conradyiu
closer
I would like to buy a SP, but I like RD as well. What would you choose? Only one of them. How to compare ?
Assaf
Well-known
RD is newer, more modern and substantially smaller. It is also know to be less reliable for having issue of lubricant messing the aperture blades. It is also harder to get and more expenssive.
SP is a lovely camera. The only drawback is its (relatively) big size.
PS I would opt for the Canonet QL17 rather then the RD. I think it's a better camera and it's also much easier to get.
SP is a lovely camera. The only drawback is its (relatively) big size.
PS I would opt for the Canonet QL17 rather then the RD. I think it's a better camera and it's also much easier to get.
jesse1dog
Light Catcher
Not sure that the RD is more expensive than the SP - doesn't seem to be in UK.
The RD shutter is fixable but unless its had a fairly recent CLA is likely to stick sometime, probably sooner than later.
The RD is a nice size, the RC is a better size for me. What is really interesting is not the similarities of the lenses but the position of the aperture ring. On my RD it is next to the camera and quite difficult to adjust. The SP is probably much better in this respect. A Google search will pull up a variety of pictures of both cameras so have a good look. Far better, handle both before you buy! Possibly not an option for you.
j
The RD shutter is fixable but unless its had a fairly recent CLA is likely to stick sometime, probably sooner than later.
The RD is a nice size, the RC is a better size for me. What is really interesting is not the similarities of the lenses but the position of the aperture ring. On my RD it is next to the camera and quite difficult to adjust. The SP is probably much better in this respect. A Google search will pull up a variety of pictures of both cameras so have a good look. Far better, handle both before you buy! Possibly not an option for you.
j
kuzano
Veteran
Don't get me wrong... I Love Olympus
Don't get me wrong... I Love Olympus
But on this range of camera's I am also in the Canon Canonet GIII QL17 camp. I have had a couple of SP's, an EC, an RC, and 4 or 5 GIII's. I can't speak to the RD, but the only Oly that felt as substantial as all the GIII's was the SP.... but it's bigger.
Read the Cameraquest site review on the GIII... then go to the RD read. I love the comment about one of the only negatives on the GIII being that it does not have Nikon engraved on the top.
I have always gotten great results, even after dropping a GIII on the asphalt from about 4 feet. I had one with a bad meter. I had one that I had to loosen up the slow shutter with a ronsonol flush (very carefully), and I had a beautiful black one that turned out to have a bit of fungus on an inner element.
The RD's may be hard to find, but the GIII's are all over the place. I just sold a near perfect GIII, with all functions working, Excellent++ cosmetics. Only needed seals for which kits are readily available at about $10. Got $80 for it and a hugely positive feedback about a week ago. I expect to pick up another in a week or so for much less. I have a bad habit. Once I sell a GIII, I absolutely have to replace it...... SOON!
Don't get me wrong... I Love Olympus
But on this range of camera's I am also in the Canon Canonet GIII QL17 camp. I have had a couple of SP's, an EC, an RC, and 4 or 5 GIII's. I can't speak to the RD, but the only Oly that felt as substantial as all the GIII's was the SP.... but it's bigger.
Read the Cameraquest site review on the GIII... then go to the RD read. I love the comment about one of the only negatives on the GIII being that it does not have Nikon engraved on the top.
I have always gotten great results, even after dropping a GIII on the asphalt from about 4 feet. I had one with a bad meter. I had one that I had to loosen up the slow shutter with a ronsonol flush (very carefully), and I had a beautiful black one that turned out to have a bit of fungus on an inner element.
The RD's may be hard to find, but the GIII's are all over the place. I just sold a near perfect GIII, with all functions working, Excellent++ cosmetics. Only needed seals for which kits are readily available at about $10. Got $80 for it and a hugely positive feedback about a week ago. I expect to pick up another in a week or so for much less. I have a bad habit. Once I sell a GIII, I absolutely have to replace it...... SOON!
kuzano
Veteran
Link to CameraQuest GIII and RD pages
Link to CameraQuest GIII and RD pages
GIII
http://www.cameraquest.com/canql17.htm
RD
http://www.cameraquest.com/olyrd.htm
Link to CameraQuest GIII and RD pages
GIII
http://www.cameraquest.com/canql17.htm
RD
http://www.cameraquest.com/olyrd.htm
Monz
Monz
I have the SP, RD (x2) and Cononet QL 17.
Both the RDs had sticky shutters - I have recently serviced one of them. Despite these problems, I prefer the RD from this bunch. It is small, very easy to use in 'A' mode, has an extremely quiet shutter, silky wind-on and a great fast lens (6 elements).
--
Monz
Both the RDs had sticky shutters - I have recently serviced one of them. Despite these problems, I prefer the RD from this bunch. It is small, very easy to use in 'A' mode, has an extremely quiet shutter, silky wind-on and a great fast lens (6 elements).
--
Monz
owenreading
Established
I have both the RD and G-III. They're both excellent cameras - the Canonet feels fantastic in the hands, very solid and hefty. The RD is almost the same size as the RC with a hood, and as stated before, has an almost silent shutter and lovely winding action.
Personally, I like them both. The Canonet feels a little better to me, but the RD is stunningly featured for the size. I believe the RD also has a better lens.
However, the RD does have the sticky shutter problem. And it's a hassle to get fixed. The Canonets tend to be more reliable.
As for the SP, I don't personally know. They do have metered manual, which is nice, but their auto mode is fully auto - no control over either aperture or shutter. Personally, I prefer the shutter priority shooting with the RC, RD and G-III. You get a little more feedback but it's all automated for you.
Personally, I like them both. The Canonet feels a little better to me, but the RD is stunningly featured for the size. I believe the RD also has a better lens.
However, the RD does have the sticky shutter problem. And it's a hassle to get fixed. The Canonets tend to be more reliable.
As for the SP, I don't personally know. They do have metered manual, which is nice, but their auto mode is fully auto - no control over either aperture or shutter. Personally, I prefer the shutter priority shooting with the RC, RD and G-III. You get a little more feedback but it's all automated for you.
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
Ahem, I too, have both the Canonet and the 35 RD. The only thing that I can say about the Canonet is that it'll sink faster than the RD if dropped in the lake 
As for Conrad's original question, I'd choose the SP. The lens is just too good.
As for Conrad's original question, I'd choose the SP. The lens is just too good.
owenreading
Established
I must say, that although the Canonet feels marvellous, the lens in my example is a tad disappointing. Blown up to 8x10 you start to see some definite softness. Annoying really, when the lens mech feels so good, especially compared to the Oly RC. The RC has (at least on my one) a *spectacular* lens, simply superb. It's the thing that keeps me using it.
However, the SP is probably the best choice. Now if only I could justify getting another compact Olympus...
However, the SP is probably the best choice. Now if only I could justify getting another compact Olympus...
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
Owen, on the Canonet picture quality, it's not just your sample. Mine also, and several other owners (or ex owners ) have expressed a similar observation as you described.
Btw, mine has been CLA'd.
) have expressed a similar observation as you described.Btw, mine has been CLA'd.
dukovac
Member
wide open differences?
wide open differences?
I too am in a big dilemma between the two. However, I can live with all the other differences except the lens quality and the size. I would take the rd for the size but as I plan to shoot with it only in lowlight / night, I would really like to see the difference at wide open or let's say 1:2,0 aperture. Can anyody help me? Is there realy a difference on small prints or is it just an another pixel-peeper thing?
One another question: Has anybody experience with shooting 1600 film on this two cameras, using the built-in lightmeter and a silver battery (lr44) (and a non-voltage-decereasing-adaptor). It should be possible as the lightmeters are underexposing with that battery. I have a large supply of mercury batteries but would really like to shoot the 1600 neopan...
and the last question: would you think that with the high grain film of iso 1600 one can see any differences between the two lenses?
wide open differences?
I too am in a big dilemma between the two. However, I can live with all the other differences except the lens quality and the size. I would take the rd for the size but as I plan to shoot with it only in lowlight / night, I would really like to see the difference at wide open or let's say 1:2,0 aperture. Can anyody help me? Is there realy a difference on small prints or is it just an another pixel-peeper thing?
One another question: Has anybody experience with shooting 1600 film on this two cameras, using the built-in lightmeter and a silver battery (lr44) (and a non-voltage-decereasing-adaptor). It should be possible as the lightmeters are underexposing with that battery. I have a large supply of mercury batteries but would really like to shoot the 1600 neopan...
and the last question: would you think that with the high grain film of iso 1600 one can see any differences between the two lenses?
Last edited: