Why a rangefinder over an SLR?

[mynewcolour]

Matt Stuart seems like a much better ambassador for the Leica fans. His photography is super entertaining and he seems cool.

 

[phrons]

With my S2 I can look with both eyes open and operate completely with one hand. I didn't think this would matter that much but it comes in handy.

I love my F3 though.

Do I have to choose?

 

[Sirius Glass]

I have always used one eye open with both range finders and slrs. The exception being when using a waist level finder or a Graflex which has a focusing hood. If one can wink then one does not need both eyes open. Besides when I keep both eyes open, the other eye ends up looking at the camera body. Why bother?

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Matt Stuart seems like a much better ambassador for the Leica fans. His photography is super entertaining and he seems cool.

Not for me... His photography is for quick amusement, IMO. See it once, get it, no interest to come back.

 

[phrons]

I have always used one eye open with both range finders and slrs. The exception being when using a waist level finder or a Graflex which has a focusing hood. If one can wink then one does not need both eyes open. Besides when I keep both eyes open, the other eye ends up looking at the camera body. Why bother?

You are right in most instances.

With certain types of photography it can be useful. Is this usefulness overblown? Probably. But, that doesn't take away the fact that it is useful. For some it makes a difference.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-news/2012/05/leica-m-monochrom-video-review/

Besides when I keep both eyes open, the other eye ends up looking at the camera body.

Next time try the right one. If possible. I do.

 

[phrons]

 

[cooltouch]

I always keep both eyes open, regardless if I'm shooting with an SLR or a rangefinder. It's just a habit I've gotten into. I've been to many airshows and auto races using longish lenses and I perfected a technique where I keep my left eye on the aircraft or race car and my right eye at the viewfinder. This makes it a lot easier to have the subject centered in the viewfinder without having to hunt around for it with that longish lens. It also helps when taking pics of the moon or other celestial objects when I'm using really long lenses. Besides that, I find if I leave both eyes open, it reduces the eyestrain on my "taking" eye considerably. Holding my left eye closed invariably causes me to squint or to actively force my right eye wide open so that I don't squint. Either situation leads to eye fatigue.

 

[destroya]

being left eye dominant, i find it almost useless to try and keep both eyes open cause the camera body, regardless of SLR or rangefinder, blocks my right eye. so have always closed one. look at the RF pict KoFe posted. the guys right eye is blocked

 

[MattKing]

being left eye dominant, i find it almost useless to try and keep both eyes open cause the camera body, regardless of SLR or rangefinder, blocks my right eye.

You need the perfect camera for us left handed/eyed people - a Baby Bessa

 

[Ko.Fe.]

And Moskva-5.

 

[Steve@f8]

being left eye dominant, i find it almost useless to try and keep both eyes open cause the camera body, regardless of SLR or rangefinder, blocks my right eye. so have always closed one. look at the RF pict KoFe posted. the guys right eye is blocked

Someone I know went to a Joel Meyerowitz photo exposition followed by a book signing by the man in person. Being a left eye dominant photographer, he asked for advice. Meyerowitz said 'force yourself to shoot with your right eye, keeping both open'.

 

[smith931]

SLRs are the most popular cameras since the 1960s, yet rangefinder cameras are better than SLR.
There are some important causes of it.

• Rangefinder cameras give higher image quality than SRL.
• Rangefinder cameras are smaller and lighter than SRL.
• Rangefinder lenses are smaller and lighter but SLR lenses look dim and poor manual focus accuracy.

I think for those reason rangefinder is still over an SLR.

 

[Sirius Glass]

SLRs are the most popular cameras since the 1960s, yet rangefinder cameras are better than SLR.
There are some important causes of it.

• Rangefinder cameras give higher image quality than SRL.
• Rangefinder cameras are smaller and lighter than SRL.
• Rangefinder lenses are smaller and lighter but SLR lenses look dim and poor manual focus accuracy.

I think for those reason rangefinder is still over an SLR.

No so.

• Not so.
  
• Usually.
• Not so.

You need to handle better SLR cameras.

 

[Bill Burk]

Next time try the right one. If possible. I do.

That’s one way to never forget to take off the lens cap on a rangefinder

 

[Sirius Glass]

That’s one way to never forget to take off the lens cap on a rangefinder

What I do with Hasselblad SWC is put yellow gaffer tape on the edge of the lens cap and the lens hood to remind me to take off the lens cap when I look through the lens hood.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

My Bessa R measures the light reflected from the shutter curtain. If the lens cap has not been removed the under exposed LED is on when the shutter release is gently partially down. Works like a charm and I never screw up a shot.

