This isn't a rangefinder but it has potential

[Gordon Coale]

This isn't about a rangefinder so maybe it doesn't belong in the Rangefinder Forum. This is about one of those scale focus cameras without a rangefinder. They may not focus like a rangefinder but they shoot like one and you might consider one of these.

I was cleaning out some boxes of books tonight and found a treasure of 6 copies of American Photography from October 1926 to August 1927. This is an ad from the August 1927 issue. There are some other interesting ads.

 

[captainslack]

Better yet, you can buy one at KEH, if you have a spare $1200! 😀

http://www.keh.com/shop/SHOWPRODUCT...=newused&BID=LS&CID=01&SOID=N&curpic=0&dpsp=0

 

[Roger Hicks]

Well, modern Alpas don't have rangefinders either! Nor do lots of other really nice non-reflexes. That's why in our book on rangefinder cameras we included direct vision cameras such as Alpa, Olympus and Robot. Check the 'books' section on www.rogerandfrances.com.

Cheers,

Roger

 

[Doug]

Yes, Roger, I've promoted your inclusive view, as I understand it, here in RFF. It makes sense for us to embrace non-rangefinder direct-vision cameras here under the rangefinder umbrella... as close cousins in usage. Cameras where viewing is primarily on an LCD screen or ground glass are significantly different, I think.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Doug,

Good! They are a bit orphaned otherwise. And I really do love my Alpa...

I wasn't sure about their status, being a very recent member, but we can stand shoulder to shoulder on this one.

Cheers,

Roger (www.rogerandfrances.com)

 

[schaubild]

Very interesting folks are joining the RFF. Hello Roger, now already two Alpas are around 🙂
And you're right, scale focusing cameras are not banned here, au contraire.

 

[Doug]

This may be a good opportunity to persue the use of a direct-view camera sans RF... Years ago many folding cameras of fine quality and sizable film had no built-in rangefinder, yet this was apparently not a barrier to producing notable photos. Nowadays we wish to restrict the Bessa-L for instance to lenses wider than 35mm, yet those older bigger cameras had less DoF... didn't they? Well, the lens on my old Kodak 620 is 105mm and f/7.7, so that aperture shouldn't strain focusing too very much.

So... What photographic function is best served by that newer expensive Alpa, for instance? What is its mission? (Landscapes come to mind quickly) Would one choose only a super-wide lens of modest aperture? Does one carry a tape measure or a string with calibrated knots? 🙂

 

[JOE1951]

So... What photographic function is best served by that newer expensive Alpa, for instance? What is its mission? (Landscapes come to mind quickly) Would one choose only a super-wide lens of modest aperture? Does one carry a tape measure or a string with calibrated knots? 🙂

Medium format "technical" cameras like the Alpa, Wica, Silvestri, etc., seem to popular with the architecture, industrial photo crowd who would traditionally use a large format viewcamera for this work.

I guess one could carry a handheld/accessory shoe mountable rangerfinder. They come up all the time on Ebay. Focus manually from a ground glass at the film plane, or an edjamacated guess.

 

[Roman]

Yep, architecture is what they are intended for - there you are not working close up, have the time to focus on the groundglass, and are working stopped down for maximal DOF anyway, so lack of an RF is no problem; many of these models also have (limited) rise/fall to correct for perspective.
I see them occasionally once a new building by some celebrity architect has been finished.

Roman

 

[Gordon Coale]

Here is another ad for that German scale focus/direct view camera. This one is from the October, 1926, issue of American Photography.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Well, I use my Alpa for travel and reportage, not architecture at all, not at small apertures, not with a groundglass, not with a tripod. I've heard of quite a lot of others using them in similar ways for similar purposes: look at Depardon's Errances for example. Apparently some use them for fashion, and because of their extreme precision they are also excellent in the studio for digital.

I prefer the stunning 38/4.5 Biogon on 44x66mm, an almost exact equivalent to 21mm on 35mm, but my wife uses a 35/5.6 Apo-Grandagon on 6x9cm, about like a 15mm shift lens. There are a number of Alpa pictures in several of our books, notably Rangefinder and Medium and Large Format -- click on 'books' on our website www.rogerandfrances.com for more information about both books.

Cheers,

Roger

 

[JOE1951]

Well, I use my Alpa for travel and reportage, not architecture at all, not at small apertures, not with a groundglass, not with a tripod. I've heard of quite a lot of others using them in similar ways for similar purposes: look at Depardon's Errances for example. Apparently some use them for fashion, and because of their extreme precision they are also excellent in the studio for digital.

Hey

Bravo!

I'm certainly not suggesting that that an Alpa or any other technical camera couldn't be used for taking the photos you suggest, just that historically, architecture/industrial was its most common usage.

Personally I come from the Bernard Plousseau (sp), Micheal Spano school of thought that any camera can be used to take excellent photos.

It's the fool not the tool!


regards

 

[RubenBlaedel]

I have a Hasselblad SWCM with a fixed 38 mm 4,5 Biogon - It can be used with a ground glass and with a mirror reflex device but I use it 80% af the time like I use my 24x36 rangfinders and because of the depth of field I often have it prefocussed and at f 8 or 11 and it will most - Because of the 90 degress people tend to think that it is a 21 mm eq 24x36 but really it is more like 26-27 horizontal just with a lot more vertical coverage. It is designed for architectural work etc. but I think it is a great point and shoot camera - I do not know if the SWCM is qualified as a rangefinder by this Forum but it sure is a great camera - would be better with the rise/shift option but that is another story - we can not all be APLAs 🙂

 

[Roman]

Well, I use my Alpa for travel and reportage, not architecture at all, not at small apertures, not with a groundglass, not with a tripod. I've heard of quite a lot of others using them in similar ways for similar purposes: look at Depardon's Errances for example. Apparently some use them for fashion, and because of their extreme precision they are also excellent in the studio for digital.

Roger,
I have looked prevously at your pictures and found them great, and of course there's nothing prohibiting you (or others) preventing you from using these cameras in the ways you do, but as JOE1951 already mentioned, historically these 'technical' cameras were designed (and marketed) for architectural photography, to the extent that you can even find Alpa ads in architecture magazines, etc.

Roman

 

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Roman,

Thanks for the kind words. What I really meant -- and this applies both to your post and that of Joe 1951 -- was that Thomas and Ursula didn't really design the Alpa for that kind of stuff, though of course Ken Corfield did intend the WA67 for exactly that: it was originally known as the Corfield Architect. I've never asked Tosh Komamura what the Horseman was designed for: maybe I should.

Cheers,

Roger