Do the Monkey?

[BillBingham2]

I’ve been going back and forth with what and how, but really wanting to listen to my wife and go digital. E-410 seems great, but the glass and camera is just not me. I like more control, give me an ASA/Aperture Ring/Shutter Speed Dial and I am a happy camper. While the viewfinders of DSLRs are getting better, they are still not up to my F2.

So I came up with an idea on the train ride in this morning I wanted to see if anyone else was doing it with the R-D1. Is anyone Chimping with long lenses?

Chimping I think is a term that describes the look of a photographer when they hold the camera up with to hands away from their face and look at the LCD as their viewfinder. I’m thinking a 105/2.5 and 180/2.8 would do fine, have to adjust the aperture after focus. I would get an F to M adapter for the lenses. I know it’s not perfect, but it’s basically an electronic ground glass.

For my 28 and 50mm lenses I would use the rangefinder.

Anyone doing this for the occasional shot?

Thanks.

B2 (;->

(for those without younger kids, Do The Monkey is a Whiggles song)

 

[oftheherd]

I always thought chiimping was looking at the results right away. When I am using a digital I often do that. If my grandson is with me it isn't a question, we will chimp.

I don't see anything wrong with what you propose. I do that too, except that I dont' have interchangable lenses on my P&S digital.

 

[BillBingham2]

I'm wondering specifically with longer lenses, lenses that you can not use with the rangefinder. The R-D1 has a short EBL and would not work for. Has anyone tried to focus longer lenses on the viewfinder.

I do it all the time with my wife's digital as it has no viewfinder (very small).

I think I might need a hood in bright light, but wondering if anyone has experience.

Thanks.

B2 (;->

 

[JNewell]

Thinking out loud for a moment, I think the weakest link in that plan would be focus. Using the LCD, you can get framing exactly right, obviously. Exposure can be gotten very close or better, maybe with the aid of a displayed histogram. Focus, though, would be very hard to judge with precision on the LCD, and DOF would not offer much margin for error with lenses of that length (and the issue would be made more critical because of the effective magnification caused by the smaller sensor).

What do you think?

 

[JNewell]

I'm wondering specifically with longer lenses, lenses that you can not use with the rangefinder. The R-D1 has a short EBL and would not work for. Has anyone tried to focus longer lenses on the viewfinder.

I do it all the time with my wife's digital as it has no viewfinder (very small).

I think I might need a hood in bright light, but wondering if anyone has experience.

Thanks.

B2 (;->

I'm skeptical about the size and resolution of the LCD being sufficient for this purpose...

 

[RF-Addict]

B2,

I don't think rangefinders and long lenses are a good marriage. Why not get something like a Canon G9 - it is a great camera that gives you tons of control (all manual, incl. focuing to all automatic and everything in-between) and you can shoot RAW. It even has a traditional viewfinder, if you don;t want to use the rear LCD.

The image quality is very good and you can shoot 100% silently for street photography.

 

[SteveM(PA)]

Wait, Bill you know this LCD isn't live, right? It's only for review. 🙂

 

[kshapero]

I do not think you can do this

 

[BillBingham2]

So much for that idea, that suck, thanks everyone!

B2 (;-<<<<<<<

 

[JNewell]

Wait, Bill you know this LCD isn't live, right? It's only for review. 🙂

Shame on me, I completely forgot that! :bang: 😀

 

[BillBingham2]

I have been a big proponent of getting rid of the LCD on the back of a RF, but now I think I have found a use for it, CRAP.

I would think that a zoom in feature (controlled by a single button toggle) that would should the central part of the image close to full scale (zoomed in) and then when you push the button again, it previews the full field. This would allow you to focus longer lenses and then frame to shoot. Now in a perfect world the amount of the screen displayed might be some what adjustable so when shooting sports it’s enough to focus but still show a bit of the frame.

This would not replace a SLR for full time shooters, but for the folks who do stuff from time to time, micro work, want to reach out and shoot their kid playing football, this would work OK.

Perhaps the idea of getting rid of the LCD would lower the cost enough so you could afford a DSLR too?

B2 (;->

 

[victoriapio]

Chimping indeed means pointing at the screen when the 2-second preview comes up and saying "Oooh! Oooh!" like a chimp. The thread confused me too because Bill seemed to be asking about whether a live preview is possible. No, it's not.

I also think long lenses wouldn't be good on the R-D1.

Just like most long lenses are not good on ANY rangefinder without glasses, special attachments, etc and even then the results are variable.

O.C.

 

[jlw]

In principle I like this idea of a DRF using live preview as a focusing aid for longer lenses. An optical RF is great for lenses up to about 90mm, but doesn't have the accuracy needed for longer ones.

So, a live-preview feature would solve this problem. You could frame the image through a shoe-mounted finder, then focus on the LCD at high magnification.

In other words, it would work about like the live-view feature announced for the Nikon D3/D300, while still providing the benefits of an optical RF for everyday shooting. One side advantage is that it would give an expanded capability without enlarging the camera, since all the parts needed are already there.

The downside is that for the live preview to work, the shutter would have to open... then close to get ready for the exposure... then open and close again to make the exposure. This would neutralize the fast response that's one of an RF camera's prime advantages.

Oh, yeah, I guess another downside is that manufacturers are not exactly crowding around to bring out digital RF cameras with enhanced features. They probably see it as too small a slice of an already-small pie.

Side note: For static types of shooting, such as landscapes and macro, it's perfectly feasible to do this with your R-D 1 as-is. Line up your shot, calculate or estimate focusing distance (if needed; subjects near infinity are no problem) then shoot a test picture and do a magnified quick review to check framing and sharpness.

I've successfully used a 135/2.8 lens this way on my R-D 1. Tip: Program your user button to activate the magnification feature for a quicker focus check.

 

[georgef]

I think you guys are talking about an SLR without the "R" 😀 , so no prism.
It also sounds like you want the whole SLR "look through the lens" thing without commiting to an SLR.
C'mon, say it: you want an SLR😀 😀 😀

 

[jlw]

No, what I really want is a digital equivalent of a reflex housing -- so I can have through-lens viewing when I need it, but not have to lug all the extra crap around when I don't.

Incidentally, the "R" is for "reflex," as in mirror -- nothing to do with a prism. There were scads of SLRs long before there was such a thing as a prism finder -- SLRs date to the 19th century (the first one was called the Marion Acadamy, IIRC) whereas the first eye-level SLR prism finder didn't make its appearance until 1948 or 1949 on the (East German) Contax D. (Yeah, I know about that earlier Hungarian eye-level reflex that Fred Spira unearthed -- Gamma Duflex, was it? -- but it was just barely a "production" model, and I think the original one used a hollow penta-mirror, not a prism.)

 

[PetarDima]

Bill,
you have to make some big decision ... I have Fujifilm S6500 fd digicam. My wife and bought it on credit - it has video recording option, as we all know - we use it
for recording kids, family gatherings ... it has LCD magnification when you use manual mod focusing and ... it's suffer :bang: as time passing by, I'm sure that
there's no accurate focusing without good RF or real prism viewfinder ...
Regards, Vlad ... can you try someones RD1 for a day or two - to see can you shoot with it?

 

[indianavince]

visoflex...

visoflex...

I'd try a visoflex for long lenses before you chimping approach. Part of the rangefinder mystique is shooting quick with instinct. Shooting a long lens like you describe is like shooting a view camera.... just use one if that is the case.

Get a D200 or Fuji S5 and Nikon's 80-400 if long lenses interest you. You will do a better job.

The RD-1 is for 20-70mm lenses I find my Elmar 90 a bit too lonf for the Rd-1...my opinion.... ps that is an opinion from someone who has made 100% of his living from photography for 20 years running........ so no arguing or flaming me.

 

[jlw]

The RD-1 is for 20-70mm lenses I find my Elmar 90 a bit too lonf for the Rd-1...my opinion.... ps that is an opinion from someone who has made 100% of his living from photography for 20 years running........ so no arguing or flaming me.

Flaming, no -- but hey, nobody here is exempt from a well-reasoned argument! (After all, a professional photographer is just a salesman who happens to make the product he sells...)

Anyway, while I'll concede that using lenses longer than 50 with an R-D 1 is inconvenient (because of the focusing-accuracy issue and the need for accessory finders) but it's not necessarily impractical.

I've been quite successful using my 100mm f/2 Canon on my R-D 1 for photographing lecture speakers; it's quieter than my Nikon DSLR, and the Canon lens is faster than any of the long SLR lenses I own (as well as being very sharp) so this is a good combo for lecture-hall photography.

The speakers usually stay put behind the podium, so you can set up the framing and focusing and then forget it -- one "chimp" to check your settings and from there on you don't have anything to worry about except watching for good expression and lighting on the speaker's face.

So, I'd say this "chimp-to-check" technique makes the R-D 1 a perfectly usable long-lens camera as long as you're not chasing moving subjects. If you'd rather use an RF for most of your shooting, and just need a longer lens for a few well-defined situations, I'd say it's a better alternative than lugging around your R-D 1 outfit and a DSLR outfit.

 

[jl-lb.ms]

The RD-1 is for 20-70mm lenses I find my Elmar 90 a bit too lonf for the Rd-1...my opinion.... ps that is an opinion from someone who has made 100% of his living from photography for 20 years running........ so no arguing or flaming me.

I recently bought a Canon 135 and found the results to be quite acceptable. It's a bit of a guess where the image frame limits are, but the resolution is very good. Chimping for this use would be very usable.

john

 

[JNewell]

Really? (Honest question, neutral tone of voice) The few times I've zoomed in on an exposure on the panel did not give me a feeling that the resolution was high enough to judge critical focus. (???)