Is this really an RF forum?

[Bill Pierce]

I wonder if the rangefinder forum, especially for the digital folks, isn’t turning into the cameras smaller than a big DSLR forum. What I liked about my film Leicas was the relatively small size and the brightline finder. These days I put accessory bright line finders on small digitals like the G10 and do the same thing to DSLR’s when I need to shoot at high ISO’s. I just don’t find myself using my digital M much. I wonder if other rangefinder folks are picking up on the small digitals as street cameras or the kind of cameras that you always have with you or I’m just part of some lunatic fringe. Your thoughts?

 

[tomtofa]

Well, according to sales statistics you're hardly part of a lunatic fringe, but personally I prefer the digital M. Can't use an LCD, and an external viewfinder is an annoyance. I like seeing and focusing at the same time, and find the M8 and an extra lens is no burden in my daily carry bag (OK, my 'man purse').

 

[goffer]

I'd go digital M if I could afford it. Recently picked up a NEX-5 with F and M adapter to hopefully subdue my lust for an M8, so far so good. Sure these new mirrorless/m43 cameras aren't rangefinders but they carry some of the same motifs that make RF's so great.

 

[Pickett Wilson]

If the forum demanded strict adherence to RF, it would be, if not already dead, then rapidly dying. The lure of digital, as film is getting harder to get processed, is pulling more and more here away from rangefinders, simply because the only digital rangefinders are not affordable to most people. Frankly, from my experience, micro 4/3 is plenty good, from an image quality standpoint, to do most anything RF's did in the film days. And as much as I love my Leicas, the Olympus E-P2 with the EVF in the hotshoe gets picked up much more these days. The fact that I can hang most any lens on it is part of the appeal. It's also small and quiet. And...it's digital.

If Leica continues to be the only company making a digital RF, this forum over the next few years will become something very different than what it is today. But, that's not a bad thing. The variety here is great from my vantage point. I could afford to buy an M8, and would have if M 4/3 hadn't come along. But, I'm just not interested any longer in an M digital.

 

[newspaperguy]

I'm with you Bill... I've turned to a CV 35mm bright line finder
on both my G-5, and more recently my Oly C5050.
Lock at 35mm, preset distances, preset aperture - just like I did with film RF.

BTW - Here's the Canon: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=127504&ppuser=20714

 

[DNG]

I'd go digital M if I could afford it. Recently picked up a NEX-5 with F and M adapter to hopefully subdue my lust for an M8, so far so good. Sure these new mirrorless/m43 cameras aren't rangefinders but they carry some of the same motifs that make RF's so great.

This are some of my thoughts also... I use my M5 with my 28 and 50, but, in tight times (like now, for me), I use my Panasonic G1 to save the film expense, or Pentax K20d for wide angle stuff.

I would love to own a M9, but, I don't see that in my future at the moment.

It all boils down to what a person can afford. The m/43 & NEX cams are a old photographers dream... a short register that allows ANY brand lens to used on the SAME digital camera !! Yes at a loss of some field of view, but, I don't mind, some may not like it, but not me.

 

[FrankS]

If the forum demanded strict adherence to RF, it would be, if not already dead, then rapidly dying. The lure of digital, as film is getting harder to get processed, is pulling more and more here away from rangefinders....

I wonder if we have access to sub-forum use statistics that could confirm or deny this assertion. I would find that interesting.

My opinion is that Picket is wrong here, but I understand that people see what they want to see. I am just as firmly in the classic film camera camp, as Picket is in the digital one.

 

[feenej]

I still don't own a digital camera much less a fancy interchangable lens small one. I don't mind reading about them here.

 

[back alley]

i keep telling people...get an rd1...small and simple and affordable (sort of)...

 

[back alley]

as for rff dying...there are so many old leicas around that i doubt that it would happen.

and that's not counting the nikon s2 and s3 crowd!

 

[Bill Pierce]

I think the film Leica is alive and well - and justifiably so. I know major photographers who have chosen to stick with it and with silver printing also. When Kodak announced the discontinuation of Microdol X, Fotocare, a NY store that services many of the really fine photographers in the area, ordered hundreds and hundreds of gallons of the developer. While I think it will get harder and harder to get materials for film photography, it certainly will not be impossible. Die-hard “filmers” will persist and the Leica will be among their favorite cameras.

