Minimal Rangefinder Outfit.

The second sentence begins with "And" which is a joining word. It gives a poor impression when there is a grammatical error right at the get-go. (I don't mean to be nit-picky, but you asked for comments.)

The second paragraph begins: "Like many photographs...." and I'm guessing you mean to say: "Like many photographers...".

Still in the second paragraph it says: "With the advent of digital cameras, this rhetoric continues at an alarming pace." What rhetoric are you referring to?

I'm thinking you should get this proof-read before publishing it with your name on it.
 
Last edited:
the last sentence in that same (first) paragraph ends awkwardly, as well... "desire and to equipment"? it doesn't make sense to me

umm.. I see several other instances like that.. do you want me to go through them all here?
 
Thanks, I have made those changes. Proof reading was never one of my strong points... But thanks for your comments, they have been updated, and I will read it over myself as well again, to catch more mistakes.
 
At its final conclusion, what has been decided regarding a LM mount PM outfit? It consists of a Zeiss 25mm f/2.8 and a Voigtlander 50mm f/1.5 lens combination, coupled with a Voigtlander R3a.
Right on! I'm with you! 😎
 
final conclusion?

David, there are tons of grammatical errors in your article. Content-wise I am with you, but you really need to have someone whose strength is proof-reading to do this for you.
 
I pretty much agree with the content. I can go through and try and fix some of it if you would like.
 
I couldn't read the entire piece, but I get the impression that it may be an exercise in rationalization of a previously reached conclusion, rather than a pure and unbiased exercise in applying logic to a problem. Used Leicas and Canon P's, as well as vintage Leitz and Canon lenses should have been considered. FSU gear and Contax would further complicate the issue. 🙂
 
True, many thoughts and ideas from this was a record of past experiences and conclusions. But not so much the final specific conclusion. Many of the ideas have been around for a while, and many others have probably thought the same. The logic was individual, but the process generic, or that was my intent. Perhaps I should've stated that equipment to be considered had to be in current manufacture, again, a personal choice. But, the principles, I believe, can probably be applied to anyone, but then again, this wasn't a comprehensive treatise. Call it a systematic description of my journey.

bmattock, for me criticism is not a problem (I am in the design field) and for me, forces one to produce better work. But only if the criticism is positively intented, which is what I believe these comments so far are!
 
David, I am going to take a guess. An educated guess, but a guess nonetheless: it seems to me that you are struggling with two issues: 1) your thought is running by faster than you can write it; 2) you are thinking in another language.

Please correct me if I'm wrong. The contrivances in your essay are what I would expect to find in (on?) my earlier technical writings for High School for some of the classes I had to take in English (I went to a bilingual High School in Mexico).

Frank's other observations are, imho, right on: I think you're simply trying to explain why you think what you already thought from the beginning, rather than take the reader through your experience. You're explaining why you reached a conclusion which is evident to you, but which you have not outlined nor explained throughout each phase of your experience quite why, just simply that that is your conclusion.

I hope that helps.
 
eeyore said:
bmattock, for me criticism is not a problem (I am in the design field) and for me, forces one to produce better work. But only if the criticism is positively intented, which is what I believe these comments so far are!

Yeah, I'm just giving these guys a tweak. I appreciate the obvious effort you've put into your work, and the good-natured way you're responding to positive criticism.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
David: You've taken a very (well, almost painful, to me) methodical approach to the selection. There's a lot to be gleaned from your work, and I appreciate it.

In the end, you make your choices on mathematics and specifications. Your second paragraph now opens with:

"Like many photographers I spend an unhealthy proportion of time looking, reading and dreaming of this camera and that lens. No doubt, my skill in this craft would've be far greater had I invested that time into actually photographing."

So, I wonder, how will your choices stack up photographically? Will you like how the lenses render the images? Granted, they're high quality lenses, but that doesn't mean they're equal in their renditions.

And, as far as ruling out the ZI because it doesn't come in black, black bodies will be shipping soon. Well, supposedly soon.

Earl
 
"To further this discussion, the question is asked, what would be the ideal LM system, that is based on the principles of a PM outfit? For this, I would say, referring to the information above, a combination of 25mm, 35mm, 50mm and 75mm lens with two bodies. Both bodies being a Voigtlander R3a. And with this system, I would select the Voigtlander 75mm f/2.5 Color-Heliar and the Voigtlander Nokton 35mm f/1.2 ASPH. This combination would fit my photographic needs for a lifetime. The only possible addition would be a full frame digital M rangefinder body." EEYORE

This was what you had written at the end of a very long and technical essay on minimalism and photography.



" Be sure you check and get adapters for whatever camera you choose. Check all gear for mount " L39 Screw or M Bayonet mount" and decide whats best for you. I like the R2 better than the R and both of these have been discontinued. Dont forget about the L model for a inexspensive second body and I would reccomend a 35mm or 28mm on a L body with a 75mm or 90mm on a R, R2, R2a, or another 2 body setup would be R3a with a 40mm and a R3a with a 90mm. I would much preffer 2 bodys and 2 lenses compared to 1 body and 3 lenses. Be sure and let us know what you get and good luck."

This is what I wrote to a 16 year old kid around 24 hours ago who is interested in getting started with rangefinders.


Im a terrible writer and worse at spelling but you seem to be trying to hard and its not coming across as interesting or keeping the attention of the audience and furthermore there is a problem with critical facts. The framelines on a R3a are 40mm where you have suggested a 35mm lense and I failed to see mention of either viewfinders or lense adapters but it could have just been lost in there somewhere. Your entire point was directed at minimalism yet you relied on technical facts to the point of diatribe in a effort to prove you were correct in your assumption where you could just as easily explained things in terms of how you would use them and what you like to take pictures of.


Thanx for posting and opening yourself up for critisism, I understood you to want honest reaction to what you have written and I would like to encourage you by saying you have a good idea for a article and its much easier to come back to earth with writing than to climb out from under a rock. Keep on writing.
 
Last edited:
I think it is the first problem. People tell me that all the time, when I speak as well. I have been using English as my primary language for 20 years, so I am pretty sure I don't think in another language, unless of course, it is some weird language in my head... Perhaps I should add more that will take the reader through the journey, so to speak. But first up is to edit the current text... Thanks.
 
Back
Top Bottom