peterm1
Veteran
Having been a Leica shooter for 20 years I have in the past couple of years moved increasingly to digital - mainly SLRs although I have a pseudo rangefinder too, in the form of a Panasonic L1 (a camera which Leica also sold re-badged as a Leica Digilux 3.) It handles much like a classic rangefinder and was much cheaper than an M8. Apart from this I am mainly shooting Nikons and still take my M4P out for the occasional walk.
The main reason I am mainly shooting digital is the convenience of the format and the ability to post process - I either convert to black and white or more recently have been experimenting with desaturated and toned color - just for fun.
In a sense I have returned somewhat to my photographic roots as I have been doing progressively more and more street shooting - usually with a Nikon D200 and a prime standard lens or short telephoto (equivalent to shooting a 50 and a 90 on my M body.) Only now and then will I use something longer.
Not asking for critiques but examples can be found here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/80702381@N00/sets/72157610362797162/
I find it fairly successful and enjoyable and personally quite like my results (although I imagine the results are not everyones' "cup of tea" and in any event I am developing my style further as I learn more. Something we occasionally forget about as photographers!
OK presently the style of my photos is certainly different from "traditional" rangefinder street shots in some respects - except for subjects - but as I say I like to experiment and develop my own style. In fact for me this is probably the most enjoyable aspect. And I confess I do post process quite a bit - for me this is not an issue although I understand this is not the case for some who believe its them the camera and nothing else.
As to the shooting process, the key advantage for me in using an SLR is the ability to frame quickly, shoot from a bit of a distance (I do not like poking my camera into peoples faces from a close distance) and to immediately see results. (Shooting in a busy street with people milling like birds in flight is a real challenge.) I do not think that AF is necessarily an advantage having used classic rangefinder cameras I know I can pre-focus. The key disadvantage is that a digital SLR and some lenses (e.g. the Nikkor 17-55mm f2.8 zoom when I use it) are pretty obvious and do attract some strange looks.
But what about other people. What is your experience of using SLRs for street photography? Does it work for you or do you '"need" the rangefinder for it to work for you? Do you like the process using an SLR - does it matter? Do you like the results you get? (To each is own is my philosophy but its interesting to share thoughts on a subject that is dear to all our hearts.
The main reason I am mainly shooting digital is the convenience of the format and the ability to post process - I either convert to black and white or more recently have been experimenting with desaturated and toned color - just for fun.
In a sense I have returned somewhat to my photographic roots as I have been doing progressively more and more street shooting - usually with a Nikon D200 and a prime standard lens or short telephoto (equivalent to shooting a 50 and a 90 on my M body.) Only now and then will I use something longer.
Not asking for critiques but examples can be found here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/80702381@N00/sets/72157610362797162/
I find it fairly successful and enjoyable and personally quite like my results (although I imagine the results are not everyones' "cup of tea" and in any event I am developing my style further as I learn more. Something we occasionally forget about as photographers!
OK presently the style of my photos is certainly different from "traditional" rangefinder street shots in some respects - except for subjects - but as I say I like to experiment and develop my own style. In fact for me this is probably the most enjoyable aspect. And I confess I do post process quite a bit - for me this is not an issue although I understand this is not the case for some who believe its them the camera and nothing else.
As to the shooting process, the key advantage for me in using an SLR is the ability to frame quickly, shoot from a bit of a distance (I do not like poking my camera into peoples faces from a close distance) and to immediately see results. (Shooting in a busy street with people milling like birds in flight is a real challenge.) I do not think that AF is necessarily an advantage having used classic rangefinder cameras I know I can pre-focus. The key disadvantage is that a digital SLR and some lenses (e.g. the Nikkor 17-55mm f2.8 zoom when I use it) are pretty obvious and do attract some strange looks.
But what about other people. What is your experience of using SLRs for street photography? Does it work for you or do you '"need" the rangefinder for it to work for you? Do you like the process using an SLR - does it matter? Do you like the results you get? (To each is own is my philosophy but its interesting to share thoughts on a subject that is dear to all our hearts.
