards.
But I wonder how many potential RD-1 buyers are now holding those same funds and waiting to see how the Fuji performs. If it does do well, I could see it really pushing down the sales prices on the Epson.

[kshapero]

I thought this too. But it is not a given. So far all the posers have been digital rangefinder look a likes. I mean really, (I ought-ta know I had one) does anyone really consider "focus peaking" a rangefinder experience? Etc, etc. So far the R-D1 and the M8/9 are the only digital rangefinders out there. So we will see how Fuji does. But (my final word on this) IMHO, the Fuji X100 (I had this, too.) sucks because the manual focus sucks. Maybe I am on old purist. Maybe.....

[TVR]

well if it does...so be it but the people who have one now probably dont care about the value they just enjoy using it, if we valued all our gear as a stock shares we wouldn't have as many cameras or enjoy photography....just remember when you buy a new car as soon as you have left the lot it has already lost some value

[dreilly]

How will you focus M-mount lenses on the new Fuji? Sure, frame lines will be neat to see projected in an optical viewfinder, but will there be focus confirmation, and how good will that be? Focus peaking would be via live view, which means the full EVF. In which case it's the same as a GXR and a Nex 5n. I've had both of those cameras and MF isn't bad in either case, just different. But I'm not sure I see where the new Fuji does something different, or better. Maybe I'll be surprised.

[tbarker13]

Certainly true for those who crave the rangefinder focusing experience. For those who just want a small camera, however...

I suspect a lot will depend on the quality of the Fuji lenses. If they are competitive with Leica, Zeiss and Voigtlander, that may be enough for some people.
I'm not suggesting the market for an RD-1 will vanish overnight. But this could remove some of the demand.

[back alley]

i've wondered the same thing...but i have no idea where the price will go...it might go up if people don't like the new fuji!
i wonder about the fuji pro...it looks, and if like the x100, will feel like a rangefinder but it's not.
if the fuji lenses are not up to expected snuff...the whole thing falls apart.

the rd1, weather folks want to agree or not, is a special machine, a unique machine that produces unique and beautiful images...i am finding there is no price that can be set for that.
i just bought a d90, nice machine and i love the new 40 i put on it...but the images are not nearly as beautiful as the rd1 produces. skin tones are dreadful for one, all mottled...

ok, rambling here...if the price on the rd1 drops like a rock i will buy a few more...maybe one for each lens...hmmm, i'll need a new bag then...

[kermaier]

Ha! "new bag".... :)
I'm with you, Joe -- if r-D1 prices tank, I'll pick up another one on general principles.
::Ari

[chris00nj]

Well, I am fully film right now, but with 2 kids now, processing has become more difficult with limited time so I'm feeling some internal pressure to go digital.

The R-d1 seems rather nice (minus the crop factor), but $1200+ still seems a bit steep for a 7 year old digital camera with a 6MP sensor. I don't think I'd go for it for more than $600-$700.

The Ricoh is newer with a better sensor for about the same price, but I don't know how focus peaking works and would want to try it before I bought it. Unfortunately, I don't think any store carries Ricoh here.

Bottom line, is that I think I'll be with film for some more time.

[Jamie Pillers]

Already seeing some RD-1 prices around $1100, down from last year's $1500.

[Lss]

I wonder how many potential RD-1 buyers are now holding those same funds and waiting to see how the Fuji performs.
There are already more than half a dozen crop sensor camera bodies that can take M mount lenses and are more modern than the R-D1. From what we know so far, the only new thing on the X-Pro1 is the hybrid viewfinder. Since Fuji has kept their mouth shut about the possibilities of using the optical viewfinder in any effective way with adapted lenses, it is safer to assume that these lenses will be best used via the EVF. If this really is the case (which we obviously do not know for sure), the X-Pro1 offers nothing new for the rangefinder user looking to use their LTM/M lenses. It is however probably a better camera in some other ways than some (all?) of the existing competition, which may be enough to pull some potential R-D1 users towards the Fuji instead. Surely any new camera may have that effect, and the Fuji seems very interesting and capable in its own territory. That territory is not digital rangefinders using M mount.

[huntjump]

R-D1 is a great camera. Enough said. Whether its worth $[fill in blank] is up to each user, how much the user wants a digital rangefinder that takes your m-glass, and how much they value the newer sensors. Whether that's $600 or $1200, doesnt matter to me, except if it does hit $600, i most surely would want a second.

I'd consider buying the fuji, but just want to wait and see about the manual focus.

[Mr_Flibble]

I'm with you, Joe -- if r-D1 prices tank, I'll pick up another one on general principles.


+1.

Would be nice to have a back-up R-D1 for a nice price.

[jsrockit]

But I wonder how many potential RD-1 buyers are now holding those same funds and waiting to see how the Fuji performs. If it does do well, I could see it really pushing down the sales prices on the Epson.

I would gather that there aren't many since there aren't that many used Epsons on the market. To me, if you want the Epson, you are looking at it because you like the fact that it is closest thing to a film camera in the digital world. It's so outdated (note: I didn't say not useful) that you truly have to love the camera to be considering it these days. There is no reason to otherwise bother with the Epson if you are just looking for any old camera to stick your lenses on.

[jsrockit]

From what we know so far, the only new thing on the X-Pro1 is the hybrid viewfinder.

AND that is a big "new thing."

[FranZ]

I sold my Rd-1s because I couldn't focus at max aperture due to an anomaly in the retina of my right eye. For me my X100 is a Godsend, the Pro-1 even more!
Don't care the manual focus sucks, X100 autofocus is good enough for everything I shoot (It focuses on humans properly at F2/3200 ISO 1/10th of a second) which is, in itself pretty amazing, with very good IQ.

[kshapero]

i've wondered the same thing...but i have no idea where the price will go...it might go up if people don't like the new fuji!
i wonder about the fuji pro...it looks, and if like the x100, will feel like a rangefinder but it's not.
if the fuji lenses are not up to expected snuff...the whole thing falls apart.

the rd1, weather folks want to agree or not, is a special machine, a unique machine that produces unique and beautiful images...i am finding there is no price that can be set for that.
i just bought a d90, nice machine and i love the new 40 i put on it...but the images are not nearly as beautiful as the rd1 produces. skin tones are dreadful for one, all mottled...

ok, rambling here...if the price on the rd1 drops like a rock i will buy a few more...maybe one for each lens...hmmm, i'll need a new bag then...Agree on all points. We shall see.

[richardhkirkando]

I thought this too. But it is not a given. So far all the posers have been digital rangefinder look a likes. I mean really, (I ought-ta know I had one) does anyone really consider "focus peaking" a rangefinder experience?
I'd say that focus peaking is a "Nikon F3 w/ waist level finder and H screen" experience. It works really well for what it is, it's just different.

[rbelyell]

I So far the R-D1 and the M8/9 are the only digital rangefinders out there. So we will see how Fuji does. But (my final word on this) IMHO, the Fuji X100 (I had this, too.) sucks because the manual focus sucks. Maybe I am on old purist. Maybe.....

totally agree that if one wants the RF experience outside of leica, the only digi alternative is epson, though imho it is way overpriced at the now going rate of $1400+usd. that being said, and that being the definition, the fuji CANNOT compete because it will NOT be a RF! the fuji will compete with the ricoh and nex7 as incredibly high quality mirrorless digi- cams that can accomodate M and M39, among almost all other, lenses. for those who want the RF experience that's really the beginning and end of the analysis. why do we keep demanding of these tools things they are expressly not designed to give?! the pro x1 is NOT a RF.

and btw, NEITHER IS THE X100! please stop erroneously complaining about this incredible camera because it does not do what it was NOT INTENDED to do, simply because you WISH it were so intended! the x100 is a compact autofocuse camera, thats it! its not a RF or any other kind of manual focus tool. to keep complaining that its MF 'sucks' is like complaining about how difficult it is to cut down a tree with a chainsaw when the motor's off! a chainsaw is NOT INTENDED to work with the motor off, and the x100 is not intended for manual focus and the x pro1 is not intended to be a RF. what is so difficult about these comcepts?

[little jack]

i don't see the rd-1 as overpriced at all. They are a damn collectable. First M digital- and very cool analog readouts. Wonder how long they will last?

[willie_901]

I doubt Fuji will implement a practical method to use the XP-1 in manual focus mode with analog lenses.

I don't see how the XP-1 will have any affect on RD-1 prices. People who own M and LTM lenses and need/want an optical finder only have three digital options.

[tbarker13]

totally agree that if one wants the RF experience outside of leica, the only digi alternative is epson, though imho it is way overpriced at the now going rate of $1400+usd. that being said, and that being the definition, the fuji CANNOT compete because it will NOT be a RF!



But that's only true for rangefinder purists. For those just looking for a smaller camera, it's very much a competitor. Especially if it turns out to be any good.

The RD-1 is a cool camera. But like all digital cameras, it's aging is going to be an accelerated thing. The fact that they've been holding in the $1,500 range for so long is a testament to the strength of the camera.
But we know rangefinder users represent a niche market. And it doesn't take a lot of depressed demand to have a big impact on a niche market.

[tbarker13]

I don't see how the XP-1 will have any affect on RD-1 prices. People who own M and LTM lenses and need/want an optical finder only have three digital options.

That may be. But you leave out the possibility that there are people who use M and LTM lenses because they like a small camera system (regardless of how it focuses). If the new Fuji lives up to its hype, I don't see any reason to think there won't be people who jump from one system to the other. But whether they will be many or few, remains to be seen.

[rbelyell]

youre totally right tbarker, that really was my point in quoting what i did and tesponding to it. if you want the RF experience youve got leica and epson, period, so dont look to the fuji, and thus fuji will not effect rd1 prices.

if you dont care about the RF experience but just want a great place to shoot your M/M39 lenses, than fuji might be for you, but so is ricoh (also w/o AA filter) and nex7, so again, no effect on rd1 prices.

more globally, i was pleading with RF desirers to please not expect and therefore put down the x pro 1 because it doesnt replace your rd1--its not intended to do so.

at the end of the day, imo, people holding on to 6mp non serviceable technology, or who would consider buying such a tool, do not do so for size or any other reason besides wanting a real digi rangefinder. as such none of the nonRF mirrorless cams are rd1 'competitors'. if they were rd1 prices wouldve crashed after the very well reviewed ricoh m module.

[tbarker13]

Obviously, we can only speak for ourselves. But I'm one user who was considering another RD-1, but have now pre-ordered one of the Fujis.
So that's at least one less person keeping prices up on the RD-1.;)

The other cameras you mentioned have no appeal to me. Partly because I believe they are just plain ugly. And I refuse to shoot without a viewfinder.

