Any reason not to get a Nikon S2?

[jsrockit]

I've always been a Leica user, but have always been curious about the Nikon RFs. I see that S2 models are relatively cheap with a 50mm lens (compared to Leica and other Nikon RFs)... so I was thinking of getting one to satisfy my curiosity. Is there any reason I shouldn't if I am used to Leicas (or any other reason)?

Thanks.

PS: I don't use film often enough to go for a different, more expensive, Nikon RF.

 

[Keith]

I did the same thing ... curiosity got the better of me and a I bought a black dial S2.

Nice camera but not for me sorry ... you have to find out for yourself though!

 

[Roger Hicks]

Limited choice of mostly elderly lenses, ergonomics that some find very frustrating (not just focusing 'backwards'), cameras mostly 50-60 years old and not always well maintained.

If you want to take pictures, stick with the cameras you're used to. If you're more interested in finding out about cameras, buy an S2. Of course, you may find that an S2 suits you far better than a Leica, though if you do, you'd be in quite a small minority.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Keith]

I think they're a beautiful looking camera but I agree with Roger about the ergonomics.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I think they're a beautiful looking camera but I agree with Roger about the ergonomics.

Dear Keith,

A bit like Harley-Davidsons. Beautiful to look at; sound great; totally bloody useless for at least 90% of riders (or photographers, for the S2); perfect for the remainder, who are split between serious riders/ photographers and poseurs who can't get beyond the cool factor.

This is not to deny their appeal to either serious H-D riders or serious Nikon RF photographers: merely to assert that they're a fairly small proportion of all photographers/ motorcyclists. Of course you could say the same about Leicas but I'be be surprised if there were even one tenth as many Nikon fans as Leica fans.

Cheers,

R.

 

[jsrockit]

Hmmm, I'll check one out in a store. Perhaps it is time to buy a M3 instead.

 

[BTMarcais]

I have an M3, got an S2, sold the S2. I actually really liked the S2 on its own.... but shooting it with both it and a Leica M in the bag drove me nuts w/ the focusing/aperture turning the other way.....

I liked it though, and sold it only because I needed the $ for another purchase. I don't know if I would buy it again, it's niche is pretty well filled w/ the M3, but at the right price it could happen.

-Brian

 

[furcafe]

I don't think the ergonomic differences between a Leica & the S2, the main ones being the different focus directions & the focus wheel/infinity lock, are really a big deal. Of course, everyone has their own preferences, but the same considerations would apply to a Leica M user who had never tried a screwmount "Barnack" Leica or any # of other RF cameras.

For me, the bigger user drawbacks to the S2 are that it only has framelines for 50mm (= accessory finder for wides & teles), a tinted VF (= more contrast w/the RF patch @ the cost of a dimmer view), & a separate shutter speed dial/switch for slow speeds, similar to the old Barnacks (= PITA if you change speeds a lot--I do because I shoot in an "aperture-priority" style).

I've always been a Leica user, but have always been curious about the Nikon RFs. I see that S2 models are relatively cheap with a 50mm lens (compared to Leica and other Nikon RFs)... so I was thinking of getting one to satisfy my curiosity. Is there any reason I shouldn't if I am used to Leicas (or any other reason)?

Thanks.

PS: I don't use film often enough to go for a different, more expensive, Nikon RF.

 

[xayraa33]

Try one, what have you got to lose.
I like them.

 

[BillBingham2]

As mentioned it is a zero risk proposition.

A few of us crazy folks have switched from Leica to Nikon RFs. For me it was a handling issue. I like to use both wide and long lenses so my travel kit for film is a Nikon SLR (FTn) and a rangefinder. I had Leicas and Bessas but it was never easy to switch between RF and SLR, stuff just turned different directions. You see I often adjust aperture and/or focus as I am raising the camera to my eye. As I made the switch before the recession so switching to Leica SLRs was out of the question financially. Also I grew up on a Nikon SLR and have found just the lens mix I like. I switched and life was a lot easier.

I also found that focusing, tripping the shutter and winding all with one hand was very cool. Years back when I did a lot of event photography I used my left hand for off camera flash and did OK with my old M4-P and a 35 'Cron with a focusing tab. The Nikon RF grip (ok Contax had it first) was PERFECT. No need for focusing with my pinky I could use my middle finger with any lens 50 and wider. This would have been heaven for me years back.

It also happened that I liked the way classic Nikkors paint light. Also by accident I learned to love 50mm lenses, something I never did before.

B2 (;->

 

[Paul Luscher]

Had an S2 for a while. Two things finally put me off the camera: first, the dim and diffuse rangefinder patch. After shooting Leicas, this was a big comedown. I shoot a lot in low light, and when using the S2 under those conditions, it was a guessing game as to whether I was really in focus ( found I could focus better even with a Barnack Leica).

The other thing was the fiddly lens change. You have to jack the lens mount back to infinity to change lenses, otherwise you can damage the camera. This was something I would find myself forgetting to do in the heat of action, being so used to simply ratcheting lenses on and off my Leica.

And did I mention that compared to a Leica M, an S2 is noisy? Enough so to attract unwelcome attention, in certain circumstances...

 

[Highway 61]

I have several Nikon RF models and the S2 is my favorite one : 1:1 viewfinder with beautifully etched 50mm frame and a superb green tint ; very accurate RF patch (you can see what is in the patch, which is often not possible with a Leica, so focusing on an eye iris at close-up portrait is possible for a very, very accurate focus) ; beautiful art-deco lines (the front plate is the most beautiful one of all Nikon RF bodies, because its upper left part has the round end of the Contax II), so beautiful Nikon logo, nice shutter sound with a distinctive brakes noise due to a mechanism inspired from the clockworks hammers, RF easy to adjust oneself it it happens to come off, no selftimer, very reliable frames counter.

Yes the shutter is more noisy than a Leica M one but as Fred said it's ball-bearing built so if it works, it works, and won't stop to work even if left on a shelf for a very long time (certainly not something you can say re. a Leica M).

 

[css9450]

Of course you could say the same about Leicas but I'be be surprised if there were even one tenth as many Nikon fans as Leica fans.

Oh, sure, but Leicas are just, well, weird.

😉

 

[MC JC86]

As a "poseur" in most pursuits, I thoroughly enjoy my S2. Lots of new lenses from Cosina/Voigtlander too, don't let the availability of optics deter you.


The only problem ergonomics I've run into concern lens mounting and unmounting, as previously mentioned... but if you can get used to Nikon's way of indexing non-ai lenses, you can get used it.

Definitely not a good choice to mix with Leica on the same outing though, pick one of the other.

 

[SolaresLarrave]

I am heavily invested in Leica gear, but bought a Nikon S2 kit out of curiosity. I got hooked... because I liked the differences. Granted, not the camera for users who change shutterspeeds frequently, but the lens it uses (a 50mm f1.4) is gloriously sharp wide open and the camera is a bit lighter than any Leica body.

In short, you just have to try one.

Good thing: will keep you alert because of the differences, has a good resale value and for some reason it attracts more attention than a Leica.

Bad things: when you're used to the Leica layout, the S2 turns out disconcerting. The shutter release button is behind the spot where you expect it, and the focusing wheel turns differently from the Leica. As for changing lenses... why bother using anything other than a 50mm? It's the only lens you can use without an external viewfinder. Other Nikon lenses are insanely expensive, but fortunately you have the CV option.

In short, it all comes down to one thing: you have to try it.

I was going to sell mine, but I had so much fun with that camera at one time that I simply couldn't do it. Be careful, it may happen to you too! 🙂

 

[Richard G]

And the Leica S2 is so much more expensive.

