Rangefinder question

[abhishekdg]

Well film is almost an alien part of photography to me until yesterday when I had the first ever chance to hold onto a leica M6 . Couldn't believe the feel of the camera.
It seems that even after 24 hrs I still long for the camera badly and it sadly makes my Nikon D90 look so very inferior. I mean its film not digital , manual focus , no viewing through the lens but still the feel of it alone was enough to sell all my digital stuffs and get a rangefinder.
The smooth focus of using the creamy summilux for 5 minutes has been haunting me even in dreams.
So still undecided, want to know your views on whether I should pull the trigger for a rangefinder. Ofcourse I would have to sell my digital stuffs as they no more appeal to me after using the leica for 5 mins. I don't know it may sound weird but i am only dreaming of it.
Also wanna know if there's a little less costly option to Leica . My highest budget is 1500 with the lens.

It may sound childish but need your views as to what's best for me. Will it be good for me as i am just a newbie in photography to go for a rangefinder or stick to digital and later move to rangefinders with experience..

 

[Fred Berg]

Wow, it got you bad!

Voigtländer do some very nice rangefinders for the sort of money we are talking about. Their own glass is very good but I think you can also use Leica/Zeiss lenses. Contax G models are also worth considering and they can also take Leica/Zeiss lenses.

 

[gsgary]

ive just picked up an M4 they are wonderful cameras, have a look at the Voigtlander R2 and get the 40f1.4 or 50f1.1 fantastic lenses they blow Canon and Nikon out of the water

 

[usayit]

* What focal length(s) is your preference? Unlike SLRs, it matters. You want to make sure that the viewfinder has the framelines to match. Your preference will also determine the ideal viewfinder magnification.

* Meter or no meter? Often my preference is a small light meter that sits on my hotshoe. It allows me to look down at it and examine the exposure values without having to bring the camera eye-level.

* You original post talks a lot about "feel" of the M6 and the summilux. How important is that to you? There are other options for rangefinders out there but not all have the same feel... some are actually quite advanced compared to the M6 (Hexar RF, Contax etc, Voigtlander)

* Have you shot with a rangefinder (other than hold it)? In my experience, people either fall in love with it (like me) or hate it. Its a rather large investment so perhaps you should try cheaper options (Canonet for example) just to try it out for size. I'd hate for you to go off selling a bunch of perfectly good digital stuff to end up with something you don't like.


My first Leica was an M3. I was able to find a "user" with a 50mm Summicron. I shot with it for a year or so and saved up enough for a CLA @ Essex Camera Services Inc. - Home (local to me). A similar combination "should" fit in your budget. It was loads of fun and I still shoot Leica today. When it came time to sell something, I sold my M6 to keep the M3. It felt better. Its not quite perfect for me... I have to admit. In retrospect, I would have gone with the nearly identical M2 because it has the wider 35mm framelines. No one was around to explain to me the importance of viewfinder framelines and magnification. In the end, its still a joy to have.



If you are looking for alternatives, I highy recommend voigtlanders. Here is a link to a chart at the US based dealer. The chart has all of the voigtlander rangefinder models indicating important features like; Mechanical vs Electronic shutter, viewfinder Magnification, and famelines. They are good functional rangefinders that can be had brand new... but not quite the quality nor the feel of a Leica.

http://www.cameraquest.com/voigtchart2.htm

 

[SamSpade1941]

Well film is almost an alien part of photography to me until yesterday when I had the first ever chance to hold onto a leica M6 . Couldn't believe the feel of the camera.
It seems that even after 24 hrs I still long for the camera badly and it sadly makes my Nikon D90 look so very inferior. I mean its film not digital , manual focus , no viewing through the lens but still the feel of it alone was enough to sell all my digital stuffs and get a rangefinder.
The smooth focus of using the creamy summilux for 5 minutes has been haunting me even in dreams.
So still undecided, want to know your views on whether I should pull the trigger for a rangefinder. Ofcourse I would have to sell my digital stuffs as they no more appeal to me after using the leica for 5 mins. I don't know it may sound weird but i am only dreaming of it.
Also wanna know if there's a little less costly option to Leica . My highest budget is 1500 with the lens.

It may sound childish but need your views as to what's best for me. Will it be good for me as i am just a newbie in photography to go for a rangefinder or stick to digital and later move to rangefinders with experience..

Welcome to something that will haunt you for as long as you will live for the rest of your days, for me it is a single stroke M3 with a 50mm f2 Summicron. FWIW you can buy an M3 these days fairly reasonably, you can even get and M4p for not a ton of money. In fact the 50mm lens will cost about what the body will. Many including my will argue that the cost is so worth it, every single day I have to fight off the urge to not sell a hunting rifle and then call KEH and have them send me a Leica on the BBT. Its that bad for me, it is really hard to shake that feeling once you handle and actually shoot some photos with one. Its like a woman that came into your life touched your cheek lightly then left you standing there in the night. :hail:

 

[timor]

Wow, it got you bad!

Leica has this ability

 

[slackercruster]

I have dslr, rangefinder and m43...they all have their purpose.

Get some $$ together and buy a rangefinder.

But I'd rec the Fuji Pro or an oldy Epson RD1s. Film is dead pretty much. But if you want film, hate your digital gear, then sell it and do it.

 

[Fred Berg]

I have dslr, rangefinder and m43...they all have their purpose.

Get some $$ together and buy a rangefinder.

But I'd rec the Fuji Pro or an oldy Epson RD1s. Film is dead pretty much. But if you want film, hate your digital gear, then sell it and do it.

I don't understand why peole are convinced that film is dead.

 

[timor]

One word: PROPAGANDA.
Propaganda spread by Nikon, Canon, Sony etc. etc. etc.
A miracle of no need for film and processing for average bread eater, disregard for older technologies and awe of new. (Remember life with no cell phones ? How we wasted time then ?)

 

[Ysarex]

I have dslr, rangefinder and m43...they all have their purpose.

Get some $$ together and buy a rangefinder.

But I'd rec the Fuji Pro or an oldy Epson RD1s. Film is dead pretty much. But if you want film, hate your digital gear, then sell it and do it.

I don't understand why peole are convinced that film is dead.

Film died December 30, 2010

Joe

 

[Buckster]

Photography processes and equipment have been changing and evolving ever since the first image was recorded, and will continue to do so. The new eventually replaces the old, and that's just the way it is.

These occasional whine-fests over the good old days of film and how digital is so much worse and inferior and propaganda-driven are just getting pathetic.

You can still shoot with 8x10 glass plates, if you want to. And you can say it's really the best way to record images, if you want to. You can lug them around with your big wooden view camera and 70 pounds of tripod and other gear on a donkey just like Ansel Adams did in Yosemite, if you want to. And you can even say that any photographic technology that came after 8x10 glass plates is all just propaganda, conspiracy and marketing driven to force that new crap down our throats when 8x10 glass plates are still the best way to go, if you want to. And it won't matter one bit, because the world keeps turning, changing and evolving, whether you like it or not.

Now turn off your computer and the internet, go listen to your 78 RPM records of Bing Crosby while your 17" black and white TV shows re-runs of Howdy Doody, load up some film, preferably in an antique camera, and smile, knowing all is right in YOUR world, even if the rest of the world has gone mad. You don't even have to justify it to anyone.

 

[abhishekdg]

You guys are just awesome.. With all your suggestions it seems that I should look into Voigtlander series of rangefinders.Well I have been photographing for only 3 months with my DSLR and not a single day have passed without taking a photo. However, here are my preferences as to what I enjoy shooting:-

1. I love to shoot Black and White.. Even a plain Black and White image without no composition moves me more than the best of the colourful landscapes. It has something that stops my eyes from wondering aimlessly in a picture and focus selectively. It basically brings a lot of joy and satisfaction to see a balck and white image rather than a colour. As a result, I have started to convert all the images I shoot into Black and White..

In 1 sentence - "Colours mingle.. They loose their identity - Unlike B&W which captures souls"

2. I like to shoot landscapes and street scenes.Telephotos(Wild life and bird) are not my cup of tea. The lenses are pretty heavy and cannot afford even some of the prime telephotos from Nikon.

Main objective - Landscapes with some human interactions

3. I like to be able to use wide lenses and anyday prefer primes over the zooms. I don't like zooming rather than zooming with my feet seems better to me.
Looking for 2 lenses - something wide enough like 20-24 mm for my landscapes and 50mm for standard focal lengths in 35mm.


4.Personally it may seem crazy but I would like to learn manual focus . I really do not like to use autofocus where the camera decides for me. I would really love to learn the art of manual focussing.

5. I dont know if I should get a light meter or a built in light meter in the rangefinder. But surely I want it to help me determine the exposure as I am pretty new to photography and cannot determine exposures from my own..

Please consider the above points and let me know your suggestions.

Lastly and most important to me - I just cant forget the feel of the Leica lenses.. Th esmooth buttery focussing ring and the simplicity of only a few buttons on the cameras. My digital Nikon D90 has so many buttons and options which I feel like so very confusing.. I dont use even half of those provided...

 

[usayit]

@abhishekdg...

You and I are so very similar.... Right down to the focal length perferences. I'm a a 24-50-90 shooter myself. Sometimes I will shoot with just a 35-75.

I'm at work in a meeting, will try to reply later (unless someone responds before them). For now, the toughest requirement to meet will be the 24mm lens.. Wasn't all that popular until recently and some of the lenses may be out of your price range. As such, many cameras didn't have the 24mm framelines relying on a 24mm viewfinder attachment. 28mm might be a easier bet.

 

[gsgary]

You could also look for an M4-2 the one that saved Leica they are cheaper

 

[timor]

In my opinion rangefinder is a bit hard to use with ultrawide lenses. They require additional, external viewfinders to have the proper angle of view when composing the frame. Just a thought.