Digital Camera for a RFF lover

TaoPhoto

Documentary Photographer
Local time
3:00 PM
Joined
Nov 3, 2010
Messages
108
Okay, I truly love my M6, Bessa, Fed-2, etc. Great film cameras, and I have a strong preference for all manual bodies and prime lenses.

That said, what would be the ideal, affordable, digital camera for someone like me? I know the Leica M9 is just about perfect, but that's way out of my price range. I've been using Olympus DSLRs, but as nice as they are, they are still too complicated, too menu driven. Is there, other than the Leica, a mostly or all manual digital camera with interchangeable lenses? It seems that there must be, but I have yet to find it. What is the poor man's M9?
 
I'm aware of both. The M8 is only slightly more affordable than the M9. Still too expensive for my budget. The Epson is nice, but dated, and difficult to get repairs.

I guess I should refine my question a bit. It doesn't have to be a rangefinder. Just a manual, or close to it, digital camera with interchangeable lenses. The Olympus EP-1 and EP-2 might be close. I'll have to have a closer look at them.
 
Find yourself a Pentax K5 body and some older manual Pentax "M" prime lenses. The camera can then work as stop-down aperture priority, or as full manual, and you get a focus-confirmation light if you need it. The metering display is as a sort of graphical centre-the-needle thing.

The unfortunate thing is that it isn't a rangefinder of course, but it fits your description of what you want despite not having an M9-like viewfinder.
 
I don't think you're going to find exactly what you're looking for. With the exception of the M8, M9 and R-D1 all digital cameras seem to come with pretty overloaded internal menus. I have fully adapted to digital so it's not a huge thing to me but it would really be nice to have a "simple" manual camera with access to all the primary controls through buttons or dials on the outside. Having to go to the menu for "specialty" features wouldn't be so bad in this case. Sadly, I don't think you'll find anything like this in the lower price ranges.

If you haven't considered one yet the Leica Digilux 2 might be a compromise. It's older with a smaller sensor but it does have (mostly) analog controls and it produces some very nice images--especially out of camera B&W jpegs. Might be worth a look...
 
I had a look around at interchangeable digitals, tried out the Panasonics, Sonys etc etc. Ended up with a Samsung EX1 (not interchangeable, but a wide f1.8 lens). I've accepted I'm not going to get film quality out of digital but I'm pretty happy with it and it didn't cost the earth.
 
...I guess I should refine my question a bit. It doesn't have to be a rangefinder. Just a manual, or close to it, digital camera with interchangeable lenses. The Olympus EP-1 and EP-2 might be close. I'll have to have a closer look at them.

I know I am a bad boy :angel: but sometimes I like to fool the big photo market salesperson with similar questions like yours.

<<Listen, I'm looking for a new digital compact camera to support this one (showing my old Ricoh). Of course, it should be in a reasonable price range>>
80 % of them don't even understand what the heck I am showing when I point to my RF compact...

<<Just show me what you would recommend me, possibly with interchangable lenses. I don't care about megapixels or movie functions, but I have other few important specs:

a) not a big DSLR (I point again to my Ricoh)

b) it should have a viewfinder (even a digital one is ok), I don't like shooting with a display)
Or better a rangefinder system? (I explain to the 80 % what that tiny additional windows on my Ricoh is) But you know, my moneys doesn't go for a M Leica, don't you?

c) manual focus

d) exposure with M, A, S mode

e) dedicated knob, wheel or whatever mechanical control to manually set A (look here! yes, the Ricoh again)

f) same for S>>

:D

Now the show typically starts!

Nowadays the clever and good informed salesperson knows about the X100. Alternatives? But if I ask for an interchangable lens one, (under USD 3000), I get no answer.

Isn't there really a market for that? Or why don't we see more offers in the "compact interchangable" world with hands on controls?
 
