How do you use your rangefinder?

How do you use your rangefinder?

  • Family pics and everyday camera

    Votes: 407 58.4%

  • Professional work

    Votes: 77 11.0%

  • Landscape

    Votes: 247 35.4%

  • Street

    Votes: 432 62.0%

  • Don't use rangfinders at all

    Votes: 18 2.6%

  • Sports

    Votes: 15 2.2%
  • Total voters
    697
Hell, I just take pictures with it. I covered photokina with it; I'm working in a series called Second-hand Religion; I illustrate travel pieces with it...

Cheers,

R.
 
I use mine in all aspects and types of photography with the exception of macro. My most favorite way to use RF's is vacation because of the lighter kit I can carry compared to a loaded bag of lenses and an SLR. I once carried my F4s, zoom lens, M4-2 and 40mm/90mm on vacation. I've learned my lesson and will never do that ever again... 😱
 
Mostly photos of friends and family. Often in low, available light with a wide angle lens. I got my first M6 in 1990 because I was having trouble focusing my Nikon F in low light and now I use Leicas for most of what I do. My daytime camera currently is a IIIc in my pocket. M6 when I need more capability. Joe
 
Thanks for all the replies folks, however I meant to add a poll but somehow submitted a thread without one. That is the reason why the question seems too general 🙂))

What I meant is what are you using your rangefinder camera for ie. street, family pics, professional work etc.
 
bugmenot said:
Rangefinders have no specific usage location or field of photography. However, there are some types of photography they excel in, while not so much in others.

For example, you won't see many photographers using a rangefinder for Moon or Astrophotography (or any Telephotography in general). You also won't see too many people with a rangefinder in a sports game or similar events. Not that RFs can't do such things, but they are just not very good at it and will demand a very skilled photographer to do such types of photography well. Then again, there was a couple of people with large format rangefinders on the sidelines during Olympic Games in London. 😀 Rangefinders are also not very suited for macro work ...

I am sure you are quite aware of areas it CAN excel in, like street photography and anything where patience is a virtue, and there are no critical scenes that only appear for a fraction of a second and are gone afterwards. Any type of still or semi-moving objects that allow enough time to meter, focus and compose. That's where a rangefinder does well.
Click to expand...

Just to add to a very good answer, the absence of a mirror means there is less vibration and handheld shots at lower speeds than, say, an SLR are possible. I've taken shots indoors, on 100 speed film and at shutter speeds of 1/15th and still managed to avoid blur.

Plus, there's no blacking out in the viewfinder when you take a shot, which can help (me at any rate) tell whether you've managed to get what you were after or need to try again.
 
zvos1 said:
I like rangefinder cameras and have been using them last 5 years but I am not much of a "street guy" where rangefinders are traditionally used.
I'd like to find out how my fellow RFF members use their rangefinder cameras...
Click to expand...

Presuming this is an honest question:

An RF camera is not best suited to macro and close up work: they can be done but take the development of some technique and practice due to the fact that you cannot see through the taking lens to get the framing and focus correct without some trial and error.

RF cameras are similarly not best for when you need longer lenses—again, the focusing system is not accurate enough for lenses longer than about 135mm nor can you frame accurately enough to be worth the effort. Fortunately, my need for focal lengths longer than 135 is pretty infrequent.

NOTE: If you add a Visoflex to a Leica RF camera, you are using an SLR, not an RF camera. I just wanted to make that clear. ;-)
Click to expand...

Those are the two primary limitations of RF cameras. I do some street photography, but that's not all I do with a camera. I photograph parties, landscapes, friends and family, architecture, macro and table top, and some motor racing. The RF camera can do most of this well ... given the range of field of view from ultra-wide to medium portrait tele as the constraint, and with some effort for the macro and table-top work. For these two areas, I usually put down the RF camera and use an SLR or a TTL electronic camera.

For hand-held use with long lenses, 135mm equivalent FoV and up, the best camera is an SLR. For tripod use with long lenses, the TTL electronic camera is my favorite.

(BTW, the new Leica M announced at Photokina 2012 adds TTL electronic capability to the RF camera, so the new Leica M will obviate using another camera for all but the hand-held long lens situation. The SLR remains the best option for that situation.)
 
denizg7 said:
i buy an expensive lens and then turn the 1.0 1.2 1.4 5.6 8 knob all the way to 16 and then just random click to people's faces. This way i don't have to focus

i have a new book coming out in amazon called shooting while jogging , where i basically clack clack to peoples faces while exercising
Click to expand...

I have a lens that goes to f32, but it's kinda hard to jog with. The one that goes to f22 is a little easier to handle while moving. Will it make me a better photographer?
 
Serious answer to the OP post: 98% of my photography is a chronicle of my family's life. Portraits, candids, posed vacation shots, etc (as you can see from the images I've posted here). I occasionally will photograph a cityscape or landscape if something catches my eye. I find RF well suited for this type of photography, although for pure posed portraits I have much better results with the TLR, which overall is the camera I most enjoy using.

I was using a pro-level SLR prior to RF, with great results, but the weight of the camera and the size of the lenses made it hard to always have around. These days light and simple is my motto. I never have more than one camera and at most two lenses with me at any time.

Recently I was lucky enough to get a freebie rx100, so we'll see how that camera will will fit in the day to day shooting, but I cannot imagine it will be able to provide the same physical satisfaction of the other cameras.
 
bugmenot said:
You also won't see too many people with a rangefinder in a sports game or similar events. Not that RFs can't do such things, but they are just not very good at it and will demand a very skilled photographer to do such types of photography well. Then again, there was a couple of people with large format rangefinders on the sidelines during Olympic Games in London. 😀
Click to expand...
You can use them for close action.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=113876

.
 
froyd said:
I have a lens that goes to f32, but it's kinda hard to jog with. The one that goes to f22 is a little easier to handle while moving. Will it make me a better photographer?
Click to expand...

the important thing is a lens of such a high caliper needs to have no autofocus. If your lens is expensive and does not have autofocus feature it means its for professionals, and if you use it then you are a professional of the professionals , unlike nikon , or canon
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom