Is the G1 a rangefinder?

Is the G1 a rangefinder?

  • Yes! It's as much a rangefinder as any other RF camera.

    Votes: 4 8.2%

  • Well, it is adaptable to RF lenses, so what's the problem?

    Votes: 9 18.4%

  • No, I don't see a rangefinder anywhere on the camera.

    Votes: 32 65.3%

  • I wouldn't touch this debate with a ten foot pole!

    Votes: 4 8.2%
  • Total voters
    49
Poll is closed, but as stated I thought it entirely missed the point. I don't care whether the camera is a "rangefinder" or not. To me, the power of the rangefinder lies in its particular set of qualities as a photographic tool, regardless of the physical implementation.

In prior posts on RFF, I posed that electronic viewfinder (EVF) digital cameras were an approach to meeting many of these needs in a digital camera. The result in the G1, and in the much better EVF cameras that will follow, is something that's neither a direct-view RF nor an SLR. It benefits by losing the SLR's reflex assembly (like RF cameras), retains the pros and cons of TTL viewing (unlike RF cameras), and gains new features from its digital hertiage (histogram in the VF).

To me, much more interesting (and difficult) questions are:
  • Will mature EVF cameras challenge the SLR throne?
  • How well will future EVF cameras hold up to the various "rangefinder design ideals"?
  • Will hybrid direct-view/EVF finders emerge that provide the best of both rangefinder and SLR composition?
 
jwhitley said:
[*]Will hybrid direct-view/EVF finders emerge that provide the best of both rangefinder and SLR composition?[/LIST]
Click to expand...

I think it would be cool to have the heads up display approach where instead of the patch you'd have a EVF projection. You could control the magnification to help with focusing.
You know, so old folks could crank it way up. 😉
 
Sorry guys ... I didn't mean to be such a pain in the arse! I just sent Joe a PM as he was puzzled by my outburst.

I'll repeat it for the rest of you and please accept my opology!


Sorry Joe,

I didn't mean to come across as so grouchy and unreasonable .... I still love you deeply! 😛

A bit out of sorts today (personal stuff) and I took it out on the forum which is unfair ... I'll go out and burn a couple of rolls of film instead. My aplogies!

Cheers ... Keith. 😱
 
If by a "rangefinder" you mean a camera that focuses using a rangefinder mechanism, then it is obviously not a rangefinder. But "rangefinder" camera has come to take on other meanings. For example, is a rangefinder camera that has a lens mounted that only does zone focusing (e.g. the CV 15mm) still a rangefinder camera? Most people would say so, because it has the other attricutes of a rangefinder camera: small, unobtrusive, quiet, excellent at low-light/available light photogrpahy, etc. etc. In that sense, the G1 is the pure digital heir to the mantle of the rangefinder camera. As digital cameras develop we will see the current era as a time that gave us hybrid digital cameras - made like old film cameras but with a "digital emulsion". Cameras like the G1 move the development of the pure digital camera forward significantly. In that sense, it is the embodiment of a true new generation of entirely digital rangefinders. But of course, who really cares what it's called? It's just different and excellent.

/T
 
G1 will be old news by spring because G2 would arrive with even more bells and whistles, but that would be overshadowed by 24 mp Canon G11, not to mention Lumix LX4 with 20/1.8 lens and usable ISO 6400.

All of the above announcements would be totally eclipsed by the first sub $1000 full frame SLR by Nikon and followed soon by Canon... And the year would end with Nikon medium format digital ranagefinder...

While all this is happening some of us still will be running around shooting with Ms or Bessas and other old friends who we know and trust, and they have hardly changed in decades.

Getting excited about digital cameras are like getting excited about sunrise or sunset. Bad example but what I'm trying to say is we all know the drill and its boring and predictable the same way that every day the sun will rise and sit.
 
digitalintrigue said:
Kinda like some posts.
Click to expand...

the first digital P&S that I ever bought, died recently. the sensor just went blank.

Anyway, I threw it away without a second thought.

My first film camera is in a box with silica gels and it is a P&S as well - i love it more than any cameras that I have owned.
 
