Is the SP worth it?

somebody has a 21/4.5 SC for sale in the classifieds. If it is the same formula as the 21m CV in LTM, it is a great performer for the money. I tested the 21mm Biogon in Contax mount against the 21CV in LTM, and the CV exhibited better resolution, while the lenses were about equal in flatness of field and contrast.
 
Last edited:
winoto said:
hello all,
i'm fairly new to RFF but my history with the nikon RFs is longer.
the problem: the high price of SP. i need support from fellow RFF members prior to plungging deep into the pockets of my wallet to justify its acquisition.

i have been lusting after this camera for a good year and a half. despite all it's benefits: six built in, color coated framelines, titanium shutter on some, non-rotating shutter speed dial, brightline illuminator, etc. i have not yet bought one purely because of its rarity here in australia and the price. Is it worth it? (sadly one SP kit just went on ebay for a just little more than the S3 kit...still self flagellating myself for it) i hope it was to one of you lot. i didn't really need the lenses.

Having never actually held one in hand and played with one, I don't know what i'm missing. I'm awaiting some enlightenment.

At the moment i have 5 pairs of perfectly good pair of eyeglasses with scratched left lens due to my nikon S rounded viewfinder. I believe (and am trying to convice my wife to believe) that the SP may solve this problem. Come to think of it, I could've bought an SP for the price of my five ruined pairs of eyeglasses!!

The titanium shutter is what i desire most? does anyone know which models SP serial numbers have these shutters? should I just have one of my nikon S converted by S. Gandy to titanium shutter? one of them certainly could use a curtain replacement.


Thanks...i appreciate your input

having said all this, it would probably only take a good user brassed black nikon SP for me to sell my soul to the seller.
Click to expand...

Considering the fact that a new SP will cost about as much as a new Leica M8 and that the SP will last for at least 50 years whereas the M8 will last for considerably less....

You tell me, (provided your kids won't starve) is the SP "worth" it? :cool:
 
>>I breifly owned the 2005 SP kit but returned it to the dealer for a few reasons<<

Nikon RFs are very different from Leica RFs. Different ergonomics, different approach, different quirks. Just as I feel lost the couple of times I've handled a Leica, so I am very surprised by those people who switch back and forth between the two systems.

I do find Nikon bayonet lenses very fast to change. As you get familiar with a system, learn to do some things by habit, like always setting the lens to infinity. Once I've removed the lens, I leave the focus ring set to the 2:30 position and place the new infinity-set lens on -- I can tell by feel and sound if it fit in correctly.

If you don't use your middle finger on the focus wheel, you can place it on the front plate directly in front of the focus wheel, next to the RF window. This makes for an extremely strong, steady grip on the camera. It's a different hand position than the Leica. That's because it's not a Leica copy. It's its own camera.
 
>>Is it possible to buy the 35mm lens that usually sells with the new SP or are they only available as a package?<<

Only as a package, unless you find someone who is breaking up the set. That's been done with the S3-2000. Haven't seen it done with the SP-2005.
 
I would bet that the CV 21 resists flare much better than the Biogon too (based upon several CV samples and never having touched a Biogon).

When I was swaping lenses on and off my Nikkormat, I had to do something simular. Make sure the fstop was at 5.6 or faster as I started to unmount it. I did it in sleep and wondered what the big deal was when Nikon came out with AI (I still wonder). I do not look at changing lenses on my S2 as a big deal at all.

B2 (;->
 
That's right. For my Nikomats, I have to set the lens to f/16 to mount an unmount. For the Nikon F with an FTn meter, you have to do a quick back-and-forth twist of the f/stop ring to get the meter lined up correctly.

As for metering, nothing is as accurate as a handheld incident. Every advance in through-the-lens meter techology since 1965 has been aimed at trying to make TTL as accurate as incident.
 
>>I would bet that the CV 21 resists flare much better than the Biogon <<

I own an original Biogon 21/4.5; I don't think it ever had flare. It's an excellent lens. I don't care for its weight (10 ounces/275 grams), but I've never had any trouble with its image quality. I won't replace it with a CV, but if I were doing it all over again, I'd have bought a CV 21/4 instead. (These didn't exist when I bought the Biogon in the early '90s).
 
Last edited:
With regard to flare, I did not see a whole lot of difference between the 21mm Contax Biogon and the 21mm CV in LTM, although I did not point the lenses directly toward the sun, but at an acute angle. Not much flare in either case. I assume that the Biogon is only single coated and the CV is multicoated, and I would suspect the improved lens design and improved coatings would favor the CV in flare-producing conditions
 
>>for my money it is actually the best rangefinder 35 ever made<<

My professional portfolio and family albums are filled with almost two decades of technically fantastic photos taken with this lens.
 
As a user of Leica Ms and Nikon SLRs for roughly 35 years, I have to say...yes indeed, one or the other of them certainly goes the wrong way...but I've never really figured out which! ;) Nevertheless, it is possible to get on with both systems...:D

NIKON KIU said:
To you the Leica may be logical but this is the Nikon forum, the Leica is not logical at all...everything turns the wrong way,the lenses have the engraving in the wrong place, the lens realease is in the wrong place:eek:
Shall I go on?

Kiu:)
Click to expand...
 
awilder said:
I breifly owned the 2005 SP kit but returned it to the dealer for a few reasons:

4.) 35/1.8 not very sharp by todays standard. Needs to be stopped down to at least f/2.8 or f/4 before performance is decent. Contrast to the new 50/1.4 on the 2000 S3 which is the best 50/1.4 Nikon's ever made and is only beat by a small degree by the 50/1.4 asph. Summilux.
Click to expand...

I'm very surprised to read this! The 35/1.8 lens on the SP 2005 is THE reason I've gone so crazy over Nikon RF. I compared it to my AIS 35/1.4 and was astounded at how much better the 35/1.8 is both in terms of sharpness and colour rendition. Now I'm getting film scans that rival and even beat the quality I'm getting out of my D200.

As for the SP 2005 body, its the smoothest, nicest to use camera I've ever held or owned. Absolutely beautiful in every respect.

I'm sorry to hear you had a less than pleasing experience.

Jon
 
The 35/1.8 has a bit of diffuse flare wide open. At f/2 at smaller, I've always found it both sharp and surprisingly flare-free.
 
xayraa33 said:
maybe it was one of the first reissue Sp's , as the assemblers had to learn how to do it , as the original SP assemblers have long retired or are now ashes in an urn.
Click to expand...
The same team already had experience building over 8,000 S3-2000 and 2000 S3 Limited Edition Black cameras. I've had the opportunity to handle maybe a dozen S3-2000, several S3 Black Ltd, and several SP 2005 cameras and the S3 Black Ltd and SP 2005 cameras are noticebly smoother and a little quieter. The team definitely got better as they went along. As Kiu said, "awilder" was probably unlucky and got a bad example .... probably the only one in 2,500.

Jon
 
Last edited:
IMHO, the most ergonomic place to place the shutter release is in the middle of the winding knob or the axis of the winding lever, as Leitz finally got right w/the M3 . . . an idea they may have "borrowed" from Zeiss Ikon's Contax II/III or IIa/IIIa (on which you can obviously still use the "1-2-3" method).

wes loder said:
Moving the release to the front of the deck requires an additional linkage and would place the fingers of the right hand too close together for the "1-2-3-shoot" operation. Cheers, WES LODER
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Lets not gp too much off topic.
The man asks if buying the original SP is worth the money.
Let me tell you...the SP sells around $1200 to $1500 with the lens,you have been using Nikon S's!!
My friend,when you hold a Nikon SP in your hands,you will never ever use the S again!
Difference is day and night...get my drift?
Buy the SP,you will never regret!

For those who have been using Nikons SLR's for 35 years, I say...shame on you! you used Nikon SLR's and Leica but NO RANGEFINDER Nikons?

How lost can you be?

Kiu
 
I find that the ergonomics of the Contax II are related to, but different from, Nikon ergonomics. I base this on my Kiev II. Compared to the Nikon, the Kiev/Contax rf window is right on the edge of the camera, and the focus wheel on the Kiev/Contax is much further from the edge. This makes 1-2-3 Nikon-style shooting impossible for me, and my fingers are pretty average sized. It also makes it impossible to hold the Kiev/Contax in the most stable logical manner, with your middle finger on the top corner of the front plate.

In fact, if you try 1-2-3 with a Contax/Kiev, you really are giving someone "the finger". So watch out.


attachment.php


attachment.php


Compared to a Nikon S3, which has the same ergonomics as an S2 and SP.
attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • kiev-nikon-grip-001.jpg
    kiev-nikon-grip-001.jpg
    26.2 KB · Views: 1
  • kiev-nikon-grip-008.jpg
    kiev-nikon-grip-008.jpg
    24.5 KB · Views: 1
  • kiev-nikon-grip-010.jpg
    kiev-nikon-grip-010.jpg
    25.9 KB · Views: 1
awilder said:
I breifly owned the 2005 SP kit but returned it to the dealer for a few reasons:

.
3.) I prefer a built in meter as I shoot mostly slides and don't feel like using an external meter.
Click to expand...

You prefer a built-in camera light-meter?
You need a light meter?

No wonder!!

Kiu
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom