Rangefinder and SLR


time4d

Member
First of all, I have to say that I dislike comparison threads. Yet, here I am posting one!

I have been shooting a medium format TLR for about half a year or so and I've been getting great results with it. I am thinking of upgrading now. I want to try something different this time, either a rangefinder or an SLR. I've done all the research I could possibly do and I know the strengths and limitations of each system. I've even picked up rangefinders and SLRs at the shop to play with them, but I just haven't had the opportunity to shoot with either one.

I shoot mainly portraits and landscapes and I'm very used to DSLRs and TLRs. For those of you with experience with rangefinders and SLRs, which would suit my purposes better? I'm particularly concerned with a rangefinder's close-up portrait capability (Especially fixed-lens ones) and lack of DOF preview. All types of cameras can be used to take all kinds of photos, but there must be a reason why SLRs are THE cameras for portraits.
 

If you're looking for mf RF, depending on format, a mamiya 6/7 system haa great lenses for landscapes and portraits, alao checkout the fuji equivalents but coming from an slr would mean you have to get used to rf; no preview, focusing and composing on seperate windows depending on focal length.

If you wanna stick with slrs can consider the bronicas, mamiya rb/rz, pentax 67 , Pentagon 6 or arax copies for a more all in one system. But to warn you, they're heavy.
 

Thanks for the advice. Have you used both systems? Do you find rangefinders (in particular the Fuji 6x9 series) to be clumsy when you're taking close-up portraits?
 

Thanks for the advice. Have you used both systems? Do you find rangefinders (in particular the Fuji 6x9 series) to be clumsy when you're taking close-up portraits?

Just sharing my experience n observations re MF rf vs slr.
For MF rf, I shoot w Fuji gf670 & hassy 903swc.
For MF slr, I shoot w hassy 503CXi w interchangeable lenses 80mm, 120mm, 180mm.

RF is compact, ideal for street shooting, travel, landscape, and street portraits where framing is not critical (as with all rf camera).
SLR is heavier, more bulky, but offers more accurate framing. Usually MF SLR offers interchangeable film backs which is not offered on most MF RF systems although the Hassy 903Sswc is a rf camera but offers interchangeable film backs.

For close focusing, MF slr w macro lenses is the way to go; really depends on how close u want to focus. I use the Zeiss CF120mm macro-planar for close-ups.

Hope this info is helpful.
 

Is the MF SLR mirror slap something I should be worrying about, or is it really insignificant when mounted on a tripod?
 

Is the MF SLR mirror slap something I should be worrying about, or is it really insignificant when mounted on a tripod?[/QUOTE
On the Hassy 503 CXi, the mirror is up and the secondary blind is opened way before the leaf shutter releases. Shouldn't be a problem when tripod mounted, even handheld. If you really need absolutely no vibration, then activate mirror-up function prior to shutter release.
 

My only experience shooting portraits on MF is with a TLR, so I can't comment much on
MF RF or MF SLR.

For 35mm, it really depends on what kind of portraits you are looking at. If you wanna do environmental portraits, I think a RF with a 35mm or 28mm might work well. But if you want to get tighter it'll be hard even with e 50mm due to the MFD. You can go longer, say 90mm. But I don't like framing a photo in a teeny tiny window, unless you get an M3 maybe. So for me personally, SLRs gives me the best flexibility when doing portraits (even though I shoot 90% of my work with a 35mm on RF).

My 2 cents from personal experience
 

for portraits, get contax 645, can't go wrong with it

you can see josevilla's blog, he is using contax 645
http://josevillablog.com/

or get hasselblad...
 

Bought a GW690II in the end. I know that if I don't like it there will probably be takers!
 

First of all, I have to say that I dislike comparison threads. Yet, here I am posting one!

I have been shooting a medium format TLR for about half a year or so and I've been getting great results with it. I am thinking of upgrading now. I want to try something different this time, either a rangefinder or an SLR. I've done all the research I could possibly do and I know the strengths and limitations of each system. I've even picked up rangefinders and SLRs at the shop to play with them, but I just haven't had the opportunity to shoot with either one.

I shoot mainly portraits and landscapes and I'm very used to DSLRs and TLRs. For those of you with experience with rangefinders and SLRs, which would suit my purposes better? I'm particularly concerned with a rangefinder's close-up portrait capability (Especially fixed-lens ones) and lack of DOF preview. All types of cameras can be used to take all kinds of photos, but there must be a reason why SLRs are THE cameras for portraits.

SLR / DSLR are by far the most versertile camera & lens application for a wide range of photographic requirements.
I've just a hobbyist and started with SLRs long ago back in school days. I lerned from experience over the years that I wanted good & fast glass & a compact body as a camera system for my needs.
I also found post processing digital image provides the photographer hell lots of room to be artistic and creative.

Hence digital FF RF camera with EVIL function became my choice.
 

What's EVIL function? Electronic viewfinder?
 

I just have to shoot a few rolls on my new rangefinder and see how I like it! Will keep you all posted...
 

Back
Top