Ease of focusing for you ... SLR or Rangefinder?

Ease of focusing for you ... SLR or Rangefinder?

  • An SLR with a good screen and finder and a fast lens.

    Votes: 39 24.8%

  • A rangefinder.

    Votes: 81 51.6%

  • Sigh ... autofocus.

    Votes: 37 23.6%
  • Total voters
    157
Keith

Keith

The best camera is one that still works!
Local time
11:27 PM
Joined
May 5, 2006
Messages
19,181
Sometimes (generally) I'm convinced that an SLR with a good viewfinder like an OM with a decent screen combined with a fast lens is the best option for focusing quickly and accurately ... then I have days where I can't seem to focus an SLR to save myself and wish I had a rangefinder in my hands and today was one of those days! It should have been easy ... it was a posed group shot outside in open shade on a sunny day and I struggled for some reason and the harder I tried the more difficult it seemed ... back and forth, back and forth and never feeling like I'd quite nailed it.

Aging eyes are a pain in the arse I've decided ... some days it seems worse than others and being a contact lens wearer my vision seems to be subject to fluctuation depending on humidity etc.

For the (ahem) more mature photographers out there what's your choice as your faculties fail you? ... and don't give me that autofocus rubbish! :p
 
Last edited:
Autofocus is the Boomer's friend, Keith! :)

SLR's are much easier for my aging eyes to focus. Just can't get around that. I have to use diopters on everything, though. With rangefinders, the Bessas are easier to focus than Leicas these days.
 
The true test only when indoors at night, with +3 EV light. Then a rangefinder is your friend, relatively speaking.
 
ruby.monkey said:
Some days it's the rangefinder, others the SLR; never the AF on my Pentax K20D - that just sucks right royally.
Click to expand...

Ditto... I need to upgrade my K10d at some point for the days my eyes just don't have it. Dare I say that a lot of times the best focusing camera I have is my Canon S95?
 
All three options suck :)
Just different combinations of too slow, too painful or too inaccurate.

You dont have my option mate, I bulk focus 2-3 times a day :D
Wide lens with a distance scale for me thanks.
 
Mine viewfinder on SRT 101 is quite dusty and dirty, so I find it focusing often difficult. Same goes to the viewfinder on my Rolleiflex, which focusing is even worse on a sunny day.

The rangefinder on Minolta 7sII is very clear but quite small, but I think I handle it pretty good. There is one thing I can't adapt to it - focusing when the camera is in its vertical position :(.. so I often focus horizontally and then switch the camera vertically.
 
Well, generally speaking I find SLR's better simply because I focus using the matte rather than the center split screen.
I dislike the fact that when I use RF's, I have to focus with the subject in the middle of the frame and then compose. I just prefer working the other way round (compose > focus).

But generally I use hyperfocal on the RF's anyway. Also, focusing SLR's at night sucks.
 
Since I got a rangefinder I only use my DSLR because it's digital. I don't like viewing through the lens - I know it has its advantages but I just don't like it anymore. I want a sharp bright viewfinder so I can see what's going on...
 
SLRs are easier for sure. That was one of the reasons I bought an R9 recently.
But the viewfinder in a rangfinder is hard to beat for brightness.

So it really comes down to situation. Auto focus has never been apealing to me.

I bought a Yashika Samurai back in the 80s and that had auto everything.
Great gadget at the time but it soon became apparent the auto focus wasn't everything it should have been.
Somehow that one camera put me off for life... haha. :D

EDIT: This is one ugly camera. Click at your own risk.

http://www.camerapedia.org/wiki/Yashica_Samurai_X4.0
 
I find both rangefinders and SLRs trickier to use as I get older and my eyesight poorer, hence I'm using TLRs a lot more these days. I find being able to focus on a large ground glass screen from a moderate distance far more accurate.
 
With my poor eyes , a wider lens than a 35 mm in a manual slr is quite hard to focus, and on a RF you have to use an external finder, so I went on a contax G2 :D
 
My eyes are getting older too so I am afraid AF is easiest for me.

Bob
 
My Canonet is the hardest to focus, next is my Nikon FE which is stupidly fast to focus and then the Canon 40D which just focuses, I dont even think about it. Personally, I'd take a new FE over a rangefinder any day of the week. Too bad they don't make cameras like that anymore :-(
 
The fastest is of course AF. But AF just like MF needs practice and skill to use. For example if I shoot with a DSLR I focus with AF-on button and leave the shutter button to release priority. That is pretty much like MF except instead of my thumb and index finger, I'm using my thumb to focus.
 
Last edited:
Depends on the camera. My IIIf needs some cleaning of the RF so right now it's a bit easier to focus my FTbN or F2. Other cameras, different results.
 
sc_rufctr said:
But the viewfinder in a rangfinder is hard to beat for brightness.
Click to expand...

I found that a Noct-Nikor gave me a VF'er that is brighter than my Leica M6 with MP upgrade. Also focusing on the ground glass seems to be a better focus aid than the split prism. Under really dim conditions it is just a matter of contrast where I optomize for the greatest contrast in the scene. A rangefinder can not do this for me. At this level its about focusing light into the brightest spots. BTW I also own a 75 Lux.

Also going ultra-wide and scale focusing is a great solution. My Plaubel 69W is a 21mm equivilent and with a leaf shutter I sometimes do handheld at 1/8th of a second.

Cal
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top