Struggling With Rangefinders

Great shot!

Bill Burk said:

You’re accustomed to Nikon’s 100 % viewfinder and probably not shooting color slides.

I was always envious of that (Pentax / Olympus don’t do more than about 97%).

Of several rangefinders I have, a few have framelines with parallax correction, that’s important to keep from cutting off people’s heads.

Even with parallax correction you have to be aware it pertains to the foreground and the background does not move (so you use framelines for your subject but keep the sliver of mountains where they were at infinity focus, outside the close-up frame).

These are things you can grow accustomed to, but I totally understand your annoyance.

Click to expand...

A craftsman needs to understand how to use their tools!

I think that my rangefinder journey has also been marred by the 50mm f1.2 LTM. It’s absolutely wonderful on digital cameras, but its contrast is less exciting on film.

One issue that crops up with rangefinders is focus fishing. Since everything is sharp in the viewfinder it is difficult to know which way to move the lens to focus without a lot of experience. The key is to return the lens to infinity after each photo. You will always know the direction to focus then and it makes the camera much faster to focus. This is especially true with untabbed lenses.

I go back and forth between SLRs and rangefinders. I've been doing it my whole life though so I don't find it all that daunting. Rangefinders are nice since they can be so small, though some SLRs are small too. The one real benefit to rangefinders is seeing outside the frame. With fixed lenses on SLRs you need to move the camera around. I prefer zooms on SLRs for this reason. Another nice thing about rangefinders, at least in the Leica M mount, is choice for lenses.

The Canon 7 is a fantastic camera. I generally prefer using it to my Leica M3, though I usually use my Konica Hexar RF since I like the automation.

halfaman said:

It is not the shutter, but the shutter actuations counter what makes a loud noise. Can be damped in some way but I never care about it.

Click to expand...

Thanks for clarifying this ... but the noise is still rather loud, especially compared to the Retina iic which is whisper-quiet.

DavidClapp said:

I think that my rangefinder journey has also been marred by the 50mm f1.2 LTM. It’s absolutely wonderful on digital cameras, but its contrast is less exciting on film.

Click to expand...

The older LTM lenses had a so-called "classic" look that was low contrast by comparison to modern lens design and coatings. Also, if the lens has internal haze, it will manifest as low contrast.

There are two fairly straightforward ways to address this;

• Switch to a more modern lens design like a 50mm f/2.5 Color-Skopar (just watch to make sure you don't get a hazy one)
  
  
• Develop for higher microcontrast. I shoot a lot with all kinds of lenses, new and old and use semistand or EMA long duration/low agitation/high dilution development that kicks the contrast into nice places even with an older lens. For example, here is one shot with an uncoated 50mm f/3.5 collapsible Elmar made in 1945 - it does not lack contrast:

chuckroast said:

The older LTM lenses had a so-called "classic" look that was low contrast by comparison to modern lens design and coatings. Also, if the lens has internal haze, it will manifest as low contrast.

There are two fairly straightforward ways to address this;

• Switch to a more modern lens design like a 50mm f/2.5 Color-Skopar (just watch to make sure you don't get a hazy one)
  
  
• Develop for higher microcontrast. I shoot a lot with all kinds of lenses, new and old and use semistand or EMA long duration/low agitation/high dilution development that kicks the contrast into nice places even with an older lens. For example, here is one shot with an uncoated 50mm f/3.5 collapsible Elmar made in 1945 - it does not lack contrast:

View attachment 416327

Click to expand...

LTM, the ESG champignons of cameras. May they live forever!

DavidClapp said:

I bought a Canon 7S and a VTDeluxe and a 50mm f1.2 LTM. I’ve been a professional landscape / travel photographer for 20 years, so I’m highly experienced.

The whole rangefinder experience has turned out to be a detachment for me creatively but I’m trying to like this format.

1. I feel detached from the precise framing of the F2AS I own. These rangefinders lack versatility and I get quickly bored of the restrictions.
2. I am far from enjoying composition with the 7S 50mm frame lines, the VT’s rotating viewfinder prism is better. I bought a 35mm to end this on the 7S, but the lens was a eBay Japan dud so I’m stuck with frame lines until I get a 35mm.
3. I use my 50mm f1.2 LTM digitally with my Canon R3 to great effect so I’m certainly keeping this beautiful lens. I have to say this lens is the only really good thing I have taken from this rangefinder experience.

Should I rethink my strategy with this kit?

Any help gratefully received!

Click to expand...

Well it certainly looks like you should

pentaxuser

I used SLRs for over half of my life and then one day I tried a Contax II rangefinder.

I bought it on the spot and have been ruined since that day.

Rangefinders have certain advantages with certain lenses. One advantage is that every lens you use will focus the exact same way. Doesn't matter if the lens is wide or tele, or has a narrow maximum aperture or not.
Wide angle lenses are much easier to focus on a rangefinder. I can't speak to many other rangefinder systems, but Leica's is great from 21mm to about 75mm. Filters are another advantage - they don't darken the viewfinder like on a SLR.
The hardest things about rangefinder use is the need to develop "pre-visualization" skills, and using longer lenses. The frame lines get tiny at 90mm, and 135 is pretty much the maximum. I can focus a 135mm on my M3 (with its higher magnification finder) pretty accurately, if I stop down a bit. On a standard .72 or .68 finder, 90mm becomes challenging. My eyes are getting old - you may have no problem with a 90...
Once you get to know a few of your lenses, and how they render at different apertures, you can visualize how the final image will probably look. Sometime, the results will surprise you, too.

SLRs are more accurate with framing (if you've got a camera with a 100% finder), and much better at longer focal lengths.