Anyone in here give up on RF's?

[jmooney]

I know this may seem blasphemous in light of the sign above the bar so to speak but since this is the corner where SLR users hang about I though I'd throw it out there.

Have you given up on RF's?

I've bought in to the mystique full bore (not just Leica mystique but RF as well) about how small and light and simple they are. How it's a camera that you can and that others have carry around the world to points unknown armed with a 35mm lens and bag of Trix and record anything you see. How they are the perfect camera for carrying daily and making a visual journal of your life. It all sounds awesome but it just doesn't seem to be working.....

I want to love it, I want it to become all that and more for me but it's not working.

I have two daughter's age 1 and 5 if I get close enough to fill the frame I run into the minimum focusing distance and it's blurry. I can't follow moving kids with it that well. I don't mind the loading (I actually prefer the M2 loading to M4 style) but it takes a while and it's tough to concentrate on it while looking after everyone.

I feel like I'm missing too many shots that I need to be getting and I know that the Leica glass is great but if I miss the "decisive moment" then I might as well have a dog turd in my hand for all the good it did me.

I guess I overdid it on the Red Dot Kool-Aid because I've gotten so knotted up about it I feel like if it's not a Leica it's junk and I know that's not true or that I'm somehow taking pictures of lesser value because I haven't done it "properly" like the great masters.

I've given it a good try and I'm not a bad or incompetent photographer by any means so I know how to take pictures and operate all varieties of cameras but enough important things have been missed with the Leicas and Bessas that I would have easily gotten with an SLR that my confidence is shaken and SWMBO has basically outlawed the M's (and film sort of) for anything of importance.

I just got today another M2 and mounted a recently purchased 35/2.8 Summaron on it and honestly it looks wonderful sitting on my desk but the thought of putting film in it makes me queasy.

I guess the fact that camera is getting in the way of my photography should tell me what the right answer is. I guess I still need some reassurance that holstering my N80 and saddling up doesn't constitute failure as a photographer.

Hell, I'm not so sure that film is even still something I should be messing with but that's another soul baring thread for another day.

Thoughts? Experiences? Comments? Advice? Mentorly wisdom?

Any or all of the above is sincerely appreciated.

Jim

[Keith]

I alternate between being convinced I'm really an SLR shooter and then maybe not ... constantly.

I think you just have to accept the fact that there are horses for courses and use whatever feels right on the day. I just did a job photographing a bunch of computer geeks doing their thing over a forty eight hour period in a very dark gallery ... it was purely available light so an SLR wasn't an option IMO. I was using Tri-X pushed a stop and an f1.5 lens at 1/30 sec ... I seldom missed focus and nearly all the shots are as sharp as they needed to be. An SLR (in my hands) would have really struggled in this environment!

The rangefinder has survived in a very comptetetive market for a good reason as far as I can see and I think it will be around for a while yet. For really close focus and totally accurate framing when it's required ... I'll use my OM-2 happily and leave the rangefinders at home.

[ferider]

Jim, it might not be for you and that's OK.

However, before you give up you might want to try a tele on your M2 or even better an M3. The stereotype that RFs and teles don't go together is just not true.

[Brian Legge]

Use the best tool for the job. Simple as that in my mind.

What traits would your ideal camera have? Once you sort that out, what camera is the closest to that?

Kids move fast and good moments occur in all light. Autofocus may be useful. Ability to take one photograph mid day and another closer to dusk could be useful - maybe something digital better suits your needs? Something you could carry all over and perhaps has zoom. Maybe a 4/3s camera would be a good fit? Or even a more basic digital point and shoot?

This says nothing about how good film or rangefinders are - only that there may be better fitting options for this particular need. If you enjoy using rangefinders in other situations, you can always hold on to one and save it for the times it better meets your needs.

[Pickett Wilson]

Any of my Canon DSLR's, with a Canon ST-E2 in the hotshoe, will nail focus 100 percent of the time in total darkness in the environment you were shooting in, Keith. Try that with an RF!

My 1DMkIV will focus track a football player running full tilt at me at 10 frames per second (unassisted) in light so bad I'm having to shoot at ISO 8000 and F 3.5.

[Steve M.]

Well, you always want the right camera for the job at hand. For sure a RF, or any camera for that matter, isn't an all purpose tool for every situation. I much prefer using an SLR for portraits. But all you need to do is use a Leica III w/ a 50 lens to appreciate what these cameras can do. Light, quiet, stealthy, and fantastic image quality.

[Keith]

Originally Posted by Pickett Wilson

Any of my Canon DSLR's, with a Canon ST-E2 in the hotshoe, will nail focus 100 percent of the time in total darkness in the environment you were shooting in, Keith. Try that with an RF!

My 1DMkIV will focus track a football player running full tilt at me at 10 frames per second (unassisted) in light so bad I'm having to shoot at ISO 8000 and F 3.5.

