peripatetic
Well-known
I find myself unaccountably attracted to owning a rangefinder camera. I guess it's mostly because I am attracted to decisive moment photography.
I have increasingly found myself using only a 50mm lens on my Canon 5D, I haven't used anything else for months.
I would love a digital rangefinder, but the Epson seems too risky to buy as it is now discontinued. I tried the M8 in a shop but found it a little difficult to see through the viewfinder with my specs on. There is no doubt that it is a work of art, as I am sure are the M7 and MP too. I was hoping to fall in love with it, but found myself distinctly unsure when I left. Like I had met a movie star and come up disappointed. Also having used the 5D for a year now I find myself very reluctant to go back to a crop sensor, even one as good as the M8. The change in focal length, and attendant loss of shallow DOF means that I would be wanting the 35mm f1.4, which with the M8 body comes in at around £5500. That is a lot of money for a camera with one lens and some real flaws.
So it looks like until a new digital rangefinder comes along it's back to film.
The M7/MP Leicas are an option of course, but still pretty expensive, although I would expect an M7/MP to last for the rest of my life, unlike the M8. But I'm not 100% sure that I want to join the Leica club. It's OK if one is a photojournalist, but for an amateur it seems like a club for rich folks; a real indulgence - and the viewfinder of course is the same as the M8. So I am rather leaning away from the Leicas for now.
The Voigtlanders look OK, but although very practical they aren't terribly exciting. There seems to be no romance about them. I have no doubt however that I would end up with a couple of VC lenses before long.
One camera that I handled and did love was the Mamiya 7II with the 80mm f4. But there is the whole 120 issue. I would have to get a flatbed scanner. Getting the film processed is more hassle and more expensive, it's a mail-order thing rather than local lab. It's still on the table. But it's a big camera, lighter than the 5D, but it lacks that "carry anywhere and everywhere" quality that I was hoping to gain. Price and quality are excellent though.
But here's the thing, I always hankered after a Contax with its Zeiss lenses when I was younger and could not possibly afford it. And the ZI has captured my imagination. I haven't been able to hold one, but the viewfinder is clearly good enough when wearing glasses. The lenses are obviously wonderful; different but not really worse in the real world (as opposed to test charts) than the Leicas for a fraction of the price. I really like the look of the the body too. (Black or Silver? - tough choice - they are both so nice!) Combine with the C Sonnar 50mm and I find myself captivated, like a mouse hypnotized by a cat.
So here is what I am thinking:
Zeiss Ikon + ZM 50mm f1.5 Sonnar + Nikon Coolscan V comes in at a little under £2000 including VAT. That is £3500 cheaper than an M8 with 35mm f1.4. Which is a LOT of film and procesing. The cost of a roll of film, processing and low-rez scanning to CD costs about £10. That's 350 rolls. I reckon I will average no more than a roll a week, after all I am not planning on selling my 5D. Which is nearly 6-7 years until break-even with an M8. I seriously doubt an M8 would last that long. After a while I would likely add 2 or 3 more lenses. probably a 25 or 28 Biogon, and perhaps a 35 and 75 VC for occasional use.
In 5 years I think the odds of being able to find a new digital rangefinder body at a more reasonable price (or a truly compelling Leica) is pretty likely. By that time I will have a small collection of M lenses and be in a position to take advantage.
Am I mad? Probably. Changing from one SLR to another certainly doesn't make anyone a better photographer, but maybe, just maybe, learning to use a RF might help me make better images of the sort I really like. And even if my images are no better I can hardly see them getting worse.
Just a few of the sort of pictures I have managed not to mess up too badly...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/peripatetic/sets/72157594434616919/
Your thoughts and comments appreciated. Should I join the club?
I have increasingly found myself using only a 50mm lens on my Canon 5D, I haven't used anything else for months.
I would love a digital rangefinder, but the Epson seems too risky to buy as it is now discontinued. I tried the M8 in a shop but found it a little difficult to see through the viewfinder with my specs on. There is no doubt that it is a work of art, as I am sure are the M7 and MP too. I was hoping to fall in love with it, but found myself distinctly unsure when I left. Like I had met a movie star and come up disappointed. Also having used the 5D for a year now I find myself very reluctant to go back to a crop sensor, even one as good as the M8. The change in focal length, and attendant loss of shallow DOF means that I would be wanting the 35mm f1.4, which with the M8 body comes in at around £5500. That is a lot of money for a camera with one lens and some real flaws.
So it looks like until a new digital rangefinder comes along it's back to film.
The M7/MP Leicas are an option of course, but still pretty expensive, although I would expect an M7/MP to last for the rest of my life, unlike the M8. But I'm not 100% sure that I want to join the Leica club. It's OK if one is a photojournalist, but for an amateur it seems like a club for rich folks; a real indulgence - and the viewfinder of course is the same as the M8. So I am rather leaning away from the Leicas for now.
The Voigtlanders look OK, but although very practical they aren't terribly exciting. There seems to be no romance about them. I have no doubt however that I would end up with a couple of VC lenses before long.
One camera that I handled and did love was the Mamiya 7II with the 80mm f4. But there is the whole 120 issue. I would have to get a flatbed scanner. Getting the film processed is more hassle and more expensive, it's a mail-order thing rather than local lab. It's still on the table. But it's a big camera, lighter than the 5D, but it lacks that "carry anywhere and everywhere" quality that I was hoping to gain. Price and quality are excellent though.
But here's the thing, I always hankered after a Contax with its Zeiss lenses when I was younger and could not possibly afford it. And the ZI has captured my imagination. I haven't been able to hold one, but the viewfinder is clearly good enough when wearing glasses. The lenses are obviously wonderful; different but not really worse in the real world (as opposed to test charts) than the Leicas for a fraction of the price. I really like the look of the the body too. (Black or Silver? - tough choice - they are both so nice!) Combine with the C Sonnar 50mm and I find myself captivated, like a mouse hypnotized by a cat.
So here is what I am thinking:
Zeiss Ikon + ZM 50mm f1.5 Sonnar + Nikon Coolscan V comes in at a little under £2000 including VAT. That is £3500 cheaper than an M8 with 35mm f1.4. Which is a LOT of film and procesing. The cost of a roll of film, processing and low-rez scanning to CD costs about £10. That's 350 rolls. I reckon I will average no more than a roll a week, after all I am not planning on selling my 5D. Which is nearly 6-7 years until break-even with an M8. I seriously doubt an M8 would last that long. After a while I would likely add 2 or 3 more lenses. probably a 25 or 28 Biogon, and perhaps a 35 and 75 VC for occasional use.
In 5 years I think the odds of being able to find a new digital rangefinder body at a more reasonable price (or a truly compelling Leica) is pretty likely. By that time I will have a small collection of M lenses and be in a position to take advantage.
Am I mad? Probably. Changing from one SLR to another certainly doesn't make anyone a better photographer, but maybe, just maybe, learning to use a RF might help me make better images of the sort I really like. And even if my images are no better I can hardly see them getting worse.
Just a few of the sort of pictures I have managed not to mess up too badly...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/peripatetic/sets/72157594434616919/
Your thoughts and comments appreciated. Should I join the club?
wgerrard
Veteran
Why do you think a rangefinder would facilitate "decisive moment photography"?
Serious question. And, welcome.
Serious question. And, welcome.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Craig: First, welcome. 2nd, that's a nice set you've got there ... of photos, of course! 
I think your math is good, though you need to account for inflation of film and processing, which, due to a diminishing market for film, will likely happen.
Your thinking about the ZI is pretty much mine as well. Trouble is, I haven't handled one yet. I've handled the Bessa R4 (very nice) and R3 (not quite as nice but it was clad in the inexpensive half-case) and of course Leicas. Have you handled the ZI?
I think the magnification factor of the VF will be a very large part of my decision, though the long baseline is nearly a deciding factor on its own.
I think your math is good, though you need to account for inflation of film and processing, which, due to a diminishing market for film, will likely happen.
Your thinking about the ZI is pretty much mine as well. Trouble is, I haven't handled one yet. I've handled the Bessa R4 (very nice) and R3 (not quite as nice but it was clad in the inexpensive half-case) and of course Leicas. Have you handled the ZI?
I think the magnification factor of the VF will be a very large part of my decision, though the long baseline is nearly a deciding factor on its own.
Photon42
burn the box
Make sure you understand the character of the Sonnar.
peripatetic
Well-known
wgerrard said:
Simply that one sees more in the finder than you get in the picture without having to take your eye away.
With the SLR I find myself watching, then anticipating a shot, raising the camera and having to react as soon as the situation falls into view. With a rangefinder the extra space around the framing lines should mean (with practice) it's easier to frame the shot in fluid situations.
Perhaps this is less of a big deal than many make out, but I think it would be fun to try.
Alas I now see that Sigma will soon be releasing the DP1, which can be fitted with an optical viewfinder, and it becomes a serious alternative. The only downside is that I think I would find 28mm a bit wide for a fixed-focal length.
mfogiel
Veteran
peripatetic
I have some points to make.
1- the true advantage of film photography today is in B&W imagery - do you like B&W ?
2- the true advantage of a RF is, that you can carry it with you all day every day, and it does not bother you
3- Zeiss Ikon is the best RF for the money, and in some aspects (vision) it is best at any price
4- ZI is at it's best at 35mm - I use the Biogon and Nokton 35/1.2, but the new Nokton 35/1.4 could be a sweet choice for little money
5- the C Sonnar is wonderful, but it really is an f2.8 lens (or a f1.5-f2.0 lens) lookup the thread on the comparative focus, for general shooting, I think the Planar is more versatile - if you want to use it for portraits, you can always put a soft filter on
6- if you buy from japan, you will save 40%, and you could get the CS 5000 instead of the CS V
7- if you start doing B&W, develop yourself and you will not look back
I have some points to make.
1- the true advantage of film photography today is in B&W imagery - do you like B&W ?
2- the true advantage of a RF is, that you can carry it with you all day every day, and it does not bother you
3- Zeiss Ikon is the best RF for the money, and in some aspects (vision) it is best at any price
4- ZI is at it's best at 35mm - I use the Biogon and Nokton 35/1.2, but the new Nokton 35/1.4 could be a sweet choice for little money
5- the C Sonnar is wonderful, but it really is an f2.8 lens (or a f1.5-f2.0 lens) lookup the thread on the comparative focus, for general shooting, I think the Planar is more versatile - if you want to use it for portraits, you can always put a soft filter on
6- if you buy from japan, you will save 40%, and you could get the CS 5000 instead of the CS V
7- if you start doing B&W, develop yourself and you will not look back
peripatetic
Well-known
Photon42 said:
Thanks for the headsup.
I have looked at the reviews and threads, I like high-contrast lenses, so that is fine. The bokeh looks great, very pleasing.
The focus calibration at f2.8 or f1.5 issue is possibly a mild annoyance. I am familiar with focus shift though because I use the Canon EF 50mm f1.2 (SLR lens) which also suffers from focus shift, lacking as it does a floating rear element. It is calibrated for f1.2 and suffers at f2-f2.8 at close distances.
On balance I would prefer it calibrated at f1.5. But you do make a good point. Perhaps the Planar might be a better choice all-round and cheaper to boot.
As I say I will keep the Canon 5D, and most likely use it in preference for low-light work in general.
But learning to use the Sonnar properly would all be part of the fun I guess :angel: regardless of its calibration. I would certainly check with the dealer though whether I was getting new or old stock and do some tests to make sure I understood where the calibration was set.
peripatetic
Well-known
1. Oh yes, I would mostly be using BW.mfogiel said:
2. That is a large part of the attraction.
3.
4. Hmm, on my SLR 50mm is my favourite FL, but I have wondered whether I might end up preferring 35mm on a RF. Certainly I would try a CV 35mm.
5. I shall think carefully about whether the 50mm Planar might be a better choice than the Sonnar.
6. I'm not sure about that, when I look at the Japanese prices then add VAT and duty it seems like I might save maybe 5% on the price but lose the convenience of a local seller. If the camera gets through without duty that would be different of course but I am never that lucky!
7. Certainly something to think about, but alas I live in London - which is a bit like living on a ship. Space is precious and I certainly don't have the space available for a darkroom. Just developing might be possible though. I would have to think about it carefully.
Thank you all for you comments.
Last edited:
mfogiel
Veteran
peripatetic
Try to buy a small item from matsuiyastore on the bay - I get it delivered to Italy with no customs or vat, they have their shrewd ways...
I resisted developing for a long time, but in the end this is the only way to avoid your negs from being ruined - with a changing bag, you can do it in the kitchen or bathroom in daylight, no need for a darkroom.
Try to buy a small item from matsuiyastore on the bay - I get it delivered to Italy with no customs or vat, they have their shrewd ways...
