I started my freelance career in the late 90s in California. I did a LOT of freelance work in the action sports industry, primarily skateboarding with some BMX. Back in '98 or '99, I happened on a deal on an M3 and a 50 Summicron DR. Looking back at how relatively inexpensive that combo was, I want to kick myself for letting it go! I used it for a bit, was wowed by the image quality, especially how the pair worked with B&W film. I liked the rangefinder approach, but to be frank I wasn't won over by the platform. At the time, it didn't do what I needed it to.
I learned to shoot on my mom's Nikon F (hey, mom had good taste!). My introduction to photography and most of my learning was on the SLR platform. By the time I was working as a freelance, SLRs (I used to prefer the EOS 1n) with fast tracking/servo AF were what I needed; they did things I couldn't easily accomplish with the M3, so I traded it for a (I'm still kicking myself, LOL) crappy portable strobe setup after a flying skateboard took out my old rig. I didn't look back.
Fast forward to 2012. I've moved on to shooting more photojournalism, portraiture, and less action sports. In the past year I've bought and used a whole bunch of lenses, an R3A (thanks Stephen Gandy!), a Hexar AF, the x100, an M4, and finally the M8. I'm a really late bloomer in the rangefinder world I guess? The rangefinder platform is VERY relevant for me for several reasons:
1.) The stealth factor. DSLRs are EVERYWHERE these days. So are M4/3 or P&S digital cameras. In public settings where I need to grab candids on the fly, I don't know how many times I've seen people pause and interrupt a candid moment to look at the guy/girl aiming a big ass Canikon SLR at them, or because they see someone holding up a smaller digital camera while they compose via the rear screen. People are conditioned to see DSLRs/P&S digitals and have an almost knee jerk reaction when they see one pointed at them. That 1 second of reaction is enough to blow a shot. The rangefinder platform is a lot more discreet, and for whatever reason people seem to not notice my "small" M8, x100 (yeah I know, NOT an RF), Hexar AF, M4, etc when I point it at them. I've gotten within a few feet of a scene, zone focused, then brought the camera up to grab the shot quickly and discreetly. It's great for that. When my needs were all about AF speed, telephoto lens use, and critical framing, the SLR platform was king...but for what I do now I find myself leaving my 1Ds at home more often than not.
2.) The form factor - My favored rig for most of my "on location" assignments used to be a 1Ds mk ii and a 35mm 1.4L and 50mm 1.2L prime. That's like 15 lbs of gear, minimum...and more like 20 lbs if I needed to lug a wide zoom around just in case I needed wider shots. I find myself taking the M8 and two lenses instead, the lenses fit in a hip bag and the M8+lens is lighter than the Canon 50 prime alone! It's easier to move with the smaller rig, and I tend to not bang the Leica around as much because...well duh it's smaller. This comes in handy at festivals/street fairs, or any situation where I need to navigate through a crowd.
3.) The fun factor - Lets face it: Any modern Canikon DSLR is probably smarter than I am. They autofocus as fast as most people can think. But where's the challenge in that? There is none. It's weird but I feel a distinct disconnect when I pick up my 1Ds these days. It feels...soulless. I mean, it does a job and does it exceedingly well, but frankly it's so high-tech and so easy to use that it often feels like I don't need to think about what I'm doing anymore. It feels like I'm on cruise control. Shooting with the RF forces my to really engage myself, and to really concentrate on every aspect of what I'm doing. It could be that I'm so habituated to the SLRs that they feel like second nature. And not fun because they aren't a challenge. Whatever the reason, I know that the RF platform challenges me more, makes me really engage with what I'm doing, and it makes shooting "fun" again.
I've always seen my excessive collection of cameras as a toolbox...the right tool for the right job and all. This might be a controversial claim to make on RFF but I will say that I think every top-of-the-line modern offering from Canon/Nikon/Leica are more or less on par with each other in terms of final image quality...the real determining factor is what platform lends itself best to a person's style of photography. The RF platform is definitely relevant to those of us who need what the RF platform offers!
I think I will always need to own a DSLR with useable high-ISO performance and access to a fast 200mm+ telephoto lens (I shoot concerts at least once a month). But I find myself using the M8 on assignment when shooting human interest pieces more and more, and I am also sure I'll be trading up for an M9 quite soon (LOL, anyone wanna trade a 5D and some L glass for one?).
At a personal level, 2012 has been a year of shooting more film. I started processing B&W at home again after a 10-year hiatus from the medium. I mentioned the lack of "soul" I sense in my Canon gear and I think my return to shooting film as a hobbyist this time around is because I needed to reignite my passion for photography. And moving to a "lower-tech" but more engaging platform has been AMAZING for me because it's let me reconnect with what I love doing so much.
So is the rangefinder relevant to my photography? Well, if you're talking about relevance from a purely technical standpoint ("the camera as a tool"), then no, not particularly. But honestly the platforms effectiveness on the job isn't the most important thing for me...shooting with an RF has reignited my passion for photography, and helped to make the work I have to do with a camera feel less like work again. And that's been a wonderful thing.
