DSLR compared with RangeFinder - a few thoughts

[MikeMyers]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

50 minutes ago, pgk said:

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

I certainly agree, especially with a tripod, live view, and a visoflex. 

[TomB_tx]

In college in the 1960s my "kit" became both an M4 and a Leicaflex SL, as they had different strengths and uses. I used the M4 most (w/ 35, 50, & 90) for people, available light, 
reportage, etc. The SLR for long lenses, macro, etc. With 50 Summicrons for both cameras, and found focusing faster & easier with the M. 90 was quite usable with both, but beyond that I preferred the SLR. My kit bag was pretty heavy with both systems, and the Leicaflex lens selections were expensive and limited (for the amount I used them), so when Pentax came out with the tiny MX and smaller (and cheaper) lenses I switched to that for SLR use. I found I preferred ultrawides (20-21m) on the SLR instead of using an accessory finder on the M.

I still find the best use of my M10 is 35 to 90 mm, and I still use my old Leica R and Pentax lenses on a base A7 like I used an SLR system. I briefly tried dSLRs and ditched them quickly, as they are quite a compromise for manual focus lenses, and I hate autofocus.

The M is best for general photography, but other systems have their place.

[Advertisement]

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

[MikeMyers]

On 1/20/2022 at 8:53 AM, TomB_tx said:

I briefly tried dSLRs and ditched them quickly, as they are quite a compromise for manual focus lenses, and I hate autofocus.

When I'm using my Leicas, I never even think of auto-focus, but with my dSLR cameras, I expect it.  I've got my old SLR cameras, many of which are manual focus, but they have a viewfinder screen designed to help in focusing.

I can't think I hate auto-focus, because on my D750 it feels essential, and when I shoot sporting events there's no time for anything other than auto-focus.

I used to use rangefinder focus on all my old cameras.  On my Nikon and Leica RF cameras, it was as natural as pushing the shutter release.  The M10 has an excellent viewfinder/rangefinder system, and unless it's a moving subject, focusing is effortless.  I rarely use the "zone system".  In between shooting, every so often I practice focusing, moving the camera somewhere at random, focusing, then moving it again.  There are times though, when I just forget to focus.  There even are times when I forget to remove the lens cap, but both of these are very infrequent.  

Oh, and if I'm walking around, I will set the focus and the exposure every so often, so if a quick shot becomes available, I'm more likely to get it right.

 

On 1/20/2022 at 8:53 AM, TomB_tx said:

In college in the 1960s my "kit" became both an M4 and a Leicaflex SL, as they had different strengths and uses.

Memories.  Back then, I only could afford one camera at a time, perhaps with two lenses and my light meter.  For most of the time, I had a Nikon SP, with a 35, 50, and 135.  I still have it all, but I've misplaced the 135, and my SP "squeaks" when I try to focus it.  It needs a C&L.

Before that, I had my Contax II or later, IIa, with only my 50mm Sonar lens.  I would go to Willoughby's and Peerless camera stores, then Olden Camera, and dream of buying a second lens.  I guess I've always just tried to "make do with whatever I got".

 

One current annoyance is some of my lenses have "tabs", and others just have the round focusing ring.  I wish they all had tabs......

[MikeMyers]

I thought of another way to think of the differences between Leica cameras and the new generation of mirrorless cameras.

With the Leica, I see what it is that I want to capture a photo of, and I need to figure out the best way to configure the camera to do so.

With the mirrorless, I see what the camera sensor is seeing.  It's not "reality", it's a tv show.

 

Also, with the Leica M, focusing is "real".  Whatever my hand does to the focus wheel, the lens does exactly that, no more, no less.

With mirrorless, I just learned today that most of the lenses are "focus by wire".  There is no way to be sure that the lens does what I think I did with my hand.

I got interested in the new Fuji X-Pro 3 camera, that in some ways is similar to a Leica - but all the lenses for it that I could find are "focus by wire".  

I plan to look at one of the Nikon Z cameras tomorrow when I visit the shop.  From what I've read so far, I am unlikely to be impressed.

[BarberShop]

Honestly you're allowed to think whatever you like in order to justify your use of Leicas. I personally don't think the Leica sensor or glass has any particularly appealing look. For me it's more practical. I love the look of shallow DOF and lenses with characteristic flaring and bokeh. My ideal setup would probably be a digital Nikon FM3a but the closest thing they have is a Nikon DF which although smaller than a D750, is still quite big compared to Leicas and Sony E bodies. I also have used Sony's before but as someone who stares at a screen all day already, I don't want to stare at another screen whilst taking pictures. I'm also quite a big fan of being able to see the surrounding scene at all times regardless of the lens focus or focal length. But I actually think Leica's rangefinder is pretty mediocre. The rangefinder in my Zeiss Ikon ZM is both bigger and very noticeably brighter.. and the focus patch is bigger too. 

Edited February 11, 2022 by BarberShop

[Ray Vonn]

6 hours ago, MikeMyers said:

From what I've read so far, I am unlikely to be impressed.

In terms of the photography process and basically enjoying oneself, yes, I have one and it's basically an all out computer compared to a rangefinder.  But in terms of just image quality, then that's different.  RF lenses will beat the gear from these new mirrorless systems in terms of character and size but other than that?  Definitely not, the new FF mirrorless lenses in terms of optical quality and in built corrections are stunning, light and balanced too.  Leica or rangefinder gear is not better in that regard.

Edited February 11, 2022 by Ray Vonn

[MikeMyers]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4 hours ago, BarberShop said:

Honestly you're allowed to think whatever you like in order to justify your use of Leicas.

I suppose so, but that has it backwards.  For the type of photography I do, many times (but not always) my rangefinder camera is the better choice, for lots of reasons.  There also are times when my dSLR is better, and I did buy a Nikon Df in addition to my D750, and for many reasons prefer using the Df, but sometimes (not always) the 24 meg sensor seems like a better choice than 16....    but most of the time, they are close enough that I can ignore those details.  The Df is a wonderful, lovely camera, a joy to use, and smaller/lighter than the more "modern" Nikon cameras.  It feels more like my old Nikon SLR cameras, like the F2, and has mostly mechanical controls, which I also prefer.  In many ways, it is more like a Leica M than a D750, but of course, the focusing is not with a rangefinder.....

[Ko.Fe.]

It might depends from how you have started. I used nothing but RF for first years, because it was only camera at home.

I get used to it. On the so called "West", SLRs were dominant for decades. And people get used to it.

Once digital became abundant and not too expensive it was era DSLRs. Those who started with SLRs were happy until manufacturers have told them the mirrorless is way to go now. Ex DSLRs users are migrating in flocks to mirrorless now and manufacturers to keep those steady money from SLR/DLSR programmed flocks are keeping mirrorless in regular shape and even size

RF had and still have limitation which is not good for sales. Due to this. it only works well for those who could use right eye. 

But in both cases RF or DSLR it is water under the bridge, niche products now. EVF is much more profitable and masses are willing to pay to have high rate emissions as close as possible to their eyes. 

[Mikep996]

TBH, I don't see a Leica M as a better image getter than any other decent camera.  I've used Leicas and Nikons for many years and don't believe that a Leica image can be distinguished from/preferred over a Nikon image in some magical way.

The Leica M is the only camera I normally use (other than my iPhone) but I use it because I enjoy using it more than any other camera, not because I think it can capture a better photograph.  To me, the fun of using a particular type/brand of an item is the most important reason to buy it.

I use vintage tube (valve) stereo gear NOT because I really think it sounds better, but because I enjoy using it/seeing those glowing tubes. 😍  I'd be a fool if I tried to convince anyone that a 1963 McIntosh tube amp sounds better than a modern solid state amp.  OTOH, it does sound much better than a solid state amp of the '60's/70s!  

I take better photos when I'm having fun taking them.  My Leica Ms have always been more FUN! 🤩

 

 

[MikeMyers]

55 minutes ago, Mikep996 said:

I don't see a Leica M as a better image getter than any other decent camera.

Some tools bring out more of the ability of the user.  When you come right down to it, there's a lens and a sensor.  But I'm pretty certain that my Leica gear (camera body, controls, and viewfinder/rangefinder) allow me to put more of "me" into the finished result.

I got to use a Nikon this morning with an EVF.  I hated it - it felt like a toy camera.  If looked and felt like a box with a tv screen built in.  I tried it with a 24 and 50 focal length for the lens, and at 24 the image was twisting and turning as I panned one way or the other.  I guess my other cameras do something similar, but this Nikon EVF was awful.  I also want nothing to do with lenses that "focus by wire", as when I focus manually, I love the precision feel of focusing.  My Leica M10 and my Nikon D750/Df work and feel good, and both are useful to me, depending on what I'm doing.  This electron Nikon EVF was not only horrible, it shows me what the sensor is going to create, when I just want a "real life" view so I can decide how to set the camera.

For walking around, I prefer the M to a dSLR.  If the lens gets to 135 and longer, I prefer the dSLR, but the Visoflex helps me if I didn't bring my dSLR.

[jdlaing]

Nothing could be further from the truth that all that is there is a lens and a sensor.

[Lukitas]

The first cameras I handled were a Pentax Spotmatic, and a Mamiya c3something, in 1965. I was four. At 17, dad gave me a Nikon f2. And a Hasselblad, couple of years later.

When dad got into Leicas, I tried to follow him with Zorkis and Feds. Barely useable rangefinders. Played with Sinars an Linhof Technikas.

What all these cameras have in common is a bloody simple interface : set aperture, speed and focus, then shoot.

Today, the only camera that gives optical viewing and simple manual setting is the Leica M series. All other cameras are overloaded with a surfeit of features and complicated aids - even Leica is guilty of this. But if one wants to make photos looking through glass, choosing your own focus point, Leica is the only one.

Ok, I'll admit, a Hasselblad 500 with a digital back will do the trick. For an even bigger investment.

 

Cheers

 

Lukas

 

[RexGig0]

I was interested in good binoculars, long before I started using interchangeable-lens cameras. I was an amateur “scientist,” long before “citizen scientist” became a trendy term. This may be why I still want to see the world through optical glass, and optical viewfinders, rather than electronic viewfinders. If I see a distant bird, or other interesting creature, then point a glorified television at it, I am no longer seeing the bird, I am watching it on television. If I have a duty to get an image, well, OK, I will use any tool that gets the job done, but that is not the same thing as photography, for the love of it.

My wife has a Nikon P1000, which is one of those glorified televisions, in “bridge camera” form, but with a zooming magnification factor in the thousands of millimeters, and a Z6, which can be adapted to our big telephoto SLR lenses. She is a serious citizen scientist, and a Texas Master Naturalist, so, I am glad that she can count striations on a distant bird’s feathers, or count the leaflets-per-leaf on a distant tree, with her images, but that is (non-paid) duty, not my idea of fun. We may well buy her a Nikon Z9, with an even more-capable television, mounted on its hind end.

I am not speaking with religious fervor, or zero tolerance. I have an Olympus EVF, that mounts on Leica M 240-series cameras. It has its useful moments. There are times when an EVF can be a useful tool. When I thought that I had lost my first Olympus EVF, I eventually acquired a replacement. Then, I found the first one, so, have a spare. When using this EVF, it is normally with 21mm and 28mm lenses, mostly for framing purposes.

[tom.w.bn]

That is quite a a backward looking discussion. The DSLR is dead. No one builds new DSLRs anymore.

100% of all the possible photos can be taken by a DSLM/DSLR. A fraction of that can be taken by rangefinder cameras. There is not a single photo that can only be taken by a rangefinder camera. It's just a matter of personal preference.

[Gobert]

I can tel why I changed from Nikon DSLR pro bodies and lenses to Leica M system:

• I was tired to have the feeling that I was walking with a computer before my eye, I wanted to have the photographic feeling back;
• I was tired to search for a rent-a-horse to carry my equipment;
• I was tired from auto-focus;
• I could have changed to a camera with EVF, like Fuji, but I simply love the RF from Leica.

I did not change because of quality. Nikon and Canon produce very good pro-bodies and pro-lenses, although the metal ones from Leica feel much better.

[Dennis]

Mike, I just want to tell you that I bought recently (2022) a new DSLR for my work. And it's the excellent D780 with a brand new 24/1.8G. TBH, I thought a lot for a few months about switching to mirrorless, if it was good for me (pro and cons), what I really need and want, if it was the right time. I tried recently also an SL2-S. But in the end, my inner photographer "asked" me to stay with Optical ViewFinder. For me, it's where the magic happens. 
A few colleagues-friends-photographers were shocked about my choice; they were expecting Nikon Z, Sony Alpha, Canon R, Or Fuji GFX, or Leica SL... But not DSLR in 2022.But it's me!

And I'm using always more my M10 for professional work. Maybe, step by step, I will switch entirely to M in the future; who knows. I don't have any hurry or anxiety. I just use M when possible or when it makes more sense. But yes, to say it in this way, DSLR and RF are working together side by side, but they are stored in different bags 🤣

 

[erniethemilk]

I use both the M10-P & a Nikon Z6 with a couple of zoom lenses. 

To be honest I like both, albeit the Leica is more for my soul. The Z6 feels more like a domestic appliance with little feel, but it gets the job done when I want it to. 

[MikeMyers]

1 hour ago, Dennis said:

I thought a lot for a few months about switching to mirrorless, if it was good for me (pro and cons), what I really need and want, if it was the right time. I tried recently also an SL2-S. But in the end, my inner photographer "asked" me to stay with Optical ViewFinder. For me, it's where the magic happens.

From Adorama:

DSLR Pros

1. Middle- and upper-tier pro models with solid glass pentaprism optical viewfinders, provide a brilliant “real feel” viewing image that no mirrorless EVF can quite match. Whether this is important to you is, of course, subjective, but many photographers accustomed to optical viewfinders consider it a definite plus.
2.  
3. Digital SLRs are generally larger than mirrorless cameras and this allows more room for the placement of dedicated controls for various camera functions such as ISO, exposure compensation, white balance, etc. The control ergonomics of the best DSLRs often have an edge over their current mirrorless counterparts in this respect.
4.  
5. Theuse of larger batteriesprovides greater capacity than smaller batteries. With most pro-caliber DSLRs you can shoot all day without running out of battery power, and that’s not always true with comparable mirrorless cameras.
6.  
7. Photographers with large hands often prefer DSLRs.DSLRs have evolved into a very ergonomic shape and some of them are more comfortably contoured than their mirrorless counterparts. Some shooters feel that a heavier camera, like the DSLR, alsoprovides a more stable shooting platform than some of the smaller, lighter mirrorless cameras. Again this is subjective and the decision is personal.
8.  
9. It’s hard to beat the record of durability, reliability, and consistent performance under adverse conditions of a DSLR. Additionally, DSLRS offerin-body or on-lens image stabilization systems to minimize the effects of mirror-induced camera shake. That’s why many pros are reluctant to make the switch.
10.  
11. DSLRs offer very well developed lens systems that include numerous professional prime and zoom lenses that deliver spectacular imaging performance. While mirrorless systems have yet to match the phenomenal optical arrays available for the leading DSLR systems, this will happen sooner rather than later as both camera makers and independent lens makers are rapidly expanding and upgrading their optical offerings.

 

I've got a D750.  Comparing it to my M10 is not possible.  It all depends on the type of photographs I wish to take that day.  I enjoy the Leica more, but sometimes the D750 is a better choice - for me.

 

[WvE]

Just bought one of the last D500's out there.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Ray Vonn]

8 minutes ago, WvE said:

Just bought one of the last D500's out there.

In terms of its intended use and function, that camera seems to be a classic. Wouldn’t be surprised if people are still putting it to work in 10 years time.