How equipment choice can dominate your style ... if you let it.

[Keith]

When I first joined RFF I was a newbie photographer with a nikon D70 and a couple of old SLRs kicking around that I'd had for years but didn't really use any more because I figured film was passé. Before I knew it I had a cupboard full of rangefinders and had learned to develop my own black and white film ... all good and no regrets in this area!

However ... somewhere along the line the choice of camera became more important than the photographs themselves though I'm not really sure when or how this happened! I eventually realised I was using equipment that wasn't really suited to my emerging photographic style and made adjustments, consequently my collection of rangefinders is now down to a couple of basic options and the rest is all SLR.

I desparately wanted to use rangefinders because I was convinced that they were the correct choice and a large part of that decision was instilled in me by the peer pressure you can feel when you're learning around this forum in particular. When I first joined RFF I distinctly remember a statement from management discouraging members from posting SLR images in the gallery because this was a 'rangefinder forum' after all!

I'm not about saying that one system is better than the other because we are all individuals with our own needs and I'm sure there are a lot of SLR users out there who may be better off with a good rangefinder but haven't realised it yet. This is now a much better forum for 'photographers' than it used to be IMO because it no longer attempts to cater to a particular mindset ... and hasn't done for some time now.

Bravo RFF!

[paulfish4570]

aye, laddie ...

[benlees]

Don't worry about it! But you are one the reasons why the OM system is so popular on RFF- much to the chagrin of Pentax users everywhere! LX ftw!

[Keith]

Originally Posted by benlees

Don't worry about it! But you are one the reasons why the OM system is so popular on RFF- much to the chagrin of Pentax users everywhere! LX ftw!

But then again I chose to buy an OM because I read here that it was officially RFF's honourary 'rangefinder' SLR!

See ... peer pressure dictating choice of equipment again!

[gavinlg]

Originally Posted by Keith

This is now a much better forum for 'photographers' than it used to be IMO because it no longer attempts to cater to a particular mindset ... and hasn't done for some time now.

I completely agree with this - though the forums core is still the rangefinder camera - it's really become quite open to other cameras and styles, and for that I'm thankful as I don't even currently own a rangefinder camera, and haven't for the last year or so.

i still like the people and the actual photography here, so I stick around

[Nikon Bob]

You are right that it is a much better more inclusive forum now. I never did like to see people get bullied into using something that really does not work for them.

Bob

[back alley]

well, i can't completely agree...in my case, my style dictates what gear i use.
i have tried slr, dslr, tlr, 35mm and medium format..rangefinder fits my style best.

as for the forum being a 'better' place since we have opened the doors wider...it's a different place for sure but not the same place as it was when it was rf centered.

i miss those days, simpler days...

[nighstar]

i'm a newbie on this forum so i can't comment on how things have changed etc, but i can empathize with having acquired numerous cameras since joining this forum.

i swear GAS is very contagious here!

[Ducky]

Although I am now a DSLR user I can look back over several years of trying, using, buying and selling some wonderful gear I would not otherwise have used if I had not joined this forum. I also learned about film, developing and printing my own BW photos at home. What I learned about photography from this forum and it's members could not be duplicated.

Speaking to the OP, you are correct in your main point but, like so many things, getting to the point of deciding on gear and style is part of the journey.

Thanks all.

[Peter Klein]

Many (most?) Internet photography forums segregate people by camera brand. So if a person's photographic evolution dictates that they change brands, they have to leave their friends and find others.

At least RFF is about a type of camera rather than a specific brand. But rangefinders are a narrow niche, and many of us use more than one type of camera. Then there's the gray areas, such as using RF lenses on mirrorless bodies.

Every group has to make its own decisions about what is on-topic and what is off. But I think we do our members a disservice if we get too picky. For example, a Leica forum that doesn't allow the posting of photos taken with Leica lenses on Voigtlander bodies, or vice versa.

I found my preference for RFs long before the Internet, so the peer pressure was never an issue. But I suspect that people who are still finding themselves photographically may sometimes be adversely influenced by that peer pressure. If you get interested in telephoto or macro, you're not doing yourself a favor by sticking to RFs out of group or brand loyalty.

