pgk Posted March 31, 2012 Share #21 Â Posted March 31, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) If you follow that argument then an SLR would have been an even better choice. SLRs are certainly better for precision framing, but that doesn't mean to say the using a viewfinder, or indeed not using a viewfinder, cannot yield the image as required by the photographer. We are not all identical clones fortunately, and different ways of working suit different people. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 31, 2012 Posted March 31, 2012 Hi pgk, Take a look here 21mm sans viewfinder. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Lord Fluff Posted March 31, 2012 Share #22 Â Posted March 31, 2012 SLRs are certainly better for precision framing, but that doesn't mean to say the using a viewfinder, or indeed not using a viewfinder, cannot yield the image as required by the photographer. We are not all identical clones fortunately, and different ways of working suit different people. Â Sorry, you misunderstand - the previous poster was complaining an external finder was a very slow way of working when shooting action - my point being that using a rangefinder at all is inherently slower than a modern SLR for that purpose (seen a Leica being used by a sports-shooter recently?) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Fluff Posted March 31, 2012 Share #23 Â Posted March 31, 2012 Pretty clear i feel. Â I'm sure you feel it is...... Â All you've proven is that on one occasion at least, a great photographer produced a famous picture by guesswork. Of course we don't know how many times he tried this method and rejected the results. So, as per my reply, anyone can get lucky. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted March 31, 2012 Share #24  Posted March 31, 2012 HCB loved composition but to him what was important, first of all, was to catch the decisive moment according to his understanding of André Breton's works and other existential philosophers'. As HCB said, « For me the camera is a sketch book, an instrument of intuition and spontaneity, the master of the instant which, in visual terms, questions and decides simultaneously ». He used to use external finders when he could not avoid it but having to focus and to compose in two different steps is pretty well contrary to such a rationale. Much more modestly, as a previous and still R-D1 user, i've been crazy enough to buy an M8.2 for the main purpose of being able to use lenses like 21, 75 & 90 sans external finder but it's just me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohnri Posted March 31, 2012 Share #25  Posted March 31, 2012 If you follow that argument then an SLR would have been an even better choice.  Why?  I like the look my M9 delivers.  -Bill   Come to my Exhibition: COLLISION: Fashion meets Fighting At the: Hatakeyama Gallery 905 S Hill St, Los Angeles April 12 at 6:30 PM Jump start Art Walk LA and See kick ass fighting and fashion photos Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohnri Posted March 31, 2012 Share #26  Posted March 31, 2012 Sorry, you misunderstand - the previous poster was complaining an external finder was a very slow way of working when shooting action - my point being that using a rangefinder at all is inherently slower than a modern SLR for that purpose (seen a Leica being used by a sports-shooter recently?)  Yes. Me.  -Bill   Come to my Exhibition: COLLISION: Fashion meets Fighting At the: Hatakeyama Gallery 905 S Hill St, Los Angeles April 12 at 6:30 PM Jump start Art Walk LA and See kick ass fighting and fashion photos Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted March 31, 2012 Share #27 Â Posted March 31, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Sorry, you misunderstand - the previous poster was complaining an external finder was a very slow way of working when shooting action - my point being that using a rangefinder at all is inherently slower than a modern SLR for that purpose (seen a Leica being used by a sports-shooter recently?) I'm not so sure - it all depends...... I helped photograph the runners in the first London Marathon using 2 x Canon A1s. They were fitted with 100mm lenses, pre-focused and then taped up I seem to remember. It was simply a matter of hitting the shutter release when the runner reached the chalk mark on the road. A Leica M would have been just as quick without the mirror blanking of the image (but the company had A1s which were cheaper). For long lens use the SLR is of course a far better bet. Sweeping statements are often only correct because we fail to see that there are alternative ways of working which can be equally and sometimes more effective. Same with framing. Shooting without a viewfinder can be very effective at times - with pre-set focus and exposure - but as with many things, is a technique which needs to be practised and 'perfected'. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Fluff Posted March 31, 2012 Share #28  Posted March 31, 2012 Why? I like the look my M9 delivers.  -Bill  I'm sure you do, as do I. But you claimed that using a second viewfinder would be no better than using a view camera in terms of speed. So clearly speed (as opposed to framing) is important to you. In which case I can point you to SLR solutions that will furnish you with 10 frames every second. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohnri Posted April 1, 2012 Share #29  Posted April 1, 2012 I'm sure you do, as do I. But you claimed that using a second viewfinder would be no better than using a view camera in terms of speed. So clearly speed (as opposed to framing) is important to you. In which case I can point you to SLR solutions that will furnish you with 10 frames every second.  Speed is needed to capture the critical instant.  Framing always matters.  If you wish to use a SLR, that is your choice.  If you think a second VF does not slow you down, please say so.  Otherwise, forgive me, but I am not sure what your point is.  Best,  Bill   Come to my Exhibition: COLLISION: Fashion meets Fighting At the: Hatakeyama Gallery 905 S Hill St, Los Angeles April 12 at 6:30 PM Jump start Art Walk LA and See kick ass fighting and fashion photos Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NB23 Posted April 1, 2012 Share #30 Â Posted April 1, 2012 Absolutely agree. Photography IS composition. Why bother to take pictures when you can only guess at what they will consist of? Â Well you know, some people adore cropping and when you tell them against it, they argue that "in real life" there are no frames so why work within a frame? Â You then tell them that photography IS composition and they have nothing to say anymore. But they still crop to death in PP, which is nothing more then showing a lack of skill. But I digress now. Â Â Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted April 1, 2012 Share #31 Â Posted April 1, 2012 Ha ha the lack of skill. Funny this good old argument comes from people using cameras with inferior framing than entry DSLRs'. They are that good photographers, they don't need accurate framelines to compose and they don't even claim for a better framing a la M8.2. Why do they need accessory finders remains a mystery for me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Fluff Posted April 1, 2012 Share #32 Â Posted April 1, 2012 Â Speed is needed to capture the critical instant. Â Â And yet you choose to use a system that is limited in terms of frame rate, buffer size etc. You claim an external finder makes a Leica as usable as a view camera, but even without one your setup is severely limited for fast action. Â Â Framing always matters. Â Â And yet you shun an external viewfinder, preferring to guess at what you're photographing..... Â Of course this is your choice, and if you're happy with how you work that's great. It would be very interesting to see some of your 'action' work with this combo. Â Perhaps you are using the 21 Lux wide open all the time, in which case, for moving subjects, I can see an external finder not being much help. But what no-one has yet touched on is that you get so much depth of field with a 21mm lens that the focussing stage for most subjects can be pretty cursory and you can still expect sharp results, whilst composing your shot by actually being able to see it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Fluff Posted April 1, 2012 Share #33 Â Posted April 1, 2012 Ha ha the lack of skill. Funny this good old argument comes from people using cameras with inferior framing than entry DSLRs'. They are that good photographers, they don't need accurate framelines to compose and they don't even claim for a better framing a la M8.2. Why do they need accessory finders remains a mystery for me. Â Erm yeah - but the RF inaccuracy versus a totally different field of view isn't really like-for-like is it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Fluff Posted April 1, 2012 Share #34  Posted April 1, 2012 Originally Posted by Lord Fluff ..... (seen a Leica being used by a sports-shooter recently?)  Yes. Me. -Bill   To clarify, I meant someone who shoots sporting events every week for a living, not someone who has used a Leica to shoot some sport.  If you really do shoot sport professionally with your M9 then you have my apologies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted April 1, 2012 Share #35 Â Posted April 1, 2012 Erm yeah - but the RF inaccuracy versus a totally different field of view isn't really like-for-like is it. 10% wider than 24mm framelines more or less. Not a big deal really. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Fluff Posted April 1, 2012 Share #36 Â Posted April 1, 2012 10% wider than 24mm framelines more or less. Not a big deal really. Â Depends which M, and which magnification you're using of course - not every M has a VF that goes out to 24mm lines. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted April 1, 2012 Share #37 Â Posted April 1, 2012 M8.2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulus Posted April 1, 2012 Share #38 Â Posted April 1, 2012 I have 2 x 21s but currently no viewfinder - I simply use the camera's viewfinder and estimate the rest by attempting to visualise what would be there in a 90 degree field of view which actually isn't as difficult as it may seem. Â I do the same and after a little practice it really works well! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohnri Posted April 1, 2012 Share #39  Posted April 1, 2012  Of course this is your choice, and if you're happy with how you work that's great. It would be very interesting to see some of your 'action' work with this combo.  Perhaps you are using the 21 Lux wide open all the time, in which case, for moving subjects, I can see an external finder not being much help.  My photos will be on display beginning April 12 at the Hatakeyama Gallery. Come out and have some free food and drinks.  The fight shots are all taken with a M9. All either with a Noct, f/1, or a 21 'lux and shot mostly wide open.  The studio images were taken with a D3x.  The action shots are real, not staged or posed.  -Bill   Come to my Exhibition: COLLISION: Fashion meets Fighting At the: Hatakeyama Gallery 905 S Hill St, Los Angeles April 12 at 6:30 PM Jump start Art Walk LA and See kick ass fighting and fashion photos Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Fluff Posted April 1, 2012 Share #40 Â Posted April 1, 2012 Come out and have some free food and drinks. Â Thanks for the invite, but the cost of the flight from London would rather offset the free nibbles. Please do link to some of your work if you can, I am interested to see how it looks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.