new generation of RF users

[James Brannan]

I guess I'm going to mirror parts of what has already been posted.
1. Fixed lens RF's are generally very cheap. It doesn't make sense not to try a few if you are curious. Long example...
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=27520
Short, Yashica Lynx 14, Silver Yashica MG-1, Yashica ME-1, Yashical Electro 35G, Black Yashica MG-1, Yashica Electro 35 GS, Yashica Electro 35CC, and a Black Yashica Electro 35GX. After I am done replacing seals or sending out cameras the need CLA's that I can't do myself I'll still have less money invested than I do in my Nikon 17-55mm.
2. Ditto on RF's breaking me of some bad habits I had gotten into. Overshooting a scene, at times sloppy hand holding technique, and not slowing down to study the scene are a few that come to mind.
3. I love low light. Leaf shutter RF's are still the best tool made for this that I'm aware of (not counting the tripod).
4. People do react different to the "cute" antique vs. the the big black SLR or DSLR with monster lens attached. Many folks smile when I hand them the camera so they can see it. Just the other day an older fellow I was shooting said, "Hey, that a film camera. That looks like something I would have used back in the 60's." He smiled, I smiled, the whole mood of things was a little more positive.
5. As has been said a thousand times, the RF experience.

I'm a film convert and a RF convert. Like others, I still do work for pay with my DSLR's only. For my fun it must be a RF!

 

[James Brannan]

Additionally, no offence to the "RF is better for some things" folks. Just for what people actually pay me to do a RF is not the best tool. For what I enjoy the most, a RF is.

 

[Jocko]

I think film and film cameras are becoming hip in a countercultural kind of way. I believe there's a trend in Japan to use film cameras with the same passion we use them here.

I think this is a very important point, and one which I know has been discussed elsewhere. At risk of gross simplification, Japanese culture thrives on contradiction, with parallel traditions of extreme individualism and conformity, of an avid hunger for novelty and kitch against traditions of exaulted craftsmanship.

Studying contemporary Japanese photography, one does feel that RFs, toy cameras etc. do have a real counter-cultural appeal, responding to a distinctly Japanese tradition of aesthetic revolt. Given the enormous significance of Japanese youth culture, that does make these cameras "hip", and must help popularise then in the west. But - to those who object to the term - "hip" is surely nothing else than having the grace to embrace ones own way - Catullus was hip. So were Wilde, Shakespeare, Byron, Blake, Keats, Presley, Holiday, Byrne... and Barnack! 🙂

Ian

 

[jonasv]

Sociologically speaking, younger people are very much more prone to follow trends (cultural, fashion, etc) than older people. I don't think you can argue against this.

No I cannot, but it is irrelevant to my point. Maybe it's different in the US but over here there is nothing hip about rangefinders, in fact nobody knows what rangefinders are. Yet I started using them anyway. And I've read many, many similar stories on the web now...

 

[dadsm3]

Not hip? Damn.....so much for my RF tattoo shop idea. Anybody wanna buy my mini-noctilux ear stud?

 

[foolproof]

Sociologically speaking, younger people are very much more prone to follow trends (cultural, fashion, etc) than older people. I don't think you can argue against this.

true, but some of us young photographers here realise their potential as a tool more than a trend. on trends and whatnots - arent older people just as prone eg : constant buying / exchanging of equipment,(due to having the funds to) as can be seen so readily on rff ? this is a trend element within a photographic culture, is it not ?

 

[RdEoSg]

I completely agree with Tim Gray. And happen to be the same age! 😛

I started off with film. An old vivitar screwmount somethinganother. Then at some point I got an AE-1 Program. I never bought much for it because I knew I wanted autofocus and eventually I made the jump and got an EOS 1N. I knew of rangefinders but didn't think too much about them at first, but more and more I wanted one after getting to play with a few. I've always loved Leica's and knew that was the one I wanted.

But then came digital! I have gone through 4 digital bodies in the past several years and currently have the 5D which is my main workhorse camera. I don't forsee myself getting anything different for quite some time because my main interest was a full frame camera so now that I have met that need I'm pretty content..

Which lead to Leica! I completely swore off film at some point along the way, but I also love shooting Panoramics and decided on an Xpan which I thought would satisfy my lust for a leica rangefinder as well. It didn't! And now I have both!

I use all of the cameras for their own strengths, but I admit I am a bit nervous about the prospect not so much of film in the future but of getting good processing done. Did I just spend a bunch of money for an M6 that will last 50 years but a format that will be extremely difficult to get processed in 15?

 

[Marc-A.]

My very personal answer to this very interesting question would be that:

It could just be a Lemming phenomenon. We old-timers are unwittingly leading a part of the new generation across the meadow, over the edge of the cliff, and into the ocean. 🙂

But in our modern times of digital pictures, there should be another reason why many young photographers come to RF, which were film cameras until very lately. Indeed:

I have just been disappointed by digital, too flat for my taste

Moreover:

The other big motivating factor for RF's is I notice I really don't take as many photos as I would like to because I don't have my camera on me. It's big. It's bulky. To get a decent non tele view, I can't use my 50mm (which is "compact"), I have to drag around my big 17-40 zoom, which quite frankly, can be a pain in the ass.

But why RF and not film SLR? As a matter of fact, I have a nice Pentax MX with which I used to shoot with but not anymore. Well, I must stress on the fact that its:

viewfinder was so small and dull compared to my regular RF camera that framing and focussing became a chore for me, the direct view of the RF where you focus on what you want and can compose the full view for me is what I prefer. I'm sure that all ages once trying and using an RF can both appreciate the limitations and the advantages. Not sure its an age thing though, more of an art thing. These people would probably still have gone the RF route regardless of the media used for the capture.

Guys, you're brilliant!

Best 😉

Marc

 

[RdEoSg]

he cheated!

 

[back alley]

i'm 55 AND i'm hip!

i started into this thing at 20 with a rf camera and i still use rf cameras.
had a slew of slr's along the way but always had rf's, even medium format rangefinders.
everything i do photographically is with rf cameras.

to recap...young and shot with rf's
now old and still shoot with rf's.

rf's all the way!!

 

[MoTR]

I moved from Film SLR to Digi SLR and now to film RF.
I love RF because it does everything i need it to do. Full stop.
No bells and whistles no fancy modes nothing but give me ehst i see.

Big bulky SLRs get in the way, they have their purpose, but for portraits and street an RF is the best tool.

Im shooting FSU RF's at the moment cause Im broke (Yes Im a 20yr Old Student 😛) but one day will get a Leica MP and a 35 'Lux, not cause their fancy but because their the best at what I want them for.
And yes I have shot with them 🙂

So basically, Im shooting RF and film again because its special.
With digital every moment is the same.
Everytthing is flat.
With B&W film, everytime you trip that shutter, its a moment frozen in time.
For me that doesnt happen with digital.
and using an RF brings me closer and lets me grab that moment more effectivly than any other system I have tried 😛

So there...


And cause Im hip too of course 😛

 

[erikhaugsby]

I sure hope that all of us ("us" being the 17-25 demographic mentioned) aren't here just because we've decided that retro is cool and old RFs are retro. I'm here because I've become incredibly interested in the photographic process, especially B&W film, and the manual action of my Leica.

Thenagain, if I'm in a minority by saying this, I might start to be nervous about the future of manual photography.

 

[colyn]

Is it just me, or has anyone else noticed the relatively large number of youngsters (18-25 year olds) that have recently become members and are either already using RFs or asking advice on purchasing a kit?
Is this the start of the resurgence of film, or simply an anti-digital backlash by a small group of Luddites?
Regardless, it's very encouraging and great to see....

I have a daughter in this age group (21). She says digital is boring.
Of the SLR and RF cameras she has she prefers the rf and carries a Leica IIIc whereever she goes.

I think for a lot of the younger generation it's a fad but for many they have discovered something more fun to use than digital

 

[Marc-A.]

if I'm in a minority by saying this, I might start to be nervous about the future of manual photography.

Don't freak out, we're standing by you :angel:

 

[40oz]

re: the hip quotient - isn't it remotely possible that things become "hip" because people start using them, until it seems everyone knows someone with one? It really has nothing to do with getting your filthy paws on a Kiev because it's "hip," and has everything to do with noticing that a lot of people are getting into using film rangefinders, therefore it must be hip. Some purchases, clothes for ex., are made solely to "fit in," or meet some standard of "cool," while others are made because they fit with your needs and wants, cameras for ex. There is the retro/nostalgia attraction, as well.

I'm now 34, and I started shooting film as a kid with a 126 Instamatic, then a Kodak 110, and moved to a Vivitar compact autofocus 35mm. In high school, I wanted an "adult camera" SLR like my dad's 🙂 A number of years went by without a camera at, then I purchased a Canon Elph Jr. for the lens and small size, despite the fully auto nature of the thing. Then I was gifted with a P&S digital. While small, the digital was still quite a bit bigger than my Elph, yet the processing charges were hard to argue with, so the Elph took up residence on a shelf.

After a number of years of taking many photos with the digital, I decided I needed more flexibility and more control over the exposure. DSLR's were a losing proposition for the non-pro, IMHO, given the never-ending cycle of replacement. That left film. B&W for now so I don't need to pay processing costs. I picked up a fully manual Minolta SLR, aquired a few lenses, and had fun. But it was increasingly obvious the bulk of the outfit was a hassle. After a bit of internet research, rangefinders seemed to be the answer.

I picked up a Canonet when the Rollei 35 I had my heart set on was sold before I got to the shop. I like it, but now I wanted more lol. I found a Kiev 4 with a functioning meter, and probably will "need" a Fed/Zorki someday soon 🙂

Damn, almost forgot! I picked up a few 120 folders a few month's back. Negs are too big for my film scanner, so I need to get into printing now, but the things are great - no meter, slow shutters, 2 are fixed forus and the third has no rangefinder, so taking is a slower, more deliberate process, but it makes me happy.

I am a fan of well-functioning mechanical things, like bikes, watches, and cars, which might explain some of my attraction to FSU cameras in favor of modern Leicas, et al. I think they are cool, and don't kid myself about them being "tools" of any kind. I do really like what they enable me to do - take a camera to the bar or a party and shoot photos of my friends and people I like the look of 🙂 For the most part, people really do seem to let their guard down when they see your camera is film, and "old" (rangefinder) to boot. My friends think it is cheating to use it to pick up girls, but hey, what good is it if that's not allowed?

 

[tajart]

film, digital, image making... a few years ago i was showing a group of art students how to poke a hole in a shim of brass to make a pinhole camera. they were so enamoured of this process, watching an artist make a tool, by hand, i thought i'd hypnotized them. they all went out and made or modified old cameras and made a lot of film based images. i think they responded to the immediacy and simplicity of making something to use as opposed to going out and buying corporate goodies, if this makes any sense. they were all young and hip.

 

[Olsen]

- A photo dealer here in Oslo told me that Leica cameras has turned 'hip' among young people because of a (cinema) film. Which film he did not know. Does anyone here know?

For my father, - born in 1923, RF was real advanced photography. He thought that SLR's was just very vulgar. Many of his generations thought so. He told me that you could trade a Leica for a kilo of butter from German POWS back in 1945, - with film in them showing their girlfriend back in Schweinsrohe and all. Or war scenes form the Eastern Front.

He never did, though, but bought a brand new one in Germany in the beginning of the 60'. - By then, SLR's were catching on, but he bought 'the old design'. To my disappointment. He gave it, he was very proud of it, to me when I went to study in London in the beginning of the 70'. I sold it to a friend to finance more beer.... I never told my father. I will never forgive myself. He died in 1986.

For me, RF cameras,- which is anachronisms in today's digital world, reminds me of my childhood and my father. (- Yes, I will see a shrink tomorrow) I am convinced, absolutely convinced, that the same sort of sentiments drive the enormous interest for RF cameras among my own generation in Japan, one of the most important market segments for Leica cameras in our time, in the world.

Sure, there is a certain sofisticated 'hipness' (which is not the right word, - have me excused, English is not my mother tounge) about a Leica camera. Compared to a Canon AE-1 which were vulgar, at best. Or not to say these shiny creditcard sized digicams people are flashing about today, and shooting with a streight arm,- in some sort of weird photographical Hitler greeting. What has the world come to?

RF photography is culture. As we knew it.

 

[matt fury]

I think the crowd using film cameras because of hipness (either conciously or subliminally) are using older SLRs.

 

[RdEoSg]

Just thinking about Olsen's post.. I think there is another reason I decided on the leica rangefinder. I hate being the same as everyone else. I got the dslr before a lot of people had them. I was the only person at my university to have one and I had to sit down with the instructors to work out a new way of turning in assignments and so forth because they wanted me to use it, but the school wasn't yet set up for it.. I had fun walking into class as the only person using the new thing! Now that they are a dime a dozen, I wonder if maybe it was part of the reason I am going back to a rangefinder. To many people have the dslrs so I have to be different again! I don't like walking down the street the same as everyone else!

Besides.. I get some perverse since of enjoyment when a "new" photographer comes up and says something smart ass about using that oooold camera and why don't I get a new one like his fancy digital Rebel before film is gone... Usually they shut up when I mention no thanx, my 5D will do just fine... Or they ask what a 5D is and then I just have to laugh and leave them wondering as I start shooting the leica again! 😉

 

[Stephanie Brim]

Everyone knows that I fall into this demographic. Everyone also knows that I don't like to be labeled something and then put into a corner. I use film because I love the process of shoot/develop/print. I use rangefinders because I love how simple and easy to use they are. There is no counter culture, 'hipness' reason to my choice.

Simple answer to a complex question.