DSLR compared with RangeFinder - a few thoughts

[MikeMyers]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have friends in a different forum, who wonder when I'm wasting my time with my M10, rather than using my Nikon D750, or better yet, buy a Nikon D850.  Most of the photography they seem to do is what I would call "landscape photography", and one of their main criteria is dynamic range, to not blow out the highlights or the shadows, which is easy to do when you're combining bright sunlight, maybe even with reflections in the water of the sun, and deep, dark shadows.  They don't understand why I want to use a rangefinder, when the Nikon can supposedly focus more accurately, and do so faster.  They mostly turn off all the automated adjustments on the Nikon that were put there to enhance captured images for inexperienced photographers, and simply generate the best raw image they can, which they will adjust manually.  The end result of what they do is often superb.  Cameras are on a tripod, that needs to be perfectly level, and the larger the viewfinder window, the better they feel they can create the best possible image.  But, I've observed, that all those images are "static", not "dynamic".

Quoting from that discussion: "I wish I didn’t have to be so blunt but - it’s a box with a lens on the front and a sensor in the back and it can only take 36mm x 24mm images, even if they are 60Mpx. What they are asking is a phenomenal amount of money to make images that most non-pro buyers will never take any bigger than a web page. I keep on thinking of Leica cameras as expensive jewellery that can take a picture no better than many DSLRs out there but that cost an arm and a leg. Ask a dedicated Leica fan to write a review and you are always going to get the conclusion - “buy it!”. Or am I being a little cynical there?"

I write back and say that they're turning their full frame, 45 megapixel camera essentially into a view camera, and that's not what the Leica was designed to be.  My favorite Leica photos are usually captured stills of people and scenery, with the main subject very sharp, and that beautiful "buttery" out of focus effect for other things in the photo, a moment frozen in time.  When I try to capture images like what these people prefer, I use a tripod, and perhaps Live View, but I've gotten into the habit of using the Visoflex to be sure what I'm getting is what I want, and also checking the histogram - which I know is based on jpg, but it's a good starting point.  Or, I just use my D750 and do what they do.

Earlier today, I found this:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/65836829

Personally, I no longer feel it's better to say a (Nikon D750 / D850 / Leica M10 / Leica M11) is "better", because it's missing the rest of the sentence - better at what.  If I'm doing sports photography, bird photography, landscapes, street photography....   all the above cameras have their strengths and weaknesses.  Maybe it's my imagination, but when I look at awesome Leica photographs, such as the ones by @jonoslack which I viewed this morning, they do have some special quality that I find my DSLR photos don't capture as well as my Leica.  With my DSLR, I get photos OF a scene.  With the Leica, the images put me INTO the scene.  I'm also thinking back to war photos taken during WW II, and the Vietnam war, where some people captured what was happening, while others (usually with Leica M3 or Nikon F2) put me INTO the scene.  

Maybe it's the cameras, or maybe the different techniques in using different types of cameras, or maybe it really is the lenses.  Or, might it be that I started with a rangefinder camera in the 1950's, and to me, this is the best connection between me and what I want to photograph?  

......and I'll also add that to me, Mirrorless cameras are even worse than DSLR, as I'm looking at a very static image displayed on a digital screen - while with the Leica I am usually looking at the real scene, and all around the scene, with just the frame lines hinting at which I'll end up with.  The Leica is the only one that puts me almost literally INTO the scene that I'm trying to photograph.

[Luke_Miller]

My photography journey began in the early 50s with a Brownie Hawkeye and has included most camera types.  My current cameras are Nikon Df, D850, D5, and Z6.  With the Leica M8.2 I began to explore the digital Ms and now have the original Monochrom, M240, and M246.  All get used and I would argue that each is "best" at some aspect of my photography. My definition of “best” includes most enjoyable.

The challenge with any camera is finding a subject worth capturing and then capturing that subject to best advantage. My Leicas have the added challenge of being primarily manual in operation.  They bring to mind those great early days when none of my cameras had any form of automation.  So there is more effort on my part to get a properly exposed and in-focused shot.  Yes, I can turn off automated features in my other bodies, so they perform in a similar fashion, but manual focus on an auto-focus lens and aperture control on a lens that lacks an aperture ring is not the most effective or enjoyable use of that equipment.  I can manually shift the automatic transmission in my truck, but it is not nearly as fun as with a stick shift.  I work harder shooting with my Leica cameras and get more enjoyment and satisfaction from the results than from my other cameras.

Sort of like the point President John F. Kennedy was making in his famous moon speech “We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills …..”

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[farnz]

If someone cooks an exquisite meal does anyone ask which pots and pans were used?

Pete.

[RexGig0]

No Nikon or Canon 50mm lens can capture an image that is quite like what I can do with a Summilux-M 50mm ASPH. That is how I got “Summiluxed” into buying the lens, and, of course, I needed to add an M10, to plug into the rear of the lens, to keep the dust out. 😉 Then, I learned that the Leica M10’s color palette does wonderful things with my wife’s skin tones.

I started with Canon EOS DSLRs, due to availability of some used equipment, that my wife had acquired, pre-owned, from one of her colleagues. I built upon that, especially after I learned that Canon still really cared about macro/close-range photography, in field/street conditions, as evidenced by continued development of excellent macro lenses and macro flash. For a while, until I retired from public service, I felt compelled to produce the best possible evidentiary/forensic/crime scene images. My “macro kit” remains primarily Canon. An EOS 5Ds R has 50MP, and is a wonderful camera. (I actually used 7D and 7D Mark II cameras, on duty, as my employer’s software did not do well with large files, and APS-C was the norm, for that type of photography.)

I gradually shifted to Nikon DSLRs, for birds and much wildlife/nature shooting, largely because my wife had become a dedicated Nikon shooter, when her employer required Nikon images. (She was a forensic death scene investigator, for the Medical Examiner’s office.) When buying those long telephoto lenses, it makes financial sense if we concentrate upon one system. We each have D850 cameras, so, I understand why folks like them.

I had saved, and budgeted, for a high-end Nikon “super telephoto” lens, a fast one, something like a 600mm f/4, or a 400mm f/2.8. Of course, such lenses are quite heavy. Not only was I simply getting older, but a left rotator cuff injury, that occurred when moving a heavy item that had been ruined by Hurricane Harvey, had caused a postponement of wanting to carry heavy equipment, much less shoot hand-held with a long, heavy telephoto lens. I turned my attention to the concept of using short telephoto lenses for landscape shooting, but I also started looking at pre-owned Leica equipment, that was locally available. That is how I met that above-mentioned Summilux-M 50mm ASPH. It made sense to spend that “telephoto fund” on something that I could use, which is why I bought the pre-owned Summilux, the new M10, and a Nikon-mount Zeiss Otus 85mm f/1.4 lens, all together, in one purchase, as a post-retirement gift, for myself. I have no regrets, whatsoever.

Rangefinder shooting, with a Leica M camera, is quite simply, a different experience than using a DSLR. It is not a matter of either being “best.” Each type pf camera has its strengths, and each type of shooting has its joys. Not all photographers will want to use more than one system, which is neither nor bad. Most photographers will want to concentrate upon using one system, especially if that one system best suits their artistic vision.

Edited January 15, 2022 by RexGig0

[James6714]

Mike, I am trying to understand your comment of: With my DSLR, I get photos OF a scene.  With the Leica, the images put me INTO the scene"

If I could not figure it out, I will need your help.

I agree wholeheartedly with Luke, automation in camera takes away some elements of photography from me.  Now I enjoy all manual operation, even go back to shooting film with M-A, for me personally, shooting digitally is like drinking instant coffee, while analogue is like hand dripped coffee.  Each has its own advantages.

James,

[Ko.Fe.]

DSLR vs RF in 2022 is equal to Earth is the sphere dispute. 

[MikeMyers]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, James6714 said:

Mike, I am trying to understand your comment of: With my DSLR, I get photos OF a scene.  With the Leica, the images put me INTO the scene"

Think of it this way - when I am looking at a scene in a DSLR, or worse yet, a Mirrorless, I feel like I'm looking at a picture, or perhaps a video.

When I am looking with my right eye through the Leica viewfinder, I might as well be looking through a "hole" in the camera, with the border lines showing me what's likely to be captured, and also with my left eye, which is wide open, I see everything above, below, and to the sides of this "hole".   There is no real sensation with the other cameras that I'm seeing what is in front of me, and if the viewfinder pivots, I'm not even looking ahead.  

With the Leica, I see the real world, with some guidelines indicating what the final photo may include, just as if I was watching the world with no camera, me just standing there, being part of the scene.  

This doesn't work for close-ups, or mountains, or landscapes in general, but when there people or objects moving around, I see them just as if there was no camera, just a piece of black paper with a hole in it, and everything beyond the hole I still see, live, and in person, with my left eye.

 

With the Leica, I'm "there", in person, capturing what I'm seeing around me.  With a DSLR or much worse yet, a "mirrorless", it's like watching a TV, and there is no connection between "me" and what I'm seeing, no more than if I'm watching a TV show, or a movie.  The DSLR or Mirrorless shows me a scene that I'm capturing.  The Leica on the other hand shows everything through the viewfinder, and the whole world around me, as if I am literally "there", in the scene.  The Leica shows reality.  The DSLR shows reality, but bounced around in a prism and viewable from behind the viewfinder.  The Mirrorless is literally showing me just a "tv show", digitized onto a computer display that I am looking at.

 

Does this help?  

Mirrorless is hopeless, I'm just watching TV.

DSLR is better.

Rangefinder with viewfinder is best, and I see, and hear, and maybe even feel what's going on.

Edited January 15, 2022 by MikeMyers

[MikeMyers]

1 hour ago, RexGig0 said:

No Nikon or Canon 50mm lens can capture an image that is quite like what I can do with a Summilux-M 50mm ASPH.

Could you please upload one of your images?

Adorama has one  in stock, for a "mere" $5,000.  But if I had that money sitting around, I'd probably use it towards the M11.

[farnz]

1 hour ago, MikeMyers said:

Could you please upload one of your images?

You could do a simple search on Flickr on "50 Summilux asph" and that should bring up plenty of images to view.

Pete.

[cboy]

I know it's the usual spiel but it's for the simple pleasure of photography and not be bogged down with having to learning what all the feature buttons do. Be that its for the manual or rangefinder experience or both...

Having said that the new M and it's overall  direction by leica heads towards the mirrorless route. With the new evf and new lenses that extend beyond the capability of a rangefinder. The hybridisation of both mirrorless and rangefinder began with introduction of liveview and itll inevitably lead to the innovation of the hybrid rangefinder/ evf. Some argue to this but Leica was always about innovation of its lenses and CSCs

But at the end of the day it's all about ones use case and workflow. Whatever works all the power to them, but we don't need to justify ourselves that one style is better than another. 

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!

Trying to argue that the M is superior is stupid. It's just different.

Edited January 16, 2022 by cboy

[MikeMyers]

38 minutes ago, farnz said:

You could do a simple search on Flickr on "50 Summilux asph" and that should bring up plenty of images to view.

Naw, that wouldn't show me anything I would find useful.  I'd like to look at the original raw file, straight from the camera, and open it in my own editor, and view it at 100%.

After recommendations from here, I bought the Voigtlander 50mm f/2 APO-LANTHAR.  I suspect that is the "best" lens I now own.  It cost around $1,000 which I could afford.

On the other hand, for the types of photos many people create in this forum, the deliberately want the "old" lenses, because they have "character".  I guess it depends on what kinds of photos a person is shooting.

 

44 minutes ago, cboy said:

Trying to argue that the M is superior is stupid. It's just different.

I disagree.  For the types of photos I enjoy capturing, the M with a rangefinder and all the other attributes is very much superior.  If I was shooting sports, or wildlife, or machinery, or using long focus lenses, or going to the space station, and many, many other things, the M is in no way superior, and probably a handicap.  I look at the photos posted in this forum, and most of what I see benefitted from the photographer using a rangefinder camera.  Not all, but many.  I also like the relatively small size, the small lenses, the batteries that fit in my pocket effortlessly, the lack of loud sounds when taking a photo, and the shape that doesn't intimidate people I want to photograph.  I agree with you, without identifying a purpose for the camera, it would be silly to make comparisons.

My Nikon D750 is a machine, and I use it like one.  I have zero personal attachment to it.  It's like a typewriter, or a machine tool.  On the other hand I have a very real personal attachment to my M.  It feels like it's part of me, or vice versa.  I guess it mostly feels like an extension of my body.    ......I can't say it is or is not any of those things, only how I feel about it.

[James6714]

Thanks Mike for clearing up.

😀

[MikeMyers]

4 hours ago, James6714 said:

Thanks Mike for clearing up.

You're welcome, but the more I think about it, I wonder how many people feel the way I do.  Now that you know what I meant, do you agree?  I suspect most people reading this wouldn't have any idea what I was trying to say or mean.  It's just a viewfinder, you see what your photo is going to look like, and press the shutter button.  Maybe it's just a personal thing, and it has everything to do with "me" and not with the "viewing screen"?   I can't put the feeling into words, but in one case I raise the camera to my eye and press the button, while in the other case I'm moving around, up, down, to either side, and "modeling" what is going on into the image my camera will then capture.   Maybe I'm hallucinating or something.....    it's like the scene becomes sort of like modeling clay, and I can capture a better image because I'm trying so many different things to find the "best" way to capture the moment.  For me, this is easier with a rangefinder camera, maybe because I'm looking at "real life", and not an image the camera is presenting me with.   .....probably sounds very silly, when I put this into words.

[Stevejack]

I use a red-dot sight attached to the hotshoe on my Sony quite a bit. This gives me an even better view of the world around me than what the optical viewfinder in the Leica can provide, but the benefits are the same - being able to see outside the frame allows me to better anticipate what the subject will do next.

Seeing just the 3:2 frame in the viewfinder of any camera is extremely limiting, not only do you feel somewhat detached from the environment you're shooting in, but you also lose context. Where is your subject in its environment, and how is your subject likely to interact with its environment in the immediate future. Seeing outside of the frame makes it easier for you to anticipate when to press the shutter. 

You're paying quite a price for the rangefinder though, so if you don't like or need that type of shooting experience then the DSLR is probably the more sensible option. Taking budget out of consideration, the rangefinder is an extremely enjoyable way to photograph and I think it's why most of us are here. Sure, some will argue that one sensor is better than another but it will mostly come down to preference. Any of the modern camera sensors do an incredible job, so I'd suggest to just choose your camera based on what you find the most inspiring and you'll always have a good time 👍

[MikeMyers]

3 hours ago, Stevejack said:

Seeing just the 3:2 frame in the viewfinder of any camera is extremely limiting, not only do you feel somewhat detached from the environment you're shooting in, but you also lose context. Where is your subject in its environment, and how is your subject likely to interact with its environment in the immediate future. Seeing outside of the frame makes it easier for you to anticipate when to press the shutter. 

That's the reason to look through the viewfinder with one's right eye, and look at the whole scene and everything around it with one's left eye.

 

Hmm, how did you mount a "red dot sight" to the camera?  Maybe I'm thinking of a very different type of "red dot sight"?

[Stevejack]

2 minutes ago, MikeMyers said:

That's the reason to look through the viewfinder with one's right eye, and look at the whole scene and everything around it with one's left eye.

 

I can manage this on the M3 but not with the .72 finders unfortunately. You’re right though, works just as well 👍

 

3 minutes ago, MikeMyers said:

Hmm, how did you mount a "red dot sight" to the camera?  Maybe I'm thinking of a very different type of "red dot sight"?

You can get rails to attach any of the usual firearms red dot sights, but olympus makes one specifically for cameras with the coldshoe mount already attached. 

[MikeMyers]

Something like this?

Olympus Red Dot sight for camera

"Get some extra help when aiming at faraway or fast-moving subjects with the Olympus EE-1 Dot Sight for OM-D E-M5 Mark II or Stylus 1 Camera. This is particularly useful when using long telephoto lenses for applications such as wildlife capture. The sight offers a center aiming dot with adjustable brightness and position to enable fast subject acquisition and tracking. You'll be able to tell whether your aim is right on target or slightly off without looking through the camera's viewfinder or using the monitor. The EE-1 Dot Sight fits right into the camera's hot shoe and has a slide lever opening mechanism. Built for durability, it is both dust and splashproof."

 

Fascinating idea!  Thank you!!

 

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!

Edited January 20, 2022 by MikeMyers

[pgk]

Versus the dSLR. The Rangefinder allows focus which is independent of focal length. Where this is most useful is with wide-angle lenses which can be difficult to focus manually and can even be awkward on dSLRs/EVFs. Its one of the things I like about RF cameras.

However, working aginst this is the ability to see beyond the frame for the focal length being used. The wider the lens, the less of the surroundings which can be seen. So moving towards using an external viewfinder starts to make this irrelevant to a degree.

IMO the 'sweet spot' is ~35mm which is why it is the lens I use most of the time. The 50 is also well catered for but focus is not quite so fast with precision.

Regarding the 50mm Summilux, which I do have and which is my least used Leica M lens, its a fabulous lens but it has no magic about it other than being a highly competent performer with excellent characteristics all round. It is also relatively small and very well made.

I never understand why people don't see the Leica M as a 'landscape' camera because it is very capable as such and has certainly been used by famous photographers as a landscape and travel camera. It really is a matter of perception and comfortableness with a camera type. As for 'better' well forget it. Most decent cameras and lenses today are VERY good and will deliver excellent images seperated by mere nuances visible to the cogniscenti only.

[Stevejack]

19 minutes ago, MikeMyers said:

Something like this?

Olympus Red Dot sight for camera

"Get some extra help when aiming at faraway or fast-moving subjects with the Olympus EE-1 Dot Sight for OM-D E-M5 Mark II or Stylus 1 Camera. This is particularly useful when using long telephoto lenses for applications such as wildlife capture. The sight offers a center aiming dot with adjustable brightness and position to enable fast subject acquisition and tracking. You'll be able to tell whether your aim is right on target or slightly off without looking through the camera's viewfinder or using the monitor. The EE-1 Dot Sight fits right into the camera's hot shoe and has a slide lever opening mechanism. Built for durability, it is both dust and splashproof."

 

Fascinating idea!  Thank you!!

 

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!

That’s the one. It’s a great bit of kit for slow shutter panning as well, it’s easier to judge speed and direction when you have your full peripheral vision available.
I use it for motocross especially if I’m at say 1/30 sec and really close to the track, when the riders are up in the air over the jumps I can still keep them centered in the frame. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[MikeMyers]

What a great idea!  Wish I hadbought this a lifetime ago!

thank you!!