digital "Rangefinders"

[dmdejoy]

OK. If I cannot afford or justify a Leica digital rangefinder, what might best serve as a digital substitute at a more reasonable price point?

 

[former member]

There was a User condition Leica M8 in the classifieds for $1800.

 

[aad]

What I did-

Got an LX5-set the lens to always go to 50mm, learned how to completely eliminate shutter lag, and slapped a viewfinder on it.

I bet you could do it with quite a few cameras, and if you don't care about a viewfinder, then you have a world of choice.

 

[Jamie Pillers]

Problem is that for about half the cost of a nice M8, I can get a Nikon D7000 that has TWICE low-light performace, 2 and a half stops better dynamic range, and better color depth! Its gettting pretty hard to hang my hat on the 'character' of M-mount glass.

 

[LeicaFoReVer]

buy a Sony NEX and an adapter like me.

 

[CameraCollect2]

The only digital rangefinder other than the M8 or M9 would be the Epson R-d1 (s) that is more reasonable in cost when compared to the Leicas. The R-d1 goes from above 1K and up. I bought one for 1,6K. They are always mostly used. Try to get one in good shape.

The other alternative would be a micro 4/3 camera, though not a rangefinder they do take "legacy" lenses with the correct adapters. I have an Olympus E-P1 and I can use Leica screwmount and M mount lenses.

 

[kxl]

Shoot film and scan -- you get to start out with an RF and end up with a digital image.

 

[Neare]

Epson R-D1
Olympus E-P1, E-P2, E-PL1 & E-PL2
Panasonic GF1 & GF2
Sony NEX
Fuji X100

That's about as close as you can get in digital. Though my policy is to always buy what you want, otherwise you end up selling to upgrade at a later point and losing money anyway. Remember that if you use a M8, that doesn't mean you have to use Leica lenses. CV lenses are very good.

 

[Keyne]

It depends. Why are you thinking of a digital RF? If it's just to use M mount or LTM lenses then, as mentioned above, you have lots of options and price points (nex, m4/3rds). However if you want rangefinder ergonomics and feel then there is Leica and RD1.... And if this is what you are after than looking at DSLR's that cost less won't matter much in the long run. However if you are unsure about RF's in general there are much cheaper film alternatives you could try first.... For instance buy a cheap fixed lens RF from the classifieds here (some for around $100 or less) buy some film and get processed with a CD and try it out. I did that and now want to sell all my m4/3's to buy lenses for the M8 I just bought. Could I have bought a nice Dslr cheaper? Yes for sure but it's not at all the same. Also if you buy an M8 or rd1 and don't like it you can sell it for not too much of a loss (depending on how long you keep it of course).

 

[LeicaFan]

Problem is that for about half the cost of a nice M8, I can get a Nikon D7000 that has TWICE low-light performace, 2 and a half stops better dynamic range, and better color depth! Its gettting pretty hard to hang my hat on the 'character' of M-mount glass.

Nobody buys a digital rangefinder for its performance. People buy rangefinders for the rangefinder experience (and digital for those who want to retain the classic feel, but want/need digital). Rangefinders, especially digital, are designed for a niche market.

 

[Spyro]

...has TWICE low-light performace, 2 and a half stops better dynamic range, and better color depth!...

RF is not for you, get the d7000 and be happy 🙂

 

[Keyne]

RF is not for you, get the d7000 and be happy 🙂

Yeah its like trying to explain to someone reading specs on a motorboat why a sailboat is the better option... they will both get you from A to B but a motorboat is a much more advanced and efficient means of travel. Typically the person that wants a sailboat wants a sailboat for the experience of sailing. The person that wants a Rangefinder wants the experience of shooting with one.... if you want a camera for best IQ, value, speed, etc. you will not be able to rationalize an RF over other options. IMO

K

 

[Wessie]

Problem is that for about half the cost of a nice M8, I can get a Nikon D7000 that has TWICE low-light performace, 2 and a half stops better dynamic range, and better color depth! Its gettting pretty hard to hang my hat on the 'character' of M-mount glass.

D7000? I would rather shoot with Leica film RF and a fast lens.

WOW!! My mindset's changed. I can't believe I would say that a year ago when I was fixated with / full frame / high ISO / X fps etc.

 

[chrismoret]

Shoot film and scan -- you get to start out with an RF and end up with a digital image.

Pick up a M4p or so and scan,scan ,scan! Do the hybrid thing...😀😀

 

[LKeithR]

Finding a reasonably priced digital rangefinder is tough right now. M8 and M9 are (relatively) pricey, the R-D1 is hard to find and the M 4/3s options have such a large crop factor that it's like shooting with a different lens. None really appeal to me. I think this may be why there's so much anticipation building around the Fuji X100--while not a "true" rangefinder it's going to be closer than anything else that's available (at a reasonable price, I should add.)

 

[Lss]

Problem is that for about half the cost of a nice M8, I can get a Nikon D7000

If you can afford it, try both and keep the one you actually use. How's that for justification?

 

[jsrockit]

I think the upcoming Fuji X100 is going to be the closest thing.

 

[gekopaca]

1) Epson R-D1 (second hand) ≥ 1000 €
IMO the best choice, and a REAL rangefinder camera

2) Fuji X-100 (released in march-april) ≥ 1000 €
Seems to be a good new concept

3) M43 camera (Olympus, Panasonic…) with buid-in EVF "rangefinder-like"
To come certainly in few months… we can't anticipate the quality and the price