Oh well, "another fine theory ... "
Especially since I started with a rangefinder before going to an SLR,
and although I still prefer a rangefinder on occasion, I don't actually
consider it "more natural." Just, as you say, different.
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
I started with an SLR before trying the Leica. I hated the Leica at first.
Put it in the drawer and didn't use it for six or eight months. Finally,
something someone said about allowing some time with the camera caught my
attention, and I started using the camera again. After understanding it,
and being a little more comfortable with it, I was sold. For certain types
of photography it beats an SLR by a long mile. After using the Leica
exclusively for a few months, going back to an SLR was like shooting in a
tunnel. I was always worrying what might unknowingly appear in the
negative.
They are different, require somewhat different techniques, and are not best
for all types of shooting. But for some types of photography, they excel.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: E.R.N. Reed
I wonder whether the people who consider the rangefinder more
"natural" started on rangefinders before moving to SLRs?
