Just a thought

Nikon Bob · 07-20-2005

I had to use an SLR the other day that I always found satisfying to use and found that the M4 has spoiled me more than I imagined. The M is so much smoother to use and even my older Leica glass seems to perform better. I guess for the price difference it should be so and I think it is there. I would never have thought so before. I guess that I am almost converted to RF use. Just a thought.

Bob

Pherdinand · 07-20-2005

Well, last time I needed a longer lens with plenty of light so I used my slr (minolta dynax5)with a 135 prime, and it was a good experience as always. It's a great little camera, SLR or not.

But then, I've never used a Leica

FrankS · 07-20-2005

My advice Pherdinand is don't use a Leica. If you do you will become infected and the disease is incureable.

JimL · 07-20-2005

Bob, you're not alone!

I've just sold off my Contax SLR and lenses. It was a truly lovely camera and the Carl Zeiss lenses never failed to deliver, but I knew that I wouldn't use it much (if ever) again. Rangefinders just feel "right" to me.

I still love my RZ67 but have to admit that a MF rangefinder sounds like a really good idea. It's all going to end with alot of debt....

Jim

Doug · 07-20-2005

Oops, watch out, Jim! It looks like you know and respect quality, and that gets real expensive!

Actually, you could get back into Contax in a more RF-like way with the G system, and its Carl Zeiss lenses, which is ridiculously reasonable in price nowadays.

As to SLR use... I still enjoy my old all-manual Pentaxes, both screw mount and bayonet. They are similar in use to my ancient M2, though somewhat frustrating with wide angle lenses. The RF is just easier for these tired eyes to focus...

Nikon Bob · 07-20-2005

Don't get me wrong, I still think highly of my Nikons and will use them with lenses longer than 135mm. I was always a skeptic when it came to Leica and other overpriced gear but there is at least a little to it and truer words were never spoke than don't try one you will like it too much. Live and learn.

Bob

Graybeard · 07-20-2005

When I use a SLR, it is a Leicaflex.

Using a Leicaflex Standard is very much like using a M2 or M3; similar size, similar weight, and similar feel.

I've shot with Nikons - okay but not the same.

JimL · 07-20-2005

Doug,

Please keep ideas like that to yourself. Or, if not to yourself, then not to me!
I have more than enough draining my financial resources without buying more cameras, lenses and all the other associated bits and pieces you always "need" when you get a new camera.

Having said that, Contax rangefinders are really cool......

Jim

Doug · 07-20-2005

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimL

Please keep ideas like that to yourself. Or, if not to yourself, then not to me!
I have more than enough draining my financial resources without buying more cameras...

Sorry, Jim, to be the bearer of temptations (said with all the sincerity of a crocodile's tears.) Didn't you say something about medium format RFs? I was trying to save you monetary grief by offering the economical alternative.

(Yeah we can be rather evil to each other like this in RFF)

If you were to look for a MF RF, I could enthuse about the Bronica RF645, which I've been using for about 30 months... and just bought a used second body. Most of my Gallery here was shot with either the Bronica or Fuji 645. You'd certainly want to avert your eyes from KEH.com website to avoid any induced attacks of GAS (Gear Acquisition Syndrome, RFF's own epidemic).

SolaresLarrave · 07-20-2005

I still like my Nikon SLR. It's reliable and efficient... Not a Leica, but then, it's fun to switch from time to time.

But Leicas have just poisoned my life... Right now, I'm sitting and my M3 is next to my computer... keeping company!

JimL · 07-21-2005

Doug,

The sincerity of your apology touched me deeply!

So I just have to add a Contax to the list of toys I lust after but can't afford. I can live with(out) it, but my credit cards may not.

It would appear that this forum is going to lead me astray. Not a bad thing really; whenever I lose the everlasting battle with GAS I can always take comfort in the fact that it wasn't my fault, "The forum made me do it!"

Jim

Ben Z · 07-21-2005

When I first started using a Leica rangefinder I cursed to myself about inaccurate framing, no depth of field in the finder, tiny frames for the 90 and 135, bottom loading, , and a few other typical complaints. Coming off Pentax screwmounts at least I was used to top speed of 1/1000 and slow flash sync . After putting forth the effort to understand how the frame lines are configured, I was able to quickly adjust my composition so that what I see in the finder is what I get on film, and once I said to myself "hey, you've been doing this for 35 years, you know what d.o.f. will look like for each lens and aperture, even if you can't see it in the finder" that became a non-issue too. The 90/135 frame size, and the bottom-loading were also issues that were easily put to rest simply by allowing myself to adapt rather than being stuck in complain-mode. What resulted is the discovery of seeing the shot while the exposure is being made, not just before and after as with a SLR. That alone is what has spoiled me in favor of the Leica M.