Why a RF vs. a SLR?

[00ziggi]

Hey there-
i'm considering a Bessa R3A... i've shot with a SLR, and i guess i'm just looking for something different (?).
so as i'm asking myself this question, i figured i'd throw it out to you RF guys...
why a RF, instead of the (generally) cheaper and (possibly?) easier SLR?
what's the charm?

thanks!
brent

 

[ibcrewin]

I've just begun delving into rangefinders from SLR's and DSLR's. For me part it's about portability, using film again, focusing in low light and the cool classic
look of it..That last one is a bit superficial I know.

 

[kshapero]

It's mysticism, pure mysticism.

 

[FrankS]

Really, I can't explain it either.

 

[aizan]

it cost more, so it must be cooler.

 

[FrankS]

It was built in the 1950's, so it's not made out of plastic.

 

[Jocko]

Really, I can't explain it either.

I think it has something to do with these simple cameras allowing me to be more involved in the photography process.

I think it does too. At its simplest, you look through a rangefinder and look into an SLR. The connection between you, the experience of photography and the resulting picture is inexpressibly different - somehow more direct. I think 🙂

Cheers, Ian

 

[dmr]

I actually think of the SLR and the RF as being more similar than they are different, but both have their strong and weak points. Both of them are small light 35mm cameras and operate in a similar way.

The RF(s) has/have become my favorite for low light and available light. The lack of vibration gives about an f-stop over the SLR for hand-held low-light stuff.

I do like the zoom on the SLR, which works quite well in WYSIWYG mode. 🙂

 

[mtbbrian]

I am new RF convert, and before I shot with a film SLR that was AF and could do five frames a second and all that
I came to RF's because I wanted to get back to a slower more hands on kind of camera, one that required a little more thought, before I pressed the shutter.
Not only that, my SLR kit was heavy and I wanted something lighter.
Brian

 

[iml]

It's mainly the viewfinder. That's what first got me hooked, the experience of composing through a decent VF immediately improved my photography and put me more in touch with the moment. It also helps that the cameras are much cooler, the lenses smaller yet more hefty, and fully manual operation is just far more satisfying than AF and the like.

But, not everyone agrees. You may find RFs don't work for you, which is fine too.

Ian

 

[VinceC]

I like their small size and light weight compared to SLRs.

I got involved with them through reverse snobbery. Twenty years ago, everyone was moving toward giant autofocus automatic SLRs with built-in motordrive with huge zooms. I enjoyed the challenge of taking pictures that were just as good, or better, with a small, gentle, decades-old camera that didn't scare the hell out of the people I was photographing.

 

[Michiel]

You can find a detailed article about this at photoetnography.com.

 

[oftheherd]

To me each is a tool for different purposes. I have some P&S RFs like the Canonet Q1.7, and I have a Super Press 23. And of course, SLRs too. What some have mentioned about slowing down is true for film vs digital, and certainly for my Super Press from either SLRs or 35mm RF. There is something to be said for that. Its a more involving process. I haven't yet made the plunge to interchangable lens 35mm RF. I don't feel the need, and maybe I'm a little afraid too. I might like it too much and get GAS. 😀

I guess the fact that you are asking means you have to try at least an inexpensive 35mm RF. But that might not be what you really like. You might want interchangable lenses like with your 35mm SLRs. Beware the lurking GAS ... Interchangable lens RFs come in all sizes too.

But there is something about a lot of the older cameras that is just aluring. I enjoy folders too, as do many here. I bet you will like them if you try (RFs I mean).

 

[Bryce]

I got involved with rangefinders because I wanted a portable medium format camera, and because the 15mm Voigtlander lens and Bessa L are less expensive, and smaller than a similar wide angle lens for my K mount Pentax kit.
So I bought a 6x45 Fuji and the Bessa.
They then became my most used cameras...

 

[MikeL]

Maybe not a 'Why' but a 'When'?

 

[mike goldberg]

I don't know how much I can add to the fine posts, above.
At times, it is just something that can't be explained. At others,
yes, it is mysticism or a kind of mystique. And it does feel more direct.

Having moved in and out of the New Age world through the years,
I try to be aware of my inner processes. For sure, there are very fine,
expensive and modern RF cameras, yet there is something about it
that is very "Old Age." Something good happens to me with an RF
camera in hand, that is quite different from slr & digital use.

Cheers, mike

 

[shadowfox]

... and why not scale focus? 🙂

 

[dostacos]

hmm... mirror SLAP low light shooting for RF, long distance surf shots SLRs

street shooting is harder with a [generally] big SLR [older Olys don't count 😀] the newer digital SLRs really don't fly for, ahem.... "street walking"😱

 

[sherm]

Because I want to...............

 

[Joe Mondello]

http://www.dantestella.com/technical/rangefinder.html

I am shooting digital RFs (Epson R-D1 and Leica M8) and for me it happened when I held the M8 at a trade show last fall and was reminded on a physical gut level what I'd been missing since the 60s when Nikon Fs took over from Leica Ms in my family (my Dad owned the cameras and my brother and I both shot with them).

Shooting with a rangefinder is both more difficult and yet more satisfying in some ways. Digital "shutter lag" is non-existant which is a huge deal for me.

The cameras are smaller and lighter, the lenses are smaller and lighter (not less expensive though since it is a far smaller market). My Billingham Small Hadley with the M8 and 4 CV lenses takes up about half the volume and half the weight of my D200 in it's Crumpler 7 Million Dollar Home with primes and fast zooms.

These days with auto-everything 5 fps dSLRs it's almost like taking a video and then looking for the best shot in a 20 frame burst.

It just isn't like that with a rangefinder camera. It is a different photographic "experience" just as shooting with MF or LF would be.

Does that help?

Oh yeah, I almost forgot . . .rangefinders are more fun!!! 🙂

But I have both and appreciate the strengths and weaknesses of both types of camera.