The Epson is nice, but dated, and difficult to get repairs.
The Epson really is nice. What exactly is the problem with it for you? It has aged well, so unless there is a specific issue (like too few megapixels) don't worry. Same with repairs. Buy one that works, you probably won't be needing any real repairs. The rangefinder adjustments are easy to do yourself (at least on the original R-D1).
 
I have yet to see a M8 for $2000. Most are $3000, even used.

Huh? One even sold here the other day for $1700 (though that doesn;t happen often). $2,000 happens often. They routinely go for $2400-2500 here weekly. $3000 is M8.2 money... not M8 money. Not even the camera stores sell them used for $3000 unless they've been upgraded or are the M8.2.
 
I appreciate the options put forth so far, but none are quite what I'm looking for. In a perfect world, I'd love a digital back for my M6, one that leaves the controls and the focus on manual, and uses digital only for image capture. I'm not sure why it is that digital capture suddenly means you have to build desktop computer abilities into the body. All I really want is to substitute digital capture for film.

As to the Epson, it is a fine camera. My point, poorly articulated, was that for what they usually go for (when you can find one), I could buy an M8 that is more recent and has better support, with a considerable upgrade in pixels. Perhaps these do occasionally sell in the sub $2500 range, but not that I've seen.

So, I guess I'm not going to find what I want. Guess I'll have to keep that M9 on the long range want list and make do with what I have when digital is required. The Olympus 4/3 system isn't bad, it's just bulky, menu-driven and often annoying. The EP-2 is better, and it's looking like that's the direction I'm headed.
 
My M8 was $2200 around Christmas time.

To answer the OP, I don't think the digital camera that fits your criteria is here yet, but mirrorless digital cameras are going in that direction. The sony NEX 3/5 offers a larger sensor than the m4/3s cameras, and the X100 fits the aesthetic that most people around here are attracted to. However, there still isn't one that has the 'look', interchangeable lenses, and an ASP-C sized sensor (or larger) other than the R-D1/digital Ms.

If the R-D1 doesn't float your boat and $2200-2400 is too pricey, you need interchangeable lenses w/ASP-C or greater, and the NEX is too 'modern' looking for you, your last option is to wait.
 
Depends on what you're doing with the camera; what kind of work.
If you are a journalist, in 135 or equivalent (and I take some liberty here) you have a few options. A pro or pro-sumer DSLR and if you need something smaller a Canon S95. Nobody cares about a little bit of barrel or pincushion. Or noise.

If you are doing "slower" journalism, an essayist, or an artist, or in Ansel Adams' phraseology, a "working practitioner" and you happen to like rangefinders, you've got a similar plethora of options.
You can buy a D300 or a D7000 from Nikon for around a grand--less if used. Superb machines. Canon offers similar solutions.

You can do stunning work with any of the Fuji F20/20/etc series.

But, if you want to put rangefinder lenses on digital bodies, and you're not going the RD/M8/M9 route, you're off into adapter land.

I earn a portion of my living shooting with Nikon products. I've used Nikon for over 30 years and I'm comfortable where the controls are. But I have a lot of experience with rangefinders - my first camera was a 4x5 with a rangefinder and I just sold the last of the M-bodies including a pair of M6TTLs. I'm trying to convince myself that that was a good idea, but I'm happy not to be dealing with film anymore.

I have a bunch of lenses left over, about half CV and half Leica, that I'm using on a Panasonic G1 as a smaller high-optical quality solution. It took about two weeks before I started getting the results I was looking for. Learning to focus using an EVF, even one as good as the Panasonic's was a challenge. The menus and location of controls is just a matter of familiarity.

But the files are great. I'm not even bothering with RAW. Screen viewing doesn't do justice, the print is the pudding, as it were, but here's an example.
ianadams_2011.jpg

Author and screenwriter Ian Adams (left).

Technical: Panasonic G1/Leitz 40mm Summicron-C 1/160 sec at f2 ISO 100


The ripper is that I'm often too close to focus with this set up. I'm used to being able to focus to about 18" or a half-metre with any of the zooms I use on the D3 bodies. The rangefinder lenses, with the exception of the ultra-wide (a CV 12mm which on the G1 gives an angle of view of approximately 24mm relative to 135 format) all stop with the plane of focus at about 36" or one metre. Yes, we can use depth of field, but...... happily the crop factor actually works well. I'm using two bodies and one has the CV 12 and the other the Leitz 40. I carry a Tele Elmarit M if I need longer. Gives me the compression of the original focal lengths but with an angle of view that is narrower. Call it roughly 24mm to 180mm in a package smaller than one D3 body.

Further irony: there is nothing in this image that couldn't have been done with the D3 and any zoom. There is no increase in sharpness in practical terms (I'm shooting wide open for a reason here and it has nothing to do with technical image quality) nor are there any straight lines compromised by the distortion inducing zooms - which I don't really care about anyway. It's an over-rated discussion by folks who can't see content.

The principle advantage of the set up is it is a little quieter. But neither the Panasonic, or the Olympus, or the M8/9 are as quiet as, wait for it, yes, the Nikon D7000. I bought one to replace a D70 and the quiet mode is, well, extremely quiet.

So I don't know. I prefer a one camera-one lens set up. If I use two in anything other than the dark, I'm now using the D3 with the 20-35 or 16-35 and the D7000 with the 28-300 which gives me AOV roughly 42ish to 450 ish. Good for some things, not so good for others.

Most of the time I'm working with one lens on the D3. Either the 80-200 2.8 or the 28-300 slow but with VR.

There is no perfect solution, but I know that I don't like having to think about where say, the exposure comp button is on different bodies - fortunately I have been able to set that up so that it's the same on every body I use--an advantage of firmware. But I also know from over thirty years of doing this that I'm happiest with one body and a good zoom and if I need more I like to stay in the same system. Means less for me or anyone else to carry and fewer compatibility issues.

That said, with relevance to the OP, any of the offerings out there will work just fine. It becomes a matter of preference. There is no real debate about image quality. Any of the pro-sumer and pro offerings are good enough for the serious photographer who is intent on making pictures. The rest is preference. Mine is not to have to sacrifice accurate framing, focus and real preview of DOF. And that is the advantage offered by the adapter-ed digital body used with good lenses, legacy or modern. You can see exactly, before you take the shot, what will be in the file.


...It's an over-rated discussion by folks who can't see content...

i LOVE this line!!!!
 
it's like the campaign line...'it's the economy stupid'...the 'zen' of the matter, the core essence...

i use mostly all cv lenses now after owning many other brands etc.
when i get as good as my kit then i will start to look at other lenses again...and when the rd1 starts to disappoint then maybe i will look at other drfs...

for those who obsess over this or that kind of distortion or whatever...i just shake my head.

for me...it's the image stupid!
 
Another idea

Another idea

Here's another way to go that you might want to think about. Buy yourself a little DSLR (Oly E420 comes to mind, or maybe the Nikon D40 or 40x). These are pretty cheap now. Get one prime lens for it. For the Nikon, I'd get a 24 or 28 (thus being equivalent to a 36 or 42 on a film RF).

Now here's the important part of this idea. Set the kit up as a manual camera. Manual focus, manual aperture and shutter speed. Set the image quality to RAW. You might be surprised now how similar this set-up seems to a classic film camera. I do this with my Nikon D7000 and now feel its much closer to what I otherwise miss about my old Nikon F* film cameras.

The kit above won't cost you much and if you like this set-up, you can sell this and move up to a kit with a more up-to-date sensor. :)
 
As to the Epson, it is a fine camera. My point, poorly articulated, was that for what they usually go for (when you can find one), I could buy an M8 that is more recent and has better support, with a considerable upgrade in pixels. Perhaps these do occasionally sell in the sub $2500 range, but not that I've seen.
.

RD1 Regularly available here in $1350 t0 $1500 range -- or am I misreading the above?
 
Back
Top Bottom