Lotusm50
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.3 #15 · Is film really going away??? | |
And yet, people have done so well with them for so long.
Some of these faults were faults of SLR's not too long ago. There is a lot of technology packed into top-level SLR's these days. However, SLR's are not necessarily the perfect answer to the faults of rangefinders listed.
Focusing off-center, or off a focus point still requires you to move the camera to put the focusing point on the subject. Really when you get down to it, it's not much different.
SLR's can also have problems with certain subjects, and certainly have focus issues in low light.
Not showing depth of field -- OK, but if you familiar with your lenses you pretty much know what the DOF will be at different apertures. This is just substituting a switch for experience and knowledge.
None of these issues are truly deal-breakers for rangefinders. They may make you take an extra second from time to time -- but you've already made the commitment to working a little slower by accepting manual focus. And if you prefer the way they operate and the way they let you see, you prefer their form factor, appreciate the higher performance potential of the lenses (and can afford it), then it's an easy decision to go with a rangefinder. Not perfect, not loaded with convenience technology and not for all situations, but quite a usable and effective tool for many.
I accept this reality and do not own a Leica M, and think they are overpriced. I hold no pro-Leica biases, nor any romantic feelings toward the brand -- indeed, I often find a find to speak ill of them. ;-)
brainiac wrote:
Actually there are some objective differences between the two focusing methods. It's not just taste that has made SLR focusing dominant in the pro camera market.
Rangefinders...
- offer no way of focussing off-centre subjects with normal or wide-angled lenses at wide apertures
- confirm focus incorrectly on patterns
- require rotation of camera to focus horizontal lines
- can not show depth-of-field preview
- do not show accurate picture bounds
- do not allow you to accurately line up or occlude items in the picture
- and, most importantly, do not allow simultaneous composition and focussing of off-center subjects
There are many other ways in which rangefinders are obstructive compared to TTL viewfinders, but when all these issues are combined, they are quite limiting. OTOH, what are the advantages? A quiet shutter, size, and a bright viewfinder with dark lenses. Film is expensive, time consuming, and ultimately capable of lesser quality per square cm than digital. The best digital rangefinder is very expensive, very heavy for its size, not full frame, unreliable, requires IR-cut filters for normal colour, and is significantly outperformed in image quality and usability by a Canon XSi/450D.
...Show more →
Edited on Jul 18, 2008 at 07:51 AM
|
