Canon 7 - great quality

[david-syd]

Hi
Just a general comment on the Canon 7 purchase from Ebay arrived few days ago.

It is as good as most people say. The construction is much better
than I thought. This is my first film camera after 20 years .... Now in search of a lens to match it.

The Canon P also looks very tempting.

David

 

[sinisaostojic]

There is a great selection of ltm lenses from Canon, Leica, FSU, and others... enjoy the camera!

 

[Frontman]

The Canon 7 is an excellent camera, and is probably the best bargain you will find in an interchangeable lens rangefinder camera. It was made to compete with the Leica M3 and the Nikon SP, but can be had for a fraction of the cost.

The best lenses would be the Canon 50mm f/1.4, or of your budget allows, the 35mm f/1.5. The 50/1.2, 50/1.8 and 50/2.8 are good lenses, but are prone to hazing, which is often permanent. A less common lens is the Canon 50mm f/2.2, which is also a great performer.

 

[padam]

I think the best handling lens is the 35/2 LTM (very small, quick to focus, falls in the fingers nicely), but the two most popular, the 50/1.8 or the 50/1.4 LTM are also excellent.

 

[John E Earley]

I think the best handling lens is the 35/2 LTM (very small, quick to focus, falls in the fingers nicely), but the two most popular, the 50/1.8 or the 50/1.4 LTM are also excellent.

Although I traded off my 50/1.4 (an excellent lens) I fully agree about the 35.2 and 50/1.8 lenses. I also had the 35/1.8 and although it was a great lens, I find my 35/2 is equally good and somewhat less expensive. Get good ones and they'll run with the best.

 

[david-syd]

Hi All

thanks for the positive comments on the camera. I like to ask is it possible to buy something in the line of 50mm 1.4 or 35mm lens for under $200 us for use with canon 7?

 

[Scrambler]

Hi All thanks for the positive comments on the camera. I like to ask is it possible to buy something in the line of 50mm 1.4 or 35mm lens for under $200 us for use with canon 7?

Not that I've seen but luck plays a part. Usual prices closer to $300. The canon 50/1.8 is said to be pretty good. You would get a Jupiter 12 35/2.8 for your price point but I believe they are not compatible with the light baffles in the Canon 7. But keep looking because if performance is more important than cosmetics or brand you will eventually find something for the money. Unless you want the "look" don't get a Jupiter 3 because the f1.5 is not a general use setting while with the Canon 50/1.4 wide open doesn't change character.

 

[julio1fer]

You can use the Jupiter-12 in the Canon 7 if you bend a light baffle a little bit, I have done it and it works, but it is still a bit too tight for comfort.

As for normal lenses, the Jupiter-8 is a very decent one. I also have the Canon 50 1.8, and I find it a great lens. There is no shortage of example pictures in RFF; the following one is a central crop with the 50mm 1.8 at f/5.6. The 1.4 is rumored to be better but I have never used one. It is certainly more expensive than the 1.8.

 

[ForestCap]

My black 197x Jupiter-12 (bought with a price under 80$) mounts and works fine on my Canon-7 without any hacks. The rear element clears the light baffle by mm level, which is totally ok and normal for machines like camera.

There are some posts about J-12 not fitting Canon-7 but most of them don't show the "crime scene" directly, so we can't analyze which part went wrong.

A sample shot from the combination.


Gem Pond, 於 Flickr

 

[goamules]

Yes, the 50/1.8 is the best buy. It's a very high quality lens, and fairly small compared to the 1.4. I've used them all. There is nothing bad about a clean 50/1.8. In your price range a Jupiter 8 or two would also be good. They usually have none of the focusing compatibility that the J-8s sometimes have.

 

[DNG]

Not much has been said about the meter...
do most early 7's need a fix? Or just accept that the meter won't work...

And if you want a meter get a 7s CDS meter, or again.. most likely that meter won't work?

Anyone have a 7sZ?

 

[Mackinaw]

......Anyone have a 7sZ?

Yeah, me, and the meter works just fine. Accurate too. I have a supply of mercury 1.3 V batteries so finding a proper voltage power supply isn’t a problem.

The 7sZ is a fine camera. Great viewfinder. While I honestly can’t see the improvement that Dechert talks about in his Canon rangefinder book (supposedly the viewfinder optics were changed to make viewing easier for far-sighted people), the 7sZ finder does have less ghosting than the Canon 7. The finder seems sharper too.

Plus the 7sZ has a shoe, something the 7 doesn’t.

Jim B.

 

[padam]

I can confirm that the 7sZ's viewfinder is indeed much better than the earlier ones (which are still fine, by the way)

And there is some variations between the older ones as well. Some of them have finders which are not as crisp because of aging.

 

[FrankS]

I also think Canon lenses are great value. I have a 28f3.5, 35f2, and 50f1.8.

The 35f2.8 is a very good value optic as well. I had one of those too.

The canon 7 is great value with very good quality, but it felt a notch below the build quality of my M2. That's my perception, and makes sense considering the price points they were designed and built to.

 

[bobby_novatron]

I am surprised at how reasonably priced the Canon 50mm F1.8 lenses are nowadays. I think it's a superb little lens -- the quality of manufacture is on par with the Germans, I'd say.

That being said, I'm starting a little collection of LTM lenses, a few Canon ones, and some Russian ones. FWIW I have mounted the Jupiter-12 35mm F2.8 on my Canon 7 and had no problems. I read somewhere that the later-model Jupter-12 lenses are usable on the Canon 7, but not the earlier ones. The one I own is from the 1980's, and as I said it mounts on the Canon 7 without issue.

Here's a photo of my Canon 7 with the 'Japanese Summilux'. I absolutely love the Canon 7, I think it's a real sleeper and I'm surprised it isn't more expensive in the collector's market.

 

[FrankS]

It'd be interesting to see a pic of Canon 7 and Leica M5 together. They're both a bit larger than the classic M.

 

[Mackinaw]

.......I absolutely love the Canon 7, I think it's a real sleeper and I'm surprised it isn't more expensive in the collector's market.......

As good a camera as the 7 is, that dorky-looking selenium meter cell will always relegate the camera to second-class status. A pity too, because it really is an excellent camera.

Jim B.

 

[Bingley]

Hi All

thanks for the positive comments on the camera. I like to ask is it possible to buy something in the line of 50mm 1.4 or 35mm lens for under $200 us for use with canon 7?

The Canon 50/1.8 typically sells for $200 or less. Clean samples are superb lenses. Still a very underappreciated lens, IMO.

 

[Bingley]

I also think Canon lenses are great value. I have a 28f3.5, 35f2, and 50f1.8.

The 35f2.8 is a very good value optic as well. I had one of those too.

The canon 7 is great value with very good quality, but it felt a notch below the build quality of my M2. That's my perception, and makes sense considering the price points they were designed and built to.

I had a Canon 7 a few years back. Yes, the film advance was not as buttery smooth as that on an M2, but the 7 was otherwise built like a tank, and I thought the VF was very good. I agree it's a great value these days. It balances well with larger LTM lenses, and the 50/1.4 would suit it very well. I also thought that the CV Ultron 35/1.7 (the original LTM version) balanced very well on the Canon 7.

The biggest drawback for me at the time was the absence of an auxiliary shoe for external finders. I had recently purchased a 28mm lens and wanted a vf that more closely approximated the field of view of that lens. But if you're mainly a 35/50 user (as I am now) the 7 is definitely a quality camera for a reasonable price.

I've long since parted with the 7, but here's a photo of it with the Ultron 35:
Canon-7-CV-Ultron-35-a by bingley0522, on Flickr

 

[Wulfthari]

As good a camera as the 7 is, that dorky-looking selenium meter cell will always relegate the camera to second-class status. A pity too, because it really is an excellent camera.

Jim B.

The biggest drawback for me at the time was the absence of an auxiliary shoe for external finders. I had recently purchased a 28mm lens and wanted a vf that more closely approximated the field of view of that lens. But if you're mainly a 35/50 user (as I am now) the 7 is definitely a quality camera for a reasonable price.

That's the reason why 7s exist, they are better looking than the normal type, they have an accessory shoe and their meter really works.

It'd be interesting to see a pic of Canon 7 and Leica M5 together. They're both a bit larger than the classic M.

They both have an integrated lightmeter, a fair comparison is a M3 or M4 with a MR-4 meter on the top.