W
wblanchard
Guest
I'm close to getting a 7s and wanted to know people's experience with it. pro and cons? favorite lens you like mounting.
Canon LTM Any 7s shooter here?
- Thread starter wblanchard
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies: Replies 10
- Views: Views 1K
Canon M39 M39 screw mount bodies/lenses
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
I use one, although not so much recently.
Pros:
-- Nicely finished outside, superbly constructed inside, fits large hands well.
-- Bright frames for 35, 50, 85/100 and 135, all easy to see and labeled in the finder.
-- Shutter curtains (epoxy-coated stainless steel) are burn-proof and shutter holds accuracy very well.
-- 7-series are the only cameras that can use the intriguing if controversial Canon 50/0.95 lens.
-- You can shoot excellent pictures with one, and if anybody tries to stop you, you can beat him into a coma with it.
Cons:
-- VF not as bright and contrasty as a Leica M or Bessa.
-- RF patch has fuzzy edges, like most older RFs; doesn't affect accuracy, but doesn't look as tidy as an M or Bessa finder.
-- Shutter is a bit noisier than a cloth-curtain type.
-- Meter is useful, but ISO speeds go up only to 400 and it needs a NLA mercury battery or a Wein cell.
I don't know that I have a 'favorite' lens for it (other than maybe the 50/0.95.) What I like about it is that it (and the original 7) are the only Canon models that cover every lens I'm likely to use. (Okay, you need an aux finder for super-wides, but that's true of any RF, and besides, I don't own one of those yet.)
If I were going to recommend a couple of Canon lenses for starting out with a 7s, I'd suggest a 50/1.4 and a 100/2. Both are excellent optically, covered by the camera's VF framelines, and have an elegant vintage look that goes well with the camera.
Have fun!
Pros:
-- Nicely finished outside, superbly constructed inside, fits large hands well.
-- Bright frames for 35, 50, 85/100 and 135, all easy to see and labeled in the finder.
-- Shutter curtains (epoxy-coated stainless steel) are burn-proof and shutter holds accuracy very well.
-- 7-series are the only cameras that can use the intriguing if controversial Canon 50/0.95 lens.
-- You can shoot excellent pictures with one, and if anybody tries to stop you, you can beat him into a coma with it.
Cons:
-- VF not as bright and contrasty as a Leica M or Bessa.
-- RF patch has fuzzy edges, like most older RFs; doesn't affect accuracy, but doesn't look as tidy as an M or Bessa finder.
-- Shutter is a bit noisier than a cloth-curtain type.
-- Meter is useful, but ISO speeds go up only to 400 and it needs a NLA mercury battery or a Wein cell.
I don't know that I have a 'favorite' lens for it (other than maybe the 50/0.95.) What I like about it is that it (and the original 7) are the only Canon models that cover every lens I'm likely to use. (Okay, you need an aux finder for super-wides, but that's true of any RF, and besides, I don't own one of those yet.)
If I were going to recommend a couple of Canon lenses for starting out with a 7s, I'd suggest a 50/1.4 and a 100/2. Both are excellent optically, covered by the camera's VF framelines, and have an elegant vintage look that goes well with the camera.
Have fun!
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
More about that 7/7s construction bit:
Years ago, when visiting another city, I used to stop into a little old camera store that had both a large used-equipment selection and an in-house repair department.
(I'm not telling where it was because (a) it's out of business now but (b) the building is still there, and I'm hoping one day they'll have a closeout sale of all the stuff inside! Among interesting things I was shown there was an egg carton containing one specimen of EVERY Canon brightline aux viewfinder, in mint condition. I have been dreaming ever since of getting my hands on that egg carton!)
Anyway, this store is where I once bought a 7s, and I just happened in to pick it up at a time that the repairman had another one open on his bench for cleaning. He gave me a guided tour of its innards vs. those of a Leica M2 he also had on the bench.
His professional opinion was that the 7s was much better -- pointing out such things as gears and cams that are made of brass on a Leica but steel on a Canon. The 7s he was working on had been heavily used, but he pointed out that every gear and lever was perfectly finished and looked like new, with no signs of wear whatsoever.
Of course, that's just one guy's opinion, so no flames from the Leicidolators, please. But I thought it was interesting...
Years ago, when visiting another city, I used to stop into a little old camera store that had both a large used-equipment selection and an in-house repair department.
(I'm not telling where it was because (a) it's out of business now but (b) the building is still there, and I'm hoping one day they'll have a closeout sale of all the stuff inside! Among interesting things I was shown there was an egg carton containing one specimen of EVERY Canon brightline aux viewfinder, in mint condition. I have been dreaming ever since of getting my hands on that egg carton!)
Anyway, this store is where I once bought a 7s, and I just happened in to pick it up at a time that the repairman had another one open on his bench for cleaning. He gave me a guided tour of its innards vs. those of a Leica M2 he also had on the bench.
His professional opinion was that the 7s was much better -- pointing out such things as gears and cams that are made of brass on a Leica but steel on a Canon. The 7s he was working on had been heavily used, but he pointed out that every gear and lever was perfectly finished and looked like new, with no signs of wear whatsoever.
Of course, that's just one guy's opinion, so no flames from the Leicidolators, please. But I thought it was interesting...
d30gaijin
Noctilusting
Jim,
>>no flames from the Leicidolators<<
Flames? How about a blow torch? LOL!
>>His professional opinion was that the 7s was much better -- pointing out such things as gears and cams that are made of brass on a Leica but steel on a Canon<<
I found this interesting. When Leica changed from brass gears to steel with the M4-2 everyone complained because the M4-2 didn't have the smooth feel in operation that the M2/M3/M4 had, and they still complain about it to this day. Ain't them Leicidolators a weird lot... and I'm one of them.
Don
>>no flames from the Leicidolators<<
Flames? How about a blow torch? LOL!
>>His professional opinion was that the 7s was much better -- pointing out such things as gears and cams that are made of brass on a Leica but steel on a Canon<<
I found this interesting. When Leica changed from brass gears to steel with the M4-2 everyone complained because the M4-2 didn't have the smooth feel in operation that the M2/M3/M4 had, and they still complain about it to this day. Ain't them Leicidolators a weird lot... and I'm one of them.
Don
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
Well, Leica didn't have much choice, did they?... didn't the first run of M4-2s have brass gears, until they noticed that the original (and awful) Leica M Winder was chewing them up?
I had a (steel-gear) M4-2 and the winder, which really was a terrible kludge -- I had to send them both in to Rockleigh twice trying to get them adjusted so the winder would work, and they never really did get it right. It was a goofy design: the motor was in a sort of hinged cradle tensioned by a spring, and when the advance cycle was completed, the motor torque would twist the cradle against the spring, opening a switch contact to shut off current to the motor... assuming it didn't strip the wind gears first. And you could usually count on stripped sprockets at the end of a roll if you didn't watch your frames and stop in time. NOT one of holy Leica's finest hours...!
Anyway, while the M4-2 didn't seem to be quite as smooth in the film advance department as the M3 I got later, it didn't seem like a big difference... and the 7 doesn't seem like one either.
One thing I did like a lot about my M4-2 was that it was one of the ones made in the Midland, Ontario plant... so whenever somebody noticed I was using a Leica and started maundering on about how there was nothing like a "finely crafted German camera," I could look dumb and respond, "I wouldn't know about that, I use a Canadian camera!"
I had a (steel-gear) M4-2 and the winder, which really was a terrible kludge -- I had to send them both in to Rockleigh twice trying to get them adjusted so the winder would work, and they never really did get it right. It was a goofy design: the motor was in a sort of hinged cradle tensioned by a spring, and when the advance cycle was completed, the motor torque would twist the cradle against the spring, opening a switch contact to shut off current to the motor... assuming it didn't strip the wind gears first. And you could usually count on stripped sprockets at the end of a roll if you didn't watch your frames and stop in time. NOT one of holy Leica's finest hours...!
Anyway, while the M4-2 didn't seem to be quite as smooth in the film advance department as the M3 I got later, it didn't seem like a big difference... and the 7 doesn't seem like one either.
One thing I did like a lot about my M4-2 was that it was one of the ones made in the Midland, Ontario plant... so whenever somebody noticed I was using a Leica and started maundering on about how there was nothing like a "finely crafted German camera," I could look dumb and respond, "I wouldn't know about that, I use a Canadian camera!"
I LOVE my two Canon 7 cameras and the Selenium meter is quite accurate on both. The "beater" that I sold Joe had a dead meter, but I got and sold it cheap.
The finder is great, not as good as my Leica M3 or M2. It is brighter and has more contrast than my Nikon SP with a mint finder.
I will add that the Canon 7 probably goes for half of a 7s, the only difference is the CDS cell vs the Selenium. As the CDS cell is a "bullseye type" and is not covered by a lens cap, make sure that you get a camera that was kept in an Ever-ready case. CDS cells will burn-out and lose their sensitivity.
The finder is great, not as good as my Leica M3 or M2. It is brighter and has more contrast than my Nikon SP with a mint finder.
I will add that the Canon 7 probably goes for half of a 7s, the only difference is the CDS cell vs the Selenium. As the CDS cell is a "bullseye type" and is not covered by a lens cap, make sure that you get a camera that was kept in an Ever-ready case. CDS cells will burn-out and lose their sensitivity.
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
Brian Sweeney said:
That, and the fact that the 7s has an accessory shoe and the 7 doesn't!
That doesn't seem like a big deal... unless or until you want to shoot with a lens wider than 35mm!
(Yeah, don't tell me, Brian... you found one of the super-rare "Accessory Coupler" attachments for adding a shoe to a 7 for fifty cents at a garage sale, right...?)
d30gaijin
Noctilusting
jlw said:
Same here. I was out shooting in a park a couple of weekends back with my M4-2 and a senior gentleman sees me with the Leica around my neck and starts up the conversation with, "Oh a Leica! Not many people appreciate a fine German camera anymore. Everything has gone plastic and digital” My response, "Huh? Mine says made in Canada." and had to show it to him to prove it. End of conversation. LOL! Interestingly, that’s the first time anyone has ever commented on my use of a Leica while out taking pictures. People around here don't recognize them, or simply don't care.
JLW: No, I have not found a coupler. I have thought of buying a Canon flash with the bayonet mount and turning it into an accessory shoe. BUT I do not own an RF lens shorter than 35mm, and I have the Vt and L1 with shoes. It does seem like an incredible oversight to not have an accessory shoe for the short lenses.
I came close to machining a plate for now-Joes Canon 7 with the dead meter. I took the parts out of it to get the the sheared-off prism. Thus the "Canonator". That Canon 7 was essentially included as a rear lens cap on my 50mm F0.95. Even though the seller stated that the Body was bought separate from the near-mint lens, few bid on it and I got it at a great price. The "rear-lens cap" brought down the price of the lens. It had taken a fall so hard that it sheared off the prism for the projected lines. The shear was near the bottom. Made a nice alignment for gluing it back on, getting the frameline mechanism working, and getting all of the parts out of the film advance mechanism. About 8 hours spent in all. It worked fine, Joe has it now after I got a User L1 cheap.
That is a testament to how well made this camera is: Most cameras would be good for parts after such an impact.
I came close to machining a plate for now-Joes Canon 7 with the dead meter. I took the parts out of it to get the the sheared-off prism. Thus the "Canonator". That Canon 7 was essentially included as a rear lens cap on my 50mm F0.95. Even though the seller stated that the Body was bought separate from the near-mint lens, few bid on it and I got it at a great price. The "rear-lens cap" brought down the price of the lens. It had taken a fall so hard that it sheared off the prism for the projected lines. The shear was near the bottom. Made a nice alignment for gluing it back on, getting the frameline mechanism working, and getting all of the parts out of the film advance mechanism. About 8 hours spent in all. It worked fine, Joe has it now after I got a User L1 cheap.
That is a testament to how well made this camera is: Most cameras would be good for parts after such an impact.
Last edited:
back alley
IMAGES
i saw one of those flash adapters on ebay a while back. i think it went for around 60 bucks.
i almost bid on it till i realized i never use flash.
joe
i almost bid on it till i realized i never use flash.
joe
S
Sonnar
Guest
I will break a lance for the (cheaper, more common) Canon 7 with selenium meter. My first Canon RF was the elegant P, and reading all the comments at Stephen Gandys Site whatsoever, never planned to buy a 7... but I dearly wanted a 2/35 lens for a decent price and finally found one in a bundle with a Canon 7 (small lens on a big body).
Finally, the body enjoyed me as much as the lens. Crafted excellent as well as my P body, meter working. When the P is equipped with Canon-meter, same weight and size.
Finder brightness is on the same level with the P, slightly dimmer than my Bessa-R.
RF exactness is slightly better with the 7 than the P. Bessa-R is adequate but not as good. I feel strenous with the small RF spot at the Bessa-R compared to the bigger one at the Canons, even if I can focus my 1.8/85 with all bodies correctly.
Finder quality, Peter Dechert wrote in his book that the last series, 7Sz has an improved finder, but I wasn't able to check that. Be happy if you can get one, but otherwise, I think it's more a question how a finder of a particular camera is aging. There are good and bad ones.
The selenium meters: If working, there are very usefull (in daylight) and fast thanks to shutter speed coupling. Only at night, or dark inhouse shooting I need an external meter (mostly negative film)
Maybe the old CdS-meters are a bit better, but not much... 1.35v is a pain. I know it from my Pentax Spotmatic. Wein cells are a pain for "rare users" most collectors are with a couple of bodies.. better to tape-up the selenium meters when not in use than put-in/ put-out batteries.
The missing accessory shoe at the 7 ...a little bit stressed argument, IMHO. I saw that thing at 50-70 $ a couple of times, makes you 7 a handy camera if your attitude is shooting with workers gloves...
You really want a lens wider than 35mm on a 7? With 28mm, try the whole viewfinder image without frame. Should workl. 25mm, not kidding? first question, which lens? Really the rare and expensive Canon? If so, you obviously have the money for the "rareness surcharge" of a 7S or 7Sz.. if the answer is "no, just a Voigtlander 25mm Skopar" than look also for a cheap Bessa-R. When hiking, the weight bonus speaks for the Bessa. The Canon steel is equivalent to 2 compact wideangle-lenses. In the city however, the Bessa isn't nearly as cool as the Canons...
Finally, the body enjoyed me as much as the lens. Crafted excellent as well as my P body, meter working. When the P is equipped with Canon-meter, same weight and size.
Finder brightness is on the same level with the P, slightly dimmer than my Bessa-R.
RF exactness is slightly better with the 7 than the P. Bessa-R is adequate but not as good. I feel strenous with the small RF spot at the Bessa-R compared to the bigger one at the Canons, even if I can focus my 1.8/85 with all bodies correctly.
Finder quality, Peter Dechert wrote in his book that the last series, 7Sz has an improved finder, but I wasn't able to check that. Be happy if you can get one, but otherwise, I think it's more a question how a finder of a particular camera is aging. There are good and bad ones.
The selenium meters: If working, there are very usefull (in daylight) and fast thanks to shutter speed coupling. Only at night, or dark inhouse shooting I need an external meter (mostly negative film)
Maybe the old CdS-meters are a bit better, but not much... 1.35v is a pain. I know it from my Pentax Spotmatic. Wein cells are a pain for "rare users" most collectors are with a couple of bodies.. better to tape-up the selenium meters when not in use than put-in/ put-out batteries.
The missing accessory shoe at the 7 ...a little bit stressed argument, IMHO. I saw that thing at 50-70 $ a couple of times, makes you 7 a handy camera if your attitude is shooting with workers gloves...
You really want a lens wider than 35mm on a 7? With 28mm, try the whole viewfinder image without frame. Should workl. 25mm, not kidding? first question, which lens? Really the rare and expensive Canon? If so, you obviously have the money for the "rareness surcharge" of a 7S or 7Sz.. if the answer is "no, just a Voigtlander 25mm Skopar" than look also for a cheap Bessa-R. When hiking, the weight bonus speaks for the Bessa. The Canon steel is equivalent to 2 compact wideangle-lenses. In the city however, the Bessa isn't nearly as cool as the Canons...
Last edited by a moderator: