Canon LTM canon p patch compared to other cameras

Canon M39 M39 screw mount bodies/lenses
nzeeman

nzeeman

Well-known
Local time
10:19 PM
Joined
Nov 25, 2005
Messages
1,462
i read many reviews which tell tell that canon p patch is not so good. i was wondering how is it compared to some other cameras. for example compared to kiev, zorki 6 , or canonet ql17. these are cameras i know so if someone can compare them please help me with this.

thanks in advance
srdjan
 
In some decades I have heard only praise of the Canon P. Just what do you mean by its "patch"? The R/F perhaps?
 
In my experience with my P, Fed-2, Canonet G-III QL17 and Bessa T.

The Fed-2 had a more contrasty circle than the P so its somewhat easier to line up weaker patterns, course the viewfinder in general is not all that great.

The Canonnet GIII QL17 was a bit under the P in my opinion somewhat like my Olympus RC35, you can see somewhat but contrast isn't quite as good but close. (kind of a RF patch visible, but VF overall not as good to make it worth the comparison).

The Bessa T, well I haven't found anything yet (that I could own) that could be the T's rangefinder clarity and contrast (course its a baranack style so no viewfinder lines and such).

The main two things I don't like about the P's viewfinder, the viewfinder is easily subseptable to glare if you get hit with side light, and the RF patch while you can see it is not as contrasty as say a Leica M6 or M3. Mainly would just be difficult trying to focus off an area without as much contrast in the pattern in indoor or lower light.


Course despite that the P has been my favorite rangefinder all around, if I started from scratch, and I wanted to get an RF and I already had something aside for a decent lens I'd get a P over a Canonnet. But if you're seriously on a budget (ie: can't spend 200-300 for a body, or likely 100 to 300 for a lens) then the Canonet QL17 GIII is not a bad camera for something you can get around 50$ to 125$ now days.

I'm not too familiar with the Zorkis, I just heard the Zorki 4K is likely the closest to the P in terms of functionality, and that the Zorki 6 has the best viewfinder of the Zorkis. I'm even less familiar with the Kiev.
 
It's very good, Srdjan.

Not as easy to use as Leicas or Bessas for me though, since the patch has
no well defined borders (which is what you might have read).

Best,

Roland.
 
Agreed as far as the P's RF patch. In that sense, it is similar to the later Nikon RFs. The upside is that the VF is very bright; much, much brighter than any of the Kievs or Zorkis that I've used or looked through. The P also has framelines that adjust for parallax, though they aren't projected as on a Leica/Bessa/Hexar, etc. & are vulnerable to VF flare (also, because the P's VF is 1.0x magnification, the 35mm frame is @ the very edges of the VF & can be difficult to see if you wear eyeglasses).

ferider said:
It's very good, Srdjan.

Not as easy to use as Leicas or Bessas for me though, since the patch has
no well defined borders (which is what you might have read).

Best,

Roland.
Click to expand...
 
Course one thing to keep in mind that I learned the hard way on an old model, is that the glass in front of the viewfinder isn't just a protective film. It's the actual block that holds the beam splitter, and its not straped in like it is on the canon 7, so anyone with an obsessive compulsion to keep the front of that clean might aciddently push it in ever so slightly, enough to screw the rangefinder calibration til you can get a tech to reglue that block back onto the front.

(On the leica and bessa I think , the glass in the front is basically a window that usually doesn't share as much a risk of being tapped in).
 
ChrisPlatt said:
The P's 35mm framelines are not easy to see even without glasses. :(

Chris
Click to expand...
Well you have to get your eye centered, and even then you can just BARELY see the edges on either side. But still roughly enough to know that the full window of the viewfinder is a safe bet as a 35mm framing. I don't know if they could get a wider view and still manage the lifesize viewfinder.
 
really thanks a lot guys. that was really helpful. if everything i heard about p is true, i think when i get money and buy it i will finally say "i'm done" because i am sure wont need other cameras in future as long as that one works.
 
nzeeman said:
really thanks a lot guys. that was really helpful. if everything i heard about p is true, i think when i get money and buy it i will finally say "i'm done" because i am sure wont need other cameras in future as long as that one works.
Click to expand...

Well long as you got one of those other ones you mentioned as a backup :p
 
I have one P w/ a rather well pronounced yellow- tinted patch and another that is a little faded. I'm a "lefty", wear glasses and can vouch for 35mm viewing difficulty, but get around it w/ a CV/ VC accessory VF.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom