Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,212   Posts: 1,532,092   Online: 1233
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 20 of 20

Thread: Rangefinder

  1. #11

    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    16
    The difference is that there is no lag time in your Leica versus the SLRs!
    Great capture.
    Regards,

    Michael
    Dallas, TX


    Pentax 6x7
    Mamiya 7 ii
    Mamiya C330
    4x5 and 8x10 large format

    And for those non film moments a Fuji X-Pro 1 and Nikon D4 and D800E.

  2. #12
    rwboyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    MD USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    522
    Yes that is a technical difference but for some subconscious reason both myself and subjects seem to "make" different pictures as well in terms of reaction. Honestly I was not referring to a technical difference. I think my attitude is different in some minor way no matter how hard I try - it just is. And maybe more importantly my subjects seem to be less self conscious - especially if they are not used to being in front of a camera. I know that that would be hard to prove or disprove - just my observations over the years. It is not like I am not there with a camera in both circumstances.

    RB

  3. #13
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by rwboyer View Post
    Yes that is a technical difference but for some subconscious reason both myself and subjects seem to "make" different pictures as well in terms of reaction.
    Trust me, this lack of defined reaction to having an SLR lens pointed at them is something you WANT and a reason to use a RF in these types of situations.

    Also, the old cliche "the images should do the talking rather than words" is mostly BS if the image itself is solid. Just provide a short caption and it all becomes clear. In fact, you've already written one in one of your earlier posts.
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  4. #14
    rwboyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    MD USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    522
    Quote Originally Posted by clayne View Post
    Trust me, this lack of defined reaction to having an SLR lens pointed at them is something you WANT and a reason to use a RF in these types of situations.

    Also, the old cliche "the images should do the talking rather than words" is mostly BS if the image itself is solid. Just provide a short caption and it all becomes clear. In fact, you've already written one in one of your earlier posts.
    Agreed! Now if I could just get used to using those damned clip on finders I could actually use my 21 with some degree of competence. Maybe I'll just stick with the 50 and sell the 21 for the RF ;-)

    RB

  5. #15
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by rwboyer View Post
    Agreed! Now if I could just get used to using those damned clip on finders I could actually use my 21 with some degree of competence. Maybe I'll just stick with the 50 and sell the 21 for the RF ;-)

    RB
    If it means anything, RF + wide angle don't work with me that well. There's something about the lack of perspective-accurate viewfinder in a RF that bothers me when working with 24mm and below lenses. With those an SLR works better for me. I like to feel inside the scene and the VF of an SLR with a wide-angle replicates that. I only use my M4 w/ a Summicron 35. Granted there are accessory finders, but it's just another thing to have to worry about.
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  6. #16
    rwboyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    MD USA
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    522
    Quote Originally Posted by clayne View Post
    If it means anything, RF + wide angle don't work with me that well. There's something about the lack of perspective-accurate viewfinder in a RF that bothers me when working with 24mm and below lenses. With those an SLR works better for me. I like to feel inside the scene and the VF of an SLR with a wide-angle replicates that. I only use my M4 w/ a Summicron 35. Granted there are accessory finders, but it's just another thing to have to worry about.
    My big issue is with the accessory finders - with wides I like to shoot real close and as you know the best light is usually not real bright so I do need to focus - the issue is that I have a really difficult time doing what I use 35 for at all - quick stuff - with the separate focus frame/compose operations I may as well be using a freaking view camera (hyperbole)

    RB

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    OH
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,789
    Images
    2
    Get rid of the 21 and get a 28. It's perfect for situations like the above picture. My favorite focal length on RF.

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Maine, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    112
    Weddings are such chemical emotion-bombs, I could never shoot them for a living. I respect those who do.

  9. #19
    kauffman v36's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Miami
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    279
    Images
    11
    the few weddings that ive shot i wish i could shoot them the way i personally would, and this is it. while i shoot with mostly an slr this is the same kind of stuff i catch myself shooting, and i know the bride and groom dont want it, but its awesome, so much better than a kissing picture!

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    203
    Images
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by msk2193 View Post
    The difference is that there is no lag time in your Leica versus the SLRs!
    Great capture.
    And no mirror blackout, either, which is one of my favorite rangefinder attributes. Quieter, too, but not silent or anything.

    Rangefinders present a more direct way of interacting with what you're photographing than an SLR. You're looking straight at it, as it appears to the eye, not what its image looks like when projected by the lens. But the difference, which matters to some but not to many others, really isn't all *that* huge. And some people simply prefer the SLR. It certainly has its own set of advantages.

    And in general, other photographers are the only onlookers who know/care if you're using an SLR or a rangefinder, digital or film. So if you were doing a documentary about photographers, perhaps that's something you'd need to consider. Otherwise, unless you're toting around something that looks really unusual, like a TLR or a large-format camera, the vast majority of people just register "camera" and nothing more.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin