Sam N wrote:
So true. A friend of mine was turned off to RFs after using an Oly SP and a Canonet QL17. Then I showed him the ZI's viewfinder (arguably the best on any RF) and he suddenly became more interested in them.
A Bessa with some Russian glass (Jupiter-8, Industars, but not the Jupiter-12!!!) is a very good way to go, though still more $ than FLRFs.
Indeed. The Oly 35 SP was quite nice and small... but I couldn't really focus very well. I was terribly frustrated with "I can't entirely tell if that's focused or not." I didn't quite understand there were better patches though. I gave the Canonet a try, and thus learned they all pretty much suck (ok, this is probably subjective, and I come from the SLR world, but whatever).
Tried the ZI, and WOW. Talk about night and day difference. I started looking at Bessa R3A/M's and the nokton 40, as that's all I really need. But at ~$8/900 new, I don't think I can do it. Especially after buying a GF1/20 kit =)
randomlinh wrote:
Tried the ZI, and WOW. Talk about night and day difference. I started looking at Bessa R3A/M's and the nokton 40, as that's all I really need. But at ~$8/900 new, I don't think I can do it. Especially after buying a GF1/20 kit =)
The R2's finder is nearly as nice, the camera is much cheaper on the used market and the 35/1.4 is even better than the 40 ;-)
Haha. I'll keep Bessas in mind. I just snagged a GSN off ebay for $25. Good price? Ripped off? Seemed decent to me. Can't wait for it to get here. If I like it, maybe I'll sink some money into a REAL RF, but for now I'll just mess around with that sucker and see what happens.
I did realize something important though... I look through the wrong eye! It's not as big of a deal with SLRs, but I look through the viewfinder with my left eye. Weird, since I'm a righty. But I'm gonna have to switch that up. Haha.
This thread is great for us not so hip with rangefinders (hip? rangefinders?). Thanks for all the info (and starting the thread.)
The size, quiet operation, and general coolness have my interest... but how much smaller/more discreet will one of these be than, say, my OM-1 with a 40/2 or 50/1.4? If at all? That seems to be the real draw, and those Canonet/Konica/Yashica cameras are CHEAP.
I don't think RFs are necessarily more discreet than small film SLRs. The fact that you're holding a big box up to your face tends to draw attention.
The big draws for me are:
- Smaller cameras
- No mirror blackout
- Much smaller and (usually) better wide angle lenses
- You see everything in focus and you can see what you're leaving out of the composition
- Very easy to focus an RF patch in low light (if it's a good one)
Seriously, the Konica Hexar AF. Great lens, absolutely silent in action, and autofocus that works in the dark. It offers a lot over a bunch of cameras.
cgiff wrote:
The size, quiet operation, and general coolness have my interest... but how much smaller/more discreet will one of these be than, say, my OM-1 with a 40/2 or 50/1.4?
Not at all. Discreet is a function of the photographer, not the camera.
Dont stare, dont track people with your lens, dont fire bursts. Make all your decisions re aperture/dof, focus range, ISO and shutter speed and dial them into your camera before you even start looking for photos. Use the same lens for a while, learn its fov and get used to framing without looking through the camera. Then lift the camera to your eye, take the photo, put it down again, dont stare and move on to the next photo. Do that and you've done everything possible not to be annoying, if people still have a problem with a split-second *click*, the problem is theirs, not yours.
An external VF has several attractions over those built into the typical RF: maximum magnification and brightness for a dedicated FL, raising one's face over the camera for a friendly shooting demeanor, eliminated clutter from status indicators and multiple framelines, 1:1 ratio at 50mm+ FL allowing eyes-open shooting. Downsides: additional gear, no enjoyment of camera-side parallax correction. I like them but, either way, they're needed for UWA lenses. I have the Leitz 50, 90, 135 versions, and would not hesitate to use the C/V metal versions (28 and 35 especially).
Sam N wrote:
Then I showed him the ZI's viewfinder (arguably the best on any RF) and he suddenly became more interested in them.
Are we talking size here, because it is decent, but there are even larger Bessa finders like the R4.
randomlinh wrote:
Indeed. The Oly 35 SP was quite nice and small... but I couldn't really focus very well. I was terribly frustrated with "I can't entirely tell if that's focused or not." I didn't quite understand there were better patches though. I gave the Canonet a try, and thus learned they all pretty much suck (ok, this is probably subjective, and I come from the SLR world, but whatever).
All of the compact RFs are super old, which is why they suck to focus. My freshly overhauled Canonet is at least as easy to focus as my M6, but with a smaller patch.
mikethevilla wrote:
Haha. I'll keep Bessas in mind. I just snagged a GSN off ebay for $25. Good price? Ripped off? Seemed decent to me. Can't wait for it to get here. If I like it, maybe I'll sink some money into a REAL RF, but for now I'll just mess around with that sucker and see what happens.
I did realize something important though... I look through the wrong eye! It's not as big of a deal with SLRs, but I look through the viewfinder with my left eye. Weird, since I'm a righty. But I'm gonna have to switch that up. Haha....Show more →
Lots of people do that on RF. You'll want a rapid winder if you shoot left eyed.
cgiff wrote:
This thread is great for us not so hip with rangefinders (hip? rangefinders?). Thanks for all the info (and starting the thread.)
The size, quiet operation, and general coolness have my interest... but how much smaller/more discreet will one of these be than, say, my OM-1 with a 40/2 or 50/1.4? If at all? That seems to be the real draw, and those Canonet/Konica/Yashica cameras are CHEAP.
The OM-1 and 40/2 is really as good if not better in every single way. The thing is thought that many RF lenses are as small as the OM 40/2, but are even faster.
My first 35mm camera was an old Yashica rangefinder with a fixed 50mm 1.4 lens.
It was full manual control only & had a needle type light meter. It was very simple & very good. I used it extensively on a world cruise in the Navy, till I got to Hong Kong where I bought a Canon A-1 in Kowloon ... kid in a 'Candy Store'
If I had known then about rangefinders with interchangeable lenses ... I may have never gone SLR
Sorry I don't remember more about it ... a little help from the forum ??
My first 35mm camera was an old Yashica rangefinder with a fixed 50mm 1.4 lens.
It was full manual control only & had a needle type light meter. It was very simple & very good. I used it extensively on a world cruise in the Navy, till I got to Hong Kong where I bought a Canon A-1 in Kowloon ... kid in a 'Candy Store'
If I had known then about rangefinders with interchangeable lenses ... I may have never gone SLR
Sorry I don't remember more about it ... a little help from the forum ??
pros:
- It's got a slightly wide 40mm f/1.7 lens, which is pretty sharp but not that contrasty and pretty sensitive to flare (which isn't a bad thing for me).
- Aperture priority
- Not that big or heavy (~600gr)
- costed me 25 euros
TWoK wrote:
Are we talking size here, because it is decent, but there are even larger Bessa finders like the R4.
Magnification + size. The R4's finder is big, but the magnification is very low. The ideal RF finder is large and high magnification (the latter is what nets you more focus accuracy for a given RF baseline)
Left eye shooting is not a problem. I do it all the time.
I was surprised at how small the OM-1 is with the 50/1.8. I think it's smaller than the GSN...but shaped differently. That OM-1 really is small.
The RF patch is kinda crappy on the GSN but it works. As for sound, there is an audible "clunk" when the film is advanced...but the actual shutter sound is quiet.
$25 for one if these is a great price...assuming it works!
