Can someone please explain...

hoakin1981 · Sep 10, 2014

...what is so great about rangefinders? They seem to be the go-to cameras for street shooting and I cannot understand why.

Appreciate any info. on the matter.

Thanks!

baachitraka · Sep 10, 2014

...why because there is no mirror which can blind the viewfinder during the exposure.

goros · Sep 10, 2014

I can say at least three things that have made them "the street photography cameras":

- Almost silent. The shutter noise is, in some of these cameras, unexistent.
- There is no viewfinder blackout, as they do not have mirror.
- As the viewfinder shows more than what is in the frame, you could anticipate what is coming into the frame while looking through the viewfinder.

Also, they are prety compact, lenses are smaller in size than the same for SLR, usually very, very good wide angle lenses, etc.

takef586 · Sep 10, 2014

All the above is true, but the real secret is: they are sexy wereables. Given that street photographers tend to carry their camera around at all times, these cameras become a second shirt to you. Try carrying a Leica with a 35 or 50mm Summicron on your shoulder for a year, and then you will understand why.

Jim Jones · Sep 10, 2014

I never found mirror blackout a problem with SLRs. What you miss at the moment of exposure is recorded on film. A great advantage of Leica is the natural way we can operate them, setting the aperture, shutter, and approximate focus without ever looking at or through the camera. Shooting from the waist without ever looking directly at camera or subject is useful for some street photographers.

splash_fr · Sep 10, 2014

They make great wideangles for RF since they don't need a retrofocus design because there is no mirror in they way! Whoever "they" is...

darkosaric · Sep 10, 2014

splash_fr said:
Whoever "they" is...

Dead Link Removed

RalphLambrecht · Sep 10, 2014

baachitraka said:
...why because there is no mirror which can blind the viewfinder during the exposure.

I can't understand that that is even an issuean SLR mirror has never bothered me one bit;not seeing what the lens sees would bother me far more

baachitraka · Sep 10, 2014

It may be the reason, that I prefer slight tele lenses.

removed account4 · Sep 10, 2014

maybe because they are "fun"?

E. von Hoegh · Sep 10, 2014

hoakin1981 said:
...what is so great about rangefinders? They seem to be the go-to cameras for street shooting and I cannot understand why.

Appreciate any info. on the matter.

Thanks!

I recently got back into RF cameras after a long hiatus.
Why?
I can twirl the strap around my left wrist and carry the camera in my hand all day, ready for instant use yet unobtrusive. No SLR I own can be carried this way with as much comfort. It's very quiet, just a quiet 'thunk'. The camera, a lens or two, lightmeter, film all fit in a small shoulder bag. The lenses themselves are tiny relative to the equivalent SLR lenses. I really like the 35mm lens for street pictures, and with modern films the 50/2 standard lens lets me photograph under pretty dismal lighting conditions handheld; the camera I chose gives me sharp results at 1/25 and even 1/10 if I am careful and brace the camera on something.
Lastly, I just like the thing - I chose a Kiev 4a which has a pretty high funk factor. Cheap too.

Xmas · Sep 10, 2014

In days of yore the press people used a

Nikon F with 5cm /1.4 and HP3 in Promicol @800 ASA
and also a

Leica M with summilux 35mm
or

Canon P with /2 35mm

last two both lighter and handy

The F with a motor was heavy the rangefinder got more context ie background.

Today it depends on your street style eg if you want to pose people and see the frame a SLR if you are shooting from the hip only the noise is different.

If you are into available darkness an M3 or P and XP2+ is easy to focus if you dont do digital.

A Canonet /1.7 will do as well...

ToddB · Sep 10, 2014

I'm really digging my little Canon QL17 for street shooting. Currently looking into "Zone Focusing" to make my life a little easier.

Colin Corneau · Sep 10, 2014

Small, quiet, unobtrusive.

I've found it easier to focus in lower light than an SLR, too.

There's no denying people react to one much less than a larger SLR, too. I've used both for years and see the difference.

dnk512 · Sep 10, 2014

Several years ago the rangefinderforum site had a contest for the best write up on this topic (Why use a rangefinder). The best answer stated (among other things -- several mentioned here already) the ability to see the scene as is in real life with out the distortion of aperture. I used to have little appreciation of that fact, but I am growing fond of it. Sorry, no link and no memory of the winner's name.

snapguy · Sep 10, 2014

confision

You are confusing history with today's reality. There was a time when SLR were big and clunky and perhaps had a left-handed film advance and rangefinders were small and light and unobtrusive and some street photographers who were considered great chose the latter and many people copied them.
In 1922 would a consumer chose a 1966 Mustang convertible over a Model T Ford, if he could get a Mustang? NO because the Mustang would slam itself to pieces on the heavily rutted dirt roads of the era. The Mustang would be worthless for most people in that era.

frank · Sep 10, 2014

Let's just put it down to personal preference. Use whatever camera you like, and don't worry about what cameras other people use.

baachitraka · Sep 10, 2014

For me Olympus OM-1n + 28mm f/3.5 on street, but there are other SLRs which may be smaller in size.

georg16nik · Sep 10, 2014

hoakin1981 said:
...what is so great about rangefinders? They seem to be the go-to cameras for street shooting and I cannot understand why.

Appreciate any info. on the matter.

Thanks!

imho, as far as the classical 135 and 120 RF cameras are concerned, some advantages are:

optical performance
size factor
reliability
maintenance
weight
shooting in low light (and IR)

There are some more useful stuff you will find out yourself, once you dare.

trythis · Sep 10, 2014

The only thing I like better about a rangefinder is the leaf shutter.

I dont like them much either for all other reasons and I have a Leica m3 and IIIF someone gave me! At least I can see through the finder on the M3 but the IIIf as tiny as it is is worthless with glasses except for the novelty. It awesome to hold, but fiddly to use.

I am still trying to give them a chance, but in general I think Leica is all conspicuous consumption. There may be some value in the best of the best lens in a lab, but real world, people take awesome photos with all sorts of equipment.

I have a Konica S2 that I find enjoyable and easy enough to use. The lens is great, and it was less that $20!

Not to be a jerk, but I will recommend you finish the sentence in the title of your thread posts, its a little coy not to.

DannL. · Sep 10, 2014

The Argus C3 "Brick" is probably the the foremost rangefinder camera for street photographers used through time. I suspect this is because of it's modern design, ergonomics, weight distribution, interchangeable lenses, collector appeal, and simple construction. In fact, I'll bet that the C3 has been responsible for exposing more film (in ft, not meters) than all of the other rangefinder cameras combined. I hope I am correct on this information, otherwise it could ruin my story.

cliveh · Sep 10, 2014

I would suggest the overriding reason to use a rangefinder in preference to an SLR, is the fact that the frame finders provide an aid to composition. It is closer to seeing with your eye, whereas with an SLR it is more akin to peering down the centre of a toilet roll.

frank · Sep 10, 2014

All of these fine point specific reasons that are being offered in praise of RF cameras can be argued by someone already biased against them, so I think the best response to an inquiry like this, is try a RF for yourself and see if it works for you. Use whatever camera works for you and don't worry about what camera others are using.

The same thing goes for the "what's so great about Leica" threads, and the other related and current thread about using the most expensive gear.

georg16nik · Sep 10, 2014

snapguy said:
You are confusing history with today's reality. There was a time when SLR were big and clunky...

were?

yeah, how about the “current” still in production flagman cameras from 2 of the usual suspects; Leica and Nikon.
have you ever held Nikon F6 and then Leica M7 in your hands?

photo credit: http://www.nikon-fotografie.de/

Jeff Kubach · Sep 10, 2014

jnanian said:
maybe because they are "fun"?[/QUOT[/I]

I agree. Like mention before light and silenct.

Jeff

Can someone please explain...

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency