The Bessa R4 has a built in viewfinder with 21mm lines. its a nice camera to use with wide lenses.
I bought a Bessa a while back just to use the 21mm lens. It is very annoying to look through the viewfinder and see everything in focus. The 'compose' 'focus' 're-compose' 're-focus' 're-compose' thing is tiring when the thing you want in focus is not in the exact center of the frame. The camera is fantastic, those gripes are generic for all rangefinders. The other very oddball thing is that on occasion I have found myself in situations where a cheap digital camera would be of benefit. This is where a rangefinder makes sense, however, I can't find one with a rangefinder (let a lone a viewfinder). (PM me if anyone knows where I can get one.)
I have never owned a leica, I have played with a few and shot them. They are nice to handle, and they make great pictures when they are taken care of. But price was always a barrier, they just cost so much, especially recently.
Sorry Frank. My intent was not to stir up the fanboys or the haters. Actually what I have read has been pretty good so far. I am actually interested in why people find them so useful, and why others head for the exits after a period of time with a Leica.
I find it interesting that most who have moved on have done so for reasons other than cost. That may be a big obstacle for entry, but once the camera is purchased there are other reasons to move on.
An interesting alternative is the Canon 7s, which is not as expensive, but still very good:
https://www.cameraquest.com/canon7sz.htm
It's been said (on TimeZone.com) that if you get a lunch table full of watch enthusiasts together, the last thing they'll care about is the time.
I know that there are lots of photographers who go through their entire lives without ever touching a rangefinder, and are none the worse for it.
I also know that, regardless of Leica advertisements to the contrary, that there are large numbers of professional photographers throughout history who did not use rangefinders.
But are there people who used rangefinders in the past who moved on and never looked back?
I own several Leica cameras, and I do enjoy them. But they are astoundingly expensive and not all that flexible. Their major strength is fast focusing which allows quick, candid photographs. A secondary strength is being able to continually see what is happening through the viewfinder, even while taking pictures. Another secondary strength is their quiet shutter though there are actually other, non-rangefinder cameras, with shutters that are at least as quiet. Most of these strengths were overcome by fast focusing auto-focus systems and better balanced shutter systems.
So, who out there has moved away from using rangefinder cameras and what were your experiences? After making the move have you found to miss some aspect that just could not be found in other cameras systems?
I like my Leica IIIa, IIIc (wartime), IIIf (BD), and CL. But I also enjoy my FED (2, 3, 4, 5, and 5B), Zorki, Zarya, Canon IIf and P, and Minolta 35 Model II cameras. They are all good rangefinders. I also love my Minolta SLRs, my various TLR cameras, and my Polaroids. It just depends on the mood I am in that day as far as what I shoot with. Lately it's been rangefinders. While the Leicas are top of the class, my FED 2 cameras and Zorki 4 come pretty close after a good CLA. The Canons are a joy. The Minolta I just got this week so I'm waiting on finishing the first roll of film before a judgement is made.
I'd love to have a M2 or M-A to play with, but they are not quite in my price range at the moment. My other cameras are fine for what I want to do so I am not worrying about it. Basically, be happy for what you have and can afford right now and don't get so hung up on what you wish you have. You may eventually be able to get it, and if you don't you don't do yourself any favors by anguishing over it. Shoot film and have fun because life is too short for sitting around and regretting what you don't have and not shooting what you do.
But are there people who used rangefinders in the past who moved on and never looked back?
QUOTE]
In the 70's, my father gave me his M3 and 35, 50, and 90 mm lenses. I used it constantly but....at that time, the relentless advertising for SLRs made feel I was using the wrong machine. So, I bought an Olympus OM1 with 50mm and 70-150 mm zoom lens. That camera was as small as my Leica, and I found it more fun to use. I still have the M3, but never use it and the frame lines are faded as is the rangefinder. Not being one to shoot 'street', nor candidly, I've moved on to medium and large format. Two of my friends use a Leica Monochrom which costs $7500 for the newest version of the body. They're welcome to it.
But are there people who used rangefinders in the past who moved on and never looked back?
QUOTE]
In the 70's, my father gave me his M3 and 35, 50, and 90 mm lenses. I used it constantly but....at that time, the relentless advertising for SLRs made feel I was using the wrong machine. So, I bought an Olympus OM1 with 50mm and 70-150 mm zoom lens. That camera was as small as my Leica, and I found it more fun to use. I still have the M3, but never use it and the frame lines are faded as is the rangefinder. Not being one to shoot 'street', nor candidly, I've moved on to medium and large format. Two of my friends use a Leica Monochrom which costs $7500 for the newest version of the body. They're welcome to it.
This is a generic problem with any rangefinder you need to buy one with a bright and contrasty rangefinder frame and spot.
Some of the repairers can rebuild a M3 or M2 finder like new or better but cheaper to buy another shooter.
I own several Leica cameras, and I do enjoy them. But they are astoundingly expensive and not all that flexible.
This thread has cemented my contention that a Nikkormat is superior in every way. Even to the F2, which is probably the best fitted 35 of all times.
I have so far managed to be a photographer for 63 years without ever owning a Leica and have never felt the desire for one.
I'd recommend another Canon P... In poor light the P is just as serviceable.
No Theo, but I do have a 1933 Zeiss Contax that my dad gave me that he brought back from Germany after WWII.Zeiss Contarex then, right?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?