Rangefinder, now I am a believer

[Orio]

On their site, Zeiss wrote that they made the ZM lens line in order not to have to deal with the reflex limitations and produce uncompromising lenses.

My experience with rangefinder was limited to the Contax G2, from which I always obtained excellent results, last of which the Garda series.

Today I have received the roll I shoot with the Kiev-4 just before being hospitalized. I am going through the slides as I write with my 8x loupe. I am absolutely amazed at the details captured. And I don't have top lenses for it: I have two Jenas and four Soviet Jupiters.

Well now I am definitely converted and a believer: when it comes to slides film, rangefinder system gives superior results compared to reflex.

P.S. samples maybe tomorrow.

[Attila]

That is absolutely true , Yashica Electro produce better result than most of my SLR lenses

[Nesster]

Oooh, do you make me want to get some slide film for the Fed!

Hope to see the pics soon, and post a loupe too so we can see what you do

[Séamuis]

what does the camera have to do with capturing image details? that would come down to lens, film, proper exposure, and proper developing.

one camera over another isn't going to allow for capture of more detail on a specific film, all the camera does is expose the film to light. you can certainly lose detail if your camera isn't working properly and then gain more detail or rather gain back lost detail after the camera is adjusted and working properly, but I fail to understand how a rangefinder can allow for capture of more detail on a specific film versus an SLR or any other camera type. something I'm missing here?

[Orio]

[Séamuis]

but that doesn't explain how that equals capturing more detail on the film. im very curious about this... how do rangefinder lenses have less compromises? if this is the situation wouldn't, hypothetically an SLR lens therefore be able to allow for more detail capture if it could be moved closer to the film plane, without any changes to the optical formula of the lens?

[Orio]

I am unable to give a technical reply, I can only point you to what Zeiss say about their ZM lenses:

http://www.zeiss.com/C12567A8003B58B9/Contents-Frame/51174405A82B6ADCC125722900400C68

Specifically, note their words:

[montecarlo]

Could be this (lens is too close to the sensor) the reason that digital conversion of RF cameras is more difficult .
"Light arriving at an angle to the centered microlens isn't as efficiently steered into the photosite's sensitive center. Add to that the factoid #2 that wide angle lenses don't have corner coverage as bright as their optical center coverage--a different kind of optical phenomenon, but always a consideration in wide lens design--and a common result is that full-frame images increase corner vignetting with certain legacy wide angle designs."
...
"The new Leica M8 digital rangefinder confronted this issue--and it isn't even a full-frame camera. Because of Leica's basic design geometries, the back elements of Leica lenses are considerably closer to the image plane than those in typical DSLRs. "
Source http://www.digitalsecrets.net/secrets/FullFrameWars.html

[poilu]

I am more convinced by Koji shots than by all the literature
super wide without distortion, maybe that is what Zeiss call superior lens type

[montecarlo]

By the way, regarding the issue from my previous post I remeber it was post on our forum an example with the same lens on a Epson RD1 and on a FF film RF. On the first one the lens was producing a vignette even if the sensor is a 1.5x crop one and on the film sample the vignette was less visible (or nonexistant).
The Epson's sensor I think is the same 6Mpx Sony crop sensor found in many dSLRs (Nikon, Pentax, Konica-Minolta).

[Orio]

[LucisPictor]

As far as I know, retro-focus lenses are much harder to correct than "normal" designs. That's whay RF cams/lenses show better results when it comes to wide angles, unless you use an excellent SLR wide angle lens. I think that a 28mm Zeiss SLR lens is not at all worse than a Russian 28mm RF lens. But even a performance on the same level is amazing regarding the price difference. This alone is a good reason to use a RF now and then.

[Katastrofo]

Looking forward to those pics, Orio!

[Séamuis]

I am as well, since I have been very well stunned by the quality of other photos Orio has posted.

[Laurence]

This is a great point alone:
Carsten wrote:
But even a performance on the same level is amazing regarding the price difference. This alone is a good reason to use a RF now and then.