Sold the DSLR .....

M

markbradford2

Newbie
Local time
5:37 AM
Joined
Jul 2, 2007
Messages
2
I found that I just wasn't using my D70s and have re-kindled my love of photography with a Leica D Lux 3. I've taken more photos in three weeks than I took in the last year and hardly any using the auto settings.

It is clear to me that I want portability than a DSLR with a zoom lens. I am happy to get in close and spend time composing each shot. I have been considering a Epson R-D1s (can stretch to a M8). I really like the tactile design of the Epson and its controls. Having not used a RF before, what pitfalls should I be aware of, if any?

Thanks Mark
 
The only pitfall I can think of is that once you start using them you get hooked and then can't stop buying stuff! My slr's are all but redundant since I bought my bessa r2, sold that and got an M6ttl, sold the ultron 35 on here and bought a summicron asph, then got another M6 that I couldn't resist and a 15mm cv to go with it. I'm now looking for a 50mm elmar 2.8. Should be a warning on this site telling you straight, IT'S GOING TO COST!!!!! I would love a digital rangefinder as well, but still concerned about reliability issues.
 
Last edited:
I guess the disadvantages are:

No practical telephoto/zoom option - you're limited to at most a 100mm lens if you want reliable focus

All manual, nothing to save you (bar aperture priority exposure)

Sold my D70 almost a year ago, haven't looked back since :)

And taken more keepers in that time than I ever did with my (D)SLRs
 
I am visiting Volcanoes National Park on the Island of Hawai'i (the Big Island) and was taking photos mainly with my Canon Digital Rebel XT simply for ease of use - autofocusing, image stabilization of the lens, the zoom lens. But in the afternoon, I starting taking photos with my Leica M8. When I downloaded the photos, I discovered something interesting. The dynamic range of the exposure in the Leica photos was VASTLY better than the Canon. Much less post-processing was necessary. I will only use the Leica for the rest of the trip.
But, of course, the Leica should be better - it cost 8-9x more than the Canon.
Eric
 
Actually, I find an RF camera to be faster. You can use hyperfocal or zone focusing and just bang away in fast street shooting situations. No waiting for DSLR AF to lock on, no fiddling with fine focusing with a regular SLR.
 
I've been tempted a couple of times to get rid of the DSLR because I like rangefinders so much. But fortunately it's never really come to that, because every time I'm about to sell it, someone asks me to take pictures where only a DSLR is fast and flexible enough to deliver. Doesn't mean that I wouldn't want it to be more portable..
 
No pitfalls with rangefinders - except your main photographic subjects are sports, kids, animals, macro and tele.

The R-D1 has two things to take care of:
- many samples left the factory with disaligned rangefinders. A control, by you or a trustable seller like Robert White in UK, before the purchase is very recommended
- don't knock that camera - the RF is easily disaligned again.

If I could redesign it, I would choose a viewfinder with a lower than 1:1 magnification, to make a 21mm lens (32mm with crop factor) usable without accessory finder. The lowest in-finder wide angle framelines of 42mm (28mm with crop) seems a bit limiting to me. An in-built grip, allowing bigger batteries, would be useful, too.

Didier
 
tedwhite said:
Actually, I find an RF camera to be faster. You can use hyperfocal or zone focusing and just bang away in fast street shooting situations. No waiting for DSLR AF to lock on, no fiddling with fine focusing with a regular SLR.
Click to expand...

Ted's got it right. I do the same w/ a CV 21 or Canon 25 on my Model P's and girlfriend uses a Nikon FM2 w/ a Nikkor 20 and never have to focus.

Bill
 
Coming back to film I was worried I'd miss all these things - AF, long zooms, on-the-fly changable ISO, etc. I haven't missed any of them (except the ISO part sometimes.)

I sold my D1x a few weeks back. Don't miss it at all - in fact it paid for 8 of my film cameras :D
 
I sold my canon 1DmkI and L glass a while ago and have not looked back...much.
But I did come to the realization that there are certain photo opportunities that I just have to conciously say no to.

..I was camping this past weekend and came across a black bear at about 200 feet or so (maybe it was the bear that came across me LOL); I thought I can really get a nice shot of it this close, but then I realized I am no longer carrying a 300 f.2.8. so move on I did, left with the beautiful memory; and the whole experience was way less bothersome than I would have thought in my "can't move without a bag of lenses" DSLR days.

You just have to get your mind around the strengths and weaknesses of an RF and shoot accordingly, that's all.
enjoy! George
 
Thardy said:
As stated above, limited telephoto. It is taking me some time to get used to focusing.
Click to expand...
after having an R-D1 for a couple of years (it's my main camera; I also have a 5D) I find I'm now tending to use the 5D with manual focus lenses, and using it like an RF :D

- it cracks me up the way some people think that using a DSLR means you HAVE to stick a bl**dy great lens on it :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
tedwhite said:
Actually, I find an RF camera to be faster. You can use hyperfocal or zone focusing and just bang away in fast street shooting situations. No waiting for DSLR AF to lock on, no fiddling with fine focusing with a regular SLR.
Click to expand...
Huh?

Last time I checked, both my DSLR and SLR had manual focussing ability, and the lens I used (a very sweet 17mm manual focus one) did have distance and DOF scales..
 
My D70s languishes in the cupboard and has done for several months now ... but I could never bring myself to sell it as the price I'd get would make a mockery of what I paid for it. When I bought it they had a suggested retail in Oz of over $1800.00 Aust with the 18-70 kit lens ... I did pay less than that but then shelled out another $1300.00 for the 18-200 VR lens. Since discovering rangefinders though ... it seems incredibly bland to shoot!

I thought long and hard about an R-D1 but am wary of products that may be impossible to repair in the future. Working on that principle ... if Leica ever go belly up my M8 will be an expensive door stop! Every time it freezes, and it did it tonight, my pulse rate goes up considerably! :p
 
tedwhite said:
Actually, I find an RF camera to be faster. You can use hyperfocal or zone focusing and just bang away in fast street shooting situations. No waiting for DSLR AF to lock on, no fiddling with fine focusing with a regular SLR.
Click to expand...

Ted does have a point if you're using most AF zooms. Most of the consumer models don't have a distance scale and non have DOF scales. My Canon 50/1.8 doesn't either, but that focal length would be quite difficult to use in hyperfocal or zone focus on a dslr.

On the other hand, a simple technic is just to focus on a known distance and switch the camera to manual focus.

But as Mark's point is a well known advantage of RF's. If you want to get up close, an RF is the easier/better tool to use.
 
I don't see why you can't be just as careless in focusing with a DSLR as compared to a RF. You can just do the same and zone focus with just about any camera. Most of the time you can't live with just a RF. I have tried maybe some 5 times already.



tedwhite said:
Actually, I find an RF camera to be faster. You can use hyperfocal or zone focusing and just bang away in fast street shooting situations. No waiting for DSLR AF to lock on, no fiddling with fine focusing with a regular SLR.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom