What Are To YOU The Most Significant/Important unRF-Features?

R

radi(c)al_cam

Well-known
Local time
6:10 AM
Joined
Feb 23, 2010
Messages
975
(poll will follow, perhaps)


So far, I found the following features that are either nonsensical/impossible to embed into (film) RF cameras, or at least very very uncommon:


— 1. Camera Back/Film Magazine Interchangeability
— 2. Finder Adjustments (e.g. Angle Finder, or full Finder Interchangeability)
— 3. Focusing Screen Interchangeability
— 4. (true) Mirror Lock Up
— 5. Depth-Of-Field Preview


Did I forget something peculiar?
 
Long telephotos. Perspective correction lenses. Photographing anything closer than 70 cm. Aligning star- or polarizer filters. WYSIWYG at all times. Not losing accurate focus by dropping the camera.
 
TTL viewing is the only thing. Everything else is just ergonomics.
TTL viewng allows easy (or at least easier):
1. Long lens use
2. Accurate framing
3. Depth of field preview
4. Filter application, like polarisers
5. Macro
Essentially, TTL viewing is the ultimate unRF WYSIWYG feature.

And by the way, the RF is the ultimate mirror lock up camera. Permanently locked up!
 
David Hughes said:
Mirror lock up would be very, very peculiar in a RF...
Click to expand...


Dear David,

I guess some would claim that the early Alpa cameras are a chimera or hybrid … erm … a true rangefinder; and since (IIRC) they don't have an instant return mirror, to an extent one could say that some sort of mirror lock up happens there — but at the completely wrong point of time, I'd say ;)


edit: if I understand correctly, the Alpa Reflex's mirror can be triggered manually, before or after exposure; hence it does provide true MLU!
 
Dear Alexander,

Accurate framing. But at that, you need a decent SLR. Many screens are too small (some are even below 90% coverage) and some are offset.

The rest of the features I can live without, and some border on worthless anyway, e.g. d-o-f "preview".

Cheers,

R.
 
WYSIWIG e.g shooting between objects and more accurate framing in that situation, shallow depth of field effects (through grass, say.)
 
radi(c)al_cam said:
Dear David,

I guess some would claim that the early Alpa cameras are a chimera or hybrid … erm … a true rangefinder; and since (IIRC) they don't have an instant return mirror, to an extent one could say that some sort of mirror lock up happens there — but at the completely wrong point of time, I'd say ;)


edit: if I understand correctly, the Alpa Reflex's mirror can be triggered manually, before or after exposure; hence it does provide true MLU!
Click to expand...

Um, why would you use the mirror after exposure?

Thinking about it, there's a lot to be said for a decent lens on a P&S.

I think the real problem with these posts is that few cameras score 9 out of 10 and none score 10 out of 10. In a nutshell, we should accept that 8 out of 10 is an excellent score and settle for that. Luckily there's no shortage of cameras to satisfy whatever we would then want. OK so it's a Stoicism...

Regards, David
 
David Hughes said:
Um, why would you use the mirror after exposure?

Thinking about it, there's a lot to be said for a decent lens on a P&S.

I think the real problem with these posts is that few cameras score 9 out of 10 and none score 10 out of 10. In a nutshell, we should accept that 8 out of 10 is an excellent score and settle for that. Luckily there's no shortage of cameras to satisfy whatever we would then want. OK so it's a Stoicism...

Regards, David
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more. I've been through a whole range of cameras and you quickly realise nothing is perfect, nothing can do everything. And even more so when it comes to medium format cameras.

My solution: own several and enjoy them all :)
 
I always kept an SLR for :
- macro
- long lens
It was rarely used, and presently almost never, because I can "borrow" my wife's M43 when needed.
 
The Most Significant/Important unRF-Feature
Click to expand...
Bulk and credibility..

If you want to portray yourself as a serious photographer, you need an SLR, the bigger the better, and don't ignore the size of the lens.. fit at least a 70-200/2.8 with a big honking hood. Add battery grip for extra points. Visit any camera or photo club and you'll know what I mean; you don't even have to use it, you just have to plonk it down on the table and show it off. Only after that can you pull out your RF/compact/single-use without being snickered at..
 
brennanphotoguy said:
All mechanical shutter speeds (works without a battery)
Click to expand...

Excellent cue!

Roger Hicks said:
Accurate framing. But at that, you need a decent SLR. Many screens are too small (some are even below 90% coverage) and some are offset.

The rest of the features I can live without, and some border on worthless anyway, e.g. d-o-f "preview".
Click to expand...


Also, «decent» is an excellent cue.

I would like to add: «sustainable».

I guess it's not dystopic when I state that most of the photographic equipment stuff made since about 1970~1980 (notable exceptions are some, not necessarily upscale/«luxury», goods where and if the makers did not trust the plastics- and electronics-boom) will not withstand the test of time; many of the computerised wonders are already broken.

While a Leicaflex SL, or a Minolta SR-7, or even a humble Kiev 60, for instance, will quite certainly work in 2067, or at least will be repairable without much hassle, a say Canon AE-1, or a Nikon F5, etc.etc. simply won't work, will be irreparable — and will probably be even hazardous waste.

So, how do we define a «decent» unRF?
 
You didn't specify 35mm only, although I suspect that was what you were thinking. I got very lucky when a fellow worker offered to get me a Super Press 23 from a store he about lived in outside his Tokyo office. It has interchangeable lenses, selectable framelines for 100mm, 150mm, and 250mm lenses; a bellows back, interchangeable backs, and each lens has its own non-battery supported shutter. It even has ground glass backs. But I got it for the big 6x7 back I ordered with it. It is also very compact and light weight (not!).

When I want non-RF features, I gladly grab an SLR with no shame, and frankly, 35mm SLR are what I prefer.

I do have 35mm RF also, but not for SLR specific features of course.
 
Roger Hicks said:
Accurate framing. But at that, you need a decent SLR. Many screens are too small (some are even below 90% coverage) and some are offset.
Click to expand...

I actually prefer my consumer-grade SLRs with their 92 or 93% (or whatever it is) VF coverage because it approximates that part of the picture which is hidden by the cardboard slide mount. I'd probably unknowingly frame too tight with 100% VF coverage.

Negative shooters, your experiences may differ.
 
pvdhaar said:
Bulk and credibility..

If you want to portray yourself as a serious photographer, you need an SLR, the bigger the better, and don't ignore the size of the lens.. fit at least a 70-200/2.8 with a big honking hood. Add battery grip for extra points. Visit any camera or photo club and you'll know what I mean; you don't even have to use it, you just have to plonk it down on the table and show it off. Only after that can you pull out your RF/compact/single-use without being snickered at..
Click to expand...

Hi,

Don't forget the camouflage jacket around the camera and lens.

Regards, David
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom