Rangefinder Questions

curiouslyadrift

TPF Noob!
Joined
Dec 22, 2004
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
I have a few rangefinder questions:

What are some decent, reasonably affordable rangefinders? (older models are fine since they tend to be cheaper, but no huge cameras)

How do digital point-and-shoots compare to film rangefinders of similar cost?

I've heard SLRs are much better for nature photography, but are rangefinders decent for landscape-type shots?

Is there a technical reason that lenses aren't made with a longer focal point than approximately 135mm, or is it just practicality?
 
No problem. That'll keep you busy ;)

Here's a summary:

Reasonable cheap affordable rangefinders:

Russian - Kiev 4; FED 2s; Contax IIIa copies; Leica IIIf copies

(around $20-50 max unless you're going for a limited edition Reid - a Leica copy)

Japanese - Konica I, II, III, S, S2, S3 (up to around $100 max)
Yashica Electro; Minolta 7sii; Canonets

English - hmmm....my English compatriots have got to be good
at something other than cricket...it'll come to me.

And others... such as medium format rangefinders (these are way cool!) - Voigtlander Bessa IIs; Perkeo IIs etc

-->How do digital point-and-shoots compare to film rangefinders
of similar cost?

Imagine chickensh*t instead of turkey for Christmas dinner?


--> I've heard SLRs are much better for nature photography, but are rangefinders decent for landscape-type shots?

Old wives come out to play - come to www.thephotoforum.com to be educated!

--> Is there a technical reason that lenses aren't made with a
longer focal point than approximately 135mm, or is it just
practicality?

There is a window within a window (the viewfinder) of a rangefinder called a 'patch' on which overlapping images indicate the correct focus. The normal screen is around 50mm usually. To view 85mm, the frame lines shrink to less than 70% of the full viewfinder frame. By the time you start looking at 150mm, you can just about work out the area for composing the 150mm perspective on a 50mm viewfinder - it barely occupies 30% of the screen. That's really unpleasant to work with for most amateurs. Some expensive rangefinders have shifting framelines to automatically correct; others don't. So you use the same patch to focus the camera, and then use an extra viewfinder (usually hotshoe mounted) to focus. Some like it, some don't....
 
Thanks again.

I suppose I should have clarified by "reasonably affordable" - I meant around $500 or less. But if I can start with a $100 camera that will still produce good results, I might as well begin with that.
 
$500 is a lot of money. You could get a really decent vintage rangefinder for that price, or even a modern one.

If I had $500 to spend, I'd get a medium format rangefinder (Bronica RF645) which is discontinued probably. If my $500 didn't stretch and I really wanted a medium format one, I'd get a second-hand one since these are built like bricks. I'd probably get a vintage one with a sharp Heliar lens from Voigtlander. But that's really too obscure for someone just starting off in photography.

Decent manual rangefinders like the Voigtlander series are fantastic - the Bessa T, L and R are all great cameras with excellent lenses. I've made 24x16" blow-ups of these on Tech Pan film which are fantastically sharp. Alas - 35mm is too small for my work nowadays; I only use 35mm to shoot snaps ;)

The Konica S3 is around $100 for a great working condition one. Get it - low risk and you can save the other $400 for later when you're sure of where you want to put your money...

I'd recommend getting used to a standard lens (around 40mm - 50mm) rather than having loads if you're seriously into photography....cheaper too. The rest you can add later.
 
if you want something new:
www.cameraquest.com

there you find everything about the (great) Voigtlander
rangefinders. I have used a Bessa R with several lenses
myself and was very pleased with it...

In general rangefinders are better for short focal lenghts
28mm to 90mm, 135mm is pushing it - since the frame
in the viewfinder gets so small (it uses a small part of
the viewfinder only) that it's extremely hard
to focus accurately (especially wide open)
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top