Rangefinder vs. SLR Cameras: Main Differences

[khushkal]

What is main difference Rangefinder vs. SLR Cameras

 

[Rickbb]

One focuses with a set of small paired lenses separate from the one that takes the picture , the other focuses through a single lens that also takes the picture.

 

[limr]

What is main difference Rangefinder vs. SLR Cameras

The mirror.

With a rangefinder, you compose the image through a viewfinder, but you are not looking through the lens itself. You could have the lens cap or a colored filter on the lens the whole time and never know it (ask me how I know.) When you take a picture, the shutter opens and exposes the film (or sensor).

SLRs have a mirror that allows you to look directly through the lens to compose your shot. When you take a shot, the mirror is moved up to get out of the way so the light can hit the film or sensor when the shutter opens.

 

[wfooshee]

A reflex camera (the "R" in SLR) views the scene in the viewfinder through the lens that will expose the image. A rangefinder camera uses a viewfinder completely separate from the photographic optics. The viewfinder is simply a window through the camera. It has a second, overlayed image in the viewfinder that shifts left or right with the focus knob, and when the images overlap exactly, that subject is in focus. That overlayed image comes from a second window and is projected into the viewfinder by mirrors, and matching those images to achieve focus is the "range finder" process.

Most rangefinders are fixed-lens, meaning the lens built onto the camera is what you get and all you get. There are interchangeable-lens rangefinders, but they have compromises with the viewfinder, as the viewfinder image doesn't match the lens. Leica's method involves projecting a frame into the viewfinder to show you the area captured by the lens, but the image is not magnified to fill the viewfinder, which can make focusing extremely difficult.

There are no zoom lenses on rangefinders.

My first 35mm camera was a rangefinder, a Voigtlander Vitessa that my dad bought new in 1952. I still have it and still shoot with it occasionally. It has a superb 50mm f:2 lens, and no metering; It's a completely manual camera. My first Christmas home from college I begged for a 35mm camera outfit, having seen my friends at school shooting with their Minoltas and Pentaxes, and Dad handed me the Voigtlander and a Weston light meter, and told me to shoot nothing but Kodachrome.

 

[RAZKY]

The viewfinder is simply a window through the camera. It has a second, overlayed image in the viewfinder that shifts left or right with the focus knob, and when the images overlap exactly, that subject is in focus.

Only when the images coincide is the subject in focus. "Exact overlap" is a new one to me. If there is any overlap at all the subject would be out of focus, depending upon the depth of field.

 

[cgw]

Unlike an SLR where the VF is very nearly WYSIWYG, RFs can show what's outside the frame lines which do show WYSIWYG. Photographers like HC-B took advantage of this for their extraordinary compositions. Lately, the little Fuji X-100 series cameras--35mm equivalent fixed lens RF cameras--combine an electronic VF with an optical finder whose frame lines adjust for paralax with focus distance--magic!

 

[wfooshee]

Only when the images coincide is the subject in focus.

That's exactly what I meant by overlap exactly. When the shifting image exactly matches the primary image, that subject is focused. "Coincide" = "exact overlap."

 

[RAZKY]

That's exactly what I meant by overlap exactly. When the shifting image exactly matches the primary image, that subject is focused. "Coincide" = "exact overlap."

Appreciate the clarification. We don't see many split-image viewfinders these days, and a lot of neophytes can get confused.

 

[Grandpa Ron]

SLR you see what you get. Range finder you see that area being photographed.

With many if today's modern DSLR cameras, you do not have to worry about distance, aperture, shutter speed, or ISO; some tech Guru at the camera company has already done the work for you.

So why would you want Range Finder?
* They are often cheaper.
* They are tough.
* There are few moving part to go wrong.

You mentioned SLRs, so you are talking film cameras, then I can attest to the fact the that you can take an Argus C5 RF, unload the film and put it in your canoe camping gear. It will sit there and be ready to go on your next adventure.

And, if it falls overboard, there is another one on Ebay.

 

[RAZKY]

SLR you see what you get. Range finder you see that area being photographed.

Interesting observation. I use both SLRs and rangefinders - seeing what I get and seeing the area being photographed is the same thing with either type. What am I missing here?

 

[wfooshee]

Interesting observation. I use both SLRs and rangefinders - seeing what I get and seeing the area being photographed is the same thing with either type. What am I missing here?

In an SLR, the viewfinder image is taken through the lens mounted on the camera. Aside from any small shortages in area coverage (many viewfinders are slightly less than 100% of the frame) the image on the viewfider is exactly the image that the film or sensor will capture. It's the same optics.

In a rangefinder, the viewfinder is "representative," so to speak. It's not viewed through the camera's lens, but if it's well designed, it's a very good representation of the captured image. Framing may be slightly off with closer subjects due to parallax errors, with the viewfinder being slightly to one side of the photographic optics. Also, an adapters, such as close-up attachments on the lens, are not accounted for in the rangefinder's viewfinder, as it's not looking through those adapters.

I have some closeup adapters for my Vitessa, and using them requires consulting a chart. You measure the subject distance from the lens, set the focus knob to the value in the table, and hope the folks who did the chart knew what they were on about. (They did...) The viewfinder means nothing in that situation on a rangefinder. This image was taken with such an adapter, and the subject was not even fully inside the viewfinder window. Composition was by aiming the camera to center the lens on the center of the desired subject frame, not by viewing the image in the viewfinder.

 

[RAZKY]

In an SLR, the viewfinder image is taken through the lens mounted on the camera. Aside from any small shortages in area coverage (many viewfinders are slightly less than 100% of the frame) the image on the viewfider is exactly the image that the film or sensor will capture. It's the same optics.

In a rangefinder, the viewfinder is "representative," so to speak. It's not viewed through the camera's lens, but if it's well designed, it's a very good representation of the captured image. Framing may be slightly off with closer subjects due to parallax errors, with the viewfinder being slightly to one side of the photographic optics. Also, an adapters, such as close-up attachments on the lens, are not accounted for in the rangefinder's viewfinder, as it's not looking through those adapters.

I have some closeup adapters for my Vitessa, and using them requires consulting a chart. You measure the subject distance from the lens, set the focus knob to the value in the table, and hope the folks who did the chart knew what they were on about. (They did...) The viewfinder means nothing in that situation on a rangefinder. This image was taken with such an adapter, and the subject was not even fully inside the viewfinder window. Composition was by aiming the camera to center the lens on the center of the desired subject frame, not by viewing the image in the viewfinder.

Doesn't answer my query. In your example you were not seeing the area you were going to get, so of course you were not seeing the area being photographed.

 

[cgw]

Interesting observation. I use both SLRs and rangefinders - seeing what I get and seeing the area being photographed is the same thing with either type. What am I missing here?

No clue about your visual acuity but RFs usually show what's not being photographed outside the frame lines. Not aware of any SLR that does that. Not the same thing in my experience.

 

[wfooshee]

How does it not answer your query? The viewfinder on the rangefinder does not show what the film or image sensor will see. With the rangefinder's standard lens it will be close enough for framing, but there will be variation, especially as you move towards the subject. If you're trying to frame something that barely fits in the frame, and it's too close to the camera, the viewfinder may well show the full subject but part of it may be cut off in the image, because the viewfinder's axis is offset to one side. For general viewing, it's "close enough."

The difference is that an SLR's viewfinder image is actually viewed through the lens mounted on the camera. Even if the viewfinder's image is not 100% of the frame (most aren't,) the center of the viewfinder image is the center of the photograph that is taken. Parallax error means a rangefinder's image will be slightly offset for close subjects; subject that are close enough to focus without the adapters I mentioned, like 3 or 4 feet.

You can't do depth-of-field preview on a rangefinder, because the viewfinder image is not through the lens.

Also, although not common at all, there are interchangeable lens rangefinders, and the viewfinder's field of view does not change with the mounted lens. In the case of Leica, there will be frame lines projected into the viewfinder, but the viewfinder's image is not enlarged with a longer lens, or reduced with a wide lens. As a matter of fact, the wide-angle lens comes with a separate viewfinder that attaches to the flash shoe so you can frame for the wider lens.

 

[RAZKY]

Incredible that anyone thought my initial comment was anything but tongue-in-cheek!LOL