Alone or with others?

[Bill Pierce]

First off - Best wishes for a wonderful 2009.

Secondly, a question that might guide future discussions...

How many folks here take the great majority of their pictures with a rangefinder? How many folks use the rangefinder as just one tool in their toolbox? And, of course, most important - why?

Bill

 

[Al Kaplan]

I shoot ther great majority of my pictures with a rangefinder (including a Bessa L with my 15) because I like the direct view in the finder and the handling of the camera. I still have a couple of TLR's but haven't really used them in a couple of years. I sold the Hasselblad outfit and the 4x5 view camera a few years ago, followed by a couple of Leicaflex SL's and a bunch of R lenses. I still have a Visoflex II, a 400mm and a 65mm Elmar for macro work. My client base had changed, and then as I entered my 60's I became "semi-retired".

 

[Chris101]

I own a number of cameras, only one of which (currently) is a rangefinder. However if I break it down by percentage, I take a disproportionate number of photos with it - mostly street/casual portraiture. On the other hand, I use SLR cameras for more formal portraiture, and for technical photography, such as copying or macro.

If I carry a camera into an unknown situation, it's usually the RF, but then I do keep a Nikon FG with a zoom lens in my car, just in case.

 

[bmattock]

I'll be charitable and say I use a rangefinder camera about 10% of the time. Another 10% for film-based SLR cameras and non-rangefinders (zone focus, etc) and the rest digital SLR or digital Point-n-Shoot.

 

[feenej]

I used my rangefinder a for 95% of my photos for about two years. I am using slr's more now.

 

[Austerby]

I hardly use my 35mm SLR or dSLR since re-discovering rangefinders and gathering a small set of different bodies and lenses. About 60% of my photos are with one, the remainder being 120 format for which I do not have a rangefinder.

 

[morback]

I exclusively use analog rangefinders.

I find everything else too big, too heavy, to clunky, too slow, too fancy and with too many useless buttons (what other button except the shutter release do you really need?), levers, switches and trapdoors.

I also recently discovered that I can't tell when I'm in focus with SLR's, and I'm still very young!

The simplicity that forces my active participation in the image making makes my daily joy.

 

[rpsawin]

When I’m doing what I consider to be serious work I shoot street/urban about 40% of the time and use 35mm rf’s exclusively for this. I shoot nature/wildlife about 10% of the time and use 35mm slr for this. The rest of the time I shoot landscapes, seascapes and industrials and use mf rf’s, mf slr’s and a 4x5.
My choices are driven primarily by lenses and by the “shooting” style (mine) used in each type of shooting. When I’m just out shooting for enjoyment I almost always use my rf’s. I find them the most enjoyable for fast action or in the moment type shooting. I shoot some digital stuff, landscape & urban, but am not yet happy with the results.

Best regards,

Bob

 

[keithdunlop]

For my particular work, weddings, I consider a rangefinder to be a tool to be used in the situations that it's better suited for, just like a mechanic uses a certain wrench for a certain job.

My primary reasons for adding a rangefinder for weddings are 1) better focus accuracy in low light, 2) quieter operations in small chapels, and 3) smaller/lighter package. I have suffered too many focus errors with my D3 in low light situations, and in certain dark situations with little target contrast, AF simply fails to work. A rangefinder is simply a better tool in this regard.

However, I will still use my D3 when needed. Rangefinders are not as well suited for macro work or use of telephoto lenses than an SLR. So when I need to shoot with my 60mm Nikkor Micro or my 70-200mm VR the D3 comes out. Flash results are also more predictable for me with my Nikon system; another reason to keep my D3 in my bag. There is also a reliability factor for me. I know that given any specific shooting situation, I can predict a high level of success of getting the shot with a DSLR.

However, I anticipate that I will shot with the M8 more frequently as I become more comfortable with it as a primary (and reliable) wedding camera. The weight/bulk of carrying a pair of D3's with 24-70 and 70-200 lenses attached significantly alters the way I want to work at a wedding. I prefer to work quietly and unobtrusively, being able to move freely about the event and people, as it naturally unfolds. Many times I feel like a bull in a china shop with the bulky DSLR's swinging about.

 

[MikeCassidy]

Most [90%] pictures are taken with my M3, some with my Xpan also a rangefinder and a few with a Rollei. I wonder what lenses everyone are using most of the time; fro a while I did 21mm then 35mm nor 50mm so boring.

 

[MikeCassidy]

oooh never digital. Always film, Tri-X and Rodinal.

It need everyone to know that I am <b>very</b> superior.

 

[bmattock]

It need everyone to know that I am <b>very</b> superior.

Not until you do the Weasel Dance.

 

[Jason Sprenger]

If I'm bringing a camera "along", I bring a 35mm RF and sometimes a medium format folder. If I'm specifically going after photographs, I'll bring an SLR or a larger format camera depending on the subject and the circumstances.

I prefer the SLR for use with color (digital) or with longer lenses (85mm+). I use a 4x5 when it will make a difference to me, specifically when the situation allows for a tripod. Though since its a Graphic, it can play the hand-held game too.

 

[furcafe]

I use rangefinders as my primary photographic tool (@ least 75% of the time) for 3 primary reasons:

(1) Size matters. They're relatively small & light. Sort of a variation on Weston's (can't remember whether it was Edward or Brett) quip about there not being anything worth photographing more than 500 feet from his car. In my case, if I can't comfortably carry a camera + lens, or ideally more than 1 camera + lens, on my person for hours @ a time & as part of my daily routine (e.g., walking on city streets, commuting on a subway, etc.), it will never be my primary tool.

(2) They fit my photographic interests. I enjoy documentary, environmental portraits, cityscapes, & similar genres, but nothing requiring long lenses or macro. I use lenses over 135mm (in 35mm format) only a handful of times a year; same goes for close-up work.

(3) Ease of (manual) focus. I prefer cameras w/a minimum of automation (I do use aperture-priority exposure settings, but that's about it), including manual focus, because I think they're more fun to use. Among such cameras, I find RFs to be the easiest & fastest for me to focus.

 

[jmkelly]

Breaks down to about 2/3 RF, 1/3 other. I really enjoy the process of using the RF, as well as my other manual film cameras. But when I'm chasing the kids around for casual snappies it is sometimes nice just to deal with keeping them in the frame, and let the camera do the rest of the work.

 

[BillBingham2]

When looking at carrying one camera, it's either a P&S or an RF. I find that this gives me the capability I want to capture most pictures I see, not all but most. When I am not as concerned about weight or size, I take add an SLR (DSLR some day) to the mix. Combining an SLR with a RF/P&S covers everything I want 98% of the time. There are times where I want a 4x5, mostly for the higher level of control it provides, but they are few and far between.

When carrying two systems I only have one over lapping lens (a 28mm) that I carry. Not sure why as both systems are IMHO, Ubber Reliable, perhaps it's the boy scout coming out again (be prepared...).

I am hoping that the 4/3M systems that will come out will provide me with the control, flexibility, size and quality I have in my current systems. Fingers crossed, but not putting any money down on it.

I wonder if there are folks who carry two different formats (e.g. 35 & 120) andy why?

B2 (;->

 

[newsgrunt]

Work is 98% digital with the odd assignment shot on large format.Daily newspaper deadlines dictate digital.

Personal shooting is about 75 % rangefinder (35 and mf) and the rest split between large format, mf slr, Holga and pinhole.

Leicas because they're light and discreet and a pleasure to work with. Large format because seeing things upside down and backwards exercises the grey matter or so I hope 😉

 

[msheppler]

m3 and a folder

m3 and a folder

I carry an m3 and an Agfa Isolette III. I love the leica with a 50mm Summicron and when I want a larger negative, (actually slide), in a different, larger format I have the folder. I probably wouldn't carry a larger medium format camera. Some pictures like a larger format and I don't pay any weight penalty with carrying the Agfa.

 

[tmfabian]

i use a RF for about 99% of my work. I use them because i enjoy using a RF... honestly, i could use just about any camera and get the same results, but i just don't enjoy using other cameras as much as RF's...sounds like a silly reason, but it's also why I live where I live, drive what I drive, and watch the TV i watch, because I enjoy it...why use/do something you don't enjoy.?

 

[dmr]

My carry-everywhere camera is an Olympus P&S, and because I have it with me all of the time, I do a good percentage of my shooting with it.

As for the RFs, I'll usually bring one with me intentionally when I'm going out shooting for the purpose of shooting.

I still do use the SLR (film, no I haven't gone over to the Dark Side) quite a bit, but my main low-light cameras are the GIII and the Mamiya SD.