If you were unable to shoot with a RF...

I asked this question because for me, even though my experience with RF cameras is limited, I have noticed that the OVF in RF cameras offer a very different shooting experience than shooting with a SLR or even an EVF.

With a SLR or EVE one relies on seeing the photos before putting the camera to the eye, with a RF camera, you look through the OVF first and then see the pictures; this allows for more improvisation and hence more creative photography. Is this a correct observation?
 
Well, I remember times then not everyone could afford RF, not to mention SLR.
You know what solution was... :)
Right, distance scale focus camera.
I also use my XA very often as scale, not RF. And currently playing with Rollei 35.
 
I would move on to any other camera.

I love rangefinders, but I also love TLRs, SLRs, and scale-focus cameras (Rollei 35). I sometimes use point and shoots, but I like those less.
 
Hsg said:
I asked this question because for me, even though my experience with RF cameras is limited, I have noticed that the OVF in RF cameras offer a very different shooting experience than shooting with a SLR or even an EVF.

With a SLR or EVE one relies on seeing the photos before putting the camera to the eye, with a RF camera, you look through the OVF first and then see the pictures; this allows for more improvisation and hence more creative photography. Is this a correct observation?
Click to expand...

Maybe for you. Works pretty much the same for me.

G
 
I would use what I'm using now... a mirrorless APS-C camera with interchangeable lenses specifically designed for that system.

My primary requirement is being able to operate the camera without holding it at arm's length as one would hold a child with a soiled diaper.
 
Hexar AF for the snaps together with a Rolleiflex 3.5 for the photos where I want to have more control over the result.
 
Hsg said:
If you were unable to shoot with a RF camera -- -- what would you do?
This is a hypothetical question to see how important the RF camera and its OVF is to your photography.
Click to expand...
I would simply use another camera. The rangefinder is nevertheless very important, because it is what works best for me.
 
I really like the RF approach, more than the SLRs. It's having to picture what I want mentally rather than relying on what I see. Or to put it another way, RF focus selection is seeing with nearly infinite depth of field and selecting focus within that, while SLR is seeing with shallow DOF and imagining how it will look expanded. EVF with manual lenses is seeing a low-fi version of the final picture - unless it's really dark and then I tend to focus with open aperture and stop down for the picture.

But I also use SLR, TLR, view camera, scale focus, fixed focus... I was not noticeably less happy about life before discovering rangefinders.

I wonder how much is early experience? My first camera, which I had for 10+ years, was a fixed focus VF camera. Has that influenced me to assume direct vision, deep depth of focus through the VF and a VF on the left? My 5YO wanted to go and take photos of birds the other day, and he specifically wanted to take the digital P+S because it has a screen on the back that he can use holding it out in front of himself. I've seen great photos he's taken with a film SLR, and offered him an older (CCD) digital SLR but the back screen "feels right" to him. I'll have to change that ... ;)
 
For something similar to the Nikon SP I usually shoot with, the Nikon F is it's SLR twin. I like the F2 as well, but it is noisier than the F, or at least my F2 Titan is. Lately I have been playing with an F4, and with it's silent mode, it is just about the quietest SLR I have tried.
 
I moved to RF cameras because I got bored with SLRs... and I already had tried MF stuff. The Canonet I got from eBay was a godsend. Without it, I would have abandoned photography altogether.

In these days, I use my SLRs for "jobs" and my RF cameras for fun. :)
 
Hsg said:
I asked this question because for me, even though my experience with RF cameras is limited, I have noticed that the OVF in RF cameras offer a very different shooting experience than shooting with a SLR or even an EVF.

With a SLR or EVE one relies on seeing the photos before putting the camera to the eye, with a RF camera, you look through the OVF first and then see the pictures; this allows for more improvisation and hence more creative photography. Is this a correct observation?
Click to expand...
The RF/OVF certainly offers a different experience, and one that has some advantages. But I'm not with you on the seeing 'direct view' pics just through the OVF, and beforehand with others. I see the scene and its photo opportunity directly before raising any camera to my eye. Surely, different people will have different approaches to the task...

Doug
 
I don't get on with SLRs, so I'd stick with my scale focus beauties - Trip, Minox, Pen D & Chrome Six.

Of course, there are AF digitals, too.
 
I've always been keen to try a compact autofocus camera with hotshoe OVF, like a GR, RX1, etc.

Otherwise despite posting on this forum now and then I don't have any special preference between RF and SLR, I quite like switching between them.
 
Hsg said:
I asked this question because for me, even though my experience with RF cameras is limited, I have noticed that the OVF in RF cameras offer a very different shooting experience than shooting with a SLR or even an EVF.

With a SLR or EVE one relies on seeing the photos before putting the camera to the eye, with a RF camera, you look through the OVF first and then see the pictures; this allows for more improvisation and hence more creative photography. Is this a correct observation?
Click to expand...
Interesting. Exact opposite for me.

Cheers,

R.
 
I have no problem with moving-mirror cameras, and keep many on hand. How about the Contax S2 or Nikon D3X? :)
 
Not all RF viewfinders are equal. I find some SLRs (OM1, FE2) easier to use than some RFs (Electro 35). A big bright RF VF like M4 is a wonderful thing. But no one type of camera is the be-all and end-all; I like other types just as much, sometimes more depending on the subject. Sometimes less. The important thing is to keep on seeing, and making pictures of what you see.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom