Rangefinder - A different culture ?

[dee]

I am new to Rangfinders , mid 2006 , and use my M8 and Leica Dig 3 DSLR extensively , but somehow , here , it's not so much about the equipment , but a kind of culture steeped in deliberation , care and teaching . [ which I lack , LOL ] and continuity .. history .

Pick up most magazines these days and Digital SLR seems to swamp the content somehow. This seems to be so in many other photgraphy places .
It's as if the purpose of an SLR has been buried under all the Photoshop stuff etc . I find it quite overwhelming . This does not happen with Rangefinders - for obvious reasons .

Despite the name , this place is great for traditional values - irrespective of equipment ... and I hope shortly to load a Contax III camera with inexpensive reversal film once more .

 

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Dee,

I think you're right. RF users march to a different drum -- or possibly a whole set of different drums. In fact I doubt that many of us hear the same drum as one another.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

SLRs were made for film too and they generally required the same care and deliberation to get good results from that rangefinders do, at least until the plastics and electronics and autofocus models that came into being in the late 1980's took over the SLR world, but that was before digital.

 

[chris000]

I do think we are at the stage in photography (and many other things) where technology 'advances' for its own sake and not to serve the needs of users. On the whole I think that has not really gripped the Rangefinder world (at least not yet) and I like that.

Although I genuinely love the results I get from using film, part of why I still like to use it is, if you like, a personal statement against the continual march of unnecessary technology.

In itself I don't regard the growth (and now dominance) of digital photography as a bad thing, but digital technology does provide far more scope for overblown gizmos and gadgets that most users will never need or use.

 

[rxmd]

SLRs were made for film too and they generally required the same care and deliberation to get good results from that rangefinders do, at least until the plastics and electronics and autofocus models that came into being in the late 1980's took over the SLR world

Electronics actually came way back in the 1970s and hasn't made cameras any worse. 😉 I'm under the impression that since 1980 or so, in rangefinders we see and repeat all developments in the SLR arena with some ten to fifteen years delay: autofocus, plastic, electronics, digital. Correspondingly, we get the same discussions, also ten to fifteen years later, with the same absence of results.

I think the OP is simply expressing good old cultural pessimism - I mean, "deliberate care and teaching" being "swamped" and "buried under all the photoshop stuff"? I find this kind of discussion quite pointless; if photographers were running around with M8s in masse today, there'd be just as much photoshopping, and whoever feels inclined to lament about something would just find something else to lament about.

 

[oftheherd]

There is plenty of gear talk, as in "What should I buy" threads. Or, some weirdo who often touts Fujica cameras and lenses. I think the difference here is that we aren't locked into anything. We talk about Minox, folders, large format, developing, post processing, and anything else that has to do with photography. Photography, yep, that's it. And a big sprinkling of comradrie. The comradrie allows discussions of some things not necessarily photo related from time to time.

It all probably comes down to what Dee said, a belief in traditional values. We may not all have the same traditions, but we respect each others traditional values. What a treasure that is.

 

[dee]

rxmd - maybe I did go OTT over the expressions , but with ASdee , I get swamped just with too many people / too much noise , detail etc !

It's just that if I want to read a computer magazine , I will buy one [ not ] - not reams of digital post processing and camera technology in a camera mag - but I was left behind with my Minolta 7000i , so am far from typical .
I have no argument with those embracing DSLRS and any camera , nor with digital post processing , it's just that it DOES seem to interfere with the content .

What I like about Amateur Photographer - and one or two other mags , is the focus on the picture taking process and the inclusion of all means to that end ... both modern and not so modern .

Something I find in this place .

Sometimes it seems that the title ' Rangefinder ' Forum is a touch misleading [ for some one Miss Led , but trying to pretend guy LOL , I love my puns ]

I would not wish to change the title for the world , but it's actually an inclusive place which , because a Rangefinder is a niche interest [ !!! ] these days attracts maybe a different kind of enthusiast .
Deeranged-snapshooter ?

I love the free pictures possible with my Digi-boxes , and know that I am indeed fortunate to own an M8 - although it is way beyond my capabilities .
Thanks Dad , you would turn over in your grave at such extravagance which you paid for - or the dust specs would .
Of course I had to chose a Leica Dig 3 - carrying on a great tradition of squinty viewfinders LOL .

[ Leica have not cottoned on to this once in a lifetime aquisition , sending me an M9 brochure , neither have my insurance co , concerning like for like replacement ??!! ]

I realise that I am very much an outsider here - but it's fun and keeps me a little more ' connected ' in a manner free of solid people who bewider me . I also have deeficulty putting together what I am tyring to say ,'cos it's a bit ethereal somehow - like my little Fed lense having ' sparkle ' an inadequate description as you will ever find !

When I post , I do feel like a kid struggling to relate to groan ups and real people .. but what the heck - what's new !?