View Full Version : Minimal Rangefinder Outfit.
Hi, I just finished writing an article about my minimal rangefinder (camera) outfit. Would appreciate any comments, thoughts and reply if you are interested. Below is the location of the article. I am very much value all your feedback, positive or negative!
http://www.katharos.org/david/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=27&Itemid=51
Thanks!
The second sentence begins with "And" which is a joining word. It gives a poor impression when there is a grammatical error right at the get-go. (I don't mean to be nit-picky, but you asked for comments.)
The second paragraph begins: "Like many photographs...." and I'm guessing you mean to say: "Like many photographers...".
Still in the second paragraph it says: "With the advent of digital cameras, this rhetoric continues at an alarming pace." What rhetoric are you referring to?
I'm thinking you should get this proof-read before publishing it with your name on it.
JoeFriday
11-21-2005, 15:20
the last sentence in that same (first) paragraph ends awkwardly, as well... "desire and to equipment"? it doesn't make sense to me
umm.. I see several other instances like that.. do you want me to go through them all here?
Thanks, I have made those changes. Proof reading was never one of my strong points... But thanks for your comments, they have been updated, and I will read it over myself as well again, to catch more mistakes.
Frank Granovski
11-21-2005, 15:26
At its final conclusion, what has been decided regarding a LM mount PM outfit? It consists of a Zeiss 25mm f/2.8 and a Voigtlander 50mm f/1.5 lens combination, coupled with a Voigtlander R3a.Right on! I'm with you! :cool:
final conclusion?
David, there are tons of grammatical errors in your article. Content-wise I am with you, but you really need to have someone whose strength is proof-reading to do this for you.
Will do, I'll find someone... Perhaps treat it as a WIP until proofing is complete...
I'll give it an editorial run-through, if you'd like (I've copied it into Word), but can only get around to it in a couple of days...
lynn, that be great! Much appreciated as well... Let me know how you go, you can send me a PM if you'd like.
Byuphoto
11-21-2005, 16:41
Overuse of the word iterate
Penguin_101
11-21-2005, 18:25
I pretty much agree with the content. I can go through and try and fix some of it if you would like.
I couldn't read the entire piece, but I get the impression that it may be an exercise in rationalization of a previously reached conclusion, rather than a pure and unbiased exercise in applying logic to a problem. Used Leicas and Canon P's, as well as vintage Leitz and Canon lenses should have been considered. FSU gear and Contax would further complicate the issue. :)
bmattock
11-21-2005, 18:45
Tough crowd!
True, many thoughts and ideas from this was a record of past experiences and conclusions. But not so much the final specific conclusion. Many of the ideas have been around for a while, and many others have probably thought the same. The logic was individual, but the process generic, or that was my intent. Perhaps I should've stated that equipment to be considered had to be in current manufacture, again, a personal choice. But, the principles, I believe, can probably be applied to anyone, but then again, this wasn't a comprehensive treatise. Call it a systematic description of my journey.
bmattock, for me criticism is not a problem (I am in the design field) and for me, forces one to produce better work. But only if the criticism is positively intented, which is what I believe these comments so far are!
But only if the criticism is positively intented, which is what I believe these comments so far are!
Sincerely and absolutely.
Gabriel M.A.
11-21-2005, 18:59
David, I am going to take a guess. An educated guess, but a guess nonetheless: it seems to me that you are struggling with two issues: 1) your thought is running by faster than you can write it; 2) you are thinking in another language.
Please correct me if I'm wrong. The contrivances in your essay are what I would expect to find in (on?) my earlier technical writings for High School for some of the classes I had to take in English (I went to a bilingual High School in Mexico).
Frank's other observations are, imho, right on: I think you're simply trying to explain why you think what you already thought from the beginning, rather than take the reader through your experience. You're explaining why you reached a conclusion which is evident to you, but which you have not outlined nor explained throughout each phase of your experience quite why, just simply that that is your conclusion.
I hope that helps.
bmattock
11-21-2005, 19:01
bmattock, for me criticism is not a problem (I am in the design field) and for me, forces one to produce better work. But only if the criticism is positively intented, which is what I believe these comments so far are!
Yeah, I'm just giving these guys a tweak. I appreciate the obvious effort you've put into your work, and the good-natured way you're responding to positive criticism.
Best Regards,
Bill Mattocks
David: You've taken a very (well, almost painful, to me) methodical approach to the selection. There's a lot to be gleaned from your work, and I appreciate it.
In the end, you make your choices on mathematics and specifications. Your second paragraph now opens with:
"Like many photographers I spend an unhealthy proportion of time looking, reading and dreaming of this camera and that lens. No doubt, my skill in this craft would've be far greater had I invested that time into actually photographing."
So, I wonder, how will your choices stack up photographically? Will you like how the lenses render the images? Granted, they're high quality lenses, but that doesn't mean they're equal in their renditions.
And, as far as ruling out the ZI because it doesn't come in black, black bodies will be shipping soon. Well, supposedly soon.
Earl
Bryan Lee
11-21-2005, 20:20
"To further this discussion, the question is asked, what would be the ideal LM system, that is based on the principles of a PM outfit? For this, I would say, referring to the information above, a combination of 25mm, 35mm, 50mm and 75mm lens with two bodies. Both bodies being a Voigtlander R3a. And with this system, I would select the Voigtlander 75mm f/2.5 Color-Heliar and the Voigtlander Nokton 35mm f/1.2 ASPH. This combination would fit my photographic needs for a lifetime. The only possible addition would be a full frame digital M rangefinder body." EEYORE
This was what you had written at the end of a very long and technical essay on minimalism and photography.
" Be sure you check and get adapters for whatever camera you choose. Check all gear for mount " L39 Screw or M Bayonet mount" and decide whats best for you. I like the R2 better than the R and both of these have been discontinued. Dont forget about the L model for a inexspensive second body and I would reccomend a 35mm or 28mm on a L body with a 75mm or 90mm on a R, R2, R2a, or another 2 body setup would be R3a with a 40mm and a R3a with a 90mm. I would much preffer 2 bodys and 2 lenses compared to 1 body and 3 lenses. Be sure and let us know what you get and good luck."
This is what I wrote to a 16 year old kid around 24 hours ago who is interested in getting started with rangefinders.
Im a terrible writer and worse at spelling but you seem to be trying to hard and its not coming across as interesting or keeping the attention of the audience and furthermore there is a problem with critical facts. The framelines on a R3a are 40mm where you have suggested a 35mm lense and I failed to see mention of either viewfinders or lense adapters but it could have just been lost in there somewhere. Your entire point was directed at minimalism yet you relied on technical facts to the point of diatribe in a effort to prove you were correct in your assumption where you could just as easily explained things in terms of how you would use them and what you like to take pictures of.
Thanx for posting and opening yourself up for critisism, I understood you to want honest reaction to what you have written and I would like to encourage you by saying you have a good idea for a article and its much easier to come back to earth with writing than to climb out from under a rock. Keep on writing.
I think it is the first problem. People tell me that all the time, when I speak as well. I have been using English as my primary language for 20 years, so I am pretty sure I don't think in another language, unless of course, it is some weird language in my head... Perhaps I should add more that will take the reader through the journey, so to speak. But first up is to edit the current text... Thanks.
Thanks again for the feedback. I opened it up so that I can improve.
Trius, I guess that I have missed out a whole bit regarding the rendering qualities of each lens, beyond their focal length and aperture. And perhaps that is difficult to do, without have experienced each of these lenses. In some way, I base my opinions on experience. I use the Contax SLR system, and really do like the way the lenses render the image. In the same way, I feel the same about the Contax G. I have never much liked the way the Leica R lenses, Canon EOS or even Nikon render the images. Just my personal experience. Yes, that comment about the black ZI needs to be amended.
Bryan, perhaps the last paragraph should not be a paragraph, but a postscript. But your point is noted, and it seems so obviously out of place now... Wonders of a fresh eye. There was a number of other technical issues that I did not discuss, like the framelines. From my mind, I was going to have 25mm and 50mm lens, and yes, the R3a only has framelines for 40mm and above. And there would be a need for a 25mm viewfinder. But I guess that my thoughts did not make it into type. True, the reasoning is somewhat theoretical and to most, probably dry as well. But my main point was that this was my process in achieving the end goal. And this worked for me. For some people, they just need to use things a few times, or they just know. But I guess that the minimalism journey is different for everyone, but my contention of what it is remains the same. Just a different road.
From the feedback so far, it is clear to me that I didn't make my intentions clear enough, and didn't make the journey as engaging as it could've been. Additionally, there should've been a little bit more technical explanation about a few things that I glossed over. Back to the drawing board.
