new to rangefinders

[bluedust]

I have been taking photos for about 2 years now. I have only ever shot digital and initially thought that I would never shoot film. I would consider my self an photo enthusiast and I have shot a few weddings and I am currently a church photographer. The rangefinder camera has intreiged me for some time now and these are the reasons.

1. I wish I could take my camera everywhere with me but it is too big and it has 'steal me' written all over it. Rangefinder cameras are more descrete. All other digital compacts that are manual have those silly lcd viewfinders. Rangefinder is the obvious choice.

2. Having a digital slr means I have a small view finder; this means it is hard to see if things are in focus and therefore I rely on auto focus often.

3. I feel that I am missing something in the whole arena of photography if I do not try a rangefinder.

Now I have never touched a rangefinder before; but for some reason I feel addicted to the whole concept. I have ordered a cheap rangefinder on ebay to see if I will like it; it is the olympus rc from the 70's. Is the anticipation as good as actually using one or am I just crazy?

The fact there is a whole website about rangefinders must say I am not crazy and that I have recognised a good thing.

The main reason for this post is to ask this question: if I end up loving my new old rangefinder and decide getting a newer one which rf camera would be ideal for a beginner like me; considering I have never shot film before and I have 2 years experiance shooting digital.

 

[JoeFriday]

hi bd.. welcome to the club!

I've never used an Olympus RC, but I've heard other people rave about them.. hope you like it! I started not too long ago with digital cameras, too.. but I had the same misgivings about the equipment.. it seemed to get in the way of my photos quite often, and I found myself taking pictures that I didn't like but which the camera seemed to prefer (does that make sense?)

my photography style has totally changed now that I've gotten into RFs.. it's a rare occasion when I pick up one of my digicams now

 

[ray_g]

Welcome, bluedust. The RC is a great little cam, with a sharp Zuiko lens. I am sure you'll like it.

I'm with Brett about digital and RF's. Since switching to manual cameras from a modern whizcam SLR, I have come to appreciate having control as never before. More recently, I have been using a DSLR, and find myself manually focusing especially with wide lenses, taking a meter reading and setting the shutter speed and f/stop myself. Funny how sometimes, less is more. 😉

 

[bluedust]

you too?

you too?

I love my 20D and it is good for the work I do. But I do often find I take so many pictures I don't like. I think switching to film may help me think about what I am doing before I shoot.

What rf do you have?

 

[bluedust]

kit junky

kit junky

I also forgot to mention; I have a huge digital slr kit. I have a 20D and 10D with 4 lenses in total. I have a off shoe flash with bracker etc. I need all of this for work but when I want to have fun do I really want a large back pack full of camera gear?

I don't know if I will trade my digital gear but I know I will leave it home for an RF because I leave it at home anyway because the bulk is too much. I live in London and miss an amazing shot nearly everyday. *sigh*

What is the main difference between to old classic RFs and the newer RFs?

 

[jano]

A year ago I thought I was the only one going from digital to film, but apparently, I'm not unique! All those in my photo club think I'm whacko, but hey, my shots are just as crappy as theirs, and I had loads more fun taking mine 🙂

 

[VinceC]

Rangefinders (and also older all-manual SLRs) are a great way to learn more about photography if that's what you want to do. Camera technology is always aimed at making them easier to use and more automated for the casual shooter. But this takes away control for those who want to understand and take advantage of how the whole process works.

Digitals do tend to make people "burn" through pictures at an astonishing rate of speed. And I've seen professional photojournalists who should know better just blast away like they're clearing an al-Qaida stronghold with a burp gun.

The whole point of the "decisive moment" is to train yourself to just take the one shot that matters. And it's much easier to get into that frame of mind with a small, inconspicuous camera like a rangefinder. It erases all that technological clutter between you and what you're trying to photograph. It's not for everyone, but it sure looks like it might be a good road for you to explore.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

RF's are just fun to use. They are small, straightforward, and do not require menu options to operate. The RC is a great camera, very sharp. Try it, you'll like it.

 

[JoeFriday]

bluedust, I've got a rather large assortment of SLR lenses and filters that I keep in a (way too big) camera backpack, also.. it's nice to have a DSLR around for special purposes (mostly to take pics of my RFs), but even my cheap RFs are more valuable to me.. funny how it works that way

the differences between older and newer RFs are mostly two things... price and modern conveniences (AE, or just metering in general).. there are tons of great older rangefinders sitting around in people's closets.. and even a lot still being used regularly.. the quality of the stuff made decades ago is so much better compared to the planned obsolesence of modern appliances.. the older stuff will still work as well 50 years from now, whereas the newer gear has yet to prove itself

on the other hand, having a built-in meter can be nice, too

 

[Fred]

Yup, Brett pretty much sums it all up. I went from film SLR to digital SLR and a bit of both for a while . Unless I'm doing stuff for other people I shoot 95% film with an M mount RF. The difference is now I enjoy taking photo's again using to quality glass. My AF SLRs go out now and again as do my old Pentax MX and Canon A-1....