I resisted developing for a long time, but in the end this is the only way to avoid your negs from being ruined - with a changing bag, you can do it in the kitchen or bathroom in daylight, no need for a darkroom.
ljsegil
Well-known
Return to Film
Return to Film
Hello Peripatetic,
I too chose to go back to film after several years shooting exclusively with a digital SLR, also because I wanted to experience rangefinder shooting. Suffice to say I am a complete convert, now shooting with 35mm, medium format, and large format film cameras and enjoying it ever more over time. The digital comes out when I have to know that I have the shot captured on the spot, but I no longer get the pleasure from digital photography as I do from film (although the processing to the final print is easier). I use the ZI rangefinder and love it; in fact sold a Leica M7 as I so preferred the Zeiss. I have also used some of the Voigtlander rangefinders (R3A, R2S) and classic Nikon (SP) and Contax (IIA), but none gives me the sheer pleasure of use that I find with the ZI. The Zeiss viewfinder and ease of sharp focus compared to all the others, as well as a very well thought out ergonomic design, make it simply a cut above any other rangefinder I have tried. I have the Sonnar 50/1.5 and have never had the focus issues that others have reported and love its look; it is my most used lens. I also have the Biogons 35/2.0 and 21/2.8 and find them outstanding, easily a match for any of the Leica glass that I still have (accepting offers for sale if anyone cares to contact me off post for enquiries). Even though 4x5 large format has become my new photographic passion, I always travel with my ZI and a lens kit consisting of the 21/2.8, 35/2.0, 50/1.5, and one outsider, the Leica 75/2.0 apo-Summicron (and sometimes a Leica 50/2.2 Summar classic for its special look) to capture the bulk of my shots; the LF camera is for the times when I can spend hours just photographing scenes I already know I want to capture (and for some of the set scenes on my most recent trip I was actually happier with the 35mm rather than the LF results; I shot both formats just to see the comparison).
Anyway, this is a sort of long-winded paean for the Zeiss Rangefinder and its associated lenses. I am having a several year long love affair that shows no sign of ending, rather I can't wait to see what the 85/2.0 Sonnar is like compared to the Leica 75/2.0, and hope to replace more of my expensive Leica glass with ZM lenses as I generally prefer their look and certainly prefer their cost.
Best of luck to you in your deliberations.
Regards,
Larry
Return to Film
Hello Peripatetic,
I too chose to go back to film after several years shooting exclusively with a digital SLR, also because I wanted to experience rangefinder shooting. Suffice to say I am a complete convert, now shooting with 35mm, medium format, and large format film cameras and enjoying it ever more over time. The digital comes out when I have to know that I have the shot captured on the spot, but I no longer get the pleasure from digital photography as I do from film (although the processing to the final print is easier). I use the ZI rangefinder and love it; in fact sold a Leica M7 as I so preferred the Zeiss. I have also used some of the Voigtlander rangefinders (R3A, R2S) and classic Nikon (SP) and Contax (IIA), but none gives me the sheer pleasure of use that I find with the ZI. The Zeiss viewfinder and ease of sharp focus compared to all the others, as well as a very well thought out ergonomic design, make it simply a cut above any other rangefinder I have tried. I have the Sonnar 50/1.5 and have never had the focus issues that others have reported and love its look; it is my most used lens. I also have the Biogons 35/2.0 and 21/2.8 and find them outstanding, easily a match for any of the Leica glass that I still have (accepting offers for sale if anyone cares to contact me off post for enquiries). Even though 4x5 large format has become my new photographic passion, I always travel with my ZI and a lens kit consisting of the 21/2.8, 35/2.0, 50/1.5, and one outsider, the Leica 75/2.0 apo-Summicron (and sometimes a Leica 50/2.2 Summar classic for its special look) to capture the bulk of my shots; the LF camera is for the times when I can spend hours just photographing scenes I already know I want to capture (and for some of the set scenes on my most recent trip I was actually happier with the 35mm rather than the LF results; I shot both formats just to see the comparison).
Anyway, this is a sort of long-winded paean for the Zeiss Rangefinder and its associated lenses. I am having a several year long love affair that shows no sign of ending, rather I can't wait to see what the 85/2.0 Sonnar is like compared to the Leica 75/2.0, and hope to replace more of my expensive Leica glass with ZM lenses as I generally prefer their look and certainly prefer their cost.
Best of luck to you in your deliberations.