Last edited:
Nh3 said:
While all this is happening some of us still will be running around shooting with Ms or Bessas and other old friends who we know and trust, and they have hardly changed in decades.
Click to expand...

Because film is a mature technology. Stable, predictable, and very useful.

Utterly boring from a technical point of view, but good for making photographs.

Getting excited about digital cameras are like getting excited about sunrise or sunset.
Click to expand...

I get excited about sunrise and sunset, but perhaps not everyone feels that way. With regard to digital cameras, I get excited about a new technology that is advancing by leaps and bounds, and which I am alive to see begin to mature. That's cool stuff.

You remember, like when the first cars and telephones started showing up when you were a boy, grampa.

Bad example but what I'm trying to say is we all know the drill and its boring and predictable the same way that every day the sun will rise and sit.
Click to expand...

I like film and all the advantages that a nice stable and mature technology can provide. And I like digital and new advances coming every day, making it better and better.

And that's bad because?
 
Nh3 said:
the first digital P&S that I ever bought, died recently. the sensor just went blank.

Anyway, I threw it away without a second thought.

My first film camera is in a box with silica gels and it is a P&S as well - i love it more than any cameras that I have owned.
Click to expand...

Of course. All film cameras are good, all digital cameras are bad. BORING. But whatever, let's have that stupid fight again. I'm sure no one will get their feelings hurt, say something horrible, and stomp off or get tossed overboard.
 
I was thinking about this rangefinder definition as it pertains to camera usage modes. A rangefinder camera is not necessarily a requisite to the type of shooting that many people associate with rangefinder-type photography.

I used to have an Olympus Stylus film point-&-shoot. In actual use it was pretty close to "rangefinder-like"; not because it had a small focus patch in the middle of the finder (it doesn't); not because it manually focusses (it doesn't); not because you can use your choice of fine M-series glass (you can't); but because the wide, clear, optical viewfinder and the camera's general ease of operation made it transparent to the image-making experience. It was a useful, user-friendly tool; compact, lightweight, etc.

My Zorki IV has many of these same attributes, albeit minus the built-in light meter; and it weighs, well, a bit more than the film P/S, and certainly much more than the new Panny G1.

My Retina IIIC is also a very capable rangefinder; very similar to the Zorki in actual use, since the selenium cell meter is dead; but again, it's much heavier than a modern P/S.

Comparing the image-making experience of using the Retina vs the G1, I find the G1 at least as usable, and very "rangefinder-ish". I prefer to keep the LCD folded inwards and turned off, and use the EVF only. Should I desire the "purity of experience" of manual-focus only, I can set the G1 to manual focus (via a mechanical switch on top, not via a menu) and then upon twisting the lens focus ring a very rangefinder-like focus window appears in the EVF. Except this window you can choose to move around anywhere on the screen, and it's zoomed in. It's not a rangefinder-type of paralax focusing using overlapping images, but rather like a magnified SLF-style focus screen appearance. But very usable and practical.

In dim lighting I find the EVF's electronic amplification of the scene to be very useful for composition and focus; again, it's not directly rangefinder-ish, but at least as usable; perhaps more useful in dim lighting than a non-amplified optical viewfinder.

So technically, the G1 is obviously NOT a rangefinder. But it exhibits many of the attributes of a rangefinder camera in terms of usage modes. It's a very capable, easy to use tool for creating photographic images discretely and quietly, all the while maintaining a high degree of quality.

It has its down sides, too, being a feature-overfilled digital camera. You have to work with it for a while to learn which software features are useful to your style of shooting, and which to just ignore.

~Joe
 
You know, I liked it here. Lots of talk and mostly laid back guys. The kind you'd like to meet whilst shooting an old camera. The kind with sound advice and a sense of (sometimes grumpy) humour.

But lately I see more and more pissing contests & hurt egos. Not amusing.

Btw, the G1 is not a rangefinder, but it is the revolution.
 
The G1 looks pretty interesting. I think I'll check one out when they go down a bit in price, along with the adapter prices.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom