Soeren
Well-known
Hi guys/girls
Around 6 months ago I got my first 35mm rangefinder since I sold the QL17 G years back, a Zorki 4. Qualitywise its decent and the pics from the Jupiter 8 are pretty good. Only thing is it just doesn't feel right. Handling shutterspeed change and film advancing is not intuitive so it somewhat ruins my fun. So if id like something a bit more modern not to expensive and with 35mm framelines what would you recommend and which lenses should I get (2 lens- alt. 3 lenskit)
Best regards
Around 6 months ago I got my first 35mm rangefinder since I sold the QL17 G years back, a Zorki 4. Qualitywise its decent and the pics from the Jupiter 8 are pretty good. Only thing is it just doesn't feel right. Handling shutterspeed change and film advancing is not intuitive so it somewhat ruins my fun. So if id like something a bit more modern not to expensive and with 35mm framelines what would you recommend and which lenses should I get (2 lens- alt. 3 lenskit)
Best regards
jamais
Established
I have used a Zorki 3s, a Canon P and a Leica M4-P. I know exactly what you mean. The Canon P is a wonderful well built camera but I would not recommend using it with 35mm lenses on a regular basis due to the 1:1 magnification of the finder. If you wear glasses it is even worse.
Classique
Well-known
I shot with Canon P and Canon 7 for a while and I liked the handling of P better. I really enjoyed the 1x viewfinder and large focus patch. 35mm is a bit harder to see (you have to roll your eyes) but it is better than not having one.
Recently I got a Leica M4-2 and other than the smaller slightly dimmer viewfinder, handling is even better. Shutter is quieter on slow speeds and it is actually a bit smaller than Canon P. The added grip helps a lot also.
thegman
Veteran
Depends on the budget really, but if you want something a bit modern, then I'd be looking at either a Bessa R2A, or a Zeiss Ikon. Both have meters, and even aperture priority modes.
Budget is a major factor though, the Zeiss Ikon is a beauty, but they are not pennies.
Budget is a major factor though, the Zeiss Ikon is a beauty, but they are not pennies.
Bill58
Native Texan
The P all the way (as long as you get one w/ a bright VF and a deep yellow patch).
Mackinaw
Think Different
All three are excellent cameras. Note that the Canon P uses reflected framelines, which may or may not have aged well. I've seen some Ps' with nice contrasty viewfinders and others that are "washed out." If you decide to go with a P, make sure you look throughout the viewfinder first.
Both the Leica M and Canon 7 use projected framelines. The big difference between the two cameras, at least regarding the viewfinder, is that the focusing patch of the Canon 7 is "soft-edged" while that of the Leica M is "hard-edged." Most folks find the Leica a bit easier to focus, because of this.
Quality-wise, they are all top-notch. I prefer the Canon 7 over the P, but that's just me. If given a choice though, I'd go with a Leica M. Hard to beat a Leica.
Jim B.
Both the Leica M and Canon 7 use projected framelines. The big difference between the two cameras, at least regarding the viewfinder, is that the focusing patch of the Canon 7 is "soft-edged" while that of the Leica M is "hard-edged." Most folks find the Leica a bit easier to focus, because of this.
Quality-wise, they are all top-notch. I prefer the Canon 7 over the P, but that's just me. If given a choice though, I'd go with a Leica M. Hard to beat a Leica.
Jim B.
Range-rover
Veteran
I think you should look a a Nikon S3, it has a 35mm finder as well, I just got one
and love it.
Range
and love it.
Range
ChrisN
Striving
+1 for the P (if you don't wear glasses). Beautiful camera, and excellent ergonomics.
That said, I ended up with an M (or two). Initially I couldn't feel any advantage, but in the long term I'm happy that the M is the better camera for me, for the lenses I want to use (and a few other less concrete reasons).
Who remembers the statement by our member JLW? "The Canon P is a "sweet spot" in RF camera evolution: It has enough modern features to be convenient, but retains classic look and feel. It's elegant and prestigious (in a restrained way) but not so much so that you'll be afraid to take it out and use it. Owning one impresses those in the know, without attracting the attention of status-conscious wankers."
That said, I ended up with an M (or two). Initially I couldn't feel any advantage, but in the long term I'm happy that the M is the better camera for me, for the lenses I want to use (and a few other less concrete reasons).
Who remembers the statement by our member JLW? "The Canon P is a "sweet spot" in RF camera evolution: It has enough modern features to be convenient, but retains classic look and feel. It's elegant and prestigious (in a restrained way) but not so much so that you'll be afraid to take it out and use it. Owning one impresses those in the know, without attracting the attention of status-conscious wankers."
mretina
Well-known
The P is really nice and has a great viewfinder 1:1 magnification (better than Leica for 50mm). The 7 handles 35mm better and you may have a working meter. I have and use both of them, but I would recommend the P of the two.
If you look for a modern camera, light and easy to use and you can cope with some plastic, I recommend a Bessa R (LTM mount only), it is my first rangefinder and still the one I go to when I need an accurate meter, a light modern camera and speed up to 1/2000. You have certain limitation on collapsible lenses
Otherwise you can get an M2 that has great 35mm framelines, is the cheapest leica M you can find (but still twice or more the price of a Bessa R / Canon P or 7) and you can also go for M mount lenses. In terms of quality and rangefinder patch Leica is the best.
But as an immediate upgrade to the Zorki and the modern feel I would go Canon P / Bessa R.
If you look for a modern camera, light and easy to use and you can cope with some plastic, I recommend a Bessa R (LTM mount only), it is my first rangefinder and still the one I go to when I need an accurate meter, a light modern camera and speed up to 1/2000. You have certain limitation on collapsible lenses
Otherwise you can get an M2 that has great 35mm framelines, is the cheapest leica M you can find (but still twice or more the price of a Bessa R / Canon P or 7) and you can also go for M mount lenses. In terms of quality and rangefinder patch Leica is the best.
But as an immediate upgrade to the Zorki and the modern feel I would go Canon P / Bessa R.
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
Hmm... I have an M4-P and a Canon P.
The viewfinder is brighter on the Leica and the clarity and the precision of the patch is not even a contest.
Either I have a dim Canon P or you have a dim M4-2
mike rosenlof
Insufficient information
I can agree with just about everything said here (the thread up to here, not just this quote). The P is a nice nice user camera. I too am not crazy about using it with a 35mm lens. The viewfinder is OK, but not optimal. Get a 35mm viewfinder to put in the accessory shoe, and it's nice again.
Mablo
Well-known
Canon P's viewfinder is not too bad for 35mm. Either you roll your eyeball a bit or you need to learn to focus with your right eye keeping both eyes open. Still, the rangefinder patch is dim compared to a Leica M or Bessa R. It doesn't matter too much on the street or shooting cityscapes etc. but if you shoot a lot of portraits where focus is critical it probably will become a problem.
Soeren
Well-known
Thanks guys for your replies. I do wear glasses so the P seems out of the question. Maybe I should watch out for the Bessas too as mentioned.
How about lenses? Which 35mm for a Canon 7?
Best regards
How about lenses? Which 35mm for a Canon 7?
Best regards
All of these are fine cameras if you just are interested in having a better rangefinder, but if you want a Leica, the canon's don't scratch that itch.
richardhkirkando
Well-known
For ultra cheap, the older black J-12s will work on a 7.
Mackinaw
Think Different
If you're talking about Canon LTM lenses, all of the Canon 35mm lenses are pretty good.
The Canon 35/2.0 has a fine reputation. Very compact and light, with excellent performance wide-open. Some folks (me) don't like the bokeh (fish scale-like).
The Canon 35/1.5 is a good lens. Very fast with good overall performance. It is scarce though and usually commands a premium price.
The Canon 35/2.8 isn't particularly fast, but has a nice classic 1950's look. Affordable too.
Others can talk about Leica LTM lenses and Voigtlander lenses.
Jim B.
Soeren
Well-known
Thanks again. Uhh still undecided, that P looks really nice
Will my Jupiter 8 work on any of the Canons? What are the chances I need to readjust focussing etc?
And while on the subject J8 how do I tighten up the aperture ring?
Hmm there are som good looking P's out there not to expensive maybe.....
Best regards
Will my Jupiter 8 work on any of the Canons? What are the chances I need to readjust focussing etc?
And while on the subject J8 how do I tighten up the aperture ring?
Hmm there are som good looking P's out there not to expensive maybe.....
Best regards
Brian Legge
Veteran
There is absolutely nothing wrong with a P in good condition.
The J8 alignment risks should be the same on any of these cameras as all were originally made to the Leica standard. Its possible to find a perfectly fine on - or adjust (or have on adjusted) - but its always a gamble. Good ones can be stellar lenses.
On the 35mm side, I'd consider a Voigtlander 35mm 2.5. The Canon 35mm 2.0s are more expensive and the 2.8s slightly less but the VC 35mm is more likely to be in good condition and is a steal if you can find one for $300 or less given the results you can get out of it.
J12s are hit and miss - both in image quality and fitting in Canon bodies. I had a P which definitely didn't take but some people have had luck with particular pairs. Its difficult to avoid light flaring though unless you use a hood with it.
The J8 alignment risks should be the same on any of these cameras as all were originally made to the Leica standard. Its possible to find a perfectly fine on - or adjust (or have on adjusted) - but its always a gamble. Good ones can be stellar lenses.
On the 35mm side, I'd consider a Voigtlander 35mm 2.5. The Canon 35mm 2.0s are more expensive and the 2.8s slightly less but the VC 35mm is more likely to be in good condition and is a steal if you can find one for $300 or less given the results you can get out of it.
J12s are hit and miss - both in image quality and fitting in Canon bodies. I had a P which definitely didn't take but some people have had luck with particular pairs. Its difficult to avoid light flaring though unless you use a hood with it.
Soeren
Well-known
So what to look out for when buying a Canon P?
From what I read the later LTM RFs more often than not had crinkeled shutterblades. comments?
I also read somewhere that the mechanics are sturdy and up till around now shows no problems, true?
How much should I expect to pay for a sound P body and are reasonably fast canon 35mm and 85mm (around f/2 ) rare or within reach on a budget ( estimate prices please)?
Best regards
From what I read the later LTM RFs more often than not had crinkeled shutterblades. comments?
I also read somewhere that the mechanics are sturdy and up till around now shows no problems, true?
How much should I expect to pay for a sound P body and are reasonably fast canon 35mm and 85mm (around f/2 ) rare or within reach on a budget ( estimate prices please)?
Best regards
Mackinaw
Think Different
Look though the viewfinder first. Because the framelines are reflected, there's a lot of variation. The general view and framelines of some Ps' are washed out and flary, while others are contrasty and well defined. Wrinkled shutters often look much worse than they actually are. If the wrinkles aren't extreme, the shutter will work as designed. Mechanically, the P is a well-designed camera, but bear in mind that they are now 50+ years old and may be in need of a CLA. If you need a major repair, forget it, new parts are not available. Somebody else can give you an idea of price.
JIm B.
JