You have lost your mind with the Forum Categories

JLW said:
-- Why is there a "Scale Focus 35's" forum on Rangefinder Forum?

-- How many 35mm half-frame rangefinder cameras are there? (The only ones I can think of offhand are the Leica 72 and the Nikon S3M, both of which are vanishingly rare and both of which are already covered by other forums. Maybe there are one or two more -- and I'd love to see a list -- but are there enough to need a whole forum?)


-- How many "35 Panor Not Xpan" rangefinder cameras are there? Again, I'd love to see a list.
Click to expand...

CameraQuest said:
scale focus -- over a million Rollei 35's

the Ruskie panoramics

Stephen
Click to expand...

a) I would think that jlw was asking why scalefocusing cameras now would be 'allowed' on a dedicated rangefinder site - and not what type of scale focusing cameras were made.

b) What Russian rangefinder, panoramic cameras are there?

c) I think you missed his third question about half-frame rangefinder cameras.
 
CameraQuest said:
I obviously agree with the importance of rangefinder photography,
it is just first cousins Rollei 35's, half frame, and even the original Leica A are still very popular with rangefinder people.

Stephen
Click to expand...

So are SLRs, dSLRs, LF ground focusing glass cameras, digital P&S cameras and pinhole cameras.
 
I visit RFF daily to read/reply and go to the RFF Gallery to look at photographs. For the life of me, I can’t see where giving me several choices to read/reply is a bad thing. In discussing overlapping forums, VinceC commented that “A good number of discussions about Nikkor, Canon and Soviet lenses have been posted in Leica forums...” – which is a good example of the overlapping that’s not uncommon. In my mind, the “good number of discussions … have been posted” = more info = more hits = better forum. Many have come here and stuck because we found a place where we could discuss our “niche” of photography. It’s a no-brainer to me that as the membership expands, so will the number of niches of interest. I, for one, wouldn’t consider it “dilution,” but expansion. “We’ve never done it that way before” is a terrible excuse for not trying something different. Even if it failed back.in.the.day, it could have successful advantages now that RFF has grown.

I’ve stuck around long enough and read enough overlapping threads that my camera herd has expanded or branched out in several directions (far beyond my expectations) and some of them non.RF. I’ll have to say that this was brought about partly by the overlapping of topics that caught my interest and helped me discover new areas. That’s not a bad thing, for me anyway. Film RFs are my main photography interest, of course, and describe most of my cameras. But I also have several non.RF scale focus cameras and I’m glad there’s a place besides “Other” or “Off-topic” where I can post/reply/read about them – here - at the Forum I hang out in. I’m waiting delivery of a lowly Chaika.2. Oooooo, it’s scale.focus, half.frame, FSU. That’s THREE places I could post a comment/question. Choices. Options. How is that a bad thing? Sorry, I just don’t see it.

There seems to me to be adequate tools available here for organizing and keeping track of many threads on many forums. But one has to use them. If anyone needs help with this just ask. There are plenty of folks around able and willing to RE: Or subscribe to the StuartR forum, where all posts are by StuartR, about StuartR, relating to StuartR, inspired by StuartR and only involve StuartR cameras and StuartR photos. 😉 (just kiddin’ Stu)

"Let's change the name to avoid confusing newcomers." jlw, with all due respect, how in the Wide.World.of.Sports will changing a site's name cut down on confusion? Have some rangefinder related forums been dropped? Is there less rangefinder information now? IMO, overwhelming majority of discussion at RFF has been and still is rangefinders.

I agree, Rangefinders have lots of cousins and some of those cousins I'm not the least bit interested in. But some of them I am and it's really not that difficult to see their connection to RF photography. I like the new forums. 🙂
 
CameraQuest said:
scale focus -- over a million Rollei 35's

the Ruskie panoramics

Stephen
Click to expand...

Over a million Rollei 35's, yes, in it's day (late 1960's into the 1970's). But how many are in even sporadic use today? The Rollie 35 is the 1970's Argus. How many people alive today have even seen an Argus in use? I like the variey of the site, but in a word (or a few words), there's too many forums now, period. I figure the list is about twice the size it should be, so here's my list of 14, as opposed to the present 27:

Leica M Digital (yep, includes RD-1)
Leica M
Zeiss Ikon M
Leica Screwmount
Canon RF (could be in Leica screw, oh the horror of it all)
Contax RF
Nikon RF (could combine as Contax/Nikon RF...nahhh)
Soviet RF Copies (could be in Leica screw)
Fixed Lens RF (covers all the fixed lens Yashicas, Olympus, Minoltas, Canons, et. al.)
Panoramic
Medium Format RF (do we need a Mamiya 6 and 7!!!)
120 RF (I don't know enough about 120/large format to go into more detail)
Large Format RF (ditto above comment)
Other Vintage RF (or something more creative to describe "anything else"/"miscellaneous"/"oldie misfits")

Maybe I missed one or two, but I suggest anything over 12-15 categories is too many. There's no one on the planet who knows more about film cameras than Stephen Gandy. An historical review and commentary site like his Cameraquest (an exceptional resource, let it be said) should have many separate categories, but an on-line user forum like Rangefinder Forum should have a much more streamlined structure. And yes, let it be about rangefinder cameras only. As someone else said, this is not the "Nostalgic Camera Forum."
 
aizan said:
and the "must have a rangefinder" thing is too uptight.
Click to expand...
Great idea -- I shall ask to open a Brush and Canvases forum. "Must have a photo" thing is too uptight. An image is an image, right?

I'll say one last thing: in the past, changes like these were made with announcements and with proper feedback from the community. This has all been one-sided. So much for "nothing's going to change".

I'm not against change. I'm not, however, for contradictions.
 
Last edited:
jlw said:
None of which is a rangefinder camera, right?

None of which is a rangefinder camera, right?

If the consensus is to turn this site into "Nostalgia Camera Forum," fine -- but that's not why I'm here, and let's at least change the name to avoid confusing newcomers.
Click to expand...


Show of hands, who has a Bessa L?

(Please note that answering in the affirmative will not result in your banning)
 
nasmformyzombie said:
Over a million Rollei 35's, yes, in it's day (late 1960's into the 1970's). But how many are in even sporadic use today? The Rollie 35 is the 1970's Argus. How many people alive today have even seen an Argus in use?
Click to expand...

After I broke my old Instamatic, my father let me use his Argus a few times until I got another 126 film camera. There are even Argus users on this forum...

Not to mention that the site is being re-orged a tad to reflect the new owner. Many of his new forums I'll ignore as I'm not interested in them. The ones that interest me I'll read.
 
nasmformyzombie said:
Over a million Rollei 35's, yes, in it's day (late 1960's into the 1970's). But how many are in even sporadic use today? The Rollie 35 is the 1970's Argus. How many people alive today have even seen an Argus in use? I like the variey of the site, but in a word (or a few words), there's too many forums now, period. I figure the list is about twice the size it should be, so here's my list of 14, as opposed to the present 27:

Leica M Digital (yep, includes RD-1)
Leica M
Zeiss Ikon M
Leica Screwmount
Canon RF (could be in Leica screw, oh the horror of it all)
Contax RF
Nikon RF (could combine as Contax/Nikon RF...nahhh)
Soviet RF Copies (could be in Leica screw)
Fixed Lens RF (covers all the fixed lens Yashicas, Olympus, Minoltas, Canons, et. al.)
Panoramic
Medium Format RF (do we need a Mamiya 6 and 7!!!)
120 RF (I don't know enough about 120/large format to go into more detail)
Large Format RF (ditto above comment)
Other Vintage RF (or something more creative to describe "anything else"/"miscellaneous"/"oldie misfits")

Maybe I missed one or two, but I suggest anything over 12-15 categories is too many. There's no one on the planet who knows more about film cameras than Stephen Gandy. An historical review and commentary site like his Cameraquest (an exceptional resource, let it be said) should have many separate categories, but an on-line user forum like Rangefinder Forum should have a much more streamlined structure. And yes, let it be about rangefinder cameras only. As someone else said, this is not the "Nostalgic Camera Forum."
Click to expand...
I can only assume Mr. Gandy will want to move the site towards what interests him and helps him promote his business. He's the owner, that's only natural, and it's his right (and makes sense too). I like the new direction.
 
I must say that I preferred the forum prior to the explosion of categories. I too am a fan of the Cameraquest site and go to it frequently and I have no objection whatsoever to Stephen Gandy's involvement here. My only gripe is that previously if I wanted to look up something to do with a 35mm Yashica for instance I knew where to look. Now a Minister D could be legitimately in a couple of different forums. Similarly with the FSU cameras. I don't have the time to look through the 7 or 8 pages of new posts that are generated every day that some here obviously do. I know that there were some overlapping threads before but the potential for this has increased greatly. I also feel that 15 or so forums would be more that adequate. 🙁
 
"Over a million Rollei 35's, yes, in it's day (late 1960's into the 1970's). But how many are in even sporadic use today? The Rollie 35 is the 1970's Argus. How many people alive today have even seen an Argus in use? I like the variey of the site, but in a word (or a few words), there's too many forums now, period. I figure the list is about twice the size it should be, so here's my list of 14, as opposed to the present 27"[/I

In defence of the Rollei 35 and how many may or may not be in use ... one, the camera is damned near indestructable and two, it is a very high quality and quirky photographic device!

I typed 'Rollei 35' into an ebay search and got 169 listings ... when I typed 'Leica M3' in I got 158 which usually only represents around a dozen cameras ... the rest being adds with 'M3' tacked on to make people look!

If Stephen's figure of around a million cameras is accurate I would love to know how many of these are still usable? Off the thread topic I realise but interesting none the less! 🙂
 
Gabriel M.A. said:
Great idea -- I shall ask to open a Brush and Canvases forum. "Must have a photo" thing is too uptight. An image is an image, right?

I'll say one last thing: in the past, changes like these were made with announcements and with proper feedback from the community. This has all been one-sided. So much for "nothing's going to change".

I'm not against change. I'm not, however, for contradictions.
Click to expand...

run for your life, the viewfinder cameras without rangefinders are going to ruin everything!
 
Plasmat said:
That's right, read all my other posts carefully. I'm an unrepentant troll, only here to disturb all the precious photographers with slightly out of focus topic headlines.

Does using a rangefinder automatically make you an oversensitive politically correct curmudgeon and humor policeman?
Click to expand...

Please don't hide behind the anti-politically correct argument.

The simple problem was the title was stated as a "declarative":

"You are insane...."

Yes, I find that offensive because it is presumptuous.

If you had stated:

"Are you insane....?"

You would have left the door open for Stephen G. to explain why he's created additional categories.

To confuse "politeness" with "politically correct" is a b.s. argument by someone who probably "knows better" but doesn't want to admit he's just been very rude!
 
Dougg said:
<hand up> One Bessa-L here. I wonder if anyone here has the Z-I SW or an Alpa 12.
Click to expand...


I have even two of the Alpa's. Do I get my own category for them?? 🙂
 
CVBLZ4 said:
"Let's change the name to avoid confusing newcomers." jlw, with all due respect, how in the Wide.World.of.Sports will changing a site's name cut down on confusion? Have some rangefinder related forums been dropped? Is there less rangefinder information now? IMO, overwhelming majority of discussion at RFF has been and still is rangefinders.
Click to expand...

I meant that suggestion seriously, not sarcastically. A "nostalgia camera forum" (and I'm going to loosely define a "nostalgia camera" as a type once popular but now not in widespread use -- scale-focusing VF cameras, folding cameras, and stereo cameras, for example) might have a lot of utility to people who wouldn't necessarily recognize something called Rangefinder Forum as the place to go for information.

For example, imagine the young photographer who inherited Grandpa's Rollei 35 and is trying to figure out where the battery goes -- if he's well-educated, he would recognize that the Rollei is not a rangefinder camera, so a forum specifically about rangefinder cameras might not be the first place that would occur to him to look for help with it.

As I said, this is not a change that would benefit me personally. I'm specifically interested in the rewards and challenges of rangefinder-camera photography. The rewards and challenges of using a scale-focusing camera are somewhat different, as are the types of photo opportunities you'd pursue with that type of camera. For example, I spend a lot of time holding my breath trying to squeeze off close-up "available-darkness" shots with an f/1.2 lens at ISO 1600; nobody would choose a scale-focusing Rollei 35 with its f/3.5 (or f/2.8) lens for that kind of picture-taking.

But when I conducted one of my recent surveys, I was surprised to find how few RFF members actually care about the rangefinder aspect of rangefinder-camera photography. Many people said they chose RF cameras because they prefer to use film, and/or do their photography the traditional, craft-oriented way, and/or because they like the compact size and feeling of old-fashioned craftsmanship, or whatever.

I choose and prefer RF cameras because viewing and focusing via a range/viewfinder makes it easier to get the kinds of pictures I want to make. A scale-focusing camera, an SLR, or a TLR just doesn't work as well (and I've tried them all!) Camera choice really is all about the rangefinder for me. But I'm willing to accept that that makes me a minority-group member here...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom