Very well explained thanks! I’ve been shooting slr and dslr for 20 years but I’m gonna buy my first rangefinder ever to use as my main carry on /travel camera
Rangefinder is suited for shorter primes (e.g 50mm, 35mm, 28mm) and typically from a certain distance, like street photography. If you want to be really close (like macro work), or use zoom/telephoto, use SLR. I use both.
The one thing I guess I struggle with the most with older leica cameras is the lack of a mirror. I’ve always used a mirror and I feel lost without one to be honest. Especially for just all round casual shooting in various settings rather than going on a “photoshoot where you take the entire roll in similar lighting. The m6 is far too expensive to buy and the m5 is too big and clumsy. I admit that a big selling point for me for rangefinders and especially leica is the very small compact nature.
I use both. One of my first SLR's I bought new in 1984 and just recently had it CLA'd so that one will be with me forever, it runs like a top. Last year I got my first rangefinder which is perfect for street and travel. One other point for rangefinders is that you can use them at much lower shutter speeds as there is no mirror vibration (slap) as you get with an SLR. So at night in low light situations I can handhold it, shoot at F2 or F1.4 at 1/30th or 1/15th s/s or even lower (as steady as possible) which is a huge advantage. Load up some HP5, shoot at ISO 1600 and off I go!
Another thing is that when looking through a viewfinder on a rangefinder camera you don’t get to see depth of field like in a slr. Also you don’t get a blackout when you press the shutter. This is hard for me to adjust to lol.
Rangefinders tend to have quieter shutters than SLR's but only focus down to 1m and there are parallax issues when close up. That said they are fun to use and the Zorki and Feds are relatively cheap if you want to try the RF experience. Just don't expect Leica / Nikon quality control.
Henri Cartier-Bresson took the picture of the man jumping over a puddle in 1932, so the camera must have been one of Barnack Leicas with a peep-hole viewfinder that had no frame lines. So HCB could not see any of the outside-the-frame scenes when he took this image. This photograph does not demonstrate an advantage of rangefinder cameras, it just shows the photographer's genius! Oh and, as far as I know, no Russian rangefinder cameras has frame lines either.
I'm an SLR guy,....but will also say in favour of range finders... Rear glass element on lens is usually much closer to the film plane..so sharper as no mirror box. Tend to get sharper shots at lower shutter speeds as no mirror slap reduces vibration when taking a shot. But being able to see through the lens with an SLR at any focal length is a huge benefit over range finders
@@dangerpowers123 I have heard that before but I have yet to get that much of a sharper shot as my SLR's seems pretty darn competitive. Of course, I am not using the latest and greatest Rangefinder lenses. My lenses are composed of, Canon LTM's, Jupiter and Industar lenses and I suppose it depends on what range and age of lenses you are talking about too. When it comes to Macro and long telephoto. SLR hands down. Wide to short telephoto, it is probably based on design of each lens and whether the mirror is a restriction or not. I doubt short Telephoto it maters, at least I would think.
@@MichaelRusso sounds like we own very similar LTM lenses. I'm actually finding the variety of interesting canon , Nikon, topcor , topcon and Russian ltm lenses one of the best things about owning a Leica. But then I really like old glass. The 50mm F2 topcor ltm lens is amazing. Sharp fill of contrast. And can be had for around £200
@@dangerpowers123 The Topcor sounds like a lens in my future. I have been going on a GAS rampage lately so I will have to live with what I have now. I just bought a Jupiter-3 which I will see how well it performs. The reviews are mixed but I will have to see for myself. Low contrast is usually the biggest problem I have noticed with old lenses. Hoods help. Pushing the film a stop or two does helps too. Right now, I am battling Kiev camera light leaks. I think I got it handled this time. Old cameras can be such a headache at times. Photo taken with my Kiev/Helios-103 50mm 500px.com/photo/1008308799/Untitled-by-Michael-Russo?ctx_page=1&from=user&user_id=3538466
Sir, you have the easiest explaination for the viewfinder on rangefinder camera up until now. Have my respect! 🙏
Very well explained thanks! I’ve been shooting slr and dslr for 20 years but I’m gonna buy my first rangefinder ever to use as my main carry on /travel camera
Rangefinder is suited for shorter primes (e.g 50mm, 35mm, 28mm) and typically from a certain distance, like street photography.
If you want to be really close (like macro work), or use zoom/telephoto, use SLR.
I use both.
The one thing I guess I struggle with the most with older leica cameras is the lack of a mirror. I’ve always used a mirror and I feel lost without one to be honest. Especially for just all round casual shooting in various settings rather than going on a “photoshoot where you take the entire roll in similar lighting. The m6 is far too expensive to buy and the m5 is too big and clumsy. I admit that a big selling point for me for rangefinders and especially leica is the very small compact nature.
Clearly done explanation of the differences, especially the viewfinder examples between the two. I am learning a lot from your videos, thank you.
Hay thank you Erin, that's really kind of you to say. Have a fab weekend 😁
I use both. One of my first SLR's I bought new in 1984 and just recently had it CLA'd so that one will be with me forever, it runs like a top. Last year I got my first rangefinder which is perfect for street and travel. One other point for rangefinders is that you can use them at much lower shutter speeds as there is no mirror vibration (slap) as you get with an SLR. So at night in low light situations I can handhold it, shoot at F2 or F1.4 at 1/30th or 1/15th s/s or even lower (as steady as possible) which is a huge advantage. Load up some HP5, shoot at ISO 1600 and off I go!
That's a Great point about the lack of mirror vibration!
Thank you
sometimes I forget to take off the lens cap when I shoot with a rangefinder
Another thing is that when looking through a viewfinder on a rangefinder camera you don’t get to see depth of field like in a slr. Also you don’t get a blackout when you press the shutter. This is hard for me to adjust to lol.
Very true.
Nice job - Thank you enjoyed watching!!
Thank you
Thanks!! Love them both!
Really clear explanation.
Thank you
Rangefinders tend to have quieter shutters than SLR's but only focus down to 1m and there are parallax issues when close up. That said they are fun to use and the Zorki and Feds are relatively cheap if you want to try the RF experience. Just don't expect Leica / Nikon quality control.
Absolutely.. the 1m focusing is taking a little getting used to after years of using my Nikon F2.
Henri Cartier-Bresson took the picture of the man jumping over a puddle in 1932, so the camera must have been one of Barnack Leicas with a peep-hole viewfinder that had no frame lines. So HCB could not see any of the outside-the-frame scenes when he took this image. This photograph does not demonstrate an advantage of rangefinder cameras, it just shows the photographer's genius! Oh and, as far as I know, no Russian rangefinder cameras has frame lines either.
Ahhhhh .... Good point.
@jackson pine Very interesting story. Thanks for sharing!
Is there no rewind lever on the FED?
No leaver on the FED. But it's still worth buying for the money
I just ran a roll through a yashica 1c lynx 5000e
Initially I hated the experience
Maybe I’ll change my mind when I see the results.
35mm range finder advantage: Quite shutter, looks cool, status symbol. Everything else, SLR. And yes, I love my Fed-2.
I'm an SLR guy,....but will also say in favour of range finders... Rear glass element on lens is usually much closer to the film plane..so sharper as no mirror box. Tend to get sharper shots at lower shutter speeds as no mirror slap reduces vibration when taking a shot. But being able to see through the lens with an SLR at any focal length is a huge benefit over range finders
@@dangerpowers123 I have heard that before but I have yet to get that much of a sharper shot as my SLR's seems pretty darn competitive. Of course, I am not using the latest and greatest Rangefinder lenses. My lenses are composed of, Canon LTM's, Jupiter and Industar lenses and I suppose it depends on what range and age of lenses you are talking about too. When it comes to Macro and long telephoto. SLR hands down. Wide to short telephoto, it is probably based on design of each lens and whether the mirror is a restriction or not. I doubt short Telephoto it maters, at least I would think.
@@MichaelRusso sounds like we own very similar LTM lenses. I'm actually finding the variety of interesting canon , Nikon, topcor , topcon and Russian ltm lenses one of the best things about owning a Leica. But then I really like old glass. The 50mm F2 topcor ltm lens is amazing. Sharp fill of contrast. And can be had for around £200
@@dangerpowers123 The Topcor sounds like a lens in my future. I have been going on a GAS rampage lately so I will have to live with what I have now. I just bought a Jupiter-3 which I will see how well it performs. The reviews are mixed but I will have to see for myself. Low contrast is usually the biggest problem I have noticed with old lenses. Hoods help. Pushing the film a stop or two does helps too. Right now, I am battling Kiev camera light leaks. I think I got it handled this time. Old cameras can be such a headache at times. Photo taken with my Kiev/Helios-103 50mm 500px.com/photo/1008308799/Untitled-by-Michael-Russo?ctx_page=1&from=user&user_id=3538466
@@MichaelRusso great photos on 500px. I'm on Instagram as SteveNamyah
Automanipulation on scrap-iron