Big help if the job actually requires film Pickett.

How do these hot shoe things work ... do Nikon do this for their DSLRs?

[jl-lb.ms]

Not given up, but ... modulated. I've been mostly shooting an M8, just got a G1, and it really feels like the camera that fits me. Doubtful that I'll give up on the M8, but the reflex-like feel really fits. Maybe I just don't know what I like...

[SolaresLarrave]

I've had periods like that in which I simply give up SLRs. Then, come moments in which I give up rangefinders and shoot my SLRs. It's a matter of choosing the tool for the job. I can do close-ups with my son with my Nikons (except the Nikon S2), but when I want something like environmental portraits (he's playing in the living room, for instance), I'd rather use my RF cameras; the lenses are faster, which gives me an increased contrast between the types of light I have in his play area, and a shallower depth of field. Sure, I can photograph him with a Nikon and an AF 50mm f1.4, but then the camera is so big it's not funny.

In any case, if it doesn't give you pleasure but rather makes you feel guilt, then it's not meeting your needs. Who knows, maybe later you'll find the enjoyment.

The same thing happened to me with medium format. I honestly made an effort to like it... but I couldn't. Hence, the last line in my signature. Take care!

[jpa66]

Maybe you just don't have the right rangefinder for you. When I first tried rangefinders out, I used a Kiev ( which I didn't like - I did like the focus wheel, however ) then a Canonet, which I liked so much that I jumped in and bought a Bessa. I had only used slrs ( and dslrs ) before that. I loved the small size and quiet of the Bessa compared to slrs.

As has already been said, if you don't like rangefinders, then you simply don't like them. There's nothing wrong with that. You may want to borrow another type of camera, though, before you feel that they're not for you. A Nikon/Contax type is very different in feel than a Leica or an Ikon or a Bessa.

I never had the desire for a Leica because I can't stand the way that you load the film! It may seem crazy to some, but it's something that I find extremely exasperating.

[Keith]

Maybe for your rangefinder requirments you should get an R3A or an Ikon if you can stretch the budget that far, use the excellent AE function on either of these cameras and concentrate purely on focusing and framing for a while.

Learning to use a rangefinder effectively is a little like learning to ride a unicycle IMO ... satisfying to master the skill but not everyone can be bothered.

[swoop]

I have a Leica system and a Canon system. Sometimes I get frustrated with the Leica because it seems like the Canon images just come out of the camera perfect just the way I like and the Leica M9 always requires fussing with the colors to get it the way I want.

[kxl]

I walked away from shooting RF's a while back because my interests at the time (sports, wildlife and macro) necessitated a DSLR. But when the itch returned to shoot street with B&W film using small lightweight gear, I bought back into it, first with the R3A and now with a ZI.

[wgerrard]

For me, the advantages of RF's come down to their size and superior ability to focus in lower light. (My "lower light" is 30 minutes after sunset, so I'm not pushing anything.) Neither of these attributes is, necessarily, limited to rangefinders.

The minimum focusing distance is a recurring annoyance, as is the inability to frame precisely.

The core of an RF camera is the rangefinding focusing mechanism, to which I am not at all wedded. I doubt my ability to focus as well as an autofocus camera. That is, when i use an RF and an autofocus camera in the same situation, I am usually impressed by the sharper focus of the autofocus.

Knowing how I do these things, at some point someone will bring to market a mirrorless digital that tickles my fancy and I will swap out a bunch of RF stuff and buy it, very likely keeping one RF for b&w.

[Dave Jenkins]

Jim, like you, I totally bought into the whole rangefinder mindset -- and still do, for other people. But I'm giving up on making it work for me. I gave it a much longer trial than you -- since 1969 or 70, in fact. I've bought and sold more Leicas and other rangefinders than I like to think about, and my last M3 will be appearing in the classifieds here very soon.

It has been very difficult for me to accept the fact that no matter how much I love the idea of shooting with rangefinders, I just can't focus them in any reasonable amount of time. Apparently, others can do it, and I do understand that a disproportionate number of the greatest photographers have used Leicas. But I just can't get on with them. I can manually focus an SLR much more quickly and accurately than I can a rangefinder.

In my heart I am a globe-trotting, Leica-toting, black & white documenterian of the human condition. In reality I am a DSLR, autofocus, zoom lens, color photographer. I'll just have to deal with it. __________________

[DanP]

I still use and will always use a system other than Leica.

I have a 3 year old and a 1.5 year old and I don't need to tell you that they are not camera friendly at all. There is just so much energy in them that being still even for a fraction of a second is not possible. I had a pretty good canon DSLR but the AF always used to lag behind the kids' actions and only occasionally I used to get an in-focus shot. I switched to manual focus on the DSLR but I can't describe how hard it was.

Now I use my M4 for the kids and its a breeze, I am getting more in-focus shots not because they have slowed down, but because manual focus is so easy on RFs. And I have gotten pretty good at guessing focus, I just dial the right distance on the lens, frame and shoot. I have tried this with SLR but it is much easier on the M4, I can't explain why .

I have since sold the canon and bought a GF1, now I can use the leica glass on my digicam . M4 still gets more use, but GF1 has its place and it gets used too.

[Nikon Bob]

Yea, I have basically given up on RFs for two reasons that are related . I have gone digital and nobody makes a halfway affordable M mount DRF. When they do I will be back in the RF game.

Bob

[wlewisiii]

Trying to use a wide close up on kids is often an exercise in futility, I agree. I've always done much better with my 50 & hyper focal scale focused. Makes a fast light P&S that does wonders for getting good shots of my son.

That said, I also use an SLR & LF. No need to only use one kind of camera.

[rsosa]

well, i would say, keep the RF and buy an SLR.
I agree with what was said here, use the right tool (if thats possible, I have no children to feed and care... yet!)

the 35 cron asph I bought recently was from a father with little children who could not focus them on his M8 (it was already sold when asked about why changing the format)
He said: I just couldnt focus so fast the always moving kids (well there are techniques to compensate a little but it made sense for him to change format)
He got a D700 and is now happy... and I've got the best deal in the world near my city for a current production lens (wondering what the M8 would have gone for)

Since i first entered photography, i started with a consumer SLR, hated its focus system, went back a little in years and got a used and well cared MKIIn, AI Servo solved my focus on moving objects (birds)

So if it makes sense to you, try a pro body with AI servo, USM lens, L preferable (or the Nikon equivalent) and see what you get. Not the latest technology will save $ and maybe you can keep your beloved M

cheers

[aperture64]

RF is just another tool and doesn't replace the AF SLR. They don't work for everyone.

If rangefinders were meant to photograph fast moving objects, or your kids in this case, you would see sports sidelines filled with photographers using M9's instead of the fastest/latest SLR.

Go with what works for you and don't feel bad or look back on the decision.

[heatherselkie]

How many leicas do you have? What about trading the m system for the slr R system? I've been looking at the leica slr's ALOT lately and am smitten. They cost a bit less than Leica rangefinders. If you want to keep a toe in the rangefinder world sell some of your stuff and get a less precious voigtlander bessa or something to use some of your lenses on.
I like how I can get super sharp images with my rangefinders, but sometimes I get frustrated because the shots don't work out, are sometimes all blurry, cats and little people move faster than I can and if I want to get a shot of a bee or spider I can't do it. It's hard not to have camera lust, but I can't even afford $300 lenses while I could probably buy a whole film slr kit of some older top of the line nikon or canon for less than that.
If it doesn't work for you, don't worry about it. It's a learning experience.
My husband certainly can't figure out rangefinders.

[BillBingham2]

Jim,

I have to say look into using a P&S approach for the family. I used a Bessa L with a CV 25/4 and brightline finder. DOF is a wonderful tool that helps. I've never liked AF because of speed. I'm not really doing RFs right now, I know I will go back as time goes on. I move between tools as find the need to and don't worry about what is right, it's the journey, learning and having fun.

B2

[rxmd]

Originally Posted by jmooney

I know this may seem blasphemous in light of the sign above the bar so to speak but since this is the corner where SLR users hang about I though I'd throw it out there.

Have you given up on RF's?

Don't worry. I think we have a significant share of users here who primarily use SLRs nowadays but who still hang out at the rangefinder forum. Nobody gets kicked out, at least not for that.

I had pretty much the same experience as you did. I found myself doing more and more portraits, yet couldn't get the hang of rangefinders for everything over 50mm. Nowadays I use rangefinder cameras pretty much only with ultrawideangles, and I rarely use the rangefinder itself because focusing is so non-critical with them. At the moment it's the first time in seven years that I'm in the field with no rangefinder camera (currently I have here a Leica R5 and a Sigma DP1 digital compact).

I guess in the end it boils down to using what works best for you, and nobody will find anything wrong with that.

[back alley]

my first 'real' camera as a young man was a rangefinder...i have traveled back and forth between them and pro slrs for many years...but i am primarily an urban oriented photographer and much prefer rangefinders for that.

right now i have only rangefinders and a small micro4thirds camera, the panasonic g1 with a 'normal' af lens on it and a macro lens with adapter to play mr. close-up.
it's an ideal kit for me.

i plan on sticking with the rf approach...unless i change what i photograph.

[shyoon]

I moved away from my rangefinder set up because ultimately, I was getting more 'keepers' with my current combination of a TLR and a point-and-shoot. It was a beautifully compact and simple set up which was a delight to see, use and hold, but at the end of the day, it is the images that count.