# Is a rangefinder a mirrorless camera?



## LungFish

Or to put it in a longer form,

"What is the relationship between the type of camera that a rangefinder is, and the new category of camera known as MILC, EVIL, CSC etc."

Are they new and old versions of the same thing? Is rangefinder a subset of mirrorless? Two different categories with an overlap?

Is the defining characteristic of a type of camera the focusing mechanism, the viewfinder or the form factor?

I personally think that the way you see the image before you press the shutter is the most important distinguishing feature.  If you are looking through a non-WYSIWYG viewfinder that is one type of camera, looking at an electronically generated image is another type.  Cameras which have the option of both optical (non TTL) and electronic views fall into both categories.  Therefore, a Leica M and an Fuji X-Pro1 are the same type of camera, just with different focusing systems, but an M9 and E-P1 are different.

What are other people's thoughts on this?


----------



## Derrel

Strictly speaking, a rangefinder has a rangefinder focusing system....like a film Leica, for example, or a digital Leica like an M8, or the M 8.2, or the current M9, or the new digital "M" model (the sometimes-called 240 type). There are not very many digital rangefinders...EPSON did make one once upon a time. Anyway, yeah, I guess a digital rangefinder could be considered to be a sub-set of the mirrorless camera family...since it has no flipping mirror.

The viewfinding systems of mirrorless camera vary a LOT....we have pure optical finders, EVF finders, LCD live-view, electronic-frameline-assisted finders, and maybe another one or two that I cannot think of.  Focusing is all over the map too...rangefinder, focus peaking, phase detection, contrast detection, zOMG...

FORM factor, you ask? GACK!!!!!!!! So many!

What was the question? Why is my head spinning? Where is Usayit to answer all this>?>?


----------



## amolitor

"rangefinder" is, technically, a device for finding the range.

When applied to a camera, it usually means "a camera with no mirror and optical, lens-coupled, rangefinder, either a Leica or an inferior knockoff used by losers, not me." Ok, I made up all the stuff after the "rangefinder".

MILCs, EVILs and so on are not generally considered rangefinders, although they do have devices for finding the range in them, because it's not an optical lens-coupled rangefinder. They're not very much like Leicas. The definition is likely to change over time, however, like most "folk" terminology.


----------



## usayit

Derrel said:


> What was the question? Why is my head spinning? Where is Usayit to answer all this>?>?



Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.....

Lol.... you guys don't sleep?


----------



## usayit

I think most consider rangefinders a mirrorless camera but like Derrel eluded too.... the term Mirrorless IMO is lacking in describing what people had in mind back when Panasonic and Olympus were carving out their market.   Technically, LF view cameras and point and shoots even pin hole shoeboxes also fall into that description.   

I was hoping that the term EVIL or similar wouldmcatch on instead....  Electronic View Interchangeable Lens camera better describes the cameras.  It specicifcally mentions two design aspects that these cameras are built around,,,,  That AF and viewing is centered around the live view capable sensor providing TTL viewing just like DSLRs AND that interchangeable lenses providing the flexibility as with DSLRs.

Both TTL viewing and interchangeable lens mount as well as smaller packaging is what brought SLRs to the front of the photography world back when most still shot with MF clunkers.... 50-60s time frame.      Olympus and Panasonic both launch advertising campaigns (not much in the US) bringing light that their products still bring same capabilities as a DSLR but in an even smaller packaging.....   so EVIL is more along their line of market messaging.


----------



## dxqcanada

As others have stated ... this has to do with the mechanism used to set focus
Optical Munitions Exhibition - Range Finder

Many older cameras used this mechanism as it was simpler than designing a through the lens focusing mechanism for hand-holdable cameras ... much better than guessing the distance and adjusting lens.
The lens was coupled to the rangefinder, so as you adjusted the lens it would turn the prism.

Leica M8/9 and Epson R-D1 are examples of digital rangefinders


----------



## LungFish

I'm aware of what a rangefinder is and that the camera definition of _rangefinder_ is based on focusing, sorry if that was unclear. 

My question is about where rangefinders fit in the context of other cameras which share some characteristics of a typical rangefinder camera but use technologies not available when the format was first introduced (EVFs, autofocus) to replace the actual rangefinder bit.  I'm trying to base this on how you use the camera, rather than it's components.


----------



## timor

LungFish said:


> characteristics of a typical rangefinder camera but use technologies not available when the format was first introduced (EVFs, autofocus) to replace the actual rangefinder bit.


Can you clarify "characteristics of a typical rangefinder" ? What are those apart from an optical rangefinder ? And what do you mean by "format". Size of the negative/sensor ? First use of a coupled (or not) rangefinder ? (But that would be a class of cameras, not a format). 
Nevertheless, all today's electronic cameras have rangefinder. Mostly electronic, sometimes using infrared light, sometimes laser if more sophisticated. I don't see much difference in using this cameras, just they are more convenient than manual focusing or sometimes they suck.


----------



## Josh66

LungFish said:


> My question is about where rangefinders fit in the context of other cameras which share some characteristics of a typical rangefinder camera but use technologies not available when the format was first introduced (EVFs, autofocus) to replace the actual rangefinder bit.  I'm trying to base this on how you use the camera, rather than it's components.



I would say that rangefinders are their own category.  And I guess that would be a sub-category of "mirrorless cameras".

Basing it on how the camera is used is not practical.  Nearly any camera can be used in nearly any way.


----------



## petrochemist

I may be mistaken but I think I remember a diagram of the working of a rangefinder camera where mirrors were used in the rangefinder mechanism.  If I'm right at least some rangefinders are not mirrorless.

However my Large format viewcamera, is mirrorless and has interchangeable lenses. So it fits the MILC title though it's certainly not a compact system camera. 

Personally I find CSC far more suitable for the likes of µ4/3 cameras than MILC.


----------



## bif

LungFish said:


> Or to put it in a longer form,
> 
> "What is the relationship between the type of camera that a rangefinder is, and the new category of camera known as MILC, EVIL, CSC etc."
> 
> Are they new and old versions of the same thing? Is rangefinder a subset of mirrorless? Two different categories with an overlap?



If you "overanalyze" this you'll run through a maze of answers from some who know, some who think they know, and the totally clueless who'll respond anyway.  

My first 35mm camera with real controls was a rectangular shaped body, fixed lens, and an optical "straight through" viewfinder that also incorporated a coincident image rangefinder window (tinted yellow) the position of the image of which was driven by the focusing mechanism which was driven by a focusing lever.  When the yellow tinted window image merged with the image of the object (being focused on) in the main viewfinder you had that object "in focus".  While this type of camera, like the Leica M series, was referred to as a "rangefinder camera" it was really a camera with a "coincident image rangefinder".

I had a 2.75" x 3.75" Graflex press camera with a coincident image rangefinder and later a Graflex XL modular press camera that had a built in coincident image rangefinder focusing indicator.

In the SLR age that follow some focusing screens had a focusing aid in the center of the screen that was a "rangefinder wedge", a circular portion divided in half with each half having a prism face that would split a vertical line (edge of a building or other vertical element) when not in focus, when the split "line" was joined that element was in focus.   A variation of that was the "microprism grid", a circular area with small prisms molded into the focusing surface that "fractured" or broke up the image when not in focus.

When Olympus brought back the "retro" look in their digital Pen cameras, some referred to the body style as "rangefinder" simply because the first 35mm half frame Olympus Pens were models with the coincident image rangefinder focusing mechanism, but the digital models were NOT.  

The latest Leica M series merged digital technology with the classic rangefinder focusing mechanism and added a price tag in four figures!  Fuji has also come out with their idea of the same. 



LungFish said:


> Is the defining characteristic of a type of camera the focusing mechanism, the viewfinder or the form factor?



Most accurately, none of those three.  Although form factor taken with image format and overall design tend to define the type.  But who really needs to fully "define" it? 

 I  *USE *one, not define it.



LungFish said:


> I personally think that the way you see the image before you press the shutter is the most important distinguishing feature.



It may be the most important feature of the viewfinder but not necessarily the camera.  All boils down to what you need in a viewfinder (or what you can adapt to).  For me the ability to see the effect of exposure and depth of field in a well designed EVF is most important.  Others may not be able to adapt to that characteristic from being used to the overall brightness of the optical prism finder in full frame SLR/DSLR cameras.

In case you're wondering where I fall in the three categories of responders mentioned above,  I'm one of the ones who "knows".  At age 75 I grew up involved in photography with cameras with no focusing aid or meter, press gear with rangefinder focusing, 35mm film cameras with rangefinder focusing, SLRs, then SLR and other types with built in meters, medium format gear (Hasselblad, RB67, and electric advance long roll), 4x5 and 5x7 view cameras, and finally the age of autoexposure & autofocus.  Then on the last job I held I was in on the changeover from wet process film photography to 100% digital.

I had a lot of fun along the way, some of it as an amateur, some as a part time pro, and some as a full time professional.


----------

