[krypticide]

Anyone here use rangefinders? Been thinking about getting a digital one (only Epson and Leica, apparently). Would love to hear about your experience with them.

[Ratmagiclady]

I like the Epsons. (Analog needles! ) I was really considering trying to get a hold of one, since my film cameras were Canon FD, and I could make a very light kit, especially sharing M39 lenses with a film RF. Too expensive, though.

(If I hit the lottery, I might be tempted to treat myself to a Voigtlander R3 and an Epson, though. )

I think it'd be a logical combination to combine one some of the tech of these EVIL cameras out there with an optical RF. (Basically, make a digital rangefinder with Live View. Rangefinders provide that intimacy with the subjects and the light, but aren't conducive to more-extreme focal lengths. )

[joeyc]

I use rangefinders often. I love the rangefinder experience. Unfortunately I've never used a digital rangefinder. Multiple Bessas, Konica Auto S2 (quite exceptional), Canon Canonet (great compact rangefinder), Sears RF35 (fun cheap, compact rangefinder).

I'd suggest getting a inexpensive rangefinder to begin with (if you don't already have one), because the lenses alone can eat you up!

My suggestion... Find a Konica Auto S2. Great IQ, fast lens, easy to use. Unless it's been converted (mine has), finding suitsbles batteries may prove to be the only downside. There are work arounds though.

[séamuis]

I use Petri film rangefinders, but no digital. the epson is nice. but if it needs any repairs you are basically out of luck. as it has been discontinued. also I have always thought the epson to be quite oversized. I really like the new M9, but pretty much anything leica is out of my price range. why exactly are you considering a rangefinder? personally, I cant help but feel that anyone pursuing a digital rangefinder is doing so just for the image associated with the rangefinder (particularly Leica) and not the actual photographic experience. look, im a good photog, I use Leica & voigtlander! im vintage! etc, etc. not saying that applies to you, just stating my opinion.

[mel]

I have an early 1950s Leica rangefinder that I'm still trying to work through all the shutter speeds to see how it's working. Frankly it's a royal pain in the hiney to use compared to my digital slr, or even my fully manual K1000 with working lightmeter. But it is an extrordinarily cool camera which makes me continue to want to keep trying with it.

[Jester_rm]

I inherited a Yashica YF rangefinder and used it a short time before I went to digital. VERY solid camera (it's a Leica III copy I think), easy to use. Needed a bit of repair work so I didn't use it much. Heavy to carry, but nice none the less. Very quiet.

[krypticide]

Thanks for all the replies!

My suggestion... Find a Konica Auto S2. Great IQ, fast lens, easy to use. Unless it's been converted (mine has), finding suitsbles batteries may prove to be the only downside. There are work arounds though.

Many thanks for the recommendation, it does look like a solid FLRF. A bit hard to find, but that's fine by me. Unfortunately, I don't know a lick about film; can you recommend any that a place like Costco could process?

why exactly are you considering a rangefinder? personally, I cant help but feel that anyone pursuing a digital rangefinder is doing so just for the image associated with the rangefinder (particularly Leica) and not the actual photographic experience. look, im a good photog, I use Leica & voigtlander! im vintage! etc, etc. not saying that applies to you, just stating my opinion.

Somewhat hard to explain, but I've really enjoyed MF on the K20D with prime lenses, but I want something a bit more portable than a DSLR. A RF might be better in that respect, and I think the focusing mechanism is real cool. It's probably also less "threatening" to people when pointed at them. Plus, it might be fun! I'll probably try the film (aka cheap) RF first before plunking down for a digital RF.

[J.Scott]

Would you like to borrow a rangefinder?

I have a Konica Auto S2 sitting on the shelf, begging to be exercised.

I'm not sure where you live, but if you pay for return shipping it's yours to use for a couple months.

I live in Canada so I'm not sure if the shipping costs would be too prohibitive, but drop me a PM if you are interested.

[lithos]

Many thanks for the recommendation, it does look like a solid FLRF. A bit hard to find, but that's fine by me. Unfortunately, I don't know a lick about film; can you recommend any that a place like Costco could process?

That would be C-41 film. Colour negative film - what your mum used to photograph you when you were a kid. Occasionally referred to by other names: CN-16 (Fuji's term for the same process) or chromogenic film, print film, or just plain old colour negative. Note that there are black and white versions available that are just colour films without the colour dyes.

You know, that stuff that ends up as orange strips of negs. Wherever you find film, you will certainly find C-41 film. C-41 is particularly handy in that it has a lot of latitude - you don't have to be bang on exposure to get a good picture. That's why they use it in those meterless disposable cameras.

Kodak's Gold and Max films would probably be the most common, especially in the states. Fuji's Superia series is very good, and very common, but probably not as common as Kodak in the States. Some stores might have own-brand film.

There are pro-level C-41 films out there, too. Kodak's Portra series (a personal favourite of mine) is one, as well as the new Ektar 100 that's just been released. Fuji's PRO series is their equivalent. Both Portra and PRO come in the same speeds: ISO 160, 400, and 800.

There're two black and white C-41 films regularly available: Kodak BW400CN, and Ilford XP2 Super. They're nice, but don't have that tone and grain of real BW film.

As for a compact rangefinder, none get more compact than the Olympus XA. It's a rangefinder, like a Leica, but unlike a Leica, it's actually small. One of Maitani's genius designs, it's proper full frame, but about as big as a twenty pack of durries. 35mm f2.8 lens, five elements, some of which are high-refraction and low-dispersion to get the SLR-like quality - the total length of the lens is actually shorter than its focal length (so, technically, it's a telephoto,) with completely internal focusing. Takes A76 batteries, the kind you can still buy anywhere.

It's also a masterpiece of industrial design. It's small, but full-featured. It's got a proper meter in it, a proper rangefinder, and a proper lens. It's nicely weighted. The finish, in a touch of Zen awesomeness, is made to feel like stone, which is pleasantly unique for a camera. The clamshell case is also the on/off switch - but note that this is the only thing that regularly goes wrong with the XA, and on some of 'em it might be broken, allowing your fire the shutter with the camera closed.

The clamshell combines three functions - switch, lens cap, and shutter lock - into only one action. Slide it shut, and the meter's off, the lens and viewfinder are protected, and the shutter's locked. Note that because the VF is covered when the lens covered, you'll never take a photo with the lens cap on. This makes the whole camera smooth and sleek, and since everything's protected, buying a secondhand XA means it'll probably be in better nick than most other old cameras.

It's got a three-position switch on the base of the camera, for checking the batteries, adding +1.5 EV comp for backlit shots, and a self-time. That's an odd to have those functions, you might say. True, but this is one of the genius little touches of the camera: when it's in the self-timer positon, the switch sticks out at 90 degrees from the camera, and becomes a little foot to stabilise it when it's rested on a table. Brilliant.

The shutter release isn't just good for a CRF, it's very good by any camera standards. It's so smooth and sensitive (you WILL take a few mistake shots with it when starting out.) Very, very quiet shutter, of course.

I suppose what I'm saying is that it's a beautiful example of camera making, and well worth picking up if only for that. It's a great blend of form and function (the yin and yang of industrial design) but more importantly, because it's so small and well-protected, you can take it anywhere. If you can take a phone and a wallet with you, you can squeeze in room for an Olympus XA. For that reason, it'll get photos other cameras can't, because you won't might be able to lug other cameras around with you the way you can slip in an XA.

Of course, there're a few minor downsides. Viewfinder's not that bright, but they're never bright enough, frankly. The lens is a bit weird wide open (but most any lens is - the reason you make an f2.8 lens isn't so much because it's fast, it's because it'll be better at f4 than an f4 lens.) Meter's a bit rough, and only goes to ISO 800, which was very fast in those days, and starts at 25. It's a bit fiddly to set. And because it's so small, you may find an errant digit in your shots every now and then. And I don't know if they produced one with the focus scale in feet.

[séamuis]

Somewhat hard to explain, but I've really enjoyed MF on the K20D with prime lenses, but I want something a bit more portable than a DSLR. A RF might be better in that respect, and I think the focusing mechanism is real cool. It's probably also less "threatening" to people when pointed at them. Plus, it might be fun! I'll probably try the film (aka cheap) RF first before plunking down for a digital RF.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. some rangefinders are really small, (like my Petri Color35) but others aren't as small as you might think. this applies to the Leica M series.
with my auto-Takumar 55/2 mounted to my MX, it is likely smaller, lighter and easier to carry than a Leica M series. I was shocked when I first got my Petri 7s and realized it was larger than my MX. of course, we have no digital MX.... will it be fun? absolutely. and I certainly would encourage trying a rangefinder out. I dont think an epson would be "less threatening" than a compact DSLR such as a k-m or k-x. the epson is quite large for what it is. but if you can afford one (particularly a Leica) I say more power to you. oh, and can I borrow it sometime?

[lithos]

Leica's were small back in the days when people paid attention to them. Remember, if you didn't shoot with a Leica, you probably shot with a 4x5. They've trading off that ever since.

[krypticide]

Would you like to borrow a rangefinder?

I have a Konica Auto S2 sitting on the shelf, begging to be exercised.

I'm not sure where you live, but if you pay for return shipping it's yours to use for a couple months.

I live in Canada so I'm not sure if the shipping costs would be too prohibitive, but drop me a PM if you are interested.

If only I saw this a bit earlier...just pulled the trigger on eBay (from Canada, too). Figured I can probably recoup the cost if I end up not liking it. Many thanks for offering though!

[J.Scott]

No worries, just thought I'd offer.
So, what did you buy?
I'm anxious to hear.

If only I saw this a bit earlier...just pulled the trigger on eBay (from Canada, too). Figured I can probably recoup the cost if I end up not liking it. Many thanks for offering though!

[krypticide]

joeyc's Konica Auto S2 recommendations, plus some researching on the net, convinced me that this fixed focal length rangefinder would be a great starter (and even keeper). So that's what I got. I "sniped" an eBay auction, beat out the second highest bidder by $0.31. It was hard to tell what a fair price was, but I got it at $40.31 plus shipping from Ontario.

Can't wait to see if it works well and then put some film in it. Just don't know where to start with film, maybe black and white since I'm Mr. Colorblind. I don't know whether I'll start blazing through rolls or taking forever to shoot shots on film. There definitely will be more pre-shutter hesitation...

I got a chance to check out some old rangefinders tonight at Stanford's photography club. There was a Voigtlander Bessa (not technically a rangefinder), a Contax G2 (sort of weird, effectively AF-only rangefinder), and a Russian-made Leica M3. Russian-made because the Russians took over the Leica plant.

Unfortunately, none of the ones I saw were really good rangefinders, so I'm hopeful with this S2.

[lithos]

There was a Voigtlander Bessa (not technically a rangefinder)

Er, why not? Unless it was one of the ones without a rangefinder (the ultrawide models, or one of the old-school MF ones.)

a Contax G2 (sort of weird, effectively AF-only rangefinder)

Not weird. If you want something that'll increase your photographic ***** size, save up for a Leica with a 50mm lens ("It's what Cartier-Bresson used!") If you feel the need to show how superior you to those other tasteless plebs who use Pentaxes and Nikons and Olympus and Canons, get a Leica. If you believe your photographic talent is directly proportionate to how much you spend, get a Leica.

If you want take photos, and have money left over for film, and don't think that pointless effort unrelated to photography actually increases the merit of your shots, get a Contax G2 or a Zeiss Ikon or one of the new Voigtlander Bessas made by Cosina.

The Contax G series were very, very capable cameras. I used Tim Page's G2 with the 45mm Planar on it, and it is a wickedly sharp combo, and very fast to use (no winding on, and the AF's decent.) For the price of a Leica lens, you can easily pick up a decent secondhand G kit from KEH.com. Better shutter speeds, too.

and a Russian-made Leica M3. Russian-made because the Russians took over the Leica plant.

Russians never made any M3 clones, I think. Be careful claiming that the "Russians made Leicas" or you may find an angry, shotgun-toting mob of Leicaphiles at your door.

Unfortunately, none of the ones I saw were really good rangefinders, so I'm hopeful with this S2.

Er...the S2's good, but nowhere near as good as G2 or M3 or Bessa, I'd say. At least you can still buy batteries for those.