The forums I frequent the most are specific to a brand or type of camera. But I'm grateful that their rules are relatively loose. If you're at least interested in the forum's brand of interest, all your photos are welcome. My Leica friends will still look at my Olympus photos, and vice versa.

Here on RFF, I read the articles that interest me, regardless of camera brand. But I'm glad that most people here understand the RF way, because that's at the core of my photography.

--Peter

[jan normandale]

Dear Keith... some of us abandon our principles.. some of us don't. Are you sure about your decision?
;D

[Keith]

Originally Posted by jan normandale

Dear Keith... some of us abandon our principles.. some of us don't. Are you sure about your decision?
;D

I have no principles ... I decided on that some time ago jan.

Seriously though when you are new to photography it's very easy to be swayed in a direction that may not necessarily be beneficial ... and that's natural because you're learning and you're taking up information from your peers constantly. You have to explore all avenues of course but you should do so out of natural curiosity and not the vicarious needs of others who just want you to assimilate!

[Sparrow]

... I see joe's taken a new direction in his gear-choice




.

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Keith,

I love the phrase "the vicarious needs of others". All too often, we see, "I haven't tried this but if I could afford it I would get a _______"

On a personal level, it must surely be a feedback process, though: you choose a particular sort of camera because you think it will enable you to get a certain sort of picture. Either it does or it doesn't. If it does, it reinforces your decision. If it doesn't... Well, you try something else.

I've owned and used Leicas for over 40 years, from a IIIa in 1969 (which I still have) to the five Ms I have today. Until the 80s I still used SLRs alongside the Ms a lot more; today I use them very little. I also use less LF than I used to (despite owning maybe ten LF cameras) and less MF (again, despite owning maybe six or eight good MF cameras). For me, RFs have been slowly, constantly, self-reinforcing, despite the fact that there are certain pics I cannot take with RFs, and others where I use one of the other cameras/formats.

It might be an interesting question to know how long it takes before people realize that they've tried most of what is worth trying, and that there's not a lot of point in buying something new unless it does something genuinely different (e.g. digi-M instead of film M, or metered M instead of non-metered). I reckon it took me about 30-35 years to understand that.

Cheers,

R.

[Neare]

Yeah Keith I'm in the same boat, went down the rangefinder road for the style and not the practicality. I still struggle focusing the damn things (if I can't shoot at f8 or above, I fret)... I have since moved on to slr's and p&s's.

That saying that they're all just cameras... its true you can't tell what shot was taken with a rangefinder or slr. Only thing that matters is how comfortable you are using that gear yourself.

[randomm]

Ha! I just sold all my Canon FD gear to fund a purchase of an M2. I noticed that I had only used the FD gear once in the last year and I just could not justify keeping them. I felt nothing when picking one of them in my hands. Just didn't want to use them. I'll be left with a single Konica SLR and set of lenses for, erm SLR use (read: chase the kids round the house), and a Rolleiflex 2.8e for MF. That + 3 M bodies should be more than enough at this point of my journey.

That said, I completely understand what you're saying.

Also, what Roger is saying about knowing when one has tried enough that's worth trying seems to be a bit of a black art in my case: currently I feel that I've tried enough for a long while, but I'm not sure if I can trust that judgement... luckily I don't have to.

[noimmunity]

Rangefinders, like all cameras, impose a set of limitations, and these limitations could be construed as "dominating" depending on one's usage and goals.

But the emphasis in Keith's post seems to me to about the relation between equipment and virtual community.

My humble opinion is that the specificity of the mechanical rangefinder plus optical viewfinder and the pleasure derived from using these instruments in tandem with manual focus lenses has to remain at the core of this forum, otherwise it will have to change its community name.

I am glad that other formats are welcomed, but I really hope that the RF format continues to be given the privilege and protection of the 'default position' at RFF.

[ricnak]

I'll second that.

[Roger Hicks]

Originally Posted by Neare

Yeah Keith I'm in the same boat, went down the rangefinder road for the style and not the practicality. I still struggle focusing the damn things (if I can't shoot at f8 or above, I fret)... I have since moved on to slr's and p&s's.

That saying that they're all just cameras... its true you can't tell what shot was taken with a rangefinder or slr. Only thing that matters is how comfortable you are using that gear yourself.