But digital is going to become, indeed, is, the main stream. A digital Leica is a tough call. So many existing lenses, so many edge rays coming in at different angles... relying on the lenses themselves (which will also be used on film bodies) to solve a number of problems where other manufacturers turn to digital correction. A camera that was a legendary “available darkness” tool now with a CCD sensor that falls far behind the high ISO performance of other professional level “35mm” digital cameras. And yet, if the camera moved too far away from the imprint of its film cousins, if it no longer looked and handled like the film cameras that earned Leitz its reputation, sales would probably drop. It’s really a tough problem for Leitz. I have no idea how you solve it. Maybe it isn’t a problem. Amateur photographers, not professionals, have always been the ones that gave camera manufacturers the money to survive. The fact that professionals used your camera was good advertising, but the amateurs delivered the money that kept the company alive. Still, I'd worry if too many of my customers were Leica "fans" rather than skilled amateurs who used the best equipment they could afford. "Fans" are notoriously fickle.

 

[NickTrop]

Not so slowly - but surely, film stocks are disappearing. Labs are disappearing. Currently produced film cameras are few and far between. Digital is improving, the technology, SW, and IQ is improving with each generation. Prices are dropping. Staunch film users - the last hold outs, are facing the decision to continue with film or embrace the not so new (at this point).

For this to be a rangefinder forum - well, that leaves very few choices, excluding old (and getting older) cameras. These are often expensive options. There are those, like me, who have chosen other digital options because we can't/won't plunk down the duckets for something like an M9. However, this is one of the greatest photography forums because of its members. - The site can take a hard line and have it be 100% discussion around rangefinders, or evolve...

 

[helen.HH]

as for rff dying...there are so many old leicas around that i doubt that it would happen.

and that's not counting the nikon s2 and s3 crowd!

lol ...I'm bordering on the lunatic gringe of Both Groups

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Yes, a few things add to the change on RFF... Old RF users show more and more interest (posts, views) in small-sensor, small digital cameras (non-RFs) and tag them as "good enough". That's a small part of this change on RFF. The biggest part is the new young members from the present sales wave: after the megapixels lie, companies got to convince common people they could make great, better, pro photographs if they bought other kind of cameras instead of the common flat compact digital point-and-shoots they already had: everybody wants these small digital cameras with interchangeable lenses... The message is "you can buy a system like the ones a pro uses, but smaller and for little money"... People buy, and their images are the same, and the forum is changing as the world is changing. Some RF people will stick to RFs, and some newcomers will come to RFs, but the majority of new people here will be non-RF small digital camera people...

Cheers,

Juan

 

[DNG]

lol ...I'm bordering on the lunatic gringe of Both Groups

Yes, this is the future, ambidextrous shooting 😱 😀

 

[gb hill]

as for rff dying...there are so many old leicas around that i doubt that it would happen.

and that's not counting the nikon s2 and s3 crowd!

Hey! what about us Bessa users?....We don't get no love? 😉 Surely there is 3 or 4 of us left on here!😀 Seriously...I think the 4/3 cameras have had a bit of an impact here!

 

[Bob Michaels]

I wonder if the rangefinder forum, especially for the digital folks, isn’t turning into the cameras smaller than a big DSLR forum. <snip> Your thoughts?

I am the anomaly here since I consider all of this to be no more than "labels" to which I have an aversion.

Whether your camera focus via rangefinder or a reflected image on a screen, whether it registers on a piece of film or a digital sensor, all makes no difference to me. It is only the resulting photo that counts.

I guess I am a photograph person and not a camera person. This is probably is the reason I post so little.

 

[back alley]

the reality here at rff...is that very few are rf exclusive users...
most have a rangefinder or 2 and a dslr or m4/3 or...
a few don't even have a single rangefinder.

i have an m4/3 for fun and to take pics of my rd1s, also to play at macro when in the mood.

but my 'serious' photography is strickly rangefinder.

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

Hey! what about us Bessa users?....We don't get no love? 😉 Surely there is 3 or 4 of us left on here!😀 Seriously...I think the 4/3 cameras have had a bit of an impact here!

I tend to think few people know about the huge amount of Bessas around...

Cheers,

Juan

 

[Leigh Youdale]

Two Bessas, one M6, ten CV lenses, and a Rolleiflex. Oh, and the Nikon which has a macro lens amongst the others and which I hardly ever use and the GF-1 which I don't really get along with.
I'd noticed the proliferation of other types too, but as everything is neatly (well, mostly) placed in various labelled forums it's no problem to pick and choose those that interest me and ignore the rest. It's a broad church we belong to, and if the involvement and support of others makes my access to the portal a more complete and easier experience then I don't mind supping at adjoining tables, even if not sitting in the same pew.