 

[craygc]

Not that I really care about the arguments of one camera type over the other, however, there is an aspect of rangefinders (well, Leica specifically), over SLRs, that I find extremely useful. I often take images where I visualise a number of moving elements converging (ie. people, including myself). As such, I am estimating where everything will come together and the distance at which I will be from the subject when that occurs. With no time to focus at that point, I find the DoF scales on a Leica M lens far more spread out and visually useful in these circumstances as compared to those on an SLR lens. My manual focus SLRs are Nikons and the DoF scales on their lenses offer very little visibility of focus scale available.

 

[AgX]

But this rather is arguing about deliberate lens scales and not about differrent features as such.

 

[craygc]

But this rather is arguing about deliberate lens scales and not about differrent features as such.

In one sense that might be considered a different topic, however, given that every SLR lens I've seen (which certainly isn't all of them) has a short lens scale, I tend to associate this difference with how lenses are designed for working with a mirror box versus the shorter registration of a rangefinder; thus it becomes a benefit of the rangefinder body. (Caveat: this may well be only a design choice as Im only commenting from observation)

 

[Ces1um]

In one sense that might be considered a different topic, however, given that every SLR lens I've seen (which certainly isn't all of them) has a short lens scale, I tend to associate this difference with how lenses are designed for working with a mirror box versus the shorter registration of a rangefinder; thus it becomes a benefit of the rangefinder body. (Caveat: this may well be only a design choice as Im only commenting from observation)

Just to confound things here, my smc pentax SLR lenses seem to have considerably longer lens scales than my voigtlander rangefinder lenses do, so it may just be the lenses you have that lead you to believe that.

I like shooting with both styles of cameras, but I do find my rangefinder's focus tends to need recalibration where I've never had to do that with an SLR. Now I have a voigtlander bessa r3m and apparently they're prone to issues so that might just be my experience with rangefinders.

 

[AgX]

Lenses of same focal lenght may have different pitch. That will result in different spread of DOF scales.
At least of the distance part, the aperture part may still have a different spread, but that should be of lesser interest here.

Well, there is some camera related difference indeed: with coupled rangefinder cameras the pitch of the lens has to correspond to the cam-mechanism of the rangefinder. With SLRs the lens barrel designer has total freedom concerning the pitch of the helicoid.

 

[c41]

The point of difference to me is not looking through the lens.

To the benefit of the rangefinder:

• Always the same view, night/day, filters etc.
• A box to put things in, no perspective change.
• Easy to focus wide angle lenses.
• Very similar experience whichever lens/filter combo is being used.
• No yellow universe with b/w film.

The obvious detriments are parallax, extended minimum focus distance and not seeing what you get.

The biggest one to me is #2, seeing what is in the frame without seeing the field of view of the lens or DOF. Especially with wide angle lenses.

I prefer rangefinders but there’s no substitute for an SLR when you want to see what the film sees before exposure rather than after.

Other differences seem less relevant to the camera type and more to do with the brand/era etc. to me.

Blackout when the mirror moves or seeing outside the frame seem more like things that can be worked around. It’s the negative that counts after all, not how you got there.

I’m a left eye shooter too fwiw. I can use the right one but framing gets a lot more loose, or my left eye is closed which is kinda pointless anyway.

Once you’re used to either type of camera then unless you have some specific use case that absolutely requires one or the other, I don’t see why you can’t achieve the same thing with either type of camera. They’ve all got mirrors and hopefully film in them somewhere.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Once you’re used to either type of camera then unless you have some specific use case that absolutely requires one or the other, I don’t see why you can’t achieve the same thing with either type of camera. They’ve all got mirrors and hopefully film in them somewhere.

Such as using polarizing filters? Missed that one, did you?

 

[Pioneer]

For years and years I used only a K1000. I still own a couple and still use them.

Now though, I use a rangefinder for day to day photography because I find it very handy and I focus easier and more accurately with a rangefinder in most circumstances. I also have gotten used to, and much prefer, the shutter response from my rangefinder. I am very comfortable working with a rangefinder and that is important to me. I am very glad that Leica still makes a terrific rangefinder film camera.

Since I shoot almost exclusively with 28 to 90mm lenses, over 70% of the time with 50mm my personal preference for rangefinders probably isn't really surprising though.

However, if I want to either go with a longer focal length, which I occasionally do, or I am working with macro, I NEVER use a rangefinder. This is where the K1000 usually comes out to play. I will also use the Pentax 645 in this scenario.

Each camera type has its uses for me.

Now obviously, if I had to reduce the number of cameras I own to just one, then the SLR might win out.

I am certain that I wouldn't be very happy about it though so I would fight tooth and nail to keep at least one of each. If that didn't work I may seriously consider eliminating telephotos and macros from my photography.

This is certainly a case where comfort and familiarity with your tools is important.