the_hunter
Established
I am normally a Nikon RF collecter and user, but recently I picked up a Komura 28mm in screw mount. I want to get a Canon RF to shoot this lens on. I am leaning towards an L1 or a VI-L, with a P still on the table as a possibility. All seem to fall into a similar price range, but I know there are minor differences many of which escape me. What would collectors and users suggest as a solid entry point with reliable mechanics and a good RF image?
A few notes/preferences of mine:
I don't want a trigger advance model I feel this would get annoying very quickly.
I have an external 28mm finder that came with the lens, so the viewfinder will only be used for focusing.
I don't really want a 7 or 7s... just think they are ugly.
A few notes/preferences of mine:
I don't want a trigger advance model I feel this would get annoying very quickly.
I have an external 28mm finder that came with the lens, so the viewfinder will only be used for focusing.
I don't really want a 7 or 7s... just think they are ugly.
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
I would go for an L1...sleek styling, small, great RF and uncluttered VF and no internal reflections in the VF as found in many VI- Ls and the P ....not common like the Canon P.
Austintatious
Well-known
Mackinaw
Think Different
An L1 would be a solid choice. I have one, and it's a very well designed, just-the-essentials camera. Decent viewfinder and rangefinder, gold tinted, and warm. I also have high regard for the VI-L which, to me, has a better viewfinder. Brighter than the L1, and with parallax corrected reflected framelines that show both 50/100 frame lines. Both camera have the parallax-corecting pin in the cold shoe which automatically adjusts for parallax when the appropriate finder is mounted. Believe me, this is a nice feature.
To be honest, you'll be satisfied with either camera.
Jim B.
To be honest, you'll be satisfied with either camera.
Jim B.
the_hunter
Established
Good to know.
the_hunter
Established
I saw his write up, that is actually what made me consider the L1 and place it above the P.
the_hunter
Established
Since the external finder will be my main or only composition tool The parallax correction doesn't really matter to me.
Coldkennels
Barnack-toting Brit.
Playing devil's advocate a bit, but if you're not planning on using the viewfinder - only a rangefinder - why bother with a Canon? For me, the only real reason to take them over any other LTM camera body is the viewfinder, so I'd argue that if that's not important to you, there's far better options out there, depending on what you're looking for in a body.
If you don't care about viewfinders at all, a Bessa T and an LTM-to-M adapter will do everything a Canon will in this scenario... and have a built-in light meter.
Any screwmount Leica will be a more solid body than the later Canons (I've always hated swing-back camera bodies - they always feel a bit loose to me), and the rounded ends feel better in the hands than the weirdly angular Canons.
If you're happy with scale-focusing at 28mm, a Leica Standard or Leica I (of any type) will be the smallest possible platform for that Komura.
And if you'd rather not deal with knob wind, a late Leotax or Nicca body gives you the better features of the screwmount Leica bodies with a lever wind.
If you don't care about viewfinders at all, a Bessa T and an LTM-to-M adapter will do everything a Canon will in this scenario... and have a built-in light meter.
Any screwmount Leica will be a more solid body than the later Canons (I've always hated swing-back camera bodies - they always feel a bit loose to me), and the rounded ends feel better in the hands than the weirdly angular Canons.
If you're happy with scale-focusing at 28mm, a Leica Standard or Leica I (of any type) will be the smallest possible platform for that Komura.
And if you'd rather not deal with knob wind, a late Leotax or Nicca body gives you the better features of the screwmount Leica bodies with a lever wind.
the_hunter
Established
Good points, but I owned a Bessa T in the past and just did not like it. It felt cheap but I did like the light meter, even though I don't think it was very accurate. I have considered a Leica or Leica copy but I am not really impressed bu most of them. I have also considered a Yasuhura T981, but I am unsure of the quality, and doubt they are worth the money most people are asking. The lens did include an M mount adapter, so A Leica M would be good. Then again I have seen Leica prices of late and know that is way out of my budget.
davhill
Canon P
I’m also of the mind that any you cite would be a solid choice but find myself thinking “but if the viewfinder is inconsequential..” then why stretch for the L1 (excellent though it is, it suffers from a cloth shutter), or even the VI-L. The P is a “simplified VI-L”, is robust and uncomplicated by complex mechanisms, and readily available..
Coldkennels
Barnack-toting Brit.
What didn't you like about the screwmount Leicas and clones? Because other than the swap from bottom-loading to open-back loading (which, to me, is a step in the wrong direction for multiple reasons) and the viewfinder, there's not that much different between, say, a IIIf and a Canon P. Hell, if you swap to a Leotax T2L or a Nicca 3L instead of a IIIf, there's even less difference due to the addition of a lever wind on those bodies.
Another observation: if you wear glasses, avoid the mid-series Canons with the serrated wheel on the back for viewfinder selection (the various V and L models) - even though you'll only be using the VF for focusing, that wheel will shred the lens in your glasses very quickly. The II, III and IV models are far better in that regard as the selection lever is out of the way under the rewind knob.
the_hunter
Established
What didn't you like about the screwmount Leicas and clones? [/QUOTE]
A lot of my dislike comes from usability, advance and rewind knobs that are slow, hard to load bottom plate film opening. Another factor is just the look, I much prefer the late 50's Nikon SP
or Nikon P sleek look.
A lot of my dislike comes from usability, advance and rewind knobs that are slow, hard to load bottom plate film opening. Another factor is just the look, I much prefer the late 50's Nikon SP
or Nikon P sleek look.
Coldkennels
Barnack-toting Brit.
The late Leotaxes fix 2/3rds of that - starting with the Leotax FV they have both a fold-out rewind lever and a regular advance lever, so you get the smaller and more solid Barnack-style body, the high-magnification 1.5x rangefinder, and the speed of shooting and unloading that you'd get from more modern cameras.
They're still bottom loaders, though. Truth be told, that's a bit of a mixed bag, and I don't think it's as bad as people make out. I'm so used to it now that I think it's easier than most open-back loading setups (a position which usually gets indignant responses on here); as long as your film leaders are cut in advance, it's a pretty trivial task. Remove baseplate, pull out take up spool, hook leader into it, and just drop both cassette and take up spool into place before replacing the baseplate.
The fundamental benefits are that the camera body feels more solid in the hand (no annoying loose flappy backs) and there's less chance of light leaks. I've never had a flappy-backed Japanese camera - whether RF or SLR - that hasn't needed at least one light seal replacing (or, worse, adding to fix a light leak that should have been dealt with already). No such problems with a bottom-loader.
Personally, I'd recommend a late Leotax over any Canon RF for that reason alone unless you're desperate for the 35mm framelines and combined VF and RF of the late Canons.
They're still bottom loaders, though. Truth be told, that's a bit of a mixed bag, and I don't think it's as bad as people make out. I'm so used to it now that I think it's easier than most open-back loading setups (a position which usually gets indignant responses on here); as long as your film leaders are cut in advance, it's a pretty trivial task. Remove baseplate, pull out take up spool, hook leader into it, and just drop both cassette and take up spool into place before replacing the baseplate.
The fundamental benefits are that the camera body feels more solid in the hand (no annoying loose flappy backs) and there's less chance of light leaks. I've never had a flappy-backed Japanese camera - whether RF or SLR - that hasn't needed at least one light seal replacing (or, worse, adding to fix a light leak that should have been dealt with already). No such problems with a bottom-loader.
Personally, I'd recommend a late Leotax over any Canon RF for that reason alone unless you're desperate for the 35mm framelines and combined VF and RF of the late Canons.
bluesun267
Well-known
I concur with the advice to go for the L1; it is imminently user-friendly and those extra viewfinder magnifications are handy should you decide to add more lenses later (and I think you will once you experience just what a great shooter they are).
That being said, there's 5 different models in the L/V series, sharing the same viewfinder arrangement but with small feature differences, such as: top shutter speed (1/1000 vs 1/500), shutter curtain material and flash sync capabilities.
So I would also look for the VL, VL2, L2 or L3. The latter 2 models can sometimes be found for under $100 in good condition.
Well cared-for and freshly lubricated, the V/L series is both better built than the P or 7, more convenient than any bottom loader, and nearly as smooth as an M3
Regarding Canon backs and light leaks, I've had roughly 20 of the L/V, P, and 7 cameras through my hands in the last decade (they all share essentially identical back doors) and never had one light leak, nor needed to replace a seal, or had a loose fitting one. In fact I wish all hinged door loading cameras were built this well.
That being said, there's 5 different models in the L/V series, sharing the same viewfinder arrangement but with small feature differences, such as: top shutter speed (1/1000 vs 1/500), shutter curtain material and flash sync capabilities.
So I would also look for the VL, VL2, L2 or L3. The latter 2 models can sometimes be found for under $100 in good condition.
Well cared-for and freshly lubricated, the V/L series is both better built than the P or 7, more convenient than any bottom loader, and nearly as smooth as an M3
Regarding Canon backs and light leaks, I've had roughly 20 of the L/V, P, and 7 cameras through my hands in the last decade (they all share essentially identical back doors) and never had one light leak, nor needed to replace a seal, or had a loose fitting one. In fact I wish all hinged door loading cameras were built this well.
aizan
Veteran
The L1, VI-L, and P would all be great for a 28mm with accessory viewfinder. The L1 and VI-L would be nice with the right Canon viewfinder that adjusts for parallax. If you want to use a different one, the P or something else would be fine.
If it were my choice, I'd go further back to a knob-winder like the Canon III.
If it were my choice, I'd go further back to a knob-winder like the Canon III.