 

[Tom A]

I use both M's and Nikon Rf's. The S2 is my 50mm dedicated camera, better 1:1 finder than just about every rangefinder made - only rival today is the Bessa R3 and Zeiss ZM's.
However - if I was buying today, I would go for a S3 - you have 35/50/105 finder built in ( a bit crowded - by no worse than a M6/MP). This way you can use one body three lenses and alternate between the M's and the Nikon's.
I agree that using both system at the same time is a bit of a pain.
One reason for getting the Nikon system is that the old Nikon lenses are very good. They are in many ways better than the Leica lenses from the same era (35f2.5 - versus Summicron v1 - the Nikon is better!!), The 50f1.4 Nikon's (better than the Summilux 50f1.4 v1 - and rivals the vII too) and the classic 105f2.5 (one of the best portrait/landscape lenses ever made - even by todays standard).
The S3 has dropped in price considerably over the last couple of years - the introduction of the Millennium S3 caused it. For just a couple of $100 more - you can pick up a S3 - and as with most Nikon's it comes with a lens - usually 50f1.4'.
A 35f2.5 runs anywhere from $250-350 and the 105f2.5 around $400-450.
In short, you can get a 35f50/105 and a S3 for what a late Summicron 50f2 costs now (when did these go to $1300-1500 anyway? - they used to be $500-600 - worth that, but $1300 - no way for a 60 year old design!).
Beware though - Nikons are very habit forming!
Nikons also tend to work well. rarely need service - occasional cleaning, but of my 14-15 Nikon Rf's - only two needed service in the last 3 years. A S4 had the curtain come off and one my SP's developed a problem with the film rewind ( total cost about $300).
Better track record than my M's.

 

[MC JC86]

I use both M's and Nikon Rf's. The S2 is my 50mm dedicated camera, better 1:1 finder than just about every rangefinder made - only rival today is the Bessa R3 and Zeiss ZM's.
However - if I was buying today, I would go for a S3 - you have 35/50/105 finder built in ( a bit crowded - by no worse than a M6/MP). This way you can use one body three lenses and alternate between the M's and the Nikon's.
I agree that using both system at the same time is a bit of a pain.
One reason for getting the Nikon system is that the old Nikon lenses are very good. They are in many ways better than the Leica lenses from the same era (35f2.5 - versus Summicron v1 - the Nikon is better!!), The 50f1.4 Nikon's (better than the Summilux 50f1.4 v1 - and rivals the vII too) and the classic 105f2.5 (one of the best portrait/landscape lenses ever made - even by todays standard).
The S3 has dropped in price considerably over the last couple of years - the introduction of the Millennium S3 caused it. For just a couple of $100 more - you can pick up a S3 - and as with most Nikon's it comes with a lens - usually 50f1.4'.
A 35f2.5 runs anywhere from $250-350 and the 105f2.5 around $400-450.
In short, you can get a 35f50/105 and a S3 for what a late Summicron 50f2 costs now (when did these go to $1300-1500 anyway? - they used to be $500-600 - worth that, but $1300 - no way for a 60 year old design!).
Beware though - Nikons are very habit forming!
Nikons also tend to work well. rarely need service - occasional cleaning, but of my 14-15 Nikon Rf's - only two needed service in the last 3 years. A S4 had the curtain come off and one my SP's developed a problem with the film rewind ( total cost about $300).
Better track record than my M's.

I don't know if the O/P's intent is to build a system, although as Tom A. points out it is sometimes irresistible 😉

The 35 1.8 is one of my favorite lenses and can be had for under $500 if you look (yes I know you'd need an aux VF).. hard to beat in Leica terms, when you factor in excellent standard and medium telephotos available for 1/2 of that or less you can easily build a system for less then an M3 and 50mm summilux.

I like the S2 and the optics I bought for it so much I ended up getting an R2S for it's switchable frame lines and grip accessory. Next up is an S3 or, if I can somehow afford it, an SP.

 

[MC JC86]

3,5 CM f/1.8 w/ tri-x

Nikon Glow (just kidding)

lens would be 100% better if I had a bubble level.

 

[jsrockit]

I don't know if the O/P's intent is to build a system, although as Tom A. points out it is sometimes irresistible 😉

No, I'm not, but his info is appreciated anyway. For me, I don't shoot film often. However, when I want to shoot film, I want something nice for using with a 50mm lens. For me, it is either a M3 (I've owned the 2, 4, 4-2, and 6 in the past) or the S2. I'm leaning towards the M3, but they have went up in price recently. The S2 seems to stay around the same price.