Rangefinder for moving people

[charlesphoto99]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

17 minutes ago, pgk said:

 

You can use 5" x 4"(or 10" x 8" or larger) camera for photographing children if you want. Like using Ms you can persevere and get a few 'keepers' but like the Ms large format isn't an ideal solution especially when there are very good solutions also available. This is about horses for courses and not whether it is possible to eventually learn how to achieve something with less able equipment. The RF simply isn't the best option available, by far, and anyone who thinks that it is is living in a parallel world. 

Looks like I'm living in some kind of parallel world (what does that even mean, lol?)

Also, kids aren't 'running' all the time - if they are, I think parents have more to worry about than which camera to use. So think outside of the box and find those moments that are meaningful when they do slow down. 

 

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!

[Advertisement]

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

[pgk]

28 minutes ago, charlesphoto99 said:

Looks like I'm living in some kind of parallel world (what does that even mean, lol?)

Also, kids aren't 'running' all the time - if they are, I think parents have more to worry about than which camera to use. So think outside of the box and find those moments that are meaningful when they do slow down. 

Read the OP.

[charlesphoto99]

The first one above was taken with an M9 and late 50mm Summilux pre-asph, at about f2-2.8 and I wasn't looking through the viewfinder. And it's the imperfection to me is what brings it the dreamy quality. I probably took 75,000 plus images of them in their first decade of life, all with M's. That I've boiled down to about 60 to make a book someday, a book that has to appeal universally and make an artistic statement (and not just be about my children, but all children). Now at 11 and 14 they don't care to be photographed that much, but before the M just became a part of 'dad.' They were/are incredibly natural around it. Part of that was my NOT looking through the viewfinder, except for brief focus checks. Having shot Rolleiflex's while traveling, I knew that it creates a greater bond to not always have this thing in your face (plus it allows for greater angles and more interesting photos). Get loose, and get into the play with them. And I didn't always photograph them at their best moments (but nor did I not respect their needs).

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!

[charlesphoto99]

21 minutes ago, pgk said:

Read the OP.

Fast moving. Got it. No cropping. 

 

 

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 June 9, 2023 by charlesphoto99

[LocalHero1953]

42 minutes ago, charlesphoto99 said:

Now at 11 and 14 they don't care to be photographed that much

I found the same thing - my M2, M9 and M240 were excellent for moving people. As soon as I got it out of the bag my daughters scattered.

[charlesphoto99]

FTR, if I'm shooting sports or school events, I will pull out the Nikon and 70-200 as it can make life that much easier. 

My point is for people not be dissuaded or put off by some notion that there are things can't be photographed with an M due to some gear 'rules.' Sure, if you need your toddler to resemble an Olympic runner, then a longer zoom/tele is pertinent. The most important part is to just take the photos, all the time, and not worry about 'keepers.' Just keep doing it, and getting better. Plus they become a heck of a lot more interesting to photograph as they get older.

 

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!

[John Robinson]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Get the widest angle lens you can find, set it at f/8 and the hyperfocal distance for the distance between you and your object, get in close.

I have had some very interesting results with a 21mm on M9 or M3, focus between 2 and 3 metre.  You don't even need to look through the viewfinder:  hold the camera low and level, fire away, do a bit of cropping in PP.

[pgk]

On 6/6/2023 at 4:27 AM, LovingMonochrome said:

I have some doubts if the rangefinder will be the right choice for fast moving objects. 

 

2 hours ago, John Robinson said:

You don't even need to look through the viewfinder:  hold the camera low and level, fire away, do a bit of cropping in PP.

Ummm. Does anyone else see the discrepancy between these two posts?

[bcaslis]

On 6/9/2023 at 6:11 AM, charlesphoto99 said:

No, not wishful thinking - unless that is what some now call skill. 

We will have to agree to disagree. Can you take pictures of kids with an M? Sure. But is it a "good" choice? Respectfully no. I really hate forums like this that if you disagree with the brand being talked about, some people feel the need to shout down anyone that disagrees with them.

[JimKnopf]

An exciting topic.
I use the M11 and Canon R3 cameras. The R3 offers me one of the best Af available on the market.
Is that why the pictures of my daughter with the R3 are better?
No.
Are the pictures of my daughter with the M11 better?
No.

They are fundamentally different images.
With the M11 I am forced to adapt the situation photographically - this automatically creates a series of different image effects - all by itself.

