Canon 7 info

S

Steve B

Established
Local time
10:01 AM
Joined
Dec 18, 2005
Messages
159
Location
Bishop, CA
View My Gallery
Hi all, I'm looking for a little guidance here as I'm really starting to get interested in the Canon rangefinders. They look like such a well built and handsome camera but I've never had a chance to actually use one. Some questions.
1) How accurate is the meter on the 7, especially in low light?
2) How good is the eye relief on the viewfinder, especailly for a glasses wearer?
3) Is this a good and usable camera for one who is used to rangefinders?
For reference I have and use a Bessa R2 with Konica M-Hexanon 35mm f2 and (occasionally) a Contax IIa with sonnar 50mm f2. I've had Leica lust for some years now as they have become the icon of what a quality rangefinder looks like but I'm starting to wonder why as the Canon is just such a beautiful camera.
I'm really starting to twitch here, even to the point of doing some trolling on ebay. Any input on the below listed auctions would be most welcome.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=7592830859&ssPageName=STRK:MEWA:IT

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&rd=1&item=7594386388&ssPageName=STRK:MEWA:PIC

I've come so close to buying the 7 with the .95 but simply can't justify it. I know I'm just lusting after that huge piece of glass and the novelty of it but I know that I'd be spending a lot of money on a feature that I probably wouldn't use that much and I'm told that other lenses have better performance in the aperture range that most people use. But I sure want it. Any thoughts on lens choice would also be appreciated.
Thanks everybody,,,,,,,
 
Hello Steve,

I have a 7 and love it. I'll try to answer your questions as best as I can.

1) It is a selenium meter. If it is good, it will be as accurate as any is, but below EV 6 or 7, your Mk1 Eyeball Meter will be more accurate. I do use the meter on mine, but usually also have a hand held along. I have a VC Meter II for my classics and it goes in the pocket quite well.

2) It's fine for me. If I am wearing my glasses, I can use the 35 finder just fine. I don't always have mine on for various reasons. It is a glasses scratcher though.

3) It's my primary camera and I really prefer it to anything else I've used, including a couple of Leicas. That gets into personal preferences, but I like the finder and far prefer a swing open back. The labeled finder lines and the shutter lock are also very big pluses for me. I consider the build quality to be as good as anything in that era - which is to say superior to any (yes, any) currently made camera.

As for lenses, any of the Canon 50's will suit you admirably. I'd actually suggest starting with the 50/1.8. Mostly an underrated lens, it's starting to get noticed. Grab one before the prices get any higher on them. It's a very good lens and is very high on the bang/buck scale to my eyes.

As for those two auctions, it depends on what you want. Do you need a camera that is cosmetically perfect? Or do you want a camera that you can grab on your way out the door every day and not have to worry about a scratch in the chrome? If you, as I, tend to the latter, then right now I'd point you at KEH instead of ebay. They have a bargain graded 7 for $235 and a bargain graded chrome 50/1.8 for $149. For the same amount, essentially as the first auction you get a good user body and lens. As for the one with the 50/.95... well, it's reasonable if you want it. But I'd rather get a better everyday lens first and then down the road pick up the specialist. (I do want one, but it's going to be a long while for me... 😛 )

If you really need to spend lots of money on your Canon, spend it with Luigi at Leicatime. His half case for the 7 is exquisite. Hideous on the toy budget but an utter joy to use.

Hope this helps,

William
 
Thanks William

Thanks William

William that actually helps a great deal. I'm glad to know the viewfinder is ok and I use glass lens glasses partly for this reason. Your advice has helped me quell the twitching finger. I'd rather buy from a reputable outfit than an ebayer, though he does have a 100% feedback rating. Also I really don't care if the camera is in showroom condition. This thing is going to get taken to a lot of places that would scare the crap out of a velvet lined display case. Carefully of course.
One more question, I notice that the meter readout is on the top plate and appears to display aperture info. Is there any info available in the viewfinder? Thanks tons for your quick response. I think you may have just saved my marriage, or at least my DTI. (Domestic Tranquility Index).
 
Just out of paranoia that I was giving good info, I just set my finder to 35, put on my glasses and could see all four sides lines. 🙂 One other thing - if you buy one made after 1958, the Jupiter 12 will fit the Canon 7, despite what you may hear. My avatar picture has my J-12 mounted ... 😉 It is possibly the best FSU lens made and will give you excellent results even though it is extreamly cheap for a LTM 35/2.8 lens 😀

No, none of the meter information is displayed in the finder. It's kind of a poor mans aperture priority system. Set your aperture to, say 16, and then move the shutter speed dial until the meter needle lines up with the appropriate aperture - at least that's the best way I've found to use the meter. I like using hyperfocal technique, so that may be why it works well for me - I set my aperture, set my focus with infinity on that f-stop on the DOF scale and then adjust shutter speed as necessary.

I like KEH alot. I got my 7 from them - bargain grade for $190. I also picked up a Canon 50/1.8 form another RFF member for $100. I really beleive that a person just can not get a cheaper high quality introduction to the golden age of rangefinders.

Again, I hope this helps.

William
 
Don't discount the Canon P, either. No meter, but that viewfinder magnification is nice.

This is not just because I love the Canon P. I say this because it really is a great camera. I have no bias, I swear. 😀
 
The P is a very nice camera. Personally I like the 7 just a bit better for a number of fairly small detail reasons (not the least of which is that with 137,000 of the 7 made, they tend to be cheaper 😀 )

If you haven't already read them, this is probably a good time to point you at several pages at three web sites.

First at Mr. Gandy's Cameraquest -
http://www.cameraquest.com/canon7sz.htm
http://www.cameraquest.com/canonp.htm

And then at Mr. Stella's web site -
http://www.dantestella.com/technical/canon7.html
http://www.dantestella.com/technical/canonp.html

Finally there are Ms. Nakamura's pages -
http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/index-frameset.html?Canon7.html~mainFrame
http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/index-frameset.html?CanonP.html~mainFrame

All three give some very good information comparing the 2 cameras and all of them have slightly different preferences and biases. Hopefully between all of them and us, you can understand what you are looking for in a camera.

William
 
thoughts

thoughts

Thanks for the input. Stephanie, I think the P is a beautiful camera and would really consider one except that I know I won't use a camera without a meter as much as otherwise. I have some limited history (the last 3 years) with rangefinders so have some idea of what I'm looking for and what makes rangefinders so wonderful. I have spent some time on Gandy's site and some others as well. I really like my R2 but am interested in using a more "classic" camera just for the fun of using older cameras and branching out a bit.
Can you tell me what the viewfinder magnification on the 7 is?
 
Steve B said:
I've come so close to buying the 7 with the .95 but simply can't justify it. I know I'm just lusting after that huge piece of glass and the novelty of it but I know that I'd be spending a lot of money on a feature that I probably wouldn't use that much and I'm told that other lenses have better performance in the aperture range that most people use. But I sure want it. Any thoughts on lens choice would also be appreciated.
Click to expand...

Actually, the 50/0.95 performs quite nicely when stopped down to more normal apertures... although it may not be quite as good, especially in the corners, as, say, the 50/1.4 (which is generally considered to be the best-performing Canon RF 50mm lens, although the 50/1.8 is right on its heels and significantly less expensive.)

The real penalties you pay for using the 50/0.95 are its huge size (how many other 50mm lenses require a 72mm filter?!?!?), hefty weight, and -- probably most annoying of all -- that fact that its diameter blocks out nearly 1/3 of the 7's viewfinder! When you're shooting with a 50/0.95, there's a huge slice of finder area in which you simply have to assume nothing intrusive has bobbed up in your picture since the last time you looked; I've gotten burned a couple of times when something unexpected DID rear up!

So while the 50/0.95 is a cool thing to own, and at full aperture produces images with a uniquely atmospheric "look," I'd think it would be a poor choice as your first or only 50mm lens for a Canon RF. I'd say start with a 50/1.4 or 50/1.8 (or a nice sharp Voigtlander 50/1.5 Nokton, if you don't mind horrifying the Canon purists) and then see where you want to go from there.

The 7-series' comprehensive collection of finder framelines gives you a lot of choices; depending on whether you favor wider or longer views, your next lens might be the well-regarded Canon 35/2.8, or pricey and elusive but interesting 35/1.5. (Or split the difference and go for a snappy 35/1.7 Voigtlander Ultron.)

If you like portraits or tighter views, a 100mm lens is a nice choice: Canon's 100/3.5 is sharp, light, and tiny, while the hard-to-find 100/2 is biggish, usefully fast, and a fabulous performer even at full aperture. Nor would you want to pass on a 105/2.5 Nikkor if you found an affordable one in LTM mount; it's another hefty, super-crisp lens that does an especially great job on skin textures and other fine details.

Here are a couple of my own 50mm pix just to get you thinking...

Late-night drag races with a 50/0.95 at full aperture --
02-08-01_10.JPG


50/1.4 on an Epson R-D 1 --
epsn0073.jpg
 
Last edited:
It is 0.8x according to Karen Nakamura. That sounds about right looking through it.

William
 
Hey jlw, and all

Hey jlw, and all

Thanks for posting the pics. The idea of being able to hand hold shots like that is extremely intriquing although I think you're right in that the .95 wouldn't be the best choice for a daily shooter 50mm. Maybe I'll consider looking for one after I've had the camera for awhile. In the meantime I think I'll probably go for the VC lenses as the Nokton 1.5 looks pretty nice. My only regret is that if I go over to an LTM camera I'll probably have to sell the Konica M-Hexanon 35mm f2 that I currently have on the R2 and really like a lot! Oh, the heartbreak of gear dementia! I really do like to actually take pictures, too. Shoulda learned to play the guitar!
 
Conflicted

Conflicted

Well, now I don't know what to do. I like the M2 suggestion a lot. I hadn't thought of it as I usually think in terms of the more well known Leicas like the M3 and the M6, etc. But I want 35mm framelines and I can't afford an M6. I don't know why I'm even looking as my R2 works fine but I'm starting to lust after a camera with a little more of a classic feel and a more solid build. On the other hand I want a built in meter that works in low light conditions, or at least a built in meter. I guess I'm going to keep looking for a Canon 7 and probably get a Nokton 50mm f1.5 for it that I can also use on my R2 with an adaptor. If I really love the 7 I'll consider selling the R2 and Konica 35 and looking into some classy screw mount glass.
Thanks for being a sounding board for my gear dementia. Can I go take pictures now?
 
got it!

got it!

Well, I decided to go for it and ordered a Canon 7 and Nokton 50mm f1.5 from Mr. Sceenplays, Battleships ,The Unexplained and every page opens in a new window. Sorry Stephen, no offense intended! It should be here tomorrow and I'm looking forward to it. I've been using an R2 for the last 3 years so it'll be an interesting comparison. I bought this thing under the con that I'll be selling the R2 to pay for it but I'm loath to part with the Konica M-Hexanon 35mm f2. I'm starting to understand Stephens frustration with the introduction of the M mount. If they had maintained the standard LTM I'd be able to use the Konica on the Canon! If I like the Canon and Nokton enough I might have the R2 and Konica for sale. Thanks for all the input you guys gave me above.
 
Congratulations on picking up the Canon 7. It is a great camera.

The thread mount limited the size of the rear element that could fit into the camera. The 50/0.95 "could have" been made in M-Mount, and can be adapted to it. It is too big for the LTM and that is why Canon had to go to the "obscure" breech-lock mount for that lens. Some of us have mused over putting an M-Mount on the Canon 7. The M-Mount sits in closer to the film, done to accommodate the LTM adapter. The Canon 7 body shell would have to be milled down. HHhmmm.....
 
Fanciful, but I'd be interested.

Fanciful, but I'd be interested.

If I like this camera as much as I expect to I would at least in theory be interested in participating in an M-mount conversion. I think it would be great to have such a classic old camera that could take any Leica glass ever made. If someone wants to spearhead a project I'd contribute my body (camera that is) to the cause to get the price per unit down to an affordable level. Although, some might consider it silly to modify a camera and lens that already fit together to a totally different mount. I don't have a 50 .95 yet but I do have a Konica M-Hexanon that I'd really love to be able to use with the Canon. And it might be a fun project just for the purely esoteric aspects.
 
Steve B said:
Well, now I don't know what to do. I like the M2 suggestion a lot. I hadn't thought of it as I usually think in terms of the more well known Leicas like the M3 and the M6, etc. But I want 35mm framelines and I can't afford an M6. I don't know why I'm even looking as my R2 works fine but I'm starting to lust after a camera with a little more of a classic feel and a more solid build. On the other hand I want a built in meter that works in low light conditions, or at least a built in meter. I guess I'm going to keep looking for a Canon 7 and probably get a Nokton 50mm f1.5 for it that I can also use on my R2 with an adaptor. If I really love the 7 I'll consider selling the R2 and Konica 35 and looking into some classy screw mount glass.
Thanks for being a sounding board for my gear dementia. Can I go take pictures now?
Click to expand...

Steve B said:
If I like this camera as much as I expect to I would at least in theory be interested in participating in an M-mount conversion. I think it would be great to have such a classic old camera that could take any Leica glass ever made. If someone wants to spearhead a project I'd contribute my body (camera that is) to the cause to get the price per unit down to an affordable level. Although, some might consider it silly to modify a camera and lens that already fit together to a totally different mount. I don't have a 50 .95 yet but I do have a Konica M-Hexanon that I'd really love to be able to use with the Canon. And it might be a fun project just for the purely esoteric aspects.
Click to expand...


Hello Steve,

I have both the M2, and the 7S. I like my M2 better (Small hands, even for a chinese), but the 7s handle just alright if it is with a small lens.

There are so many interesting LTM lenses around, hunt them down! The M lens can come later!
 
Will said:
There are so many interesting LTM lenses around, hunt them down! The M lens can come later!
Click to expand...

Will has an excellent point here. This is especially true of Canon's own LTM lenses, so, while I understand the urge (to the twitching point of wanting to send my 7 to Brian and saying "do it!!!!") in the end there are so many fun lenses out there to play with...

Heck, if nothing else, get your 7 & then get a Jupiter-3 50/1.5 and ask Brian to reshim it. You'll then have in your hands a lens equal to those that some pay many hundreds of dollars for.

Then there are the little companies. I have a line on a Steinheil 35/4.5 & 85/2.8 for a very reasonable price if I can get the $$$$ together in time. I've heard good things of the 85 & almost nothing about the 35... This one is cheap enough to play, so what the heck...

Have fun. In the end, we all live too short a time to be too fussy...

William
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

N
Canon LTM 35mm f2, Canon 35mm f2.8, Jupiter 12 - opinions on these lenses?
2 3
Replies
42
Views
8K
ACullen
A
R
Canon 7 question
Replies
18
Views
835
Sonnar Brian
Sonnar Brian
wrs1145
LTM lens
Replies
2
Views
447
peterm1
peterm1
8
Help me Choose a 35mm for an Canon RF Article
2
Replies
22
Views
2K
wlewisiii
W
tortellini_man
Mounting external light meter on Canon 7
Replies
13
Views
1K
shawn
S
Back
Top Bottom