I shot with an X100 for a while. It was enough of the "rangefinder experience" for me - a person who has been using Leicas for 20 years. I think we sometimes get caught up in what we each seek out in a camera.
For you, a rangefinder may mean manual focusing and Leica lenses.
To me it means a high quality camera in a compact package.

Sometimes, when I want a coke, I grab a Dr. Pepper - and am quite happy.

My point, is that the word "rangefinder" doesn't mean the same thing to everyone. Obviously there is an actual definition of what makes a rangefinder. But in practical everyday usage, that definition means little.

[jsrockit]

My point, is that the word "rangefinder" doesn't mean the same thing to everyone. Obviously there is an actual definition of what makes a rangefinder. But in practical everyday usage, that definition means little.

Even here on the rangefinder forum? :eek:

[Paul T.]

at the end of the day, imo, people holding on to 6mp non serviceable technology, or who would consider buying such a tool, do not do so for size or any other reason besides wanting a real digi rangefinder. as such none of the nonRF mirrorless cams are rd1 'competitors'. if they were rd1 prices wouldve crashed after the very well reviewed ricoh m module.

Have you considered different people might have different opinions? It's a staggering fact but it could be true.

I owned an R-D1 but sold it because I had a tax bill. I liked the camera, as I do, say, my Hexar AF, and my Leica. It's the lenses, the compactness and the overall feel that are the deciding factors for me - overall ergonomics, and , just as crucially, the end result. How the focusing is achieved is just one factor. How good, in terms of reliabiity and speed, the focusing, another factor. AM I bothered if the XPro1 is AF? Not really. Am I bothered if it's fairly poor AF? Yes.

Overall, I reckon there are so few Epsons out there, compared to the number of buyers, that if the Fuji takes away 15 per cent of potential buyers, the price will only slip marginally. I say that as someone convinced, a couple of years ago, that the price would drop - I wuz wrong.

So I reckon the price will hold for year or three - but once it reaches a tipping point, perhaps when second hand XPro1s come on the market, it will drop bigtime.

(But I reserve my right to be wrong)

[thegman]

I think it'll drop when they get to a certain age, and start to fail. All electronics have a lifespan, and once they start to be considered unreliable, temperamental, or unserviceable , then I think the value will drop considerably. It's on worth $1200 if it's not a paperweight, and they'll be paperweights eventually, unfortunately.

[robbeiflex]

I agree that there are few enough of them out there that a small number of rangefinder "purists" is enough to keep the price up. I have never tried one, but struggle to name any other 7 year old 6 mp camera that people are willing to pay so much for, so there must be something special about it. I don't see how yet another substitute that is not a direct competitor will change that. If I'm wrong, then oh well, I'll just have to pick one up on the cheap.

[rbelyell]

Obviously, we can only speak for ourselves. But I'm one user who was considering another RD-1, but have now pre-ordered one of the Fujis.
So that's at least one less person keeping prices up on the RD-1.;)

The other cameras you mentioned have no appeal to me. Partly because I believe they are just plain ugly. And I refuse to shoot without a viewfinder.

I shot with an X100 for a while. It was enough of the "rangefinder experience" for me - a person who has been using Leicas for 20 years. I think we sometimes get caught up in what we each seek out in a camera.
For you, a rangefinder may mean manual focusing and Leica lenses.
To me it means a high quality camera in a compact package.

Sometimes, when I want a coke, I grab a Dr. Pepper - and am quite happy.

My point, is that the word "rangefinder" doesn't mean the same thing to everyone. Obviously there is an actual definition of what makes a rangefinder. But in practical everyday usage, that definition means little.

no, not me, i could care less about the RF experience, i just care about the end result. there was another thread recently about the 'fair cost' or 'going rate' of the rd1. my thought was $1400+ was ridiculous given the alternatives of ricoh, nex7, coming xpro1. this was roundly decried by rd1 users because these alternatives were not true ramgefinders. i concluded, given the imo ridiculous prices, they were correct in their analysis or the prices wouldve already plummeted post ricoh and nex7. the ricoh has no AA filter and optional evf, and is optimized for M lenses. the nex7 has great vf and tons of resolution. whats the xpro1 gonna have for M users that these dont?

[rbelyell]

Have you considered different people might have different opinions? It's a staggering fact but it could be true.

I owned an R-D1 but sold it because I had a tax bill. I liked the camera, as I do, say, my Hexar AF, and my Leica. It's the lenses, the compactness and the overall feel that are the deciding factors for me - overall ergonomics, and , just as crucially, the end result. How the focusing is achieved is just one factor. How good, in terms of reliabiity and speed, the focusing, another factor. AM I bothered if the XPro1 is AF? Not really. Am I bothered if it's fairly poor AF? Yes.

Overall, I reckon there are so few Epsons out there, compared to the number of buyers, that if the Fuji takes away 15 per cent of potential buyers, the price will only slip marginally. I say that as someone convinced, a couple of years ago, that the price would drop - I wuz wrong.

So I reckon the price will hold for year or three - but once it reaches a tipping point, perhaps when second hand XPro1s come on the market, it will drop bigtime.

(But I reserve my right to be wrong)


of course individual rd1 owners may have unique reasons for owning/buying them. i was speaking in generalities, amd generalities are not rendered generally untrue because there are a few exceptions. the question was will fuji cannabalize rd1 pricing, and generally my opinion is no, because the ricoh m module hasnt, the nex5n and 7 hasnt, and there is nothing unique to the xpro1 that should effect that when the others didnt. the only logical reason, imo, that ricoh or nex7 didnt effect rd1 price is because MOST, not all, rd1 owners or wannabes want the true RF experience.

[uhoh7]

I think the floor is a grand. Aside from the odd steal I doubt you will EVER see them go for less.

The reasons already well covered here.

If you see one for 1100 in good shape, you just can't loose.

[tbarker13]

I think the floor is a grand. Aside from the odd steal I doubt you will EVER see them go for less.

The reasons already well covered here.

If you see one for 1100 in good shape, you just can't loose.

"Ever" is an awfully bold statement in the world of consumer electronics.
Even without the Fuji, I'd bet we'll see them for $600 to $700 within 2-3 years. Soon the M10 will push down the price of the M9, which will push down the price of the M8.2, which will push down the price of the M8, which will push down the price of the RD-1.
None of that will ever change the fact that RD-1 is a great camera. But even being a great camera won't save it from this fate.

[tbarker13]

whats the xpro1 gonna have for M users that these dont?

For one thing, the Fuji's physical appearance will be much more appealing to people who like rangefinders. And before anyone says that shouldn't matter, I have to point out the vast number of threads dedicated to photos of our equipment. Many of us care (perhaps too much) about the physical characteristics of our equipment.

[tbarker13]

Even here on the rangefinder forum? :eek:

Even here.;)

[gdi]

Obviously we've talked a lot about how the M8 and M9 will be impacted by the arrival of the Fuji Xpro-1.

Yes, and it never reached the point of being interesting. Same as the talk of M8 and RD-1s being dumped in the nearest ditch because of the EP-1, EP2, G1, G2, GRDI,II,III, GXR, NEX,or that other Fuji (the X-WTF?) that everyone clamored for upon their announcement.

If all an RD-1 owner was looking for was a small camera that could accept M mount lenses, why haven't they dumped it already?

[uhoh7]

"Ever" is an awfully bold statement in the world of consumer electronics.
Even without the Fuji, I'd bet we'll see them for $600 to $700 within 2-3 years.

well, time will tell.

meanwhile, you might want to learn to cut and paste. :)

[rbelyell]

Yes, and it never reached the point of being interesting. Same as the talk of M8 and RD-1s being dumped in the nearest ditch because of the EP-1, EP2, G1, G2, GRDI,II,III, GXR, NEX,or that other Fuji (the X-WTF?) that everyone clamored for upon their announcement.

If all an RD-1 owner was looking for was a small camera that could accept M mount lenses, why haven't they dumped it already?

EXACTLY!!!!

[Leigh Youdale]

Maybe I am on old purist. Maybe.....

Is that preferable to being an old reprobate?

[Leigh Youdale]

if the fuji lenses are not up to expected snuff...the whole thing falls apart.


I don't know why people keep running this out as if it has some validity. I can only speak of the quality of the Fujinon lenses from recent experience - the Bessa III (Fuji GF670), the X100, the X10 and wide use in the cinematographic and video production industry and they're all superb. Why would anyone expect Fuji to crash and burn on the lenses for the new camera? Not logical.

Or are you referring to the still answered questions about manual focus methods to be employed and not the rendering quality of the glass? A different matter.

[Leigh Youdale]

totally agree that if one wants the RF experience outside of leica, the only digi alternative is epson, though imho it is way overpriced at the now going rate of $1400+usd. that being said, and that being the definition, the fuji CANNOT compete because it will NOT be a RF! the fuji will compete with the ricoh and nex7 as incredibly high quality mirrorless digi- cams that can accomodate M and M39, among almost all other, lenses. for those who want the RF experience that's really the beginning and end of the analysis. why do we keep demanding of these tools things they are expressly not designed to give?! the pro x1 is NOT a RF.

and btw, NEITHER IS THE X100! please stop erroneously complaining about this incredible camera because it does not do what it was NOT INTENDED to do, simply because you WISH it were so intended! the x100 is a compact autofocuse camera, thats it! its not a RF or any other kind of manual focus tool. to keep complaining that its MF 'sucks' is like complaining about how difficult it is to cut down a tree with a chainsaw when the motor's off! a chainsaw is NOT INTENDED to work with the motor off, and the x100 is not intended for manual focus and the x pro1 is not intended to be a RF. what is so difficult about these comcepts?

Amen, brother!

[Leigh Youdale]

I think it'll drop when they get to a certain age, and start to fail. All electronics have a lifespan, and once they start to be considered unreliable, temperamental, or unserviceable , then I think the value will drop considerably. It's on worth $1200 if it's not a paperweight, and they'll be paperweights eventually, unfortunately.

Not just failure. The self-inflicted depreciation of most digital cameras has more to do with obsolescence than failure rates. And that obsolescence is driven by the marketing and development programs of the manufacturers who have a strong vested interest in shifting current purchasers on to "the next big thing". At the moment, Fuji don't appear to be playing that game - at least to the same extent. If we start seeing X101 and X10.1a models then the game might have changed at that point.
Epson never really got into that game, so although the RD-1 might be seen as a bit outdated it hasn't been impacted by a succession of "you beaut" newer versions that undermine the retained value in the originals.

In the past (and history is no guide to the future, I know) Fuji have been a little quirky in that they have produced several excellent, if under-rated cameras for a time but they also cease production of them without replacing them with an upgraded version. This new X range might be a new approach though.

[Adanac]

I doubt Fuji will implement a practical method to use the XP-1 in manual focus mode with analog lenses.

That may be, although they shouldn't even bother producing a M mount adapter for their X mount if all they are going to do is offer a magnify assist - the same which already exists on the X10 and X100. At this point that is the stated offer for M glass users... maybe they are that clueless that they'd do no more. I hope not.

I don't see how the XP-1 will have any affect on RD-1 prices. People who own M and LTM lenses and need/want an optical finder only have three digital options.

Agreed. The XPro 1 won't appeal to a died in the wool purist that wants a rangefinder camera, it is anything but. It may appeal to those manual focus lens users who are willing to put up with having to switch back and forth between EVF and OVF for focus and composing... but that's not a RF experience at all.

If folks want a digital RF they've got three options as you've said and probably won't be any more than three options, ever, unless Leica comes out with new digital Ms.

[umcelinho]

the R-D1 is a unique camera. the way it feels and how it handles is very pleasing, to me even more pleasing than an M8. the fact it's "only" 6mp does not bother me at all, it's enough for me. it does have its quirks and flaws but every camera has theirs.

I got an X100 and its IQ is pretty good and has fantastic high ISO, but it's not as pleasant to shoot with as the R-D1 and I do miss manual focusing with a rangefinder, the X100's AF can be quite frustrating sometimes. I didn't miss a shot due to bad AF during my recent trip, but I wasn't doing street photography. it proved itself to be a great travel camera, but sometimes I did wish I had my R-D1 along.... just a matter of best tool for each situation. these bigger sensor EVF AF cameras are not rangefinder substitutes, I see them as complementary.

[tbarker13]

well, time will tell.

meanwhile, you might want to learn to cut and paste. :)

I don't like to mix various commenters' comments in the same post. Gets confusing.

[tbarker13]

Yes, and it never reached the point of being interesting. Same as the talk of M8 and RD-1s being dumped in the nearest ditch because of the EP-1, EP2, G1, G2, GRDI,II,III, GXR, NEX,or that other Fuji (the X-WTF?) that everyone clamored for upon their announcement.

If all an RD-1 owner was looking for was a small camera that could accept M mount lenses, why haven't they dumped it already?

I'd say that many of them have. Being dumped doesn't mean tossed in the trash. They just get sold to some other user.
And the price has steadily, though slowly, fallen. I think I paid $2,500 for my first RD-1 (my very first digital camera) about 6-7 years ago. Today I can easily buy two for that price.
And if there were no M8s or other RFish options, I bet the price would have held a little better.

[back alley]

I don't know why people keep running this out as if it has some validity. I can only speak of the quality of the Fujinon lenses from recent experience - the Bessa III (Fuji GF670), the X100, the X10 and wide use in the cinematographic and video production industry and they're all superb. Why would anyone expect Fuji to crash and burn on the lenses for the new camera? Not logical.

Or are you referring to the still answered questions about manual focus methods to be employed and not the rendering quality of the glass? A different matter.

i said if...
i don't care about manual focus...if i buy this new camera then i will have committed to using af and the fuji lenses.

i'll continue to shoot my rd1 as well, for as long as they last.

[gdi]

I'd say that many of them have.

Could you share the source of that information? It would be interesting to confirm how many owners sold their R-D1s or M9s because of the introduction of one of these other cameras.

Or are you just guessing? I suspect that is the case. Now if I were to guess, I would say more owners dumped their Epson for a Leica than a Ricoh.



And the price has steadily, though slowly, fallen. I think I paid $2,500 for my first RD-1 (my very first digital camera) about 6-7 years ago. Today I can easily buy two for that price.
And if there were no M8s or other RFish options, I bet the price would have held a little better.You are arguing that the RD-1 has seen unusual depreciation? And your example is that it dropped 50% in 6-7 years (in reality it has been out almost 8 years)? Try looking at other digitals in the same or higher price range - like the $3300 Canon 5D that sells for less than the RD-1 today and was introduced after it.

See? You can't say that the Epson price has dropped steadily since its introduction; that is simply false. I bought my first RD-1 from Epson as a warrantied refurb for about $1300 in 2006, many sell for more than that today. Over that last few years the most common selling price I have seen has been in the $1200-1400 range - that indicates price stability rather than steady decline.

The reality is that the Epson has proven to be an anomaly among digital cameras in that it has held its value far better than most others, in spite of the increase in cameras accepting M lenses. Of course the Epson prices will drop eventually, but it is silly to assume the bottom will fall out because of a single new whiz-bang camera introduction.

[umcelinho]

I got my R-D1 in 2009 for $1300, 3 years later the market price is the same. Meanwhile M8s have dropped from $2500 to $2000...

then again it's a matter of supply and demand: I believe there are both less R-D1s around than M8s and also those who had M8s sold them to get M8.2s or M9s, while most R-D1 owners preferred to keep them.

[Adanac]

There's a gently used R-D1 on Craigslist in Vancouver for $1,800 - same camera is also on eBay for $2,000 to cover the fees no doubt.

I doubt it will sell very quickly.

Isn't Epson to totally drop support for the camera as of the end of this year?

[jsrockit]

I got my R-D1 in 2009 for $1300, 3 years later the market price is the same. Meanwhile M8s have dropped from $2500 to $2000...

I bought a silver M8 for $2100 in 2009.

[chris00nj]

Obviously we've talked a lot about how the M8 and M9 will be impacted by the arrival of the Fuji Xpro-1.
But I really wonder how the Epson RD-1 will fare.....


After reading some of the comments and thinking about it, I think the X100 is going to take the biggest hit. Why buy a X100 with a fixed lens for $1200 (or $950 used), when a X-pro 1 may just be a wee bit more.

[rbelyell]

After reading some of the comments and thinking about it, I think the X100 is going to take the biggest hit. Why buy a X100 with a fixed lens for $1200 (or $950 used), when a X-pro 1 may just be a wee bit more.

the xpro 1 + 35/2.0 equivalent lens will cost twice as much as the x100, and will be a significantly bigger package than the x100, and the lens MAY not be as closely optimized to the sensor as the x100. thats why i won't be selling my x100, or more to the point, would still purchase an x100 over the xpro1.

imo, the x100 is a perfect, light compact street shooter (as well as low light shooter). it is a complement to, not a competitor of, a system camera like the xpro1. at least thats how i see it.

[chris00nj]

the xpro 1 + 35/2.0 equivalent lens will cost twice as much as the x100, and will be a significantly bigger package than the x100, and the lens MAY not be as closely optimized to the sensor as the x100. thats why i won't be selling my x100, or more to the point, would still purchase an x100 over the xpro1.

imo, the x100 is a perfect, light compact street shooter (as well as low light shooter). it is a complement to, not a competitor of, a system camera like the xpro1. at least thats how i see it.

My main issue with the X100 is the 23mm lens. To get a small DOF, you have to be very close and at f/2. The X-Pro 1 will have a 35/1.4, which can drastically narrow the DOF.

I guess it depends on what you use it for. I am mostly taking photos of my kids and the 35mm equivalent is too wide for a small child.

[rbelyell]

chris i was just responding to your thought the x100 would suffer from introduction of xpro1. i think by your reply, maybe you agree it won't because theyre aimed at different uses and users.

DOF is really an overblown issue. close up at 2.0 theres plenty of OOF. and xpro1 plus any 35/1.4 is going to cost one double the priceof the x100.

[tbarker13]

Could you share the source of that information? It would be interesting to confirm how many owners sold their R-D1s or M9s because of the introduction of one of these other cameras.

Or are you just guessing? I suspect that is the case. Now if I were to guess, I would say more owners dumped their Epson for a Leica than a Ricoh.

You are arguing that the RD-1 has seen unusual depreciation? And your example is that it dropped 50% in 6-7 years (in reality it has been out almost 8 years)? Try looking at other digitals in the same or higher price range - like the $3300 Canon 5D that sells for less than the RD-1 today and was introduced after it.

See? You can't say that the Epson price has dropped steadily since its introduction; that is simply false. I bought my first RD-1 from Epson as a warrantied refurb for about $1300 in 2006, many sell for more than that today. Over that last few years the most common selling price I have seen has been in the $1200-1400 range - that indicates price stability rather than steady decline.

The reality is that the Epson has proven to be an anomaly among digital cameras in that it has held its value far better than most others, in spite of the increase in cameras accepting M lenses. Of course the Epson prices will drop eventually, but it is silly to assume the bottom will fall out because of a single new whiz-bang camera introduction.

The source of my information? I see them for sale all the time. So clearly some people are selling/dumping them.
I don't think either of us can point to any sort of definitive sales data showing pricing trends of these cameras. But they are now selling for about a third of what they went for new.
It's my opinion that they've steadily declined in price. I guess you don't share that opinion. Of course we don't have to agree.

For the record, I'm not saying they are going to take a nosedive. But I won't be surprised if they do. When I originally posted this, there were a pair of RD-1s in the classifieds listed around 1,100-1,200 each. And they weren't drawing much interest.

That may mean nothing. Or it might mean something.
Time will tell.

[rbelyell]

a third of their original price? are you saying an m9 is now selling for $2500??? where where?? and sign me up for 2!! and if you see rd's going for $750 i'll take 3! ): imo, that' s what they should be selling for, but they ain't.

[gdi]

The source of my information? I see them for sale all the time. So clearly some people are selling/dumping them.

But in the previous posts you were stating that they were being sold to buy small cameras that can mount M lenses. Sure, they are being sold, like everything else; I was wondering why you were sure they were being replaced with little non-RF cameras.


I don't think either of us can point to any sort of definitive sales data showing pricing trends of these cameras. But they are now selling for about a third of what they went for new. No, there is no "definitive" sales data. But if you look you will see some selling for more than you could buy them for from Epson over 5 years ago (with warranty). Of course some sell for less, but it is just silly to try to claim that this camera has experienced an unusually high depreciation rate. There are many examples of digital cameras that do worse. And, of course, claiming that they have been sold to buy new little non-RF cameras is taking it to the next level.

It's my opinion that they've steadily declined in price. I guess you don't share that opinion. Of course we don't have to agree.Well there is opinion and there is fact.

For the record, I'm not saying they are going to take a nosedive. But I won't be surprised if they do. When I originally posted this, there were a pair of RD-1s in the classifieds listed around 1,100-1,200 each. And they weren't drawing much interest.

That may mean nothing. Or it might mean something.
Time will tell.I see there are two still there and offered by sellers with 1 and 2 total posts. One is $1250 and $1400. I would be surprised to see these sell quickly from these newbie sellers since they really are in the range of standard pricing. Of course another one sold for $1450 (with and old elmar) recently. I didn't see any for $1,100.

But I do agree that anything can happen regarding the prices of any of these cameras - the whole point of my posting was that I find your tying prices of the Epsons (and M8 and M9) to the availability of the Xpro to be a stretch. Most of the threads discussing the impact of the next model whiz-bang on the Leica digitals are really just a premise for the Leica bashers to try to get a rise out of the Leica owners.

BTW - I think you probably have the largest concentration of R-D1 owners in existence here at RFF. Why don't you post a poll asking how many have sold or will sell their cameras for the Fuji XPro? I think that could clear up the situation...

[gdi]

a third of their original price? are you saying an m9 is now selling for $2500??? where where?? and sign me up for 2!! and if you see rd's going for $750 i'll take 3! ): imo, that' s what they should be selling for, but they ain't.

I think he is talking about the List price of the Epson when introduced - about $3000. I don't know how many people actually paid that.

Regarding the M9 - the soon to come Fuji has only lowered the price of those by about 50%. The XPro-2 will be the one to force the M9 down to $2500! :D

[jsrockit]

My main issue with the X100 is the 23mm lens. To get a small DOF, you have to be very close and at f/2. .

That's only a issue if you are doing bokeh-porn! ;)

[jsrockit]

The source of my information? I see them for sale all the time. So clearly some people are selling/dumping them.

But aren't you talking about hundreds of cameras for sales when tens of thousands were sold (in the case of the Leicas)?

[ped]

There's really nothing similar about the two cameras apart from the size, is there?

[jsrockit]

There's really nothing similar about the two cameras apart from the size, is there?

Well, and the optical VF and shutter speed dial / aperture ring. Those are important aspects.

[ped]

I would argue the only similarity VF wise is that they both have one.

I don;t know why people would think these will affect the R-D1... It's like saying sales of the Alfa 8C will affect sales of the Nissan Micra because they both have wheels and are cars. (well, the Micra just about)

[Paul T.]

They both have optical viewfinders. For all their differences, it's a significant point of similarity.

And therefore, with the M-9, the Xpro and R-D1 constitute pretty much the whole universe of optical VF, compact cameras that will take an M lens.

[ped]

I see where you are coming from but I really don't think they overlap enough to make someone ditch one for the other. I certainly wouldn't but it looks like some people would!

[back alley]

partly it's a money thing also...if i wanted to buy the new fuji it would be easier to sell my 2 rd1 bodies and cv lenses and get the fuji with native lenses.
if i buy one i plan on taking advantage of the af feature.

[tbarker13]

But in the previous posts you were stating that they were being sold to buy small cameras that can mount M lenses.....
No, there is no "definitive" sales data. But if you look you will see some selling for more than you could buy them for from Epson over 5 years ago (with warranty)........
I see there are two still there and offered by sellers with 1 and 2 total posts. .....
.... the whole point of my posting was that I find your tying prices of the Epsons (and M8 and M9) to the availability of the Xpro to be a stretch. ....




Actually, I never said what they were buying with their previous RD-1 funds. I don't know what they are doing with the money. My point is that the RD-1, while a great camera, is no more immune to market laws than any other camera. Certainly there are people who love them. But a lot of that has to do with the options currently available to them.
The M9 is not an option for many RD-1 users. The M8 may not even be an option for many of them.
But now we are going to have a new camera system that may offer a lot to people who simply want a small interchangeable lens system - regardless of how it achieves its focus. That it will have the ability to use M lenses will be a bonus for some of them.

And regarding prices, I don't care what people list them for. Someone can list an RD-1 for $3,000, that doesn't mean it will sell for that. From what I've seen, the price point is much closer to $1,200 or so. It's going to keep going down. It's just a matter of how fast.
I'd prefer not to comment on the actual listings as I'd rather not mess with their sales. But I doubt it has anything to do with their post count. There are many, many users on this forum who don't care about such things.
Is it really such a stretch to think that a new compact digicam system could compete with an older compact digicam system? I find it odd that you seem to think it is such a crazy notion.

[dreilly]

They both have optical viewfinders. For all their differences, it's a significant point of similarity.


The optical viewfinder is worthless if you have to focus with the EVF. Same as a Nex 7, 5n with EVF or GXR with EVF. And "focus confirmation" with mf lenses was never satisfactory, even on DSLRs where you got some feedback by being able to see through the lens.

I'm surprised how this faux rangefinder with an OVF that nobody knows can actually be used for focusing lenses can generate so much interest. It could be the best thing since sliced bread. But right now we don't have enough information. And yet we're picking apart how the camera that may or not satisfactorily focus M lenses (which isn't in Fuji's interest as they probably, unlike Ricoh, want you to buy their own lenses) will effect a camera discontinued years ago and only available second-hand.

Sorry for my frustration, but the buzz around the X-1 Pro just seems irrational. I'm not one of those people saying "Fail!" over one aspect or another. But I'm not calling it a hit, either. It looks intriguing, too early to tell.

[ped]

There's a fascinating behavioural trait among RFFers who seem to be whipped into a frenzy of inadaquicy, excitement, frustration and doom forecasting all at once. It's only a camera - some people will prefer it and sell their current camera, R-D1 or not. They probably won't find it very similar to use at all. They might sell their camera because they get bored of photography altogether. Some people will buy both. There's not going to be some wall street style crash in the price of a single type of camera due to the launch of this thing! The whole idea and the hysteria around the whole idea leaves me feeling uneasy, somehow.

EDIT: Sure it'll compete with all the other cameras to an extent, but there are thousands of things competing for our money every day. The R-D1 is such a unique and excellent oddball of a camera that it would have blown out years ago if current competition on paper was anything to go by.

Now back to real life!

[tbarker13]

I'm surprised how this faux rangefinder with an OVF that nobody knows can actually be used for focusing lenses can generate so much interest. It could be the best thing since sliced bread. But right now we don't have enough information. And yet we're picking apart how the camera that may or not satisfactorily focus M lenses (which isn't in Fuji's interest as they probably, unlike Ricoh, want you to buy their own lenses) will effect a camera discontinued years ago and only available second-hand.



What else do we have to do but talk about it until it gets here?;)
I don't disagree with you. I think we have no idea what the impact of this camera will be. Two years from now, we may be talking about that failed attempt by Fuji to develop its own compact system. Or maybe we'll be talking about the XPRO-2.
I just think it's cool to have more options for those of us who simply want an interchangeable system with a small form factor. I've ordered one of them - but really have no plan to use it with M lenses. If M-mount lenses prove to be useless on the camera, I won't care. If the native lenses are good (and I have no reason to think they won't be), I expect to be pretty happy.

[ped]

I know, I'm just moody.

EDIT: NOT because I have an R-D1!

EDIT: Whoops you weren't quoting me. Well, this is embarassing.

[jsrockit]

I'm surprised how this faux rangefinder with an OVF that nobody knows can actually be used for focusing lenses can generate so much interest.

Because some of us actually like the X100 and aren't opposed to AF. MF is not the be-all-end-all of photography.

Sorry for my frustration, but the buzz around the X-1 Pro just seems irrational. I'm not one of those people saying "Fail!" over one aspect or another. But I'm not calling it a hit, either. It looks intriguing, too early to tell.

That's because you don't see the appeal of the camera. That doesn't make those who do irrational.

[dreilly]

Jdrockit,
It's totally rational if you're looking for an AF camera. What I was addressing were those talking about the x-1 as aplatform for their m- glass. Sorry for the confusion. Doug

[jsrockit]

dreilly, my fault. I should have known since this is the R-D1 thread.

[tbarker13]

It's funny how so much of the debate over these cameras is based on our own needs/wants. Those of us who don't need/want manual focus or the ability to use M-glass see the Fuji in a much different way than those who view manual focus and the ability to use M-glass as critical.
Let's face it. No one is ever going to make a camera that makes each of us happy. Let's just hope we keep getting more options to consider.

[tbarker13]

Jdrockit,
It's totally rational if you're looking for an AF camera. What I was addressing were those talking about the x-1 as aplatform for their m- glass. Sorry for the confusion. Doug

I guess I see the issue differently. When I suggest that the XPro-1 could hurt RD-1 sales, I don't necessarily think it will attract people because of its M platform. I just wonder how much of a market there is for a new system that doesn't rely on M glass.
I wonder how many people are like me - not caring how a camera focuses or what glass it uses. I just want something small, with high-quality interchangeable lenses and a real viewfinder.
I've used rangefinders for the past 25 years because they offered those things. I'm not attacking Leica or Epson RD-1s. I just wonder what the appetite might be for something new, although similar in form.
I've certainly been wrong before. Thought iPads would die on the vine. Obviously that didn't happen.

[gdi]

Actually, I never said what they were buying with their previous RD-1 funds. I don't know what they are doing with the money. My point is that the RD-1, while a great camera, is no more immune to market laws than any other camera. Certainly there are people who love them. But a lot of that has to do with the options currently available to them.
The M9 is not an option for many RD-1 users. The M8 may not even be an option for many of them.
But now we are going to have a new camera system that may offer a lot to people who simply want a small interchangeable lens system - regardless of how it achieves its focus. That it will have the ability to use M lenses will be a bonus for some of them.

And regarding prices, I don't care what people list them for. Someone can list an RD-1 for $3,000, that doesn't mean it will sell for that. From what I've seen, the price point is much closer to $1,200 or so. It's going to keep going down. It's just a matter of how fast.
I'd prefer not to comment on the actual listings as I'd rather not mess with their sales. But I doubt it has anything to do with their post count. There are many, many users on this forum who don't care about such things.
Is it really such a stretch to think that a new compact digicam system could compete with an older compact digicam system? I find it odd that you seem to think it is such a crazy notion.

If you re-read the comments we have exchanged, you should see why I assumed you were implying that sellers were selling the Epson to buy a specific camera. But anyway, I don't think it is a crazy notion that some would choose a new compact camera over an older system. In fact there are plenty of people will ALWAYS sell the older (if only slightly) camera for the newer version (G1-G2-G3; X100 -X Pro; M8-M9...).

I was just calling into question that there was something about the upcoming Fuji that would be overwhelmingly irresistible to R-D1 owners - I just don't see it being more of a motivation to sell than any number of other previous (or future) cameras.

[tbarker13]

I was just calling into question that there was something about the upcoming Fuji that would be overwhelmingly irresistible to R-D1 owners - I just don't see it being more of a motivation to sell than any number of other previous (or future) cameras.

It's really not a question - to me - of it being specifically interesting to RD-1 owners, but rather to the type of people who might buy/own an RD-1 because of its form factor. In that scenario, the RD-1 could suffer simply because it is the oldest of the pack of similar offerings.
Clearly the Fuji is aiming for that audience, with the retro styling and ability to use m lenses.
In the end, all this talk really means little. Just passing the time, while waiting for the camera to get here. We'll find out soon enough whether the thing is worth anything - and to who.

[gdi]

In the end, all this talk really means little.

On that we are in full agreement.