the unofficial Cosina-Voigtlander User Community

It used to be, post Canon P and pre-Bessa, that the rangefinder was considered an elitists camera. Something for former rock stars to take pictures with not realizing the lens cap was still on or for someone that needed to scream "I'M A PHOTOGRAPHER!!!" but in a more subtle way then a loud motordrive and long lens.

However, thanks in very large part to Cosina, there is a choice in interchangeable lens camera types: SLR or RF. For essentially the same price you can pick up an new R2x/R3x with a new lens, a budget new dSLR with kit lens, or a decent used mechanical SLR with a good lens.

So why did you pick a rangefinder? What advantages did it offer you for the kind of photography you like to pursue that a dSLR and film SLR didn't?

Easy - twenty five plus years of using 'user' Leica M's. 17 millisecond shutter delay. If you get it right, the camera will produce, no excuses. Some elitism, for sure, by staying minimalist, keeping it simple. Used the big SLR kit when needed - but traveled light with M4 plus three lenses, or CLE outfit, later M6 plus three lenses. Now the CV R2/RF35 is a really nice new option with 21/35-40/75 and still has a trigger wind. Retro look included in the deal.

For a single camera in the briefcase, RF shined; Olympus RC35, Minolta 7S-II. I have to admit these are replaced by digital tinies, and also a Coolpix for recording photos on websites and for equipment, e.g. other postings tonight.

I cringe to admit I don't really miss the Bronica S2A outfit of wedding photo days. It sits unused in the closet for the last decade.

The Epson RD-1 is probably a future wave. 21mm = 32mm, 35mm = 53mm, 50mm = 75mm. Sounds good to me some day.

Craig

First of all they look really good.

Second, they are lightweight, small and doesn't scream PRESS whenever you lift your camera to the eye like most (d)SLRs do.

Noone takes you seriously when you use such a small camera because it "doesn't have flash", "don't have a zoom lens", and still "uses film" (these, and many more, are comments I get when i use my Bessa R2 in public).

When people don't take you seriously, they don't put their guard up and you will msot likely get more "natural" behaviour off your subjects.

I won't mention the obvius advantages of a RF vs a (d)SLR as lightweight, small, no mirrormovement, and so on.

Oh, and did I mention that they look good?

OK, here is my reasoning:

I've been shooting pics since I was ~12 and received a Pentax K1000 to use. Over the past 20+ years 99% of the photographs I've taken involve people, either "street" or portraiture. I have a couple other types of photos scattered here and there, but nothing significant. Also over the past 20+ years the tools I've used have evolved...from a K1000 + 50mm for everything to a pair of F80s and a series of lenses (105mm for portraits, 24/28/50mm for street, and a 70-300 for "whatever&quot. A few years ago my portraiture "evolved" from 35mm to medium format and now 4x5, leaving my 35mm gear to be used primarily for street.

And this is one of the things that rangefinders are perfect tools for. 8)

I often have to explain myself to my friends as to why I'm not using a digital or why I'm not using an SLR. Luckily, most of my friends are real automobile enthusiasts like myself so I found the following analogy to be quite useful.

I tell them that rangefinders are like sport cars. For what they are intended for, there are no other type of camera that can do a better job and there is no other type of camera that is more enjoyable to use. I associate SLR's with SUV's. Sure they can do almost everything but they're huge, heavy, thirsty and for me, not really enjoyable to use. My Pentax MX though is a different story - its more like a very fun, Jeep CJ instead of a Ford Excursion. An SUV that really deserved the name SPORT Utility Vehicle. For point-and-shoots, I associate them with appliances like the Toyota Carolla - gets you from point-A to point-B with minimum amount of work and excitement - usually soulless. When the ask me why I use an all manual camera - I say that I use a manual camera for the same reason why I dive a stick-shift. They all understand immediately.

These are good analogies and easy to understand (which is, of course, the primary function of an analogy). I sometimes think of the 'tyranny of technology', which can be seductive, but which often results in deep technological solutions to rather shallow problems. I cannot imagine any compelling reason for me to have a camera with face-recognition technology, as I've been pretty astute at recognising faces for quite some time. The more the camera does, the less I contribute, the less I contribute, the less I feel I've had any creative part in the result. Automation has its place, though, and I have a few auto-only cameras I enjoy using, because they give good results in situations where I just want to be able to grab a good record shot. For that reason, I enjoy using my Yashica T5. But my rangefinder, the R3A, has proved far more downright pleasing to use than just about any SLR (save my Contax RX, which is a superb camera). It also frees me from the tyranny of choice in interchangeable lenses. I generally only carry my 40mm and 90mm lenses with the R3a, instead of the 24mm to 300mm range I'm too tempted to carry when I load the SLRs. That often means more pictures taken, because there's less fiddling about with equipment.