Tuolumne
Veteran
Here's another rangefinder feature that I find elsusive. One of the features of a rangefinder is supposed to be the ability to see what happens at the exact moment of exposure, since there is no screen blackout as with an SLR. For me, I cannot tell when the exact moment of exposure is BECAUSE there is no screen blackout. There's just this subtle little "snick". I find the exact moment of taking a photograph to be intensely visual; I have a very ahrd time correlating it with a sound. Did I take that picture or not? What exactly WAS happening when I pressed the shutter? With an SLR, I'm never in doubt. Of course, I missed the action for a moment when the mirror went up, but the mind is a great interpolating tool, and there never seems to really be a discontinuity.
How about you?
/T
How about you?
/T
Last edited:
fishtek
Don
Hmmmmm.....never thought about it a lot...but...what I REALLY pay attention to is the instant when I hit the trigger! I've found myself wondering if I've caught the image at the precise instant I'd hoped, and KNOWN when I've missed the shot. There's an unbidden "Oh, damn..." that pops up, without having consciously thought about the miss. I just KNEW it...
For me, my mind produces a still image, but more like a single frame in a running film videocamera. Sometimes I get it right, sometimes not. Maybe that's why I tend to shoot things that aren't moving too fast?
Regards!
Don
For me, my mind produces a still image, but more like a single frame in a running film videocamera. Sometimes I get it right, sometimes not. Maybe that's why I tend to shoot things that aren't moving too fast?
Regards!
Don
Dogman
Veteran
I never know anything EXACTLY.
JNewell
Leica M Recidivist
I'm with Dogman, except I'd turn this myth on it's head and then vote for it.
I may not get more decisive moments with RF cameras than with an SLR, but there is THIS difference: with the RF I have a much better idea if I DIDN'T get "the decisive moment." That sounds useless until you think about this: that lets me know, right now rather than after it's too late, that I need to try again! I honestly find that very valuable and a real plus for RF photography.
I may not get more decisive moments with RF cameras than with an SLR, but there is THIS difference: with the RF I have a much better idea if I DIDN'T get "the decisive moment." That sounds useless until you think about this: that lets me know, right now rather than after it's too late, that I need to try again! I honestly find that very valuable and a real plus for RF photography.
Anupam
Well-known
Not being blind during exposure works great for me - I have no problem correlating it with the sound of the shutter. I am working on slow shutter movement blurs and for this the RFs work even better because I can actually see the movement I might get on film instead of before and after views. Of course, exact is too exact a term for me - good enough is more like it.
-Anupam
-Anupam
Last edited:
ywenz
Veteran
What do you mean by EXACTLY?
Are you saying that if you took a picture of clock that displays time in 100ms increments, are you able to tell exactly at which ms you took a picture of? No..
but can you tell how far into a frame a bicyclist is in the background the moment you snapped the photo? Sure.
Are you saying that if you took a picture of clock that displays time in 100ms increments, are you able to tell exactly at which ms you took a picture of? No..
but can you tell how far into a frame a bicyclist is in the background the moment you snapped the photo? Sure.
Tuolumne
Veteran
" but can you tell how far into a frame a bicyclist is in the background the moment you snapped the photo? Sure."
But I can tell this with an SLR, too, so the RF seems to have no advantage here.
"What do you mean by EXACTLY?"
The blink of an eye. What is that? 1/10th of a second? This is one of the hallmark events people reference when they say they can tell in a RF camera what happened at the time of exposure. I can't tell any better with a RF if someone blinked at the time of exposure than I can with an SLR. In other words, I can't tell with either one. How about you?
/T
P.S. Is there some reason this thread doesn't show up in the Summary view? I have to navigate into the sub-forum to see it.
But I can tell this with an SLR, too, so the RF seems to have no advantage here.
"What do you mean by EXACTLY?"
The blink of an eye. What is that? 1/10th of a second? This is one of the hallmark events people reference when they say they can tell in a RF camera what happened at the time of exposure. I can't tell any better with a RF if someone blinked at the time of exposure than I can with an SLR. In other words, I can't tell with either one. How about you?
/T
P.S. Is there some reason this thread doesn't show up in the Summary view? I have to navigate into the sub-forum to see it.
David Goldfarb
Well-known
The whole idea that you can see what happens in front of you is problematic. The brain "sees" all sorts of things and misses things that the eyes don't or do see. To try one fairly famous experiment, watch the following film of some students in black shirts and white shirts bouncing two basketballs to each other, and try to note how many times each team passes the ball (kind of a long download)--
http://viscog.beckman.uiuc.edu/grafs/demos/15.html
Did you notice anything unusual during the game? Most people don't. If you didn't, then watch it again and ask yourself how you could have missed it. It wasn't mirror blackout.
I feel that I see the action at the moment of exposure when I'm using an SLR, even though I know that the viewfinder is blacked out at that precise instant, just as I experience the motion in a film projected at 24 fps as continuous motion.
For a fairly accessible (if not entirely up to date) account of such phenomena, I recommend Daniel Dennett's book, _Consciousness Explained_.
I feel that I see the action at the moment of exposure when I'm using an SLR, even though I know that the viewfinder is blacked out at that precise instant, just as I experience the motion in a film projected at 24 fps as continuous motion.
I have a pretty good idea of what the lens is seeing when I'm using a large format camera to make portraits, even though there might be quite some time between focusing, stopping down the lens, closing the shutter, inserting the filmholder, removing the darkslide, waiting for the right expression, and firing the shutter.
When I use a RF or viewfinder camera or TLR, my eye sees the action at the moment of exposure, but I don't know that my brain is more conscious of having seen it.
http://viscog.beckman.uiuc.edu/grafs/demos/15.html
Did you notice anything unusual during the game? Most people don't. If you didn't, then watch it again and ask yourself how you could have missed it. It wasn't mirror blackout.
I feel that I see the action at the moment of exposure when I'm using an SLR, even though I know that the viewfinder is blacked out at that precise instant, just as I experience the motion in a film projected at 24 fps as continuous motion.
For a fairly accessible (if not entirely up to date) account of such phenomena, I recommend Daniel Dennett's book, _Consciousness Explained_.
I feel that I see the action at the moment of exposure when I'm using an SLR, even though I know that the viewfinder is blacked out at that precise instant, just as I experience the motion in a film projected at 24 fps as continuous motion.
I have a pretty good idea of what the lens is seeing when I'm using a large format camera to make portraits, even though there might be quite some time between focusing, stopping down the lens, closing the shutter, inserting the filmholder, removing the darkslide, waiting for the right expression, and firing the shutter.
When I use a RF or viewfinder camera or TLR, my eye sees the action at the moment of exposure, but I don't know that my brain is more conscious of having seen it.
wontonny
Well-known
Not quite.... I worked at a photo studio and the curtain failed on the camera and they kept having shutter black out but had nooo idea why no pictures were showing up on the preview.
Ororaro
Well-known
Yes, it's a major PLUS.This shot has been posted a few times already, but I feel it has its place here.
It is the perfect example for this discussion (and the one about seeing outside the framelines), IMO.
I liked the Graffitti. Stopped and waited for the right sized person to walk by. I pre-focused and saw the girl coming... I aimed and clicked. Altough this is a film capture, I was 100% sure I git it right and so I left the scene without a doubt in my head. If it was an SLR I'd probably shoot some mo4re just to be sure. With a DSLR I would have probably shot 100 at 8 fps with the the intention to post delete and post-prosess later on. But with a Rangefinder, one shot was enough.
2 things to remember about rangefinder shooting:
1- You can anticipate the action by looking outside the framelines
2- you see and know EXACTLY what happens when you press the RF shutter
Attachments
Last edited:
Tuolumne
Veteran
NB23,NB23 said:
This shot has been posted a few times already, but I feel it has its place here.
It is the perfect example for this discussion (and the one about seeing outside the framelines), IMO.
I liked the Graffitti. Stopped and waited for the right sized person to walk by. I pre-focused and saw the girl coming... I aimed and clicked. Altough this is a film capture, I was 100% sure I git it right and so I left the scene without a doubt in my head. If it was an SLR I'd probably shoot some mo4re just to be sure. With a DSLR I would have probably shot 100 at 8 fps with the the intention to post delete and post-prosess later on. But with a Rangefinder, one shot was enough.
2 things to remember about rangefinder shooting:
1- You can anticipate the action by looking outside the framelines
2- you see and know EXACTLY what happens when you press the RF shutter
Please post the photo. It doesn't appear in your previous post.
/T
Edit: Now it's there. Very nice example!
pvdhaar
Peter
It's not only I who's affected by SLR mirror black out..
With an SLR something peculiar happens; the people I photograph respond to the sound of the mirror slapping up by blinking their eyes. You won't believe the percentage of SLR pictures showing eyes half closed. This almost never happens with the RFs. First of all, the shutter on the M4 can hardly be heard, and even if they hear it, the picture is already taken, and finally if they do manage to blink at the moment of exposure, I see it and can snap again..
With an SLR something peculiar happens; the people I photograph respond to the sound of the mirror slapping up by blinking their eyes. You won't believe the percentage of SLR pictures showing eyes half closed. This almost never happens with the RFs. First of all, the shutter on the M4 can hardly be heard, and even if they hear it, the picture is already taken, and finally if they do manage to blink at the moment of exposure, I see it and can snap again..
ChadHahn
Established
I can't find the picture, but we were on the beach one day and ended up feeding cheetos to the gulls. The gulls would swoop down and take a cheeto right out of your outstreched hand.
I decided to take a picture so I lifted my SLR to my eye and took a shot. Did I get it? I wasnt' sure, so I tried it again. Still I wasn't sure. Finally, I framed the shot, took the camera away from my eye and snapped the shutter just as the bird took cheeto.
If I had been shooting a rangefinder, I would have known right away if I had the shot or not.
I decided to take a picture so I lifted my SLR to my eye and took a shot. Did I get it? I wasnt' sure, so I tried it again. Still I wasn't sure. Finally, I framed the shot, took the camera away from my eye and snapped the shutter just as the bird took cheeto.
If I had been shooting a rangefinder, I would have known right away if I had the shot or not.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I find that particularly when photographing people whose facial expressions are changing ... as I hear and feel the shutter fire there appears to be a moment frozen in time where an impression of the exact way they looked seems to linger in my mind for a fraction of a second. If I'm concentrating I know when I've caught the expression I didn't want ... and I never noticed it until I picked up a rangefinder. I think it's what makes still life and landscape so unnapealing to me!
Fotch
Man with a RF Camera
I started with a TLR and since then, have shot with many cameras that have no black out, such as Press Camera, View Cameras, RF, and I also shoot with SLR's. Like any tool, you can adjust the stlyle of shooting to the circumstances.
However, no black out in a big advantage when you need it. Think of what it would be like if, when driving your car, in an emergancy, mud suddenly covered your windshield and it was a second or two before the windshield wiper and washer clear it off.
No thanks, not by choice.
JMHO.
However, no black out in a big advantage when you need it. Think of what it would be like if, when driving your car, in an emergancy, mud suddenly covered your windshield and it was a second or two before the windshield wiper and washer clear it off.
No thanks, not by choice.
JMHO.
ncd_photo
Nikon Fanatic
pvdhaar said:
I find this all the time - it even more infuriating with nikon's iTTL pre-flash exposure. Never had the problem with the M2, but I think that was also due to the camera being less imposing so the subjects were more relaxed.
Having said that, the Shutter response and mirror black out is so unbelievably quick on the D200 that I can see a subject just starting to blink and fire off a second shot
"in the blink of an eye"
oscroft
Veteran
I really do like to be able to see the subject at the instant that I hear the click - it leaves me with a more confident picture in my mind of what's actually on the film. Of course, that might actually be an illusion - the time taken for the mirror to rise with an SLR is really pretty short (at least with proper old SLRs - I hate the whirrs, clicks and delays you get with that auto-focus and digital stuff), but just feeling more confident of my shots is a great help.
Michiel
Established
I have both my eyes open, so the blackout in front of my right eye doesn't bother me.
VinceC
Veteran
I suggest that those who don't know exactly when the shutter opens should practice some sports photography.
Take a couple rolls of film and shoot some kind of sporting match without a motor drive. You keep the shutter partly pressed, wait for peak action, and snap. Children playing is also a good test of timing.
This takes practice, and you need to stay current to keep your reflexes fast and accurate.
With RF, I can tell if someone blinked. I can tell if flash went off, I can tell if soccer ball is in frame.
Shutter lag with an SLR is not so much of an issue. Human reaction time is much slower than the linkage to trip to mirror.
Take a couple rolls of film and shoot some kind of sporting match without a motor drive. You keep the shutter partly pressed, wait for peak action, and snap. Children playing is also a good test of timing.
This takes practice, and you need to stay current to keep your reflexes fast and accurate.
With RF, I can tell if someone blinked. I can tell if flash went off, I can tell if soccer ball is in frame.
Shutter lag with an SLR is not so much of an issue. Human reaction time is much slower than the linkage to trip to mirror.
Solinar
Analog Preferred
David Goldfarb said:
My preference for waist up portraiture and group photos is a TLR. I generally have the camera set up on a tripod and use a cable release. The subjects are usually seated or at the very least standing within one area the frame.
Without having the camera situated between the subject and myself - I'm able to talk with whoever is in the frame and once they let their guard down, snap the photo.
Group photos are more problematic. Invariably, there is a good chance someone will blink or have a less than desirable facial expression, which I did not notice when I pressed the cable release. Hence, I voted no.