Digital Rangefinder Advice !?

JonR

JonR

Well-known
Local time
8:51 PM
Joined
Mar 20, 2007
Messages
465
View My Gallery
Friends

Can I have some advice/comments on a topic I have have been thinking about for some time. I am a great fan of Rangefinder film cameras and have a number of them incl Yashica CC, GTN etc and I am also a great fan of both film and digital SLR´s with several Nikon cameras.

What I am missing and looking for is the combination -- a really a small, compact "digital rangefinder" that combines the beauty of the digital environment with the feel and ease of use of a small old film rangefinder.

I know there is the Epson and Leica options but Epson seems to be an expensive dead end and the Leica is simply too expensive relative to what it really gives you unless you own a lot of Leica stuff from the film world.

So - I have been looking at the RICOH GR Digital which seems to be very close but it is relatively old for being a digital camera and I am not so sure the sensor is good enough. Then there is the new (announced) SIGMA DP1 which seems to be even closer with a fixed lens (allthough not fast), viewfinder, bigger and new sensor, advanced ED glass lens etc.

So - any comments on this -- would you go for a DP1 or do you know of anything else in the pipeline !?

Jon
 
Nobody? Well, I'll have a go. The trouble with the GR-D and other tiny sensor-size digital, for me, is the near-infinite depth-of-field they give at any reasonable enlargement. To me this often makes the photos look "flat". To me, a sensor sized at, say, the 4/3rds system (Olympus et al) or larger is needed. If you're avoiding SLRs that (AFAIK) leaves you the RD-1, the Sony A-1, the M-8 and the new DP-1. I hope the DP-1 works out. Provision for an external optical finder may have "saved" it. If it has nasty shutter lag, that may "kill" it for me. A faster lens would've been nice. But I really want cameras in this market segment of large sensor non-SLRs. Something different...

...Mike
 
Sensor size

Sensor size

Thanks for commenting... seems as if you are thinking the same way I am with putting a high emphasis on the sensor size... I am reluctant to go for the Ricoh GR due to it´s small sensor size even if the lens is relatively fast and would guess that the bigger size sensor in the DP1 is a bigger advantage than the sacrifice you have to do on how fast the lens can be (I guess there is a tradeoff bvetween lens apparatures and size of sensor in a compact camera like that !?).

So - if the viewfinder is good then in theory DP1 should be a very interesting camera worth waiting for instead of going for the GR....

/Jon
 
One point to consider is that none are digital rangefinders. There aren't any ecept for the R-D1 and the M8. All the others are dP&S or dSLR.
 
Well... technically speaking..

Well... technically speaking..

Yes, technically speaking if Rangefinder refers specifically to the technical way of building the cameras function to focus -- you are of course right.... but to me the beauty with the so called Rangefinders is much more the ease of use, the way to use a viewfinder to "see the photo" you will take, the size and the way you can use the camera in groups of people. That´s where the functionality is and if I can achieve that through a different technological solution that´s fine with me!

So yes, my way of wording is perhaps not technically correct - I was more after the "feeling" and "functionality" in a broader sense but using todays technology!

🙂
J
 
Last edited:
JonR said:
So yes, my way of wording is perhaps not technically correct - I was more after the "feeling" and "functionality" in a broader sense but using todays technology!

🙂
Click to expand...

Are you saying that any dP&S with a viewfinder will do? 🙂

You may not but if you want small and unobtrusive than the current slew of dP&S cameras hold promises. Many people use them and you won't draw any attention to yourself when you use one. Just make sure to turn auto flash off. 🙂

Seriously, a large(ish) sensor, good hi iso performance, low shutter lag, no auto focus/auto exposure calculation delays, etc. are all issues that IMO need addressing in a camera that equals the feel of a rf. Not having handled the GR or the DP1 myself, I can't give you any advice on these specific cameras. My advice would simply be: go to your supplier and try them out! There's no speculating in empirical testing.
 
Don't be afraid of the R-D1. Get a refurb or a used one and it should serve you for the next few years for half the cost of a new one.

The R-D1 really is the closest thing to what you are seeking.
 
Tradeoffs..

Tradeoffs..

Well there are constant trade-offs when choosing what equipment to use. I get by far the best photos using my D80 with one of the modern lenses like the 105 mm VR AFS but that is a very bulky set-up and not possible to use in many situations. Sames goes for the older SLR´s even if they are somewhat smaller like the Nikon FM2 with a 105 mm Series E-lens. That´s where the RF comes into play for me -- small, easy to use, quick, does not "sound" a lot and with a wide angle lense you can easily capture what you want without complicating things. My Yashica Electro 35 CC for example is a great camera to bring along to occasions where you do want to take pictures but do not want to make it into a photo-session. Now, the world is digital today and the possibilities to play, communicate and use an electronic version of the photo is fantastic. You can of course scan all the negatives (which I do) but the optimal solution will of course be a "digital RF". I have tried numerous "point and shoot" digital cameras and presently use the Nikon P4 which is very advanced with VR-technology, high ISO range etc but I do miss the possibility to use a viewfinder and with such a small sensor the photos get´s very "flat" even if they are sharp etc. This is the reason for searching for a "digital RF" and starting this discussion.... so far what I have heard still leads me to believe that the new Sigma may just be the camera I have been waiting for..../J
 
Jon,

I shoot the Ricoh GR-D and the Epson R-D1, often side by side. They are similar in that their quality is the sum of their faults. GR-D lacks dynamic range, has a noisy sensor at high ISOs, and its difficult to control depth of field due to the focal length and sensor size. The R-D1 has the crop to deal with, making wide-angle photography a bit of a pain, its pretty big for an RF, and there are build quality issues.

I love both 🙂

Plenty of recent shots from both in my Flickr gallery linked below. The GR-D offers great manual control, a brilliant snap focus mode, and can be made very stealthy (use optical finder and shoot with the screen off). Recent firmware upgrades also mean that you can colour bracket which sort of gets around the slow RAW write speed issue. Its a brilliant street cam, lets you get close (which of course you need to with a 28mm lens). About as RF as you get in a compact.

The main benefit of the R-D1 is access to wonderful old lenses and the full creative control offered by a big sensor. Also has great high ISO performance.

Might be worth waiting a few weeks for the new Ricoh - the GX-100. Still the same size sensor (in fact with even more megapixels squeezed in) but offers a 24-80 (I think) zoom in a GR-D body with an optional external electronic viewfinder.

And then of course you have the DP1 - very excited about that one myself, but a question of wait until mid-May at least, and its going to be more expensive than both the Ricohs...
 
Thanks...

Thanks...

Terao,

Thanks for comments and based on what you say I will check out the Ricoh Digital in the shop but I will probably wait for the Sigma DP1 before I make my decision. The Epson is not on my radarscreen since I figure the service and support here in Sweden for a product like that would be zero!

Will check out your Flickr gallery also.....

/jon
 
I prefer digital rangefinders, but I'm not a bigot about it. When my M8 died, and had to be sent for repairs, I bought a Pentax K10 with three prime pancake lenses. While I'm sure the K10 with lens would displace more that a Leica with an equivalent lens, it really is effectively not much bigger, especially if you use the Leica with the Leica grip, as I do. The K10 has a very good viewfinder (with built in diopter), full weather sealing, and autofocus and image stabilization that works with heritage Pentax lenses. I think of it as an SLR for rangerfinder guys. It costs about $900, for the body, and the body with the three primes cost $2,500. The 43mm prime, which is effective 64.5 with the 1.5 crop, is a 1.9, and with autofocus, we're talking something close to Noctilux, without the extremely shallow depth-of-field...

JC
 
i think that panasonic lc5/digilux 1 can be good alternative to digital rf. they probably can be find cheaply now and they make pretty nice photos in my opinion.
 
I think of it as an SLR for rangerfinder guys...


I've been interested in the K10D for exactly these reasons. My main uncertainty is the quality of the 21mm Limited pancake lens. It seems you own it. What's your opinion on its qualities (sharpness, tonal rendering, bokeh, etc.). The examples I've seen on the web leave me with lingering questions, but that could at least partially be due to the photographer, of course.
 
I do have the 21, but haven't used it a lot. My feeling generally is that good Pentax lenses are the equivalent of good Nikons; and because the K10 supposedly (I haven't tried them) is usable with the old heritage lenses like the Takumars, it has some of the lure of the Leica. But: from looking at shots from both on my computer, the Leica seems to me to have a definate edge in sharpness, but not especially in tonal rendering (though it feels different.) Here I'm talking about the 21 pancake compared to the Elmarit 21mm f2.8 ASPH. The Leica 21mm can produce shots that seem to jump out at you. I'm traveling tomorrow, and I may take both along just to see what comes out of them mano-a-mano.

As for handiness, here (if I can do this right) are two quick shots taken on my office carpet with a Canon G7 P&S, for comparison.
 

Attachments

  • 2camx2.jpg
    2camx2.jpg
    40.8 KB · Views: 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom