Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor I am fine with those rules too, btw. Should have said so earlier, more clearly.
Can you give an example of a scale-focus camera? I don't know what that means.
And if you allow rangefinders, by what reasoning would you disallow SLRs?
Do you have any clear examples in mind?
A scale-focus camera is a camera where the lens has focus adjustment of some kind, but there is no focus confirmation device. You simply set the lens to the lens-to-subject distance you estimate with your eye. They generally have slow lenses to aid in getting correct focus. The very first Leica was a fixed-lens, scale focus camera. So were most folders and box cameras that weren't focus-free, as well as notable examples like the Kodak Duaflex, higher-end models of the Kodak Tourist II, the Agfa Isolette, Rollie 35 and the Kodak Retina I. All had focus adjustment with no confirmation, you just go "eh, looks like 10 feet", focus and hope.
As for RFs, I was always an advocate of "no interchangeable lenses", so I did only mean Fixed-lens RFs, like the Yashica Lynx, Konica C35, Argus C3 and C4, Yashica Electro 35, and Kodak Retina II. Rangefinders were the de-facto "serious" point and shoot for those who thought a brownie or similar was just not good enough, but didn't want to pony up for a pro 35mm or Medium Format Interchangeable lens camera. The Argus C3 is probably the best known example of a rangefinder for the masses.
The reason I'd allow rangefinders over SLRs has two answers:
1. Rangefinder mechanisms were the all-mechanical, pre-autofocus way of putting a focus confirmation system on a camera that does not have TTL viewing, much as autofocus was the default way in the late 80s through today. It just happens to be an optical/mechanical way of finding focus, rather than an electronic one. Just like the VF window on an autofocus camera, the framing and focusing are not done through the lens, which means you aren't completely sure what will be included due to the VF and actual lens seeing a different amount of the image, and the parallax of having the two systems on different axes. Just like in an AF, camera, too, you only know that the camera has focus at one specific point; you really aren't sure of your Depth of Field because you can't confirm it visually like an SLR. An SLR is much different in that you can, in most cases, confirm not only focus on a particular point, but also confirm what else will be in focus, and you have a MUCH more accurate idea of what will be included in frame.
Summary for the TL;DR crowd: fixed lens RFs and fixed-lens autofocus cameras are both cameras that view and focus through something other than the lens, meaning they BOTH only confirm focus at one specific point and don't let you check DoF or give a 100% accurate idea of what the final image will look like.
2. I, personally, wouldn't mind allowing SLRs under the same standard as rangefinders: fixed lens only. However, I can only think of a very few fixed-lens SLRs: The Minolta 110 SLR, the Polaroid SX-70, Yashica Samurai series, and a group of fixed-lens 35mm SLRs by Mamiya (the Auto-Lux 35, Family, 528TL, and 528AL).
Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor I wasn't asking about how your proposed rules would apply.
Unixrevolution had referred to rangefinders in the past in a general way, which would include 35mm film rangefinders with interchangeable lenses. I am just curious why he thinks of them as being somewhat more P&S than 35mm film SLR cameras.
I almost always meant fixed-lens Rangefinders, rather than Interchangeable Lens RFs. I'd really hesitate to call even an Autoexposure Leica M7 a point and shoot. Same with a Mamiya 7.