Silent moments - often with an open aperture
Snapshots - often with zone focus at f8 or f11 aperture
Movement often not with 120% sharpness - the sharpness is more organic
Often 35 or 50mm

I have to accept this "limitation" in order to get the result. But she also gives me a kind of script - that's very pleasant.

With the R3 I take every picture in every situation (if I want to) with an aperture of 1.2 or 1.4 from 35 to 90mm. As a result, I have to write the script myself, otherwise the images will be comparable and boring in every situation.

When it comes to the question of whether you can photograph moving things with a rangefinder, you also have to differentiate between the context. If you take photos for money, a single photo is perhaps much more important than the story of an entire series of photos.
Parents don't want a series of pictures from the whole day - they want pictures of their child.
The school may not want every child, but rather the story of the whole day.
Who knows.

[jaapv]

13 hours ago, bcaslis said:

We will have to agree to disagree. Can you take pictures of kids with an M? Sure. But is it a "good" choice? Respectfully no. I really hate forums like this that if you disagree with the brand being talked about, some people feel the need to shout down anyone that disagrees with them.

No shouting down. Just experienced users giving their points of view. 

[John Robinson]

Running dog, shot from the hip on a Leica SL and Elmarit-M 2.8/21.  Not an M-series camera, but using the technique I described:  set hyperfocal distance at f/8, hold the camera low and level, follow the action and press the shutter at the right moment (and no, I did not resort to continuous shooting).

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 June 12, 2023 by John Robinson

[charlesphoto99]

On 6/11/2023 at 2:09 PM, bcaslis said:

We will have to agree to disagree. Can you take pictures of kids with an M? Sure. But is it a "good" choice? Respectfully no. I really hate forums like this that if you disagree with the brand being talked about, some people feel the need to shout down anyone that disagrees with them.

It’s a choice - I don’t think good or bad comes into it, which was my point, but you seem to believe its nothing but a ‘bad’ choice, which is in my purview to call out as wrong. For Sally Mann the choice was a 4X5 view camera, but that doesn’t make her choice any less valid in relation to her subject. 

[pgk]

The OP asked was an M the 'right' choice.🤔

[charlesphoto99]

5 minutes ago, pgk said:

The OP asked was an M the 'right' choice.🤔

And imo it’s a ‘right’ choice. I think @JimKnopf above sums it up in his comment above. 

[raizans]

A list of focusing techniques to choose as the situation requires:

1) Hyperfocal focusing

2) Zone focusing

3) Scale focusing

4) Scale focusing by feel

5) Preset focusing

6) Focus with your feet (i.e., tracking)

7) Rangefinder focusing

Edited June 14, 2023 by raizans

[EJS73]

7) Rangefinder pre-focusing (waiting for the subject until rangefinder patch aligns). Actually, I find it easier to focus on movement, than achieve a level horizon in my pictures.

Edited June 14, 2023 by EJS73

[JimKnopf]

vor 28 Minuten schrieb Al Brown:

Shooting running kids with a rangefinder and a f/1.4 summilux wide open is like running a marathon immediatelly after shooting yourself in the foot with a gun. IT CAN BE DONE, but it is painful.

coal is only transformed into a diamond under pressure

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[charlesphoto99]

37 minutes ago, Al Brown said:

Shooting running kids with a rangefinder and a f/1.4 summilux wide open is like running a marathon immediatelly after shooting yourself in the foot with a gun. IT CAN BE DONE, but it is painful.

Are children always ‘running’ 24/7 and neve rstop? And when they do run, is it prudent to use f1.4 (imo fast lenses are a holdover from film days when one was stuck with iso 400)? There will always be straw man arguments for what M’s supposedly can’t do, but I’ve always been more intrigued by what they CAN do.

But then again, I’m a person who shot a book on breakdancers using Mamiya 6/7 and Hasselblad SWC cameras. IMO the more unique and interesting pictures come from pushing yourself and your gear past the comfort point. 

[charlesphoto99]

15 minutes ago, Al Brown said:

 

 

If Peter Karbe who designed some of your M lenses heard your quote above he would have ben outraged and furious.

Oh really, you’ve spoken to Peter about this? I’m not saying they shouldn’t exist (I own a 50 lux asph and a 28 cron etc) but except for visual effect, they are not the ‘Hail Mary’ they once were in the film days. Hasn’t Karbe also designed plenty of slower lenses?