Regards,
Larry
kshapero
South Florida Man
Go for the ZI. I wear specs and it is perfect. VF is large, clear and accurate. I use the C Sonnar everyday and it is awesome and versatle. It is like two lenses though which I find a plus. A great everyday kit. Forget the other baloney. And the guys in Japan are great to work with but so is Popflash. good luck.
gb hill
Veteran
Hi Peripatetic, Listen to these guys and go for the ZI. It is simply a lovely camera. The lenses are awesome. I'm betting the 5d will not see as much use after you get the ZI. I carry a Bessa R and love the ease of walking around with a rf. For film I would not give it a worry. There is plenty of film that can be had for cheap. Especially bulk. Get some chemicals a small tank, changing bag, thermometer, storage bottles, three measuring cups for the developer,stop bath, fixer, plus a few other odds & ends and you are on your way. Here is a link to one of my flickr contacts. He shoots with a Leica & Nikon cameras, scans with a cool scan 5000 and his photos are fantastic.
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/scemulillo/popular-interesting/
This should wet your appetite I would think. You can't get this kind of work from digital. Not even full frame sensors IMO.
cheers
gb
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/scemulillo/popular-interesting/
This should wet your appetite I would think. You can't get this kind of work from digital. Not even full frame sensors IMO.
cheers
gb
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Not to go OT (and I've learned a LOT about the ZI from this ... it has pretty much sealed my decision!), if possible I would opt for a change box or tent as opposed to a bag. I have a changing bag which I use for loading film onto reels, and it is a PITA. The inner bag flops down and can interfere with properly and efficiently loading the reels. It often makes me second guess my loading, and I unspool the roll to start over to make sure I haven't mis-fed the film.
Commercially available tents are convenient but very overpriced, IMO, so I'm thinking about how to build a light-tight box with sleeves for much less money. I won't make it collapsible; I'm relatively handy but not very good for more complex designs.
Commercially available tents are convenient but very overpriced, IMO, so I'm thinking about how to build a light-tight box with sleeves for much less money. I won't make it collapsible; I'm relatively handy but not very good for more complex designs.
peripatetic
Well-known
I may well give the home-processing a try at some point. After all the chemicals don't seem to cost very much. And I guess the whole kit & caboodle wouldn't be very dear.
Of course the great thing about 35mm is that if I decide to get it processed at a lab there are (for now at least) still plenty about. Actually I live in London so there are always likely to be a few not terribly far away.
Thanks for all the comments everyone.
My wife has suggested that a ZI might be a nice birthday present for my 40th in April. So I guess I'll have to wait until then.
I shall also leave the choice of black or silver to her, she has better taste than I in these matters anyway. I think she'll go for the silver, I would probably choose the black left to my own devices.
Of course the great thing about 35mm is that if I decide to get it processed at a lab there are (for now at least) still plenty about. Actually I live in London so there are always likely to be a few not terribly far away.
Thanks for all the comments everyone.
My wife has suggested that a ZI might be a nice birthday present for my 40th in April.
So I guess I'll have to wait until then. I shall also leave the choice of black or silver to her, she has better taste than I in these matters anyway. I think she'll go for the silver, I would probably choose the black left to my own devices.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Well ... does your wife have an unmarried sister of similar generosity? Actually, my wife is kind and generous so if she reads this someone else took over my keyboard.
But first, since she wants to please you, some subtle hints about how black is so pretty on this particular camera (my opinion as well) might be worthwhile. Second, what's 2 months between lovers? An early birthday present just gives you more time to continually praise her, reciprocate with flowers, etc., etc. Just trying to contribute to marital bliss, lad.
Actually, my wife is kind and generous so if she reads this someone else took over my keyboard.But first, since she wants to please you, some subtle hints about how black is so pretty on this particular camera (my opinion as well) might be worthwhile. Second, what's 2 months between lovers? An early birthday present just gives you more time to continually praise her, reciprocate with flowers, etc., etc. Just trying to contribute to marital bliss, lad.
40oz
...
Your math is good. It's clear you've thought this though rather than just tried to rationalize. Enjoy.
FWIW, color film is quite nice, and there are many to choose from to find the look you like. That's a nice thing - there are plenty of options out there still.
Very nice shots, BTW.
FWIW, color film is quite nice, and there are many to choose from to find the look you like. That's a nice thing - there are plenty of options out there still.
Very nice shots, BTW.
yarinkel
yarinkel
Hi Peripatetic,
welcome to RFF. We seem to be pretty like-minded concerning cameras as I too, own a Canon 5D with a 50mm f1.4.
