"Street Shooter" conundrum - Bessa SD800 RichoGR?

01/22/2007 11:33:32 AM · #1

Thanks in advance for any help or insight anyone here can provide.
I'm looking to get something relatively small for street/candid shooting.
A co-worker is offering me his Bessa-R and 35mm 1.7 outfit for $400.
I've shot a couple rolls with it and do like it however the meter isn't the most accurate and I'm afraid of how much money I'll be wasting on development and film (I did learn to get a contact sheet first before prints to cut the cost a bit).
So that led me to look at what is out there digitally but can't afford an M8 or Epson RD1 which leads me to look at digital point and shoots.

The perfect cam would be:
- small,
- good results at high ISO's (can live with 1600 noise if it looks grainlike in B&W),
- fast - 2.8 or better,
- goes wide - at least 28mm
- preferably captures in RAW
- preferably has some sort of IS (real stabilization)

Considering:
- Canon SD800IS
- Ricoh GR wish they had a GR2
- The Bessa R w/ 35 1.7 You can't argue with good fast glass, high ISO and slower RF shutter speed

What do you think?
$400 seems like a good price on a nice rangefinder starter kit but for the same price I could get a more versatile pocket cam.
Any other recomendations?
Thanks!

Message edited by author 2007-01-22 12:01:02.

01/22/2007 01:46:45 PM · #2

2 hour bump

hopper

Canon EOS-80D

Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS USM

01/22/2007 02:00:09 PM · #3

(my opinion only)

you won't be happy with film, nor will you be happy with the image quality of a small point n shoot digital.

buy a small, fast, wide prime for your D70 and use that instead

01/22/2007 02:22:08 PM · #4

Originally posted by hopper:

(my opinion only)

you won't be happy with film, nor will you be happy with the image quality of a small point n shoot digital.

buy a small, fast, wide prime for your D70 and use that instead

Thanks for replying.
I really don't mind film, I have an N80 that I shoot with the 50mm 1.8 and like the results.
It's just too bulky and I like the rangefinder idea of prefocusing for desired DOF. Plus, RFs allow about 2 stops slower shutter than an SLR b/c of no mirror slap so I can go even slower handheld.

hopper

Canon EOS-80D

Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS USM

01/22/2007 02:26:41 PM · #5

I have a Canon Canonet RF camera that I got off e-bay for cheap. I've replaced the seal and found a battery that'll work, but I haven't even put a roll of film thru it yet

I've had it for months :)

Originally posted by rswank:

Tamron 70-180mm F/2.8 Di III VXD

01/22/2007 07:18:14 PM · #6

evening bumpity

MadMan2k

Sony Alpha a6400

01/22/2007 11:41:27 PM · #7

Get the rangefinder for sure. Digital point and shoots suck, it's not even a comparison. The GR is not bad, except for the price and the fact that it takes about 5-10 seconds PER IMAGE to save RAW files to the card, and you want RAW to squeeze the best image out of it that you can.

RF's are unobtrusive, quiet, small, the lenses are tiny and extremely good. There's a reason everyone shoots street with them. I use a Leica M3 with the Voigtlander 35mm 2.5, which is a great lens for the price, and even when you don't consider price.

Voigtlander bodies are built pretty well, probably about as well as Canon/Nikon 1 series and F series but a lot smaller. There's definitely a lot of plastic in them though, and they won't be built as well as pretty much any Leica (well, the CL doesn't count).

BTW, have you seen the Bessa R4A/R4M that's coming out sometime this spring? It has framelines in the VF for lenses down to 21mm, and it'll pair well with their awesome 21mm 4.0. I'd like to get one if possible sometime after it comes out.

BTW #2, you can shoot at half a second handheld with a rangefinder and get acceptable results with a little practice.
//jonbuder.com/images/hippies.jpg

Message edited by author 2007-01-22 23:42:54.

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

01/23/2007 10:43:21 AM · #8

Thanks for the advice MadMan.
I have been on the fence about this for awhile now and after looking at my last roll I think I'm getting better at figuring the exposure.
My buddy also has a 25mm f/4 and a 15mm f/4.5 w/ the finder and a Bessa L body he'll prob unload on the cheap as well.
Btw, I found this chart and it looks like it could help "hand metering".
EV Chart

Nullix

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

01/23/2007 03:27:49 PM · #9

For street, go cheap medium:

Ciro-flex

For the same price, you can buy one of these and a meter and go at it.

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35 f/4 ED VR

01/23/2007 04:44:08 PM · #10

Originally posted by Nullix:

For street, go cheap medium:

Ciro-flex

For the same price, you can buy one of these and a meter and go at it.

Interesting thought.
I like the idea of looking down while framing to reduce appearance of taking a shot but that looks pretty bulky.
How do the DOF hyperfocals compare?
I'm not very familiar with medium format but think I recall that the DOF is inherently deeper at the same aperature than 35mm?
The little I've been shooting w/ the Rangefinder I've pretty much been setting it at around f/8 and prefocusing to the hyperfocal.
Would I be able to shoot wider and still get as deep a DOF w/ the MF?

darnok

Nikon D850

01/23/2007 04:58:43 PM · #11

Originally posted by rswank:

Originally posted by Nullix:
For street, go cheap medium:

Ciro-flex

For the same price, you can buy one of these and a meter and go at it.

Interesting thought.
I like the idea of looking down while framing to reduce appearance of taking a shot but that looks pretty bulky.
How do the DOF hyperfocals compare?
I'm not very familiar with medium format but think I recall that the DOF is inherently deeper at the same aperature than 35mm?
The little I've been shooting w/ the Rangefinder I've pretty much been setting it at around f/8 and prefocusing to the hyperfocal.
Would I be able to shoot wider and still get as deep a DOF w/ the MF?

MF will have a more shallow DOF than 35mm in the same way a full-frame dSLR has a more shallow DOF than a P&S.

Tamron 70-180mm F/2.8 Di III VXD

01/23/2007 07:17:02 PM · #12

Originally posted by Raziel:

MF will have a more shallow DOF than 35mm in the same way a full-frame dSLR has a more shallow DOF than a P&S.

Duh. Makes total sense, thanks for clearing that up for me.

MadMan2k

Sony Alpha a6400

01/23/2007 09:44:31 PM · #13

It's also harder to get fast lenses for MF without paying a LOT, since the focal length has to be longer and the image circle bigger, so they won't be as good for low light as 35mm with a fast lens.