I Want to Buy a Rangefinder (sigh...).
Mike
(Thanks to Anonymous)
Send this post to a friend
Note: Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site. More...
Original contents copyright 2010 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved.
:))) how many of these talks i have heard :)))
Posted by: marino | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 12:41 AM
Funny stuff. I guess I should be happy I only caught 2/3s of the references.
Posted by: Timo | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 12:43 AM
Hilarious. A priceless window onto our group mind. Thanks Mike.
Posted by: Jeff Hohner | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 01:30 AM
(Winces. Picks buckshot out of backside...)
Posted by: Semilog | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 02:04 AM
can't...stop...laughing...must...breathe...
Posted by: ctein | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 02:23 AM
Being a social outcast as proud owner of a Trip 35 and a Fed, at least I am not at risk of getting mugged.
Posted by: Lynn Burdekin | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 03:08 AM
Does this text to movie stuff allow a "shoot him" command.
Posted by: Alessandro | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 03:17 AM
The first rule of rangefinders is that we do not talk about rangefinders.
Posted by: Nigel | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 03:55 AM
I'm ashamed to say I understood every word of that.
Posted by: Matthew Allen | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 04:53 AM
for something completely different - what about your darkroom? no progress worth while reporting? or is it finished, and only i did not notice?
(just for the record, no, i do not want to buy another RF, i have got already 5)
Posted by: sebastel | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 05:03 AM
I want to USE a rangefinder http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/7508627/
and
Join the Leica user forum or not?
http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/7531337/
Posted by: cb | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 05:11 AM
Very good. I particularly like the computer speech stutter rendering one word into "range-finder". But aren't those rules onerous? Being a contrarian by nature, I tempted to buy a Leica M5 (body only) to use for pinhole photographs onto something other than Tri-X. Tempted, but not rich enough to do the deed.
Posted by: James | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 05:28 AM
Didn't realise just how much of a rebel I've been. No wonder my photographic efforts remain amateur...
Posted by: Dave Stewart | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 06:00 AM
ROTFL!!!
Posted by: John Brewton | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 06:22 AM
LOL
So true... and so sad :-D
Strange though how they overlooked a crucial point: shutter noise! (or 'shudder noise' depending on the make and model)
Still, "I wanted to buy a rangefinder", and now I'm stuck with a Leica M6 and Summicron 50... and about to send them in for repairs and CLA :-D
sigh...
Posted by: Gino Eelen | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 06:25 AM
There are implicit rules and that is true. It is not that fun when you face these people.
Last year, I went to a shop to get my large format lens CLA and one of the customers was really angry at me. I said really angry. "Why you use that lens on your Leica?" That is before M9 and my M8 is only two digital rangefinder one can use. I guess it would be alright if I use the lowly Epson RD1 with non-Leica lens, but definitely NOT M8. He really tried to lecture me on why I should not use CV lens on my Leica.
I still do not get it today why he thought that he can lecture me. Luckily I have sold my M8 now (essentially getting a Hasselblad 203fe) and hence lessons on the Leica front would not come again. I think it is ok to use my lowly Bessa R3&R4 with my vintage Leica lens now.
Well, that is not just Leica people has strong opinion. I faced a forum guy questioned me and said why one should/could not use C lens on 203fe ... I took 110 rolls this summer and I do not see any problem, including using focal plan shutter.
You really have to ignore people and their rules I think.
Posted by: Dennis Ng | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 06:44 AM
lol!
Posted by: John Taylor | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 06:46 AM
I have abandoned all hope!
Now who did I lend my OM to?
Andrew
Posted by: Andrew | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 06:56 AM
As an ex M2/4 owner and retailer of all things Leica and collectable I find this a hoot. My hat is off to the guys concerned.
Posted by: Dennis Huteson | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 07:04 AM
Unfortunately, my M6 spent only 3 months in CLA mode. 1/2 the 'recommended' time. Guess I should send it back to for 3 more months. (and they say you need a backup when shooting digital!)
Posted by: andy | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 07:14 AM
funny?
Posted by: charlie | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 07:19 AM
Sum-mee-lux
Posted by: Peter | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 07:20 AM
Neurotic!!
On a side note, what's the opinion here about why M4/3 Panasonics don't have in-body stabilization? Just so they limit the use of third party lenses? The GH2 looks awesome, but this is kind of a deal breaker.
Too many great shots lost to minimal vibration with my GF1.
Posted by: max | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 08:04 AM
No! It is not acceptable to use cheap glass on your Leica!
Posted by: Will Frostmill | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 08:13 AM
"Too many great shots lost to minimal vibration with my GF1."
