Rangefinder Qualities

J

JCdeR

Established
Local time
12:07 AM
Joined
Feb 28, 2005
Messages
88
View My Gallery
Don't get me wrong now please .... Not trying to start a pro/con discussion.

I have been happily taking pictures with my M4 (amongst other Leica's, but mainly M4) for over 20 year now, I develop myslef, I print myself, I scan, I have colour and slide done, so I do the whole lot, whatever is convenient at that moment in time, and I must say I am really enjoying it, both the process of taking the images as developing each one to a next stage.

Recently and totally by chance I got hold of a Canon EOS 3, which as some of you might know is a big and heavy SLR camera, I have a 35mm 2.0, a 50mm 1,2 and a 70-200 2,8 IS lens with it (all very very heavy, I must admit)

I have been using this setup for over 5 weeks now and I must say that continuously I ask myself why I havent done this before, it has autofocus, it's fast, it has very high shutter speeds and a magnifecent light measuring system on which I now rely fully ..... The images are perfect and the price of the equipement is nothing compare to leica stuff.

Again I have to admit that since I use this I haven't used my M4 again, it seems like a victorian gadget compared to this EOS3 thing. I understand the arguments about the weight, but why on earth would one take images with any leica if such other "great" contraptions are available for a fraction of the price .... the image quality btw is equal for the normal human eye (mine at least) again why go for rangefinders ?
 
The honeymoon will be over and you'll long for your M4 and its tiny (by comparison) lenses. But if not and if it works for you, it works for you. Each to his or her own. So I suppose this post is by way of saying goodbye :angel:
 
No, not goodbye ... I take the pleasure and Zen of taking the images higher than the quality actually

I like setting up, guessing the light values etc..... fondling my gear ... but with thread I'm just talking about the images itself and the speed of creating them
 
I also do large format, huge troublesome and heavy, but I do for the total enjoyment of setting things up .... and the wet developemnt process.... I actually have a good to bad ratio of 3 to 10 (3 good, 7 bad) but this doesn't bother me because I like the total process.....
 
It's okay, JC, it takes all kinds to make the world go around. RF's aren't for everyone. You may be an SLR person. No problem.
 
FrankS said:
It's okay, JC, it takes all kinds to make the world go around. RF's aren't for everyone. You may be an SLR person. No problem.
Click to expand...

It's not if one is an RF person or not.... what I am wondering about is why other choose RF's .... you can't deny that in view of image quality, and that is the single goal of many photogrpahers, that a modern day SLR beats any RF anyday in terms of ratio of good quality pics etc...

I understand people liking classic cameras, I do to, but I am looking for other arguments ..
 
Frank, you certainly cannot see a difference between a 35mm canon lens and a summicron at normal sizes.... maybe exploding the pic to huge sizes, or phototgrpahing walls or newspapers, but in normal day-to-day photography I would say that I'd bet my left testicle (but I won't) .... I have tried to find differences, there aren't any .... and if there are it will be in favor of the canon because of it's miraculous light metering features it has. I like pushing tri-x hard ... I develop this in rodinal 70% and HC110 for the rest... starting off with nice calculated metering makes the images smoother, even in their sea's of grain ...
 
I love my dslr, and it does give a lot of instant gratification, admit. It took me forever to pry manual lenses off my 20D. But there is something about shooting fully manual, little if no electronics that is more satisfying to me that I just can't seem to find in digital.
 
Last edited:
And then the price of the lenses, high quality lenses I must say.... whatever one has against Canon, they produce good quality lenses ... at a reasonable price
 
For me, it's about the process. I don't want a camera to do everything for me. There is a greater sense of accomplishent for me. It's not all about the final image for me.
 
Well, JC, I went quite similar road, albeint from the opposite side. Some 5 years was shooting with a comlpete EOS-3 setup comprizing the camera with booster, 28-70/2.8L, 70-200/2.8L, 550EX and whole lots of accessories. Granted, that allowed me to do two weddings quite conveniently (putting aside the huge back strain it put due to 6 hours constant shooting with heavy beasts on your neck), I've took the kit to several vacations abroad with my wife brining a real sorrow to the joy of our stay, forcing my wife to withstand my army-like campaign telling myself "I must to get to there and there and there and...within such and such hours..." lugging 12 kg backpack on top of various high-positioned observation points, etc....
Then, calm down slowly and figured the decaying frequency of shooting with my Canon gear, unless was barely able to count to 4-5 - the times I find myself getting Canon out of teh back to shoot a few pictures during last year and half ! Perhaps less then 2-3 rolls during last year and half...
That was the point I begun to realize the priciple of wise adequacy....sold out my entire Canon setup, bought into Leica (could probaly be other good RF system but was fortunate enough to swing for Leica) and now can hardly imagine how I was detained by the inadquate gear from my hobby...
I figured I find to much joy in all-manual operation, the please of developing a self-minded exposure evaluation ability and even home processed B&W...
So much relaxation to be able to shoot just as an extension of my hand...

Granted, EOS-3 (or 1V) is surely technological marvels ad some fields just require you to put these to a proper use ni order to get away with expected results, that is another story. But I found just the feeling of such quality power encapsulated in so small RF optics is so pleasing....

Well, a friend of mine is die-hard SLR user and sees himself quite natuarl with his DSLR which is OK as well. Just a matter of taste ...
 
AlexZ, exactly what I mean... great machine, great perfomance, great images .... big and heavy .... but nevertheless great images ... and the the 28-70L lens is a real beauty .... but yes, manual control is more satisfying for the soul than for the eye
 
JC, strong man, coming up with a topic like this on Sunday on RFF ; Respect 😀. But at the end you are more or less right in what you say, in my opinion. Well, I only have on Leica and it is minilux. I do not have a camera, that delivers crisper images than this one..... Man, if you found you perfect setup, that brings you the perfect images, DO IT and be happy.... Now show us some perfect pictures...🙂.

Pros for the RF I have. Fun and joy of taking pictures. Qualtiy is usually not an issue. Uses classical BW film. I like grain, by the way. It is small (and usually) quiet. To focus with a RF is different than AF and gives me another relationship to the scene.

I want to add that I have one bag wit a D50, a 20, 50, 85 lens and 70-300 zoom. It is good to have one in special situations. It replaced my F100 (one of the best cameras ever, in my opinion...) but it did not replace my RF cameras.
 
Last edited:
There's no question that at times you need a blazing fast autofocus/flash synchro/auto exposure camera, maybe with a long stabilized zoom to boot. My take on this is: if you need one like that, get a DSLR, as you'll add more conveniences on top. However I find myself wanting to shoot b&w most of the time ( for me b&w = film) in informal situations, in not too good light, etc... For this type of shooing a RF camera is just unbeatable. As for the price - well I mainly use Bessas with Zeiss lenses, and the results technically speaking, are second to none in 35mm. The truth is, as some say: "horses for courses"...
 
I am very mediocre picture taker, I just do stuff 1001 people have done before, they are not that good that I would put them on web, the fact that I got my "modern views of National Socialism" published in 23 world wide magazine was just a coincidence and based more upon the historic research accompanying it than the actual picture qualities, the following series about the private life of Adolf Hitler was not more than a spin off of the original article .... not anything to do with quality pictures... since then it has all died down a bit .... other than my Gaza strip series and Libanon rebuilding as well as the series I did about Khmer rouge current situation and the Indonisian terrorist scene,and not to forget the current status of aids in todays world, did I forget the South African indifference series on Human rights ? ahh well like I said not all very interesting image wise .... no need to have this viewed on the web .... 🙂 ....

But this has nothing to do with the innitial question why people still use expensive rangefinders .... 🙂
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Dogman
Just need to vent. Our lives are now overly secure!
Replies
14
Views
740
JeffS7444
JeffS7444
p.giannakis
Today i was told off
3 4 5
Replies
81
Views
6K
Archiver
A
ped
Aires 35-IIIc rangefinder
2
Replies
25
Views
672
rick oleson
rick oleson
Richard G
Compose within 50mm framelines, anticipate outside them, or just grab a 28?
Replies
13
Views
518
38Deardorff
38Deardorff
jesse1dog
A simple meniscus ........... !
Replies
0
Views
441
jesse1dog
jesse1dog
Back
Top Bottom