Bryan Lee
11-21-2005, 22:49
Im glad to see someone else struggleing with the editing process and as I write this I can hear myself being corrected by a very respected friend from my past. He was very critical of me for all the right reasons and Im a better writer today because of his influence. It sounds like you have a good desire to improve yourself and a healthy attitude about critisism. Keep on writing and editing sincerly, b.
Hi!
Just this: You give no reason for your preference for a 35 mm sensor in a digital RF. Quite apart from the fact that that may not be the technically most desirable solution, the adoption of any other size of sensor makes no difference to your argument: it just shifts the focal lenghts you need and even might promote the 15 mm lenses to the 18 mm you miss.
David: Writing is hard! Good writing, that is. Long ago my former wife was a copy editor, which is quite different than a proof reader. It's more what we're doing here. I learned a lot from her about the craft of clear writing from her. It was quite interesting.
Earl
"To further this discussion, the question is asked, what would be the ideal LM system, that is based on the principles of a PM outfit? For this, I would say, referring to the information above, a combination of 25mm, 35mm, 50mm and 75mm lens with two bodies.
(snip)
The only possible addition would be a full frame digital M rangefinder body."
Not sure if this is an appropriate comment here, but your initial post related to a *minimal* outfit. Minimalism, I suppose, is in the eye of the beholder, but two bodies, four lenses, and later a digital full-frame body would hardly qualify for most people!
BTW, it might be worth mentioning also that having a *full frame* digital body will have the advantage of allowing you to use all the same lenses the same way as with the film bodies (plus any other rationale you may consider appropriate).
ZeissFan
11-22-2005, 04:25
It's really difficult to write and to edit your own material. That's why you'll often see sometimes small and sometimes substantial changes on my own site over the course of a week until I get it to where I think it reads correctly.
However, getting certain things right from the start goes a long way. That would be spelling, punctuation and grammer. And then to use the correct term: Lose vs. loose, its vs. it's, quite vs. quiet ... that sort of thing. For the most part, you don't have that problem.
My first suggestion is to shorten what you've written. It's extremely long and rambles a bit.
Several items to change:
-- The use of the word "dilemma" is incorrect. A dilemma is when you have one or more outcomes, and all are undesirable.
-- Zeiss Ikon is a brand name. The company that is behind it is Carl Zeiss AG. The name of the camera is Zeiss Ikon (and not Zeiss Ikon ZM). The lenses are in the ZM mount. Cost of the Leica M7 is now $3,300.
-- You should probably replace "LM system" with either "Leica M" or simply "M system." It's not commonly known as LM, and that really serves to confound the reader.
-- I might consider a different word than "iterate," which is rather clinical. On the other hand, if you're seeking a dispassionate discussion, then that word might be OK.
-- Early on, you have double punctuation -- a period after a question that is enclosed in quotes. The question mark ends the sentence. No need for the period.
Different people have different styles, and that's just fine. Differences are what make life in this world interesting. For my taste, there's just too much thinking and rationalization going on here. There is much to be said about acting viscerally rather than intellectually. Act from the heart, follow your gut, that kind of thing.
A grasshopper once stopped a millipede who was walking by. He asked, "With some many legs, how do you keep from tripping over your own feet?" The millipede stopped to think about it, and never walked again.
I find the term "full frame sensor" very imprecise; what are sensors in 645 or even larger formats then? I would suggest that "full frame"means a sensor/negative the size of the final print and tha for 35 mm sensors we say just that: 35 mm
A fast 35/28 and a not necessarily so fast 75/85/90. Two bodies, for flexibility and security. Finders as needed. Hoods if survival desired. Having been an editor (mainly of book manuscripts) for 35 years, I dare not say anything about language.
James Burton
11-25-2005, 03:57
I noticed they had the new Zeiss M 50/2 in the window of Camera Lane today. That (by itself) would make an amusing but expensive minimal kit. You'd have to imagine the shutter moving across in front of the film, or perhaps hold it in front of your SLR.
Maybe I could gaffer tape it to my Canonet.
James
The author has not established his personal credibility sufficiently to ask people to wade through all that prattle. An article like this should begin with a brief bio, to help readers make decisions about their time. As well, there would be rangefinder photos if the author was actually a rangefinder photographer.
The writing is undisciplined: eg. mention of the virtually nonexistant Zeiss equipment in the same sentence as Leica and CV , without noting that one is poor quality, one barely exists, and one is the benchmark.
The article is plagued with random, arguable "information": eg. the silly Erwin Puts allegation about dimension required for an accurate rangefinder base. It's arguable at best, located improperly in context, and irrelevant to the normal use of rangefinders.
The article as a whole tells me that the writer is not discussing rangefinder cameras at all...just what he's read.
As well, the type is far too small.
Suggestions: Start fresh. Eliminate EVERY self-referent phrase and concept. Write with simple declarative sentences only: that will expose flawed thinking and organizational issues, and it'll spotlight random, throwaway information. Then, if you must, add self referential information. Avoid using any technique that smells like rumination or literary art until you've gotten the basic communiction constructed.
Bertram2
11-25-2005, 05:38
Hi, I just finished writing an article about my minimal rangefinder (camera) outfit.
Thanks!
Hi David ,
it would be arrogant to make any suggestions concerning grammar and style, my English is too bad fot that.
One remark only to your approach to "minimalism" in general. I am quoting:
Like many photographers I spend an unhealthy proportion of time looking, reading and dreaming of this camera and that lens. No doubt, my skill in this craft would've be far greater had I invested that time into actually photographing.
O.K, if you did so, isn't this attempt pretty similar to what you did before ?
Let me expalin:
It might sound provoking but photographic minimalism has primarily not much to to with equipment, more a secondary result of you efforts in concentrating yourself on photographic issues only which are important for YOU personally.
The more undifferentiated ( often mixed up with "variousness") your interests are, the more gear you need: Wildlife, macro, nudes , street , architecture are each atechnically a separate universe.
Technical minimalism tho (that is what you meant I presume) is the simple result of finding yourself as a photographer. That means concentrating on what touches your soul, what is moving you and what you ( therefore !!)are competent for. This reduces enormously the choice of tools you really need for "Your " work.
After practising a while this kind of focussed photographical effort in doing one certain thing as good as possible (street for example), the process of reduction will go on, your experience and the further development of a special personal style of shooting will tell you that even the reduced choice was too much, you simply do not need all what you thought you would need to do a proper job.
In other words,as a summary, minimalism comes from from photographical concentration and continuity as an automatic result, re-inforced by a focussed experience later.
"What to take for my purpose" is the headline always when it comes to gear and if the purpose is clearly focussed the choice is easy and moderate.
It's that playing around with too many issues which all beginners do more or less, which makes the choice of gear so difficult and expensive and which is btw not helpful at all for the personal development in art and craft.
That is my own personal experience and I have observed it often in the work of others and I know some who are already in the enlightened state of a minimalist
I consider them as beeing "the released souls" :D
Best,
bertram
RichardS
11-25-2005, 07:07
Hi, I just finished writing an article about my minimal rangefinder (camera) outfit. Would appreciate any comments, thoughts and reply if you are interested. Below is the location of the article. I am very much value all your feedback, positive or negative!
http://www.katharos.org/david/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=27&Itemid=51
Thanks!
You really need a good copy reader to go through the entire article and make changes. And there is absolutely nothing wrong grammatically with starting a sentence with the word "and".
Dick
I'm not a good writer, but try to be clear.
Read "A Movable Feast" by Ernest Hemingway to learn the importance of clarity.
Read and re-read "Elements of Style" by Strunk and White if you care about writing well. Strunk and White were more important than Moses.
I've used two commas in this post. Any more would be sinful.
markinlondon
11-25-2005, 07:36
Strunk and White is good. You can also buy the UK Guardian style-book. Good on form and grammar, but maybe weaker on spelling :) Lynn Truss's Eats, Shoots and Leaves is worth a read if you like a few jokes with your punctuation lessons.
Incidentally, my approach to a minimal outfit is usually to have one lens that fits the body for a while and work out what I'm missing from there. The mathematical progression idea in the article made my head hurt. Though I can see the point.
Mark
ClaremontPhoto
11-25-2005, 08:19
And I agree about the Guardian style guide.
For a beginner like me who's more involved with FSU(cheap) range finders, i can find little words of interest here, u wrote about a very personal experience, and kinda expensive too :D
So find this about M mount minimalism rather than PM in general, it's like setting an example...So u didn't speak about minimal range finder outfit, u spoke about ur minimal outfit...
I read though the whole article, and i won't try to be picky on ur choice of words or grammar, writing is a pretty hard job...And one cannot just criticize such a long article easily..
More general articles would hjelp people with a very limited experience like me...
Guess i'm done here.
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.