willie_901
Veteran
Most certainly bump worthy.
Rangefinder Photography: Out of the Shadows and Into the Sunlight
- Thread starter Alex Shishin
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 51
- Views 62K
Bingley
Veteran
I'm very glad this thread was bumped. Thanks to the bumpers! And many thanks to Mr. Shishin for his original and thoughtful post.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
A great bump and a great read.
Forty one posts since 2005 ... Alex Shishin the OP spreads himself thinly! 😀
Forty one posts since 2005 ... Alex Shishin the OP spreads himself thinly! 😀
ddejohn
Member
Great read. Thanks for sticky-ing.
My little brother is in love with photography, and uses a DSLR. For the most part he's actually more of a film maker, but takes stills frequently enough to talk about it with me. I continue to argue film's merits to him, but he won't have it. Fair enough I say, but I will have him read this.
My little brother is in love with photography, and uses a DSLR. For the most part he's actually more of a film maker, but takes stills frequently enough to talk about it with me. I continue to argue film's merits to him, but he won't have it. Fair enough I say, but I will have him read this.
Quan
Established
Good write up, thank you
Cyriljay
Leica Like
Remarkably well written Alex. I have seen all the cameras and never thought how it works . Thanks for all these putting together.
Jeremy Z
Well-known
I'm posting this 14 years after the original posts. Looking by his profile, I see Alex has posted only as recently as 2 years ago. I hope he is still with us.
Firstly, it's still a great post and I'm glad he wrote it.
If so, I would like to shame him just a bit for almost totally neglecting fixed lens rangefinders. About them, he only wrote:
Since cost was a concern, I am a little surprised that he did not more seriously consider some of these "bakachon" cameras. The main weakness to them was that they were mostly only offered with 40 or 45 mm lenses. There WERE a few offered with 35 mm; one of the all-time favorite focal lengths. (and a few with 38 mm...)
Elsewhere in the first couple posts, he said that rangefinders were quieter, but not THAT much quieter. Well, these "bakachon" cameras were/are MUCH quieter, with the leaf shutters, built into the lenses.
Speaking of the lenses, some of there were very high grade; I would say on par with a Leica 35mm. For example, the Yashinon 35/1.8 on the Yashica Electro 35 CC. Or even some of the slower f/2.8s, like then (then-newish) 35/2.8 on the Olympus XA. Let's not forget the excellent Zeiss Tessar and Sonnar on the Rollei 35, which was still in production in the early 80s. (if you could settle for scale focus and a 40 mm lens.)
As a side comment, I was perusing my book on Alfred Eisenstaedt last night. He is often pictured with two cameras around his neck: A Leica rangefinder and a Nikon SLR. I presume the Leica was fitted with a 28 or 35 mm lens, while the Nikon looked to have a 50mm. So even the the pioneer street photographers were not so pure as to avoid SLRs.
Firstly, it's still a great post and I'm glad he wrote it.
If so, I would like to shame him just a bit for almost totally neglecting fixed lens rangefinders. About them, he only wrote:
Since cost was a concern, I am a little surprised that he did not more seriously consider some of these "bakachon" cameras. The main weakness to them was that they were mostly only offered with 40 or 45 mm lenses. There WERE a few offered with 35 mm; one of the all-time favorite focal lengths. (and a few with 38 mm...)
Elsewhere in the first couple posts, he said that rangefinders were quieter, but not THAT much quieter. Well, these "bakachon" cameras were/are MUCH quieter, with the leaf shutters, built into the lenses.
Speaking of the lenses, some of there were very high grade; I would say on par with a Leica 35mm. For example, the Yashinon 35/1.8 on the Yashica Electro 35 CC. Or even some of the slower f/2.8s, like then (then-newish) 35/2.8 on the Olympus XA. Let's not forget the excellent Zeiss Tessar and Sonnar on the Rollei 35, which was still in production in the early 80s. (if you could settle for scale focus and a 40 mm lens.)
As a side comment, I was perusing my book on Alfred Eisenstaedt last night. He is often pictured with two cameras around his neck: A Leica rangefinder and a Nikon SLR. I presume the Leica was fitted with a 28 or 35 mm lens, while the Nikon looked to have a 50mm. So even the the pioneer street photographers were not so pure as to avoid SLRs.
Out to Lunch
Ventor
The OP doesn't post and I can't be bothered. Cheers, Peter
zuiko85
Veteran
Nice coffee-in-the-morning read.
Not sure about some of his conclusions, personal preference (which is fine) is more like it.
My dream of having a Leica finally came to fruition at about 60, and near retirement.
For myself, after not too long a time, the words of Mr. Spock came to mind;
‘After a time you may find that the having is not as pleasant as the wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true.’ (Or something to that effect.)
The only conclusion I could come to was that 35 years with a OM-1 with a 1-10 screen had just spoiled me. The M4-2 just didn’t feel small at all. True, the OM-1, with a mirror box it was definitely thicker, overall. But the whole ‘package’ just felt right.
Anyway, the M4-2 mostly sits it the camera cabnet. A shame really, it should go to another more discerning photographer who will love it and use it. Alas, not very good at selling stuff. Too worried it would quit three months down the road and that would make me feel very bad.
Not sure about some of his conclusions, personal preference (which is fine) is more like it.
My dream of having a Leica finally came to fruition at about 60, and near retirement.
For myself, after not too long a time, the words of Mr. Spock came to mind;
‘After a time you may find that the having is not as pleasant as the wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true.’ (Or something to that effect.)
The only conclusion I could come to was that 35 years with a OM-1 with a 1-10 screen had just spoiled me. The M4-2 just didn’t feel small at all. True, the OM-1, with a mirror box it was definitely thicker, overall. But the whole ‘package’ just felt right.
Anyway, the M4-2 mostly sits it the camera cabnet. A shame really, it should go to another more discerning photographer who will love it and use it. Alas, not very good at selling stuff. Too worried it would quit three months down the road and that would make me feel very bad.
Jeremy Z
Well-known
😕
You couldn't be bothered to post anything of substance, but COULD be bothered to post something useless. Why not just refrain from posting then?
Yokosuka Mike
Abstract Clarity
Italics, uppercase, and a confused emoji? Damn man, you must be really... interested in what Peter was thinking.
Sometimes it's best to just ignor the posts that you're not pleased with.
Hence, you may feel free to ignor me too!
All the best,
Mike
Photog9000
Well-known
Fun read, Alex!
Similar threads
