New and interested in RF

[joashwee]

Hi, just stumbled upon the idea of rangefinders and would like to know what I need to get started. A rangefinder with lens and some film, anything extra? Looking to go for a Yashica GSN since its in my budget. What film is recommended? Developing done at the normal film processing centers? Really need some advice on getting started. Thanks!

[Neo]

I've no experience with the Yashica GSN, but someone is selling a like-new unit here...

http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=509087

[Neo]

Get a RF camera and a lens, buy some film and start shooting. You can only experience RF photography by shooting actively.

Choice of film can vary widely. You can buy b/w films and process it by yourself or get a lab to do it. Or you can go for conventional colour neg films and lab-process it. If you are just starting out and do not have any darkroom stuff, just focus on shooting and let the labs process your film.

Personally, I'd advocate colour C64-process films (the standard Kodak or Fuji stuff) as the latitude is quite good so you'd get acceptable exposure. Why not b/w films? Cuz the printing can get quite expensive during the learning stage if you do not have your own darkroom. If you want b/w, just buy the Kodak T400CN or Ilford XP2 film, which are basically C64-films which you can drop off at any colour photo labs to process at the same price as your mum-and-pops Kodak Gold film, and you get back nostalgic monochrome prints.

I'm sure other CSers have different takes on the choice of film. Most importantly, remember to have fun shooting!

[joashwee]

Anyone with any advice? Help? Do enlighten me on the use of rangefinders as I am interested in knowing what I need to know to start using them. Thanks

[joashwee]

Originally Posted by Neo Get a RF camera and a lens, buy some film and start shooting. You can only experience RF photography by shooting actively. Choice of film can vary widely. You can buy b/w films and process it by yourself or get a lab to do it. Or you can go for conventional colour neg films and lab-process it. If you are just starting out and do not have any darkroom stuff, just focus on shooting and let the labs process your film. Personally, I'd advocate colour C64-process films (the standard Kodak or Fuji stuff) as the latitude is quite good so you'd get acceptable exposure. Why not b/w films? Cuz the printing can get quite expensive during the learning stage if you do not have your own darkroom. If you want b/w, just buy the Kodak T400CN or Ilford XP2 film, which are basically C64-films which you can drop off at any colour photo labs to process at the same price as your mum-and-pops Kodak Gold film, and you get back nostalgic monochrome prints. I'm sure other CSers have different takes on the choice of film. Most importantly, remember to have fun shooting!

Nice info, thanks so much. Really appreciate the help

[LowLights]

Originally Posted by joashwee Anyone with any advice? Help? Do enlighten me on the use of rangefinders as I am interested in knowing what I need to know to start using them. Thanks

I think the RF guys is hang out at Peninsula during Sat. Though I am not sure if it's a every Sat. ritual.

You might want to swing by and get to know them, I am sure they will be more than happy to inject poison.. I mean impart knowledge to you

I feel that it's the best way to get a quick start. And a good idea what RF is.

U got to look through the view finder to know if RF is for you..

But be warn RF is VERY ADDICTIVE .. as one of my friend puts it.. the point of no return

Leica prefer to say it as "my point of view"

[tan131]

Neo: it is C41 if I am not wrong? C64=K64 or KodakChrome? Printing of B&W film is not expensive if you print on colour paper (which can be done with the negatives at any photolab). It is only expensive if you decide on printing on traditional fibre paper or what some folks refer to as B&W paper. But I agree that negative films are a better option for joashwee as the wider latitude is more forgiving

joashwee:

A bunch of us hang out regularly for makan, shoot, coffee and what one of us refers to as "shoot each other"

Since you ask, I think you can easily google the "merits" of RF, such as size of camera, lens, shutter, etc. However, you have to ask your if RF is your cup of tea. I do know of people who were very keen to go into RF only to be disappointed.

RF unlike its appeal, does have limitations. If you need critical framing, you would be disappointed as the framelines are more often a guide (unlike those of an SLR). You may get more or you may get less, as 2 35mm lenses can have slightly differing angle of view. The applications or usage is also limiting if you happened to be a macro shooter or someone who uses lenses longer then 135mm.

Now to your question regarding the Yashica GSN. I used to own a Yashica GTN which is a black version. According to my poor memory, I have a few issues with the camera. Firstly, the size is huge as compared to competition such as the minolta H-matic, canon canonets, olympus 35, etc. It does have a bright 45mm f1.7 lens though. The Yashica only allows you to decide on the f-stop as the camera will decide on the shutter speed. If I remember correctly, there is no compensation and you would not know if shutter speed is too low for hand held (led indicator shows 1/60 and below). That is a concern for me but you should take the LED as an indicator you may experience handshake and the resulting picture may be blur, unless you are very competant at reading light and can guess the shutter speeds against a corresponding f-stop. Pay attention to the small yellow RF patch, as this will be critical for your focusing. A low contrast patch will see you experience difficulties in achieving focus. The Yashica GSN/GTN also comes with a teleconvertor and a wide-angle adaptor, if you can find one

Welcome to the world of RF.. and if this happens to be your cup of tea, you will be hooked.. beware

PS: If you want to experience RF and want something, small, light affordable and good, take a look at the Olympus XA (not the XA1,2,3 or 4). The creator Mr Maitani is both a legend and a genius of his time.

[Rangefinder_fan]

Hi,
just a minor edit. The process is C-41, not C-64.
To the TS, just get one of the cheaper RF cameras you can find and cheap film.
Then just head out and shoot, and then see if you get something that you like.
There is nothing hugely complicated about how an RF works, its main advantage is that its not coupled to the lens, so rangefinder cameras and lenses are generally smaller than SLRs. Generally quieter as well, since there is no mirror slap.
For focusing, it takes some getting used to, but it really isnt as head spinning as a med format rig with a waist level finder, where the image is laterally inverted.
I'm a fan of getting cheap cameras until you get a pretty good idea that you like the format, and would then like to get a better camera.
That way, if you decide that rfs are not your cup of tea, selling off a more used rf should not put you out of too much money.
And 'sides, there are gems out there in the world of '70s rangefinder cameras..
Yashica GSN series is one of them. Others to consider include the Minolta CL/CLE, Canonets, Olympus 35SP, or the Bessa R.

Good luck

rf

Originally Posted by Neo Get a RF camera and a lens, buy some film and start shooting. You can only experience RF photography by shooting actively. Choice of film can vary widely. You can buy b/w films and process it by yourself or get a lab to do it. Or you can go for conventional colour neg films and lab-process it. If you are just starting out and do not have any darkroom stuff, just focus on shooting and let the labs process your film. Personally, I'd advocate colour C64-process films (the standard Kodak or Fuji stuff) as the latitude is quite good so you'd get acceptable exposure. Why not b/w films? Cuz the printing can get quite expensive during the learning stage if you do not have your own darkroom. If you want b/w, just buy the Kodak T400CN or Ilford XP2 film, which are basically C64-films which you can drop off at any colour photo labs to process at the same price as your mum-and-pops Kodak Gold film, and you get back nostalgic monochrome prints. I'm sure other CSers have different takes on the choice of film. Most importantly, remember to have fun shooting!

[mdzmr]

Originally Posted by joashwee Hi, just stumbled upon the idea of rangefinders and would like to know what I need to get started. A rangefinder with lens and some film, anything extra? Looking to go for a Yashica GSN since its in my budget. What film is recommended? Developing done at the normal film processing centers? Really need some advice on getting started. Thanks!

Hi, its a best start for you with that cam. It easy to handle, just check whether the light meter is working. I used to have GSN, Electro 35ME and also 'J'. You can start with a ISO400 film which mostly for general purpose. There is also a B&W film which you can developed in normal processing. Then as you go along and familiar with the RF techniques then most probably you will jump into the M-mount "Leica" cam.

Good luck and enjoy shooting.

[Royale With Cheese]

I think the XA would be a great start into basic world of RF. Small, compact, affordable.

I personally like the Canonets QL17.

Beware! RF is real poison that is not easily shaken off! Just look at those cameras around in the RF forum here or if you need more poison injection, visit www.rangefinderfourm.com to learn all you need to know about RF

[joashwee]

Thanks for all the help. Looking forward to trying out some RF shooting with some of the guys.

[Neo]

I stand corrected... tan131 and rangefinder_fan are correct... it's C41 and not C64...

[TrailsofLife]

I'll recommend canon canonet Ql17 GIII, because its easy loading and fast lens. I've switched to Olympus XA since because its very compact, can put in pocket of cargo pants. But Canonet QL17 GIII has better rangefinder.

[Royale With Cheese]

I believe there is someone selling a QL 17 right now at the bull/sell forums

[TrailsofLife]

Originally Posted by Royale With Cheese I believe there is someone selling a QL 17 right now at the bull/sell forums

There's 2 actually. I'm selling mine as well, but not recommending because I'm selling lor. I tried bessa r and russian rangefinder too. But still think canonet is the better one in terms of built and usability. Bessa r is good but I really can't get use to the shutter sound. Russian rangefinder's rangefinder/viewfinder really sucked, but loved russian lenses.

[paapoopa]

Originally Posted by TrailsofLife There's 2 actually. I'm selling mine as well, but not recommending because I'm selling lor. I tried bessa r and russian rangefinder too. But still think canonet is the better one in terms of built and usability. Bessa r is good but I really can't get use to the shutter sound. Russian rangefinder's rangefinder/viewfinder really sucked, but loved russian lenses.

what is so bad about the russian rangefinder?
i am planning to get the zorki 4 though

[Rangefinder_fan]

Nothing really bad about it, aside from the fact that quality control is known to be iffy. So, getting a good one is a slight matter of luck.
They are pretty cheap though, but for the same money, you could get a japanese rangefinder instead, and they would likely be a tad more reliable. Also, compared to the Leica models that they were clones of, the quality and feel of operation is not even close. Russian or FSU lenses are supposed to be good performers, but again, quality control means that it could swing either way.
Interesting as a category for their historical significance, but I personally would question using them as daily shooters.
Others may have different opinions of course.

cheers

rf

Originally Posted by paapoopa what is so bad about the russian rangefinder? i am planning to get the zorki 4 though

[TrailsofLife]

Originally Posted by paapoopa what is so bad about the russian rangefinder? i am planning to get the zorki 4 though

I've tried quite a few Russian rangefinders(Fed1 & 5, zorki 1, 4k & 6), my main complaints is the rangefinder. Most are pale, so its hard to focus. I settled for a zorki 4k and sold the rest away in the end, because my zorki 4k's rangefinder is the brightest among all. But its not exactly bright like Bessa R.

[joashwee]

Thanks for all the help. Got lots of good advice from everyone =)