10 Lessons From 1st Trip w/ a Rangefinder System

[rtsy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

After many happy years with Nikon (last was a D700 +20 + 24-70 + 70-200 VR2 + SB800 + SB600), I needed to lighten the load as travel and my pre-teen wanting to pick up the camera once in a while made the full frame set-up infeasible.

 

So I ordered an M240 and picked up a couple of M lenses. I have just returned from our family's Summer holiday with a rangefinder system and have these leanings and observations to make:

 

First, I learned that I am a terrible photographer! A decade of Nikon's silent wave motors for autofocus and matrix metering have taken its toll. The iPhoto album I will print from this trip will feature far less shots than previous trips with a D-SLR or even one trip with an Olympus PEN. Repeat to self 10,000 time: Must. Practice. More.

 

Second, I read a lot of especially Leica users making great images with a single body and a single lens. Some have a 2nd lens (different combinations like 50 & 90, 21 & 50, 35 & 50, etc.) and produce great work. I learned that at this point, I cannot be a minimalist as these fantastic photographers. I love working with my 18mm especially in narrow streets and small rooms. The 35mm has been a godsend for small group environmental portraits (as mentioned, I shoot my family a lot when traveling). The 90mm is fantastic for picking out details. For my purpose (and poor skill level), the 50mm proved least used. I did not expect this as many swear by ever needing only the 50.

 

Third, I prefer a neck strap (Artisan & Artist ACAM 106) over a wrist strap (Gordy's). I thought that I would simply slot my M into my bag when not in use so I used the wrist strap. I learned that I switch lenses quite a bit (perhaps bad habits from my days shooting with zooms) and a neck strap is a more viable option than growing a third hand.

 

Fourth, I love the inconspicuous look (and price) of the Domke F803. But since I need 3 lenses at least (18, 90, 35 or 50, the latter when I force myself to "see" with it), I learned that I was much better off with the Artisan & Artist ACAM 1000 (a.k.a. the Image Smith). The two compartment design of the A&A Image Smith proved much easier to work with than the satchel-type Domke F-803 (and my holdover from the Nikon days, a Think Tank Retrospective 7).

 

Fifth, not once did I reach for my ND filters. Again, remember that I am a compete rangefinder / Leica newbie and I did overexpose a lot of shots. Perhaps I should slow down even more. I already felt significantly slower than when I worked with an SLR. Also, not once did I reach for my SF24D flash--after reading that many Leica users never shoot with flash. On hindsight, I should've pulled it out to fill the foreground and keep the background in good exposure.

 

Sixth, I wish I had a circular polarizer. Not having one meant I missed many great reflections, I had many washed out skies, and I could not take photos of items behind glass--for example, Lawrence of Arabia's camera at the Museum of the History of Science in Oxford.

 

Seventh, a grip is absolutely necessary. But I've not decided yet between waiting out on the Leica grips or getting the RRS grip + plates.

 

Eighth, I came across a number of negative comments from hardcore rangefinder shooters on the EVF-2. IMHO, it is a must. Inside churches / palaces, I find I have to switch between the 18 and the 90. I'm glad I did not have to switch out viewfinders as well.

 

Ninth, extra battery (especially when using the EVF-2) is a must.

 

Tenth, I hope my wife does not read this because given how frequently I switched lenses, I started to wonder how two M 240s would be sensible.

 

I am happy to hear from the experiences and learnings from other new to rangefinder folks.

 

Cheers!

[jaapv]

You don't need a circular polarizer. A linear one like the Leica swing-out one will do.

[rtsy]

I had wanted to edit my post to correct the "circular" in the polariser but it seems I am unable to edit anymore. Thanks for pointing it out!