 

[FrankS]

Welcome Bluedust!

First, nothing beats the anticipation! You can become addicted to this feeling.

If you like the Oly 35RC, for your next RF camera you may consider inter-changeable lens cameras. You have a choice to make: new or used.

If new, then you can't beat the Bessa R with 35mm lens deal. You get a big, bright viewfinder and a built-in meter. A step up, still in new, is the R2a (or R3a) which adds AE exposure option and a Leica M-mount (instead of the R's screw mount.)

If used, you have to decide: German, Japanese, or FSU. (former Soviet Union)

If FSU, you have to decide Kiev/Contax mount or LTM. (39mm Leica thread mount) LTM is more versatile as it will fit more brands of FSU cameras (Fed and Zorki), and will also fit the Leica and Japanese cameras.

If Japanese, then you have a choice (mainly) between Canon, and Nikon cameras. The Canons use LTM while the Nikons have their own which is similar to the Contax/Kiev mount but not exactly so that wide angle lenses can be shared but a focus difference makes using long lenses or fast normals troublesome. Nikon bodies and lenses have become expensive collector pieces.

If German, then you have a choice between Leica and Contax cameras. The Contax can share lenses with the FSU Kiev camera except that postwar Contax bodies will not accept the FSU 35mm Jupiter 12 lens.

If Leica, then you have to choose between earlier screw mount bodies or the later much improved M-mount bodies which feature excellent viewfinders compared to the squinty screwmount body finders. M-mount cameras will accept excellent Leica m lenses and the older LTM lenes (German, Jappanese, FSU) via an adaptor.

This is just a brash overview using a rather broad brush.

This is just scratching the surface of the interesting RF photography stuff you are about to learn. Enjoy!

 

[Toby]

If you decide RF is for you the Bessa R is the most cost effective way to go. In the UK ffordes in Scotland currently have a bucketload of ex-demo Bessas with various lenses I think the website is www.ffordes.co.uk although I personally have never bought from them.

 

[TPPhotog]

Toby I've got things like lenses from them in the past and I was happy with the service. Next day delivery and polite knowledgeable service. Usual disclaimer of no connection with them other than they accepted my cash LOL

 

[ray_g]

Of course, Frank was referring to the rangefinders with interchangeable lenses. There is a whole other world of fixed lens RF's, like the Olympus you are getting. If you have not yet seen them, the reviews on http://www.cameraquest.com are worth reading.

 

[FrankS]

Thanks, Ray. That is correct. I'll make an edit to clarify that.

 

[bluedust]

as I am new to film I will be getting my photos developed by someone else e.g. bonus print

is there anything to look out for when picking someone to do develop my photos?

To be honest I have been looking at the bessa; if I fall in love with RFs (which is likely) I can see myself getting one. I am hoping I do not find myself in the camera lens money pit again. Is it safe to say RF lenses have the same addiction to buying better lenses like SLRs do?

My likely requirements are a walk about RF to do street photography and portraits (especially candids). I would like it to be portable so I can go anywhere with it. And most importantly I would like to do low light photography. My fastest SLR lens is 2.0 which is great when it is in focus!! I would like a fast sharp lens which I can use without fear of ruining the photo because the viewfinder is so small you cant see if it is out of focus. I would prefer not to have so many lenses but I accept that sometimes it is required.

 

[ray_g]

Bluedust, it is not necessary to have so many lenses for RF photography, compared to SLR due to the nature of the subject. The upper limit would be the 135mm, and even then, not a lot use it comfortably. No macro, either, unless you really want to force it. No real zooms either, aside from the contax G's 35-70. That being said, lenses still accumulate because there are so many available especially for the M mount cameras (as Frank explained), both in modern and older versions, giving different "looks." If, like many, you ultimately get seduced to "the dark side," the equipment may be more costly than the SLR's.

 

[ray_g]

Addendum: Especially if, as you mentioned, you want fast glass 🙂

 

[TPPhotog]

Bluedust firstly welcome to RFF 🙂

If your having someone like bonus print processing your stuff and you want to shoot black and white may I suggest you use something Like Ilford XP2 (colour processed film) rated at 250 or 320 and processed normally at 400. With that film there is less chance of the labs messing up your negatives. For prints specify that you want them B&W or they will send you sepia looking prints.

 

[bluedust]

so does this mean there is no hope for get someone to process colour images?

I prefer black and white but I would like to try some colour