Rangefinder

rwboyer · Mar 27, 2010

I swear I make different images with my rangefinder 35mm cameras than I do with SLR's or larger format. Here is why I am not a wedding photographer. This is NOT a pretty picture.

Does this make you ask "What is going on here?" If so that is great - If not - I guess I blew the moment. Just wanted some other's thoughts.

Background - being informed there are NO flowers and NO best man.

Leica M6 50 Summicron - Kodak TMZ @ 1600 f4 @ 1/15

RB

Tim Gray · Mar 27, 2010

I think it's an interesting picture. What was going on?

Tim Gray · Mar 27, 2010

Also, I love TMZ.

rwboyer · Mar 27, 2010

This was the moment the bride and bridesmaids were informed that there were no wedding flowers and there was no best man - about 20mins before the wedding was supposed to start. I love how the expressions range from shock to nausea - love the brides hands.

RB

rwboyer · Mar 27, 2010

Tim Gray said:
Also, I love TMZ.

Me to - just wish it was not so freaking expensive. 90% of what I shoot in the M6 is TMZ or TX

RB

MattKing · Mar 27, 2010

The best man ran away with the flowers????

Aren't they supposed to run away with a bridesmaid instead?

Jeff Kubach · Mar 27, 2010

This a great picture, very emotional moment!

Jeff

rwboyer · Mar 27, 2010

Jeff Kubach said:
This a great picture, very emotional moment!

Jeff

Thanks - I like it as well - it is almost surreal without effect.

RB

Tim Gray · Mar 27, 2010

rwboyer said:
This was the moment the bride and bridesmaids were informed that there were no wedding flowers and there was no best man - about 20mins before the wedding was supposed to start. I love how the expressions range from shock to nausea - love the brides hands.

RB

Makes sense. The bride is clearly upset, while the girl in the middle has that look of, "I don't understand the words coming out of your mouth."

TX and TMZ are a good pair. Pretty much what I shoot in my RF too. TMZ is expensive, but I've decided I'm going to shoot as much of it as I can, costs be damned.

Allen Friday · Mar 27, 2010

It could have been worse. At my brother's wedding, we had a groom, bride, flowers, best man (me), organist, etc. When the time came for the ceremony, the only thing missing was the minister. He went to the wrong church. He did show up about 45 minutes late., which really messed up the reception, as well as the bride's nerves. Unfortunately, while I had the ring, I didn't have a camera to record the going ons.

Great shot.

msk2193 · Mar 27, 2010

The difference is that there is no lag time in your Leica versus the SLRs!
Great capture.

rwboyer · Mar 27, 2010

Yes that is a technical difference but for some subconscious reason both myself and subjects seem to "make" different pictures as well in terms of reaction. Honestly I was not referring to a technical difference. I think my attitude is different in some minor way no matter how hard I try - it just is. And maybe more importantly my subjects seem to be less self conscious - especially if they are not used to being in front of a camera. I know that that would be hard to prove or disprove - just my observations over the years. It is not like I am not there with a camera in both circumstances.

RB

clayne · Mar 27, 2010

rwboyer said:
Yes that is a technical difference but for some subconscious reason both myself and subjects seem to "make" different pictures as well in terms of reaction.

Trust me, this lack of defined reaction to having an SLR lens pointed at them is something you WANT and a reason to use a RF in these types of situations.

Also, the old cliche "the images should do the talking rather than words" is mostly BS if the image itself is solid. Just provide a short caption and it all becomes clear. In fact, you've already written one in one of your earlier posts.

rwboyer · Mar 27, 2010

clayne said:
Trust me, this lack of defined reaction to having an SLR lens pointed at them is something you WANT and a reason to use a RF in these types of situations.

Also, the old cliche "the images should do the talking rather than words" is mostly BS if the image itself is solid. Just provide a short caption and it all becomes clear. In fact, you've already written one in one of your earlier posts.

Agreed! Now if I could just get used to using those damned clip on finders I could actually use my 21 with some degree of competence. Maybe I'll just stick with the 50 and sell the 21 for the RF ;-)

RB

clayne · Mar 27, 2010

rwboyer said:
Agreed! Now if I could just get used to using those damned clip on finders I could actually use my 21 with some degree of competence. Maybe I'll just stick with the 50 and sell the 21 for the RF ;-)

RB

If it means anything, RF + wide angle don't work with me that well. There's something about the lack of perspective-accurate viewfinder in a RF that bothers me when working with 24mm and below lenses. With those an SLR works better for me. I like to feel inside the scene and the VF of an SLR with a wide-angle replicates that. I only use my M4 w/ a Summicron 35. Granted there are accessory finders, but it's just another thing to have to worry about.

rwboyer · Mar 27, 2010

clayne said:
If it means anything, RF + wide angle don't work with me that well. There's something about the lack of perspective-accurate viewfinder in a RF that bothers me when working with 24mm and below lenses. With those an SLR works better for me. I like to feel inside the scene and the VF of an SLR with a wide-angle replicates that. I only use my M4 w/ a Summicron 35. Granted there are accessory finders, but it's just another thing to have to worry about.

My big issue is with the accessory finders - with wides I like to shoot real close and as you know the best light is usually not real bright so I do need to focus - the issue is that I have a really difficult time doing what I use 35 for at all - quick stuff - with the separate focus frame/compose operations I may as well be using a freaking view camera (hyperbole)

RB

Tim Gray · Mar 28, 2010

Get rid of the 21 and get a 28. It's perfect for situations like the above picture. My favorite focal length on RF.

macrorie · May 14, 2010

Weddings are such chemical emotion-bombs, I could never shoot them for a living. I respect those who do.

kauffman v36 · May 14, 2010

the few weddings that ive shot i wish i could shoot them the way i personally would, and this is it. while i shoot with mostly an slr this is the same kind of stuff i catch myself shooting, and i know the bride and groom dont want it, but its awesome, so much better than a kissing picture!

AgentX · Jun 20, 2010

msk2193 said:
The difference is that there is no lag time in your Leica versus the SLRs!
Great capture.

And no mirror blackout, either, which is one of my favorite rangefinder attributes. Quieter, too, but not silent or anything.

Rangefinders present a more direct way of interacting with what you're photographing than an SLR. You're looking straight at it, as it appears to the eye, not what its image looks like when projected by the lens. But the difference, which matters to some but not to many others, really isn't all *that* huge. And some people simply prefer the SLR. It certainly has its own set of advantages.

And in general, other photographers are the only onlookers who know/care if you're using an SLR or a rangefinder, digital or film. So if you were doing a documentary about photographers, perhaps that's something you'd need to consider. Otherwise, unless you're toting around something that looks really unusual, like a TLR or a large-format camera, the vast majority of people just register "camera" and nothing more.

Rangefinder

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency