Who shoots with both an RF & SLR?

Both, depending on what I'm shooting. For landscapes and other static subjects Nikon DSLR. For urban subjects, people and most anything close up, Leica with B&W film, 35 or 50 Summicron. Different tools for different jobs.
 
I had an SLR and RF for a short while, and the lenses where redundant (my doing mostly), but, I picked the RF 90% of the time, so I sold the SLR kit. I had no problems switching from form factor to the other.

I do have a Panasonic G1 with a 2 m4/3 lenses and 4 adapted lenses + a LM adapter.. Which I use more than the RF with one lens. I just like the taking a break from the digital world every now and then and go 100% analog... (except the scanning of course).
 
c.poulton said:
I have just been given a Chinon CE-4 & a bunch of lenses by my father who no longer shoots film any more.

Now, I am a die-hard rangefinder type of guy who has been using RF's for over 20 years. OK I started my photographic 'journey' using an SLR in the early 80's, but I haven't used one since then.

I own a M2 which is my main camera, and I have toyed with the idea of getting another body so that I can easily and very quickly swap between films / focal lengths. Having been given the Chinon it seems crazy not to use it. So I have the idea that as a complement to my M2 I use the SLR as a second body - M2 for the shorter focal lengths, SLR for anything longer then 50.

The question is this - does anyone else shoot with the two formats at the same time - would I find it difficult switching on the fly between the two or is it a case of "never the twain shall meet", either shoot exclusively with an RF or an SLR but not both?
Click to expand...


For almost 40 years, I used nothing but Nikon SLR's, the last 10 being digital, both personally and professionally. About 4 years ago, I discovered the world of Nikon S3 2000 and loved it immediately but just could not get the hang of it for some reason.:confused: My keeper ratio was terrible wide open.

Sold it, got a less expensive M3 a few years ago and it took me awhile to really begin to use it without thinking. A few months ago, I picked up a Leica R4 + 50mm Summicron and now have a perfect RF and SLR combination. Even the focusing rings work the same direction!

Now, what would be my dream combination for everyday use? Two M bodies for two different films and a Leica R body for using the 35 and 80 Summilux lenses + a D700 with adaptor to use the same Lux lenses.:cool:
 
I used to shoot both for several years but went full RF last year (including digital). I didn't find shifting back and forth too disturbing (I shot SLR and RF side by side) I just started to like shooting with an RF more...
 
Both... and both film and digital.

(Canons, Bessas, Leica CL, FSUs in film, Nikon and Olympus SLRs.)

Lately, I find myself using the digitals (Canon G5, Olympus C-5050)

and E-1) more and more.

Maybe at my age, you can't afford to wait to see the results?
 
(raises hand)

I've a D3 and M9 kit- I'm very happy with the both of them- the "looks" appear very close- a good match.
 
For work, Canon EOS digital with a couple of zooms. For myself, rangefinder and Nikon SLR with film. I know, Nikon focuses backwards, but my hands seem to know the difference even when my mind's confused.
 
I use both for what it's worth although at the moment I'm mostly using my SLR or my TLR. The Leica hasn't been used much over the past 6 months but that will change.
 
I do. Both ways. 3 ways actually. If you include single lens, direct viewing 4x5 cameras.
What other way is there?

...and film & digital too.
 
I have carried both in the past but don't like to be weighted down so now I carry either or. I want to shoot some abstracts & landscapes with my Canon slr using some Pan F. I like to stay focused so the rangefinder will stay home.
 
I use Minolta SRM and SRT reflex bodies for 35mm. Hasselblads and Plaubel Makiflexes for 6x6/6x9/9x9 reflex. Canon for 35mm RF. Sinar Norma for larger format 4x5/5x7/8x10. All are excellent. The right tool for the right job.
 
It's no problem at all switching from RF to SLR for me and for 99% of the work I do I have both in my bag. A SLR does not have to be much bigger than a RF so I think they work together well.
 
I use the Leica R8 with DMR (Digital Module R) for shooting in the studio and shooting art, copy work, and also copying negatives (my scanner). However, I found that it was (1) heaver and (2) slower to use on the street or for more candid shots. Also, when I first got it, it was just too much money to be carrying around. I just added an M8 to my M cameras, and found that it works well for traveling and on the street.
 
I use both. I have begun to notice recently that I use rangefinders when I am "a part" of what I'm shooting - like at a party, or in a classroom, or when I'm out shooting just for me. I tend to use a DSLR when I'm more of an observer - like shooting sports for example. I guess I find that both types of cameras have strengths and weaknesses. I do know if I just grab a camera to take with me, it is always a rangefinder.
 
Canon 7D at work (i'm a videographer, not a photographer).
For personal photography, i use TLR, SLR, RF, even a Jiffy Folder. Sometimes carrying several in my bag just for the fun of it.

I dont feel awkward changing cameras and formats when shooting for personal project. Instead, i look forward to it. But i tend to use similar cameras when shooting for paid job.
 
At the same time (in the original post) does not seem always to have been addressed.

Yes, 20-30 years ago I used Leicas and Nikon Fs side by side (which was also, of course, the classic Vietnam war photographers' outfit 40 years ago), with Leicas for 21mm to 90mm, Nikons for 135mm to 800mm. But then, like Damaso, I just found that I preferred working only with Leicas. Of course I lose some pictures where a longer lens would be good, but I just don't bother with those pictures any more: it's quicker, easier and more intuitive to use one system. When I used both, I never found it hard to switch from M to F; just not worth the effort.

I still have a few Fs (and a range of other cameras from 9.5mm to 12x15 inch), but normally, if I'm using another camera, I may take a Leica more as a comfort blanket and a backup than to be used alongside.

Cheers,

R.
 
Roger Hicks said:
At the same time (in the original post) does not seem always to have been addressed.

Yes, 20-30 years ago I used Leicas and Nikon Fs side by side (which was also, of course, the classic Vietnam war photographers' outfit 40 years ago), with Leicas for 21mm to 90mm, Nikons for 135mm to 800mm. But then, like Damaso, I just found that I preferred working only with Leicas. Of course I lose some pictures where a longer lens would be good, but I just don't bother with those pictures any more: it's quicker, easier and more intuitive to use one system. When I used both, I never found it hard to switch from M to F; just not worth the effort.

I still have a few Fs (and a range of other cameras from 9.5mm to 12x15 inch), but normally, if I'm using another camera, I may take a Leica more as a comfort blanket and a backup than to be used alongside.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...


Agree with Roger and Damaso... I prefer by far to use the Leica RF...that is why I would love to have an MP.;)
 
The lot, an RF, several SLR´s (d, MF and 135), TLR´s, scale focusing folders, scale focusing MF/LF/pano cameras, view camera (though no movements), P+S, cameraphones...., but still no pinhole or toy cameras!
 
Oops! I guess I misunderstood the original question. I do occasionally use both at the same time. It tends to be when I have a long focal length on the DSLR at a sporting event and then I will have a RF with a wide angle in the bag for up close player/ spectator and sideline action. I don't have a problem moving between the systems.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom