Switch to English Language Passer en langue franšaise Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 74,561   Posts: 1,646,499   Online: 735
      
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 42
  1. #21
    John Bragg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Penwithick, Cornwall, U.K.
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    389
    Images
    9
    Hi guys, While wholeheartedly agreeing with all the good points you mentioned, one distinct advantage the rangefinder will always hold is its ability to take sharper pics at slower speeds handheld ! This is for me, the essence of its charm. No need for all the flash bang whallop etc ! Gets discreet intimate images with a minimum of fuss and razor sharp........

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,423
    Quote Originally Posted by Woolliscroft
    Well, you have to remember to take the lens cap off with a rangefinder :-)

    David.
    Yep. A zillion TLR and SLR, and one rangefinder. That's my problem, too.

    (another) David

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Arlington, Massachusetts
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    467
    I own both SLR and ranngefinder systems. The SLR is more versatile and the rangefinder is quiet, compact, and discrete.

    Robert

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by jvarsoke
    Ralph Barker mentioned that SLR and Rangefinder shooting styles differ and not everyone makes the transition kindly.

    I shoot both and yet I'm not sure what the statement refers to. Anyone wish to clarify?
    I shoot both too and in practical terms (macro/micro and long-lens sports/wildlife photography excepted) the statement means nothing. Perhaps some people aren't willing to shoot enough and keep track of things so as to learn how to get precise framing with the rangefinder at various distances, so they try to convince others that "rangefinder style" allows for imprecise framing. Perhaps some people read that HCB and Winnogrand and others used a rangefinder for their "street" candids, and so believe the genre is inexorably tied to the type of camera. Perhaps some people need to justify owning several different systems by pigeon-holing each to a specific "style".

  5. #25

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Louisiana, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,325
    I also shoot both for 35mm but I consider SLRs and RFs for different purposes.

    I consider rangefinders as great general purpose cameras. A Leica is small and light enough to carry around without being a burden and discreet enough to use when you don't want to look like Joe Photo on assignment for National Lifeographic. It can do most everything pretty well but it has limitations.

    SLRs overcome those RF limitations. They're great for close-ups, telephotos, zooms and those rare occasions when 5 fps is really necessary. Autofocus SLRs are also quicker for fast action than my hand/eye coordination with manual focus rangefinders. The limitations are that SLRs are big, generally heavier (especially with that 70-200/2.8 and motor booster) and they're not at all discreet. Rangefinders overcome those limitations.

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    9
    Even though I totally agree with what has been said before it's strange to see that no one has expressed the different optical quality of the two systems. I also own and use them both but the color tones, the bokeh, the feeling, the tridimensionality of the images that comes out of a rangefinder (mainly leica) glass is quite different from the sharp, harsh, quite cold feeling of many SRL glasses. Especially now on digital....
    Last edited by alfa; 02-02-2006 at 05:11 PM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: typewriting mistake
    alfa | alessandro

  7. #27

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    189
    Quote Originally Posted by Woolliscroft
    Well, you have to remember to take the lens cap off with a rangefinder :-)

    David.
    Nice thing with the Bessa R's, the meters behind the lens, so... if the meters not working, the lens caps not off!

    You walk around with a SLR and generally a bag of lenses and support gear, with a rangefinder, maybe that's all you're carrying.

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Louisiana, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,325
    Someone uses lens caps?

  9. #29
    rbarker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Rio Rancho, NM
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,222
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Shively
    Someone uses lens caps?
    Those who have burnt a hole in their shutter probably do.
    [COLOR=SlateGray]"You can't depend on your eyes if your imagination is out of focus." -Mark Twain[/COLOR]

    Ralph Barker
    Rio Rancho, NM

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Louisiana, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,325
    Can't take pictures through lens caps. I never use one on a lens mounted on the camera. A filter and lens hood, yes. Lens cap, no.

    But you're right about burning a hole in the shutter. I've learned to keep the lens pointed away from the sun. On a sunny day, I'll carry a rangefinder camera backwards around my neck so the lens is punching me in the stomach. It might look a little different but it works.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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