Yeah, me too. (Another sigh.) Maybe it's my age, or just me, but this is a feature I really get a lot out of. The other night I tried again and again to handhold a shot of the house with the Halloween decorations, and each time there was just a little motion blur. I was at about 1/20th. I just couldn't do it. Kept trying...but just couldn't do it. So I could either jack the ISO to where the camera isn't comfortable, or suffer just a bit of motion blur. Or go get the tripod out of the closet.
I said before I bought the GF1 that I'd never buy another camera without IS, and I should have stuck to that.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Johnston | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 08:19 AM
It is hilarious! Thanks Mike
Posted by: Cecelia | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 08:19 AM
Can I have those 4.5 minutes of my life back?
Posted by: Paddy C | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 08:27 AM
Thanks Mike!
Now I remember why I left my local photography club after a week. It really was that bad!
Posted by: Steve Jacob | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 08:42 AM
Can't wait for the Fuji X100!
Posted by: John Krill | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 08:46 AM
What is especially funny is that this isn't yet referenced on the RFF forum and they are still talking about the same gearhead topics ad nauseum.
Posted by: Frank P. | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 08:47 AM
Mike, stabilization is great even if you have an excellent grip. I just find myself trying (and failing) to get images I remember I could with a stabilized body. For example, small apertures and long lenses in daylight for landscape DOF, that was a scenario where stabilization took a lot of stress off. You knew if you wanted a big print the IS would take care of the usual micro vibrations, you just knew you were OK, not anymore. I think I'll second your motion of not buying another camera without in body IS.
It's saddening, because the high ISO image quality seems to be improving fastly for most brands, so I believe Micro Four Thirds will make more sense than ever, size is a definite plus and you get accurate Av mettering with manual lenses. I was dreaming of using the gh2 with the 20/1.7, but this certainly is a big issue.
Posted by: max | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 08:53 AM
[[Or go get the tripod out of the closet.]]
My solution is to not keep the tripod /in/ a closet to begin with. Sure, it probably bothers my wife a bit, but having it sitting around the house makes for easy access and zero excuses for not using it!
Posted by: Rob | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 08:56 AM
Thank goodness I can blame old age and a bum prostate for what happend when I watched that video.
Posted by: Mike Plews | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 08:57 AM
Very, very funny. I, too, am ashamed that I understood it all. A life wasted! But then I have a Zorki.
Posted by: MikeW | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 09:26 AM
I stopped watching when the brown one mentioned Ken Rockwell....
[I saw the iPhone 4 version of this a little while ago. Somehow, it was much more amusing. Maybe because it came first, or maybe because this one hits too close to home.]
Posted by: CK Dexter Haven | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 10:13 AM
"I said before I bought the GF1 that I'd never buy another camera without IS, and I should have stuck to that."
For the same reason, I rarely use my great 35mm f/1,4 on my DsMkII...Difficult to be sharp,handheld under 1/60sec...Maybe age, like you said...
Posted by: Jean-Louis Cuvellier | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 10:35 AM
I love it. Of course, shoot a QL17, which is not acceptable and so far down the list it's not even mentioned. :D
The medium format one is great as well (caution, some swearing )
http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/7318135/
Posted by: Bjorn | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 10:38 AM
Michael,
A shot of Bushmill is the poor man's IS.
Posted by: Chuck Albertson | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 11:23 AM
The guy's problem was that he asked for advice. He should have just gone and bought a rangefinder, he'd be taking pictures by now.
Posted by: Tom Brenholts | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 11:44 AM
So so true!! I´m sure most these rules/myths are basic insecurity on the photographers part. There has been nothing more liberating in my photography than not giving a SH*T and shedding all worries on what may be right or wrong in certain photography circles/forums/friends/schools. Funny enough I´m sure your "A year with a Leica" should provide a sufficient emancipating experience to be able to realise all cameras are just tools.
Paul
Posted by: Paul | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 12:52 PM
If you've ever wondered why more people don't use rangefinders, here's your answer: There are just too damned many "rules."
Posted by: Gordon Lewis | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 01:04 PM
I laughed so hard I nearly dropped my M2!
Posted by: Maggie Osterberg | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 01:34 PM
Barrel, fish, shooting.
Posted by: Roger Bradbury | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 01:36 PM
I'm with Ms. Parker.
(Me no Leica.)
Posted by: Nigel | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 01:41 PM
Yeah, one more reason why I still love my Nikon FM2:
http://plotphoto.com/cameras/nikon-fm2.jpg.php
Posted by: Peter Hovmand | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 02:34 PM
Somewhere on the internet is a forum discussion exactly like this. Heck, it was probably used as the script.
Posted by: Craig Lee | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 02:51 PM
"Maybe it's my age, or just me, but this is a feature I really get a lot out of. The other night I tried again and again to handhold a shot of the house with the Halloween decorations, and each time there was just a little motion blur. I was at about 1/20th."
C'mon, Mike, you know the rule... With your Panasonic 20mm lens you need 1/40th. Sheessh!
:)
Posted by: Rod S. | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 05:42 PM
Say, where do I click to see the brown guy's handle? He seems to know a thing or two. Anyone?
Posted by: Rod S. | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 05:48 PM
Frank, I did see this a few weeks ago on RFF. Unfortunately, I got all the references having been on RFF for years.
The "I want to buy a camera" the guy did was also hilarious.
Posted by: Al Patterson | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 06:03 PM
Somewhere on the internet is a forum discussion exactly like this. Heck, it was probably used as the script. - Craig Lee
Oh no, there are lots. Pay a visit to RFF (which is quite a nice place really) and you'll find a few on any day of the week.
Mike, thanks this made me laugh - and I'm one who missed the first 10 rff postings...
I've only just acquired a Leica, as a digital foil to my Ikon, and intend using my 'stepping stone' ZM, cheap CV and old M-Rokkor lenses on it:) None will be 'upgraded'. I think the Leica for a year wuold help to convince us that all cameras are just tools - certainly I am as able to take bad pictures with every camera I've ever used.
Mike
Posted by: Mike | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 06:51 PM
Alas, when I was 16 and I had a Detrola 400 rangefinder, I lusted after the pre-Spotmatic Pentax SLRs in the camera store at the mall. Now, ten Pentax SLRs later I'm lusting after that Fuji X100 and wishing I still had the old Detrola. Funny, I've never lusted after a Leica.
http://www.cameraquest.com/detrola.htm
Posted by: John St. Onge | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 07:05 PM
Pretty funny, and a bit of truth now and then. But I am just waiting for a digital equivalent of my travel camera, a CL. Although I would love to have an M9, for my uses right now I cannot justify the expense even though the results from my Leica Ms were so superior to my Nikons. The differences were subtle and my customers don't reward subtle.
And for some odd reasons (not mainstream), reflex viewing suits what I am doing right now. And to my eye the viewfinder of my D700 really does work quite nicely. I did have to give up on the half-frame cameras. Just a thousand dollars wasted there.
Posted by: Doug C | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 08:24 PM
Makes me love my Bessa more! Go CV!
Posted by: Mark Sperry | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 09:15 PM
Boy, I'm afraid I understood far, far too much of that. I don't remember anything except a couple of modern people referred to by initials that weren't obvious. Ouch.
Posted by: David Dyer-Bennet | Tuesday, 02 November 2010 at 09:29 PM
Black chrome is not acceptable. It is an inferior finish that but inadequately conceals the ugly gray-colored zinc alloy hiding underneath.
Well-born rangefinders use black paint, with the concomitant appearance of a noble, brass patina with age.
Posted by: Bruno Masset | Wednesday, 03 November 2010 at 04:11 AM
Thanks for reminding my why I decided to take all the time I used to read RFF and use it for actually shooting photos instead.
Posted by: rich815 | Wednesday, 03 November 2010 at 10:36 AM
I was at about 1/20th. I just couldn't do it. Kept trying...but just couldn't do it....I said before I bought the GF1 that I'd never buy another camera without IS, and I should have stuck to that.
Embrace the jitter (eg some of Antonin Kratochvil's recent work) or embrace the mono/tri pod.
I have the G1 and the 14-45 kit lens and I do like the in-lens stabilization. If Olympus were to come out with a competitive competitor to the G-series with in-body stabilization I would certainly consider it, but it is not on the top of my list.
Posted by: Sandro Siragusa | Wednesday, 03 November 2010 at 02:05 PM
Like Al (Hi, Al!) I got every reference, and have even met one or two of those mentioned in person. Great fun!
-Earl, shooting Olympus 35SP :)
Posted by: WeeDram | Wednesday, 03 November 2010 at 11:28 PM
Hi Mike,
Must be your age ;)
I shot this picture with GF1 and 20/1.7 at 1/15 or 1/8.. I can't remember. The EXIF info is suppressed by LR, I have to look at the RAW file at home.
I find it more convenient to handhold at low shutter speed with small cameras. I couldn't do it with my Nikon DSLR even at 1/30s.
Posted by: Chan | Thursday, 04 November 2010 at 02:31 AM
I don't want, and wouldn't have, a rangefinder.
Is this acceptable?
Posted by: Jim McDermott | Thursday, 04 November 2010 at 08:06 AM
"I don't want, and wouldn't have, a rangefinder. Is this acceptable?"
Clearly not to the little people in the animation!
Mike
Posted by: Mike Johnston | Thursday, 04 November 2010 at 08:18 AM
"There are rules..."
Well, considering how many of them I have violated, should I turn in my Leica now, and accept my permanent banishment from The Cult?
Posted by: Paul W. Luscher | Thursday, 04 November 2010 at 09:56 AM
I literally had tears running down my face as I laughed.
Posted by: Tom K. | Friday, 05 November 2010 at 01:16 AM