jrp Posted January 1, 2015 Share #101 Posted January 1, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) I don't find the rangefinder (or manual focusing) to be particular benefits, myself. It makes it harder to compose pictures, even if you can see the whole frame. Off centre subjects are a particular challenge. As I said earlier in the thread, light, compact lenses are the key benefit of the system for me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 1, 2015 Posted January 1, 2015 Hi jrp, Take a look here Erwin Puts: " Leica can not disregard the writing at the wall". I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
lct Posted January 1, 2015 Share #102 Posted January 1, 2015 I don't find the rangefinder (or manual focusing) to be particular benefits, myself. It makes it harder to compose pictures, even if you can see the whole frame. Off centre subjects are a particular challenge. Not sure if a Leica M is the best camera for you then. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrp Posted January 1, 2015 Share #103 Posted January 1, 2015 Not sure if a Leica M is the best camera for you then. I have ended up with both a DSLR system and a Leica system. I take the former for more serious work or when I need telephoto, close-up or shift lenses, and the Leica when there is more carrying to be done. I will experiment with Sony and other bodies, but so far they are suitable for only a limited range of work because of the absence of lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 1, 2015 Share #104 Posted January 1, 2015 Many of them are perfectly fine with Leica lenses. Nor is there anything wrong with for instance Zeiss lenses on Sony bodies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted January 1, 2015 Share #105 Posted January 1, 2015 Not sure if a Leica M is the best camera for you then. +1 The number one consideration…for me…in choosing a camera is how it allows me to see and to focus on the scene. I've used Ms for decades specifically because of this, not in spite of it. YMMV….but if I were you, I'd try other options. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrp Posted January 2, 2015 Share #106 Posted January 2, 2015 +1 The number one consideration…for me…in choosing a camera is how it allows me to see and to focus on the scene. I've used Ms for decades specifically because of this, not in spite of it. YMMV….but if I were you, I'd try other options. Jeff I do use a DSLR as well as the m240. Obviously I am missing something or shooting different subjects in not "getting" the uniqueness of the RF. I rarely centre the subject -- rule of thirds is probably my default composition -- and I like to isolate the subject by shooting wide open -- something that Leica lenses allow, unlike most of my fast DSLR lenses, which perform less well, although they generally have less wavy fields of focus. (The 28mm f/2 asph is probably the exception to this.) If the subject is moving (unpredictably), I can't see how to get the shot with RF, whereas it is not a problem with AF (other than with lenses that focus shift, as DSLRs focus at an effective f/2.8). For land/cityscapes I usually want leading lines into corners, eg. Hard to do if the corner is not precisely defined. Even harder if it is obscured by the lens. I'm obviously missing something, but if the something is not obvious or takes a lots of extra work, technology and convenience will, in the end win, as Puts surmises. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted January 2, 2015 Share #107 Posted January 2, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Framing is something I correct in post. For me, SLRs give me tunnel vision. They're very reassuring, but in the long run I prefer the view that the optical viewfinder and frame lines give, even if some adjustment is needed. I have yet to come across an AF system that is as accurate, or easy to use as manually focussing Leica and Zeiss lenses. I agree that it would be nice to focus off centre. It isn't feasible to move the RF patch, and focus peaking is a way off. Works well manually focussing the T with Visoflex, though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted January 2, 2015 Share #108 Posted January 2, 2015 I do use a DSLR as well as the m240. Obviously I am missing something or shooting different subjects in not "getting" the uniqueness of the RF. Some bond with the RF, some don't. Simple as that….and the reason I always suggest that people try it before spending a lot on the latest version and multiple lenses. I loved it first try, and never looked back. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted January 2, 2015 Share #109 Posted January 2, 2015 Some bond with the RF, some don't. Simple as that….and the reason I always suggest that people try it before spending a lot on the latest version and multiple lenses. I loved it first try, and never looked back. Jeff And I first started with inexpensive RFs, then moved up to a Leica M2 in 1965. Today I have many cameras and they are all medium-format viewfinder cameras or rangefinders or large format view cameras. (As a pro I did use Nikon SLRs as well as Leicas, but no SLRs now for forty years.) Habituation, bonding. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pierovitch Posted January 2, 2015 Share #110 Posted January 2, 2015 Leica vs anything else generates a lot of opinions but it's what sells that generates the black ink on the ledger. Seems to be a lot of sales being generated by the competition just to find a cheaper or more user friendly option to a Leica. Fortunately I have seen many visiting Chinese doctors proud of their panasonic with the genuine red logo. Branding can work, but still requires the Ultimate exclusive versions to drive the image. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrp Posted January 2, 2015 Share #111 Posted January 2, 2015 Why did all the other rangefinder manufacturers stop making rangefinders? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firefly Posted January 2, 2015 Share #112 Posted January 2, 2015 Why did all the other rangefinder manufacturers stop making rangefinders? SLR Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted January 2, 2015 Share #113 Posted January 2, 2015 Why did all the other rangefinder manufacturers stop making rangefinders? Speaking only from my experience, rangefinders waned quickly when Nikon introduced the F, and was aggressive in promoting it through media placement (in particular movies), virtually giving them away to major urban news photographers, and making them entirely modular. When ours broke we would throw away the bodies and keep the screen, prism, back and motor drive (if it had one.) Oh, and a non-motor drive body could usually be made to take a motor in ten minutes by just drilling a hole in the interior base plate. A funny was when some media photographers would tape over the Nikon logo. It drove the sales rep crazy, "We practically give you the camera to get our name out there and you tape over it!" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted January 2, 2015 Share #114 Posted January 2, 2015 SLR So why would other manufacturers want to restart making rangefinders? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted January 2, 2015 Share #115 Posted January 2, 2015 So why would other manufacturers want to restart making rangefinders? Because they think people might buy them? The appeal of rangefinders is written all over this forum, and the sales of dSLRs is in decline ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkCambridgeshire Posted January 2, 2015 Share #116 Posted January 2, 2015 I don't think so. In fact Contax had a better reputation than Leica did. And was more expensive... I have not seen one rangefinder camera from Fuji yet - a bit hard to recreate an experience in that case. Retro-look cameras are more of a snob product really. Fake instead of the real thing. The cameras are very good - but would have been so in any other, more functional design. Fuji have made loads of rangefinder camera models … three different MF rangefinders (6x7 , 6x8 and 6x9) … I have one in my hands right now … a Fuji GW680 III …. a GIANT Leica type rangefinder film camera dunk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 2, 2015 Share #117 Posted January 2, 2015 Because they think people might buy them? The appeal of rangefinders is written all over this forum, and the sales of dSLRs is in decline ... And what percentage of photographers does this forum represent? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted January 2, 2015 Share #118 Posted January 2, 2015 Minimal, but for Leica, very significant (I'd guess). The rather amazing thing about the Internet/free trade era is that it is a lot easier for people in the margins to survive, or do better than survive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 2, 2015 Share #119 Posted January 2, 2015 However, I guess the percentage is small enough to make an an attempt at entry into the niche extremely uninteresting/unprofitable for other companies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamey Posted January 3, 2015 Share #120 Posted January 3, 2015 "Retro-look cameras are more of a snob product really. Fake instead of the real thing." I call "bollocks". A little over two years ago I used five Leica bodies - M, R and LTM - and a multitude of lenses mostly Leica and Zeiss. Then I tried a Fuji X-10 Today, I have four Fuji X-series bodies - X-Pro1, X-T1, X-M1 and X100s - and Fujinon 14, 18, 23, 27, 35, 56, 60, 18-55, 18-135 and 55-200mm lenses plus legacy telephoto lenses. All that is left of my Leicas are my IID and M2, both with 50mm lenses. I have not used either in over a year. It's not about "retro-look", whatever that is. It's about form factor. I use and enjoy the X-Pro1 "rangefinder" form factor because I have spent the past 20-odd years using Leica M. The X-Pro1 suits me better than any M digital because it is a) more similar to a film Leica form factor and more reliable. I'm looking forward to the X-Pro2, too. Equally, I use the X-T1 because of it's "SLR" form factor; it is more suited to some types of photography, particularly macro and tele work. It is not a DSLR; it is not as bulky. Oh and it's weatherproof. Both the "rangefinder" and "SLR" Fuji X-Series form factors occupy different photographic niches. However, critically, they use the same lens mount and the same lenses. Result - only one system to buy into for any purpose. The X-M1 is, for example, a simple little beast, broadly equivalent to the Leica T in terms of target market - but it can take, without any form of adaptor, the finest Fujinon glass. Did I not mention the glass? The 23, 35 and 56mm lenses in particular match Leica's finest - and did I mention reliable? "snob" and "fake" are two words that do not apply to Fuji's X-Series products. Such words are only bandied about on this forum - which speaks volumes. I don't come here and piss on those who choose to continue to use Leica - and I don't see any reason why those who do so have any excuse or justification to piss on others. And people wonder why I don't post here anymore... Bye. Bill I agree with on some points, I also have the Fuji X-T1 and it's a very nice Camera, Last month I travelled to Japan and I took three cameras with me, the M7, M240 and the Fuji X-T1 and the reason I took the Fuji is because I frankly didn't trust the M240 however it operated flawlessly with no problems what so ever. I was so pleased with the M240 images, though still not as good as Fuji provia 100 slide in the M7 I relagated the X-T1 to mostly movies, some inages from the M240 and the X-T1. In this series the X-T1 shots are on top. The M240 did a wonderful job it bever missed a beat. Ken. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/238137-erwin-puts-leica-can-not-disregard-the-writing-at-the-wall/?do=findComment&comment=2740224'>More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.