RS-2 + nodal slide as a slightly cheaper alternative to M1-S?
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: RS-2 + nodal slide as a slightly cheaper alternative to M1-S?

Share/Bookmark
  1. RS-2 + nodal slide as a slightly cheaper alternative to M1-S?

    #1

    Join Date: Aug 2013
    Location: Southern Oregon
    Posts: 14

    I'm trying to decide between an RS-2 and a M1-S. Mostly I'll be doing multi-row panoramas with my Olympus OM-D E-M5 micro-4/3s camera, but I've got the Samyang fisheye to play with some VR panoramas as well.

    I think that just adding an upper rail to the RS-2 makes it "somewhat" equivalent to a M1-S, and it would save me $100+ US. It would also allow me to start out with just the RS-2 and a lens ring for my Samyang fisheye, and then purchase the upper rail later.

    I'd appreciate any feedback to help me decide, especially answers to the following:

    • What is the length of the lower rail portion of the RS-2? I haven't seen specs on that.
    • I believe that the RS-2 has a smaller footprint than the M1-S. Is that very important when doing spherical panoramas, or is that something that just makes it nicer, but isn't a critical difference?
    • Does the RS-2 take any of the rotators that work with the NN4, or does it take the ones that work with the RS-1?
    • For a small micro-4/3s camera and the associated small lenses, would the M1-S give me any necessary better stability? Or would the RS-2 be sufficient for what I want?
    • I would like to be able to carry everything on short (1-2 hour) hikes. I think that the M1-S would come apart & get put back together quickly and so would be easy to throw in a day pack. Would there be any problem throwing the RS-2 in a day pack (I'm assuming that the vertical rail doesn't come off the lower rail easily, but maybe I'm wrong?)


    Thanks for any help!

    ps: In some ways I'd love the M1-S, but I'm not sure I can justify the extra $100+ if the RS-2 is an adequate solution for me. I'm just an enthusiast, so things don't have to be as perfect as they would for a professional trying to make money off sales.
  2. #2
    Users Country Flag
    Join Date: Apr 2008
    Location: Hong Kong
    Posts: 2,477

    RS2 is fine for you.

    Nick



    Fanotec
    We listen. We try harder.
  3. #3

    Join Date: Aug 2013
    Location: Southern Oregon
    Posts: 14

    Great news, Nick!

    I couldn't find the specs on how long the lower rail was on the RS-2. I *think* that with a micro 4/3ds camera I won't have any problems with the lower rail not being long enough, but just wanted to make sure.
  4. #4
    Users Country Flag
    Join Date: Apr 2008
    Location: Hong Kong
    Posts: 2,477

    Quote Originally Posted by NightFlyer View Post
    Great news, Nick!

    I couldn't find the specs on how long the lower rail was on the RS-2. I *think* that with a micro 4/3ds camera I won't have any problems with the lower rail not being long enough, but just wanted to make sure.
    RS2 can support DSLRs without battery grip too.

    Nick



    Fanotec
    We listen. We try harder.
  5. #5

    Join Date: Aug 2013
    Location: Southern Oregon
    Posts: 14

    Quote Originally Posted by nick fan View Post
    RS2 can support DSLRs without battery grip too.

    Nick
    I was curious, because I'm thinking of adding a slide and then of course the QR clamp, and then the camera, and the RS-2 was designed for ring mounts. I guess if it's basically the same lower rail system as the NN4, then adding a slide & clamp could be OK.
  6. Maybe a problem with rotators!

    #6

    Join Date: Aug 2013
    Location: Southern Oregon
    Posts: 14

    Investigating further, it appears that the RD8 isn't supported on the RS-2. That means that the largest FF equivalent lens I can use on the RS-2 would be ~265 (using the RD16). Since Micro 4/3 cameras have a crop factor of 2, that would mean limiting myself to less than 130mm focal length. I currently have a 14-150mm lens (28-300mm FF equivalent), so I wouldn't be able to use that lens zoomed out all the way with the RD16.
  7. #7
    Users Country Flag
    Join Date: Apr 2008
    Location: Hong Kong
    Posts: 2,477

    150mm is still usable for a 4/3 sensor with an overlap of about 20%. But do you really need that much resolution? You can get similar result with sharper prime lens at lower focal length. How about a cheap and shape manual focus 135mm prime?

    Nick



    Fanotec
    We listen. We try harder.
  8. #8

    Join Date: Aug 2013
    Location: Southern Oregon
    Posts: 14

    Quote Originally Posted by nick fan View Post
    150mm is still usable for a 4/3 sensor with an overlap of about 20%. But do you really need that much resolution? You can get similar result with sharper prime lens at lower focal length. How about a cheap and shape manual focus 135mm prime?

    Nick
    I'm just starting into this kind of shooting, so you could be completely right and the RD16 with a 3.75 degree detent will serve. I just want to make sure that the system I buy now will be one that will be good for me for a while, and that I won't outgrow it immediately and wish I had gotten something else.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •