RFF Featured Photos

[richard_l]

I never dreamed that people were so opinionated about what a rangefinder is supposed to be used for. I thought some people liked them primarily for street because they are are fairly quiet and unobtrusive, not that this was somehow their ultimate purpose as determined by HCB or God or the Camera Designers. The almost emotional intensity of some of the opinions in this regard are really surprising and difficult to understand.

At the other extreme is Brian Bower's very popular book on Leica M photography. Of all the beautiful photos in that book there is not a single street shot. Does this mean that street shooting is inappropriate for a Leica M? Only an idiot would infer that. Obviously street photography is just not Bower's thing.

Richard

 

[back alley]

Sure, Jorge's the big cheese, and it's his right to choose any photo that he sees fit. I, for one, never set out to impose my views onto him or anyone else, even if my post(s) may have given a different impression (and if that's the case, I apologize). But let's not see the day when expressing one's honest opinion becomes a taboo, eh? 🙂

whoa hoot!
i never said that, at all.

the intensity of some of the posts and the private messeges that i am getting on this issue suggests to me that maybe a time out or a calm down period might be in order.

i think it would be ironic if our friendly forum had a meltdown arguing about what rf shooting was all about.

joe

 

[hoot]

Joe, frankly I'm surprised when you and Richard mention "emotions" in regard to my post, because I'm a fairly unemotional person, and, going back to read my posts, cannot discern even the slightest bit of mud-slinging or name-calling... I'm flabbergasted that someone has chosen to go as far as to send you PMs on this matter. As I see it, we are all having an interesting, inspirational debate here.

I, for one, am going to chalk this up to a language barrier on my part (English, after all, is not my native tongue) and step out of this discussion for fear of losing any friends over a sad misunderstanding.

 

[back alley]

ok, let me be clear.

i was not/am not talking about your posts in particular hoot.
but there is an overall emotional feel to this thread.

the p.m.'s suggest concern that maybe certain types/styles of photos might not be welcome here.

it's understanable i think. how might i feel if all i shoot is street and some suggest that landscape are all that really matter or represent the genre best?

just think of me as the camp counsellor.

and i think your language skills are fine and would regret your taking a back seat in something that is obviously important to you.

joe

 

[richard_l]

hoot's explanations make it clear that he did not intend to come across as strongly as it seemed. I apologize for misinterpreting.

Let's calm down, and please stop bugging joe with PMs.

 

[Roman]

Guys, calm down a bit - you know, us Austrians, with a few beers or "G'spritzte" (wine diluted with club soda) we like to get really controversial - but after a few hours of lively discussion, threatening to cut each others throats, we like to become bosom friends again... - that's what you get from mixing German intellect with Italian passion and Balcans fatalism...
You' d have to see 'hoot's ninja-style street-shooting (I always feel VERY embarassed even from only watching...) to know how cloes to his heart this subject really is.
That said, I think, while a range-finder is the ultimate street-shooting weapon, there are many more uses to it (like low-light - , low-noise -, low-weight - , and low-maintenance photography, to coin a few new genres...)

Roman

 

[back alley]

and to be clear again, i have no problem with hoot.
or anyone else who replied to this thread.

i like a lively discussion actually.
(if you guys only knew...)

joe

 

[Aardvark Aallen]

Let's go hang with Roman and Hoot and drink spritzers. That's my kind of culture. Italian/Balkan/German?? Intriguing. It's now on my 'life - to do list' Maybe 2 years from now. Gotta start saving though.

Conclusion

- Jorge gets to put up what he likes as a photograph
- Hoot hopes Jorge will show broader tastes in his selections in the future
- time will tell
- Jorge has some shots as does Hoot that should eventually be posted. I'm not saying which because... it's a matter of subjective taste.

Lets take some shots with film and a rangefinder and post them for all to see.

 

[ch1]

WOW! What a discussion.

Yesterday, as a "newbie" to RF, I was going to join this thread ask what you "seasoned" shooters felt made RF "distinct" from 35mm SLR or DSLR.

Yes, I know about the smaller sized gear and the quieter shutter etc. - much less the "tradition". [Although, to be frank, pixels aside, how does an Epson RD-1 RF differ from my digital Canon G3 point and shoot? They both autofocus and can be run in fully auto mode?]

That aside, what I glean from this thread is that many (most?) of you "hard core" RF'ers feel that streetshots are the "essence" of the genre.

Why?

Part of my query is that, having just obtained a Nikon S2 I am fumbling around with all its settings etc. such that I can hardly imagine "grabbing" a street shot! Chalk that one up to manual dexterity learning curve.

But, after I "master" all of that - how will my "street shooting" change from using a SLR? After all, I live in NYC and the street noise alone negates the "quiet shutter" argument.

Most of you are passionate that streetshooting is the "essence" of RF in the 21st Century.

Why?

 

[richard_l]

But, after I "master" all of that - how will my "street shooting" change from using a SLR? After all, I live in NYC and the street noise alone negates the "quiet shutter" argument.

For most street shooting in a noisy environment a small manual focus SLR will work about as effectively as a rangefinder. The main disadvantage would be with dynamic (as opposed to static) scenes. With a rangefinder the viewfinder may allow you to see outside the field of view of the lens, so you can better anticipate what will be moving into and out of the scene, thus making it easier to fire the shutter at exactly the right instant. However, many people use SLRs for street. The SLR may not be the best tool, but it'll work.

Richard

 

[RML]

One of the RFF pic-of-the-whatever (not really weekly is it?) was a RD-1 shot by RML.

Was it?! I missed it!!!!!

Please, Jorge, can you put up another of my shots?! 😛

 

[oftheherd]

What an amazing thread and viewpoints.

Well, I sure am different. I see spirited defense of different individual's viewpoints, but never saw anything that I thought anyone would take as any kind of attack. Maybe I am just too thick skinned. But I never thought I would see the day when others on the thread were seeing red and emailing Joe, and Joe was considered the quiet dispassionate one (sorry Joe, couldn't resist that 🙂 ).

I think it is wonderful that different people see photography differently. How sad and dull if otherwise. My own view (understand my favorite and most used RF is a Mamiya Super Press 23) is as some others have expressed. Just another tool to be used when "I" consider it appropriate. No others need feel as I do.

My main reason to purchase and use the Mamiya is for its large negative. Now I do appreciate the quiteness of the in-the-lens leaf shutters. There are times when I have used it for that (even though my Fujica ST 901 is pretty quiet). I sure never used it for sureptitious photography. The particular design of the Mamiya as I have often stated, makes it somewhat 35mm like to me. Probably not to anybody else.

Now if anybody is fearful of this discussion getting out of hand, and damaging the unique comradrie that exists here, I don't blame them for PMing Joe. That would be a shame. Personally I don't see it that way, but if any do, that concern on their part, as well as all of us, is part of what makes this forum unique. So hoot or others, I don't think you should be feel too guilty either. Just be sure everybody understands you are expressing your own passionate viewpoints, not shutting out anyone else's (which was how I personally saw it). Passion for photography in general, and RF in particular is another thing that makes this forum unique. Nothing wrong with that.

But just in case ... Chill all. 😉

EDIT: Btw, as for Jorge's picks, I see them as just that. Of those shown so far, some have grabbed me, some not. Pretty much as all photos I view. But all so far have been interesting photos imho. If there are any that I don't think are interesting, I will take it that Jorge's and my viewpoints don't always agree. At this point in my life that isn't going to be any big surprise to me, nor any cause for concern. Of course, that is just me.

 

[JoeFriday]

It's not written anywhere that you can't do both. 🙂

yes, the urgency of youth.. it reminds me of that old joke about the old bull and the young bull looking down a hill at a pasture full of cows

the young bull says "wow.. let's run down there and have s*x with one of them!" and the old bull says "better yet, let's walk down there and have s*x with all of them"

 

[back alley]

and to be clear...no one was seeing red.

the concerns were more about rff being turned into a 'street shooters' forum and landscapes etc. being pushed into the background.

i honestly didn't see it as a big deal, the p.m.'s that is, but a voicing of concern.

joe

 

[rbiemer]

What a discussion this is. It absolutely makes me wish we could all be sitting on some body's porch and do this face to face!
Couple of things come to mind:
This seems like two discussions: the choice of pictures and the point of RF cameras.
The first part is easy--it's Jorge's call. Is that a bad call? Certainly NOT. Would any of the pictures be my call? Doesn't matter--see above.
The second part of this I find much more interesting.
I think a fairly strong argument can be made that RF cameras are the best tool for street photgraphy but that does not --in my opinion--mean the same thing as the argument that street shots are the only "real" use for RF cameras.
RF cameras are, I think, a moderately specialized tool but not so specifically specialized as to make them inappropriate for other uses.
I can think of two other specialized uses that (once again IMHO) RF cameras are very well suited for: Infrared and film based pinhole.
My reasoning is: I can put a IR filter on my lens and still see to compose. With an SLR, it becomes abit "fiddly". If one is using a tripod it's not such a big deal--lock the camera down after you've got the "view" and then put the filter on and shoot.
But if you're not using a tripod, the framing is much harder to maintain from pre to post IR filter use.
I'm putting together a multi focal length pinhole set for my LTM camera using a set of 39mm macro-rings and an extra body cap. And almost the same argument applies--being able to see what I'm shooting--it is sometimes difficult to see well enough to check DOF with an SLR when the lens is stopped down to f22 and much more difficult if the "lens" is f128 or smaller.
As well as the mundane "small kit", "quiet", and "cool factor" these are partly why I am using RF cameras now.
OK where's the beer? 😀
Rob

 

[Sonnar Brian]

If I pick up Street Photography,

Tessina.

The perfect street camera choice. Inconspicuous, TLR, spring wound motor wind, quiet. Drop into your pocket and its out of sight. Makes a IIIf look way-big, but Minox negatives make it look huge.

 

[RJBender]

For me, RF photography is as much a sensibilty rather than a particular camera. I was drawn to RF because I inspired by cartier-bresson not ansel adams. I've attatched a couple of photos from my pre-rf days as an example - they're shot by a man who wants a leica but has a canon eos (colour) and a pentax 67 (b&w) 🙂

I can understand why you switched to a RF, Toby. Did you get tired of locking up the mirror before every shot with the Pentax?

R.J.

 

[RJBender]

My point? It doesn't matter here on RFF what subject you shoot, as long as it was done with an rf camera (or rf-less vf cameras, and a few other exceptions we looooong ago semi-agreed on).

Keep those featured photos coming!

"A rangefinder camera is one with a rangefinder that allows the photographer to judge the focusing distance. The rangefinder shows a double image, and lining up the two images of the object to be focused on more or less accurately gauges its distance. Older cameras may display the focusing distance and require the photographer to transfer the value to the lens focusing ring; most recent designs are coupled rangefinders - that is, the focus is adjusted both in the rangefinder and in the objective."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rangefinder_camera​

Can we talk about these cameras on RFF?

Contax G2 (auto focus)
Olympus XA 2(scale focus)
Rollei 35 (scale focus)​

Some characteristics of rangefinder cameras create special challenges:

No DOF preview.
Rangefinder has to be precise.
Parallax errors with longer lenses.​

I've been using my Kievs on tripods lately. I like to use my Rapid Omegas with Sunpak 555 flash units. It depends on whether I have a leaf shutter that syncs at all speeds or a focal plane that syncs at 1/30th. (Although, I do want to experiment with dragging the Kiev shutter at 1/10 th of a second with a Sunpak 555 attached.)

A rangefinder camera, in my opinion, is a precision instrument that can be used for a variety of applications. A camera that has to be focused manually with a rangefinder is a tool that helps us capture images in a special way. Auto focus and scale focus cameras aren't in the same league IMHO.

R.J.

 

[RayPA]

...

Can we talk about these cameras on RFF?

Contax G2 (auto focus)
Olympus XA (scale focus)
Rollei 35 (scale focus)​

...

R.J.​

I think the XA is a rangefinder, and not a scale focus camera, no?


🙂​

 

[RJBender]

I think the XA is a rangefinder, and not a scale focus camera, no?


🙂

I have the XA2 which has three zones instead of a rangefinder. Yes, you're right. The original XA had a 35mm lens with a rangefinder.

R.J.