I also happen to own a Mamiya 7 with a 80mm f4 (stunning quality). And I own a Zeiss Ikon with a Sonnar 50mm f1.5.
I understand convenience is an important factor for you.
For the Mamiya, you would loose in size what you gain in weight over the 5D. You may want to look for a Mamiya 6 with 75mm, the lenses retract in the bodie, making it quite compact.
The Zeiss Ikon is a great rangefinder I have to say. Lighter than a Leica, brightest finder I have ever seen. I also wear specs, it is not a problem at all. I think you might enjoy the compactness and quality of the lenses.
However, I see from your set of pictures that you take quite a lot of close-up portraits. You might want to take in account that rangefinders typically do not focus very close.
All in all I enjoy the use of the Zeiss Ikon more than the 5D. First, because of the size and weight, it is more often with me. Next, there is a certain pleasure in manual focusing, and by using film you have access to a great variety of grain, tones, and appearance for you pictures. Also, the quality of the optics is very very good.
welcome to RFF. We seem to be pretty like-minded concerning cameras as I too, own a Canon 5D with a 50mm f1.4.
I also happen to own a Mamiya 7 with a 80mm f4 (stunning quality). And I own a Zeiss Ikon with a Sonnar 50mm f1.5.
I understand convenience is an important factor for you.
For the Mamiya, you would loose in size what you gain in weight over the 5D. You may want to look for a Mamiya 6 with 75mm, the lenses retract in the bodie, making it quite compact.
The Zeiss Ikon is a great rangefinder I have to say. Lighter than a Leica, brightest finder I have ever seen. I also wear specs, it is not a problem at all. I think you might enjoy the compactness and quality of the lenses.
However, I see from your set of pictures that you take quite a lot of close-up portraits. You might want to take in account that rangefinders typically do not focus very close.
All in all I enjoy the use of the Zeiss Ikon more than the 5D. First, because of the size and weight, it is more often with me. Next, there is a certain pleasure in manual focusing, and by using film you have access to a great variety of grain, tones, and appearance for you pictures. Also, the quality of the optics is very very good.
RobScumaci
Member
I'll tell you, I could have written your post verbatim. I'm thinking the exact same thing - and the Ikon zeems to fill a gap between the Leicas and the Voigtlanders nicely. I find the urge to buy this camera overwhelming right now. Your assessment is right on IMO.
peripatetic
Well-known
It's great to find so many like-minded and friendly folk. I really appreciate the replies.
I shall doubtless in the course of time end up with a MF rangefinder too, probably the Mamiya 7II - which I absolutely loved when I played with it at Jacobs. I nearly bought it on the spot. The new Fuji folding rangefinder just announced looks pretty cool too.
My Canon 5D is only 1 year old, and the images are really fabulous considering how much the camera cost. So that should last me for another 2-3 years hopefully.
I do have the photography bug pretty bad at the moment, and put aside £100 a month in a photography fund, which I supplement with probably another £1000 from my bonus once a year. Once the fund builds up into something large enough I go out and get something nice. It seems to be a reasonable way of managing the equipment addiction.
Isn't photography strange? Two almost separate hobbies: collecting cameras and lenses on the one hand and taking pictures on the other. And of course don't we all hate those people who concentrate on the first hobby to the almost total exclusion of the second? But the first is utterly compelling, and it would be foolish to deny the pull of those beautiful tools. I think that explains the attraction back to these tools that are only appreciated by the few.
The other forums overflow with people who obsess over weather sealing and how accurately a camera can focus on a person running at top speed directly towards the photographer while shooting 10fps. I mean honestly - how could one possibly care about that? And any deficiency in a camera's ability to take these desperately uninspiring shots causes a million chicken littles to emerge panic stricken and squawking from the internet. It feels like watching a road accident; nausea inducing and yet it is strangely difficult to look away.
Why do I feel differently about Leica, Zeiss and Cosina? Simply because it is very clear (or perhaps I am fooled by their marketing materials) that the people who make these wonderful cameras and lenses are craftsmen. Their work is infused with quality. Pirzig helped us all with articulating that I guess, but here's the thing, once you start looking for quality in life it becomes hard to see things any other way. And using quality tools makes you feel special and once a bond develops the images you make change somehow.