Highlight: exactly. Well, as long as you can get the pictures you want.

Which relates to the first part of the para not always deing true. I've just been looking once again at Raghubir Singh's wonderful A Way Into India. Some of the framing -- such as a face reflected in a rear view mirror -- would have been difficult or impossible with an RF, because of parallax problems. This is a good example of how equipment limits/moulds our style.

Cheers,

R.

[Keith]

Originally Posted by Roger Hicks

Highlight: exactly. Well, as long as you can get the pictures you want.

Which relates to the first part of the para not always deing true. I've just been looking once again at Raghubir Singh's wonderful A Way Into India. Some of the framing -- such as a face reflected in a rear view mirror -- would have been difficult or impossible with an RF, because of parallax problems. This is a good example of how equipment limits/moulds our style.

Cheers,

R.

Indeed Roger and this is where an RF fails me occasionally because a lot of my shots are pre-meditated and very specifically framed. I still like a rangefinder for more spontaneous photography but because 'spontaneity' is not a dominating force in how I shoot most of the time it plays a much smaller part in my output.

I don't think I could be without one though and I do wonder about a digital M in the future ... providing my gallery work continues of course.

[Sparrow]

Range-finders are by their very nature general-purpose, middle of the road sort of cameras

Great for taking middle of the road photos ... f5.6 to f11, 1/60 to 1/500 with lenses 35 to 90mm of subjects in the middle distance under moderate lighting. Yet oddly people seem to bang on about, close-focus wide-open low-light slow-speed stuff ... it's no wonder people who didn't grow up with them get confused which cameras suit what circumstances.

[Turtle]

This is very true and people swearing left right and centre that they can nail perfect focus on their children playing with their 75 Summilux wide open abound!

When I started moving into (head/head and shoulder) portraiture I abandoned RFs in the main and brought out my trusty Eos 1n and plonked a fast 85 on it. I was never going to mess about trying to do documentary portraits with a fast long lens on a RF - madness IMO! I feel very comfortable with that decision - heck, I don't even like shooting a 50 RF lens wide open unless I have time to carefully focus and can be sure everything is fairly still. With my SLR for portraits I can work quickly and very confidently and carry a body dedicated to the 85mm precisely for this purpose. In other words, unless shooting street, I will tend to carry both RF and SLR at the same time. This might seem inefficient, but I love how I can work with RFs for the more 'open' shots and pull out the SLR when I have a closer, tighter portrait opportunity. A split second after I get focus confirmation I have my frame. A RF cannot come close no matter how much I would love it to and save over 1kg in my kit bag.

There are plenty of clues in famous images as well as great ones on this forum. I just about never see super shots off RFs with fast long lenses under pressurised situation where speed matters. Great documentary shots using the 50 summilux asph wide open are also few and far between too IMO, but a lot of this is down to some RF users not really understanding how cameras are applied under circumstances less controlled than 'cat in living room' or 'coffee cup in cafe.' I know that sounds patronising, but I think it is true. There is a lot of great information here, but objectivity is not ever-present.

[Richard G]

I got a Hexar thanks to RFF and more importantly left the Leica fold (not solely RFF influence) and tried Zeiss lenses of which I now have three. Love them. Love RFF.

[Gabriel M.A.]

I've always found that one thing cannot be the one answer to everything.

Most painters don't use only one brush. Most writers don't use only one pen vs. one keyboard vs. one dictating machine. Most doctors don't use only one medicine.

Confusing discipline with equipment is just...confusing.

[Bike Tourist]

I bought my first M3 in 1959 because the Augsburg camera store owner told me it was the best. It took quite a few PFC paychecks to settle the debt. Meanwhile, I used the M3 to supply photos to the division newspaper editor who said he would only accept 8x10s produced with a 4x5 Speed Graphic. He never knew.

Unfortunately, I became a camera junkie during the ensuing years, owning every exotic from 35mm up. It didn't help my photography much, but it sure was fun. I was always able to make photography pay for itself.

Now, in retirement, I get pangs of nostalgia for rangefinders, but I am more disciplined and am able to resist.

I shoot with a D7000 and an LX5 but I still like RFF because of the quality of the people and of the images and of the discourse.