Bill Pierce
Well-known
I wonder if the RF Forum isn’t really becoming the Mirrorless Forum. The rangefinder cameras and other cameras that were smaller, less conspicuous alternatives to the SLR and medium format cameras used in the days of film have been replaced in the digital world by cameras in which only one family of cameras, the digital Leicas, have an actual rangefinder. And, since those cameras use an older CCD design that, even in its full frame design, is out performed by current state of the art sensors, and have a comparatively high price tag, they play a smaller part in the digital world than their counterparts in the film world.
The biggest difference between mirrorless digital cameras is probably not whether they are rangefinders or not, but their sensor size. For now, the big battle in cameras for the advanced amateur and the pro is between APS C and Micro 4/3. All other things being equal (and they never are) you should be able to see the difference in large print image quality between full frame, APS C and M4/3. My suspicion is that since the volume money-makers are APS C and 4/3, that’s where the technical advances are first seen. APS C is going to give full frame a race for it’s money. 4/3 wont do quite as well in the big print, brightness range or super high ISO departments, but smaller sensor size can also mean smaller body size and smaller lens size. All of which can lead to smaller price.
So, questions for all the folks who started with film rangefinders and are now shooting digital. How do you feel about rangefinder focusing vs auto focus or manual focus of a magnified image? Any specific reason for using a camera with APS C or 4/3 or an even smaller sensor? (Notice “using” instead of “choosing.” If you are like me, I often choose in ignorance and decide what a camera can be used for once I have gained a little experience.)
The biggest difference between mirrorless digital cameras is probably not whether they are rangefinders or not, but their sensor size. For now, the big battle in cameras for the advanced amateur and the pro is between APS C and Micro 4/3. All other things being equal (and they never are) you should be able to see the difference in large print image quality between full frame, APS C and M4/3. My suspicion is that since the volume money-makers are APS C and 4/3, that’s where the technical advances are first seen. APS C is going to give full frame a race for it’s money. 4/3 wont do quite as well in the big print, brightness range or super high ISO departments, but smaller sensor size can also mean smaller body size and smaller lens size. All of which can lead to smaller price.
So, questions for all the folks who started with film rangefinders and are now shooting digital. How do you feel about rangefinder focusing vs auto focus or manual focus of a magnified image? Any specific reason for using a camera with APS C or 4/3 or an even smaller sensor? (Notice “using” instead of “choosing.” If you are like me, I often choose in ignorance and decide what a camera can be used for once I have gained a little experience.)