My romantic (and possibly ridiculously pretentious) notion is that after a year or so of using the ZI and working at learning its foibles (a good reason to stick to only one or two lenses) the camera itself will start to disappear when you set out to make an image. The thing I hate about the digital cameras is that they change so fast and one is so tempted into the upgrade cycle that you never really get a chance to settle into that complete familiarity.
I've rambled long enough, some of you are probably vomiting by now.
Anyway, I like this forum, it has quality. And if I have articulated what others feel too, then I think it is because we have all been searching for quality, and somehow arrived in the same place. Feels pretty good.
I shall doubtless in the course of time end up with a MF rangefinder too, probably the Mamiya 7II - which I absolutely loved when I played with it at Jacobs. I nearly bought it on the spot. The new Fuji folding rangefinder just announced looks pretty cool too.
My Canon 5D is only 1 year old, and the images are really fabulous considering how much the camera cost. So that should last me for another 2-3 years hopefully.
I do have the photography bug pretty bad at the moment, and put aside £100 a month in a photography fund, which I supplement with probably another £1000 from my bonus once a year. Once the fund builds up into something large enough I go out and get something nice.
It seems to be a reasonable way of managing the equipment addiction. Isn't photography strange? Two almost separate hobbies: collecting cameras and lenses on the one hand and taking pictures on the other. And of course don't we all hate those people who concentrate on the first hobby to the almost total exclusion of the second? But the first is utterly compelling, and it would be foolish to deny the pull of those beautiful tools. I think that explains the attraction back to these tools that are only appreciated by the few.
The other forums overflow with people who obsess over weather sealing and how accurately a camera can focus on a person running at top speed directly towards the photographer while shooting 10fps. I mean honestly - how could one possibly care about that? And any deficiency in a camera's ability to take these desperately uninspiring shots causes a million chicken littles to emerge panic stricken and squawking from the internet. It feels like watching a road accident; nausea inducing and yet it is strangely difficult to look away.
Why do I feel differently about Leica, Zeiss and Cosina? Simply because it is very clear (or perhaps I am fooled by their marketing materials) that the people who make these wonderful cameras and lenses are craftsmen. Their work is infused with quality. Pirzig helped us all with articulating that I guess, but here's the thing, once you start looking for quality in life it becomes hard to see things any other way. And using quality tools makes you feel special and once a bond develops the images you make change somehow.
My romantic (and possibly ridiculously pretentious) notion is that after a year or so of using the ZI and working at learning its foibles (a good reason to stick to only one or two lenses) the camera itself will start to disappear when you set out to make an image. The thing I hate about the digital cameras is that they change so fast and one is so tempted into the upgrade cycle that you never really get a chance to settle into that complete familiarity.
I've rambled long enough, some of you are probably vomiting by now.
Anyway, I like this forum, it has quality. And if I have articulated what others feel too, then I think it is because we have all been searching for quality, and somehow arrived in the same place. Feels pretty good.
Last edited:
W
Way
Guest
If my next camera were to be a DSLR is would be the 5D!
But if your first rangefinder is a ZI and Zeiss lenses then I bet you'll be pretty happy. The viewfinder is the best that I have tried - big, clear and focusing seems to snap into place. Another plus is that the camera has a long effective baselength. Meter is very good. The shutter release is perfect for me. My 1D Mark II is sitting around collecting dust while my rangefinders are used everyday. I was able to carry 2 bodies (ZI and MP) with attached 35 cron and Canon 50/1.4 lenses along with a Agafa Super Isolette 6x6 folder in a bag that would fit the 1D body alone.
One thing to consider about the 50 Sonnar: it only close focuses to .9 meters while the 50 Planar can get as close as .7 meters., a big difference for me. Something to consider if you are doing close potraits.
But if your first rangefinder is a ZI and Zeiss lenses then I bet you'll be pretty happy. The viewfinder is the best that I have tried - big, clear and focusing seems to snap into place. Another plus is that the camera has a long effective baselength. Meter is very good. The shutter release is perfect for me. My 1D Mark II is sitting around collecting dust while my rangefinders are used everyday. I was able to carry 2 bodies (ZI and MP) with attached 35 cron and Canon 50/1.4 lenses along with a Agafa Super Isolette 6x6 folder in a bag that would fit the 1D body alone.
One thing to consider about the 50 Sonnar: it only close focuses to .9 meters while the 50 Planar can get as close as .7 meters., a big difference for me. Something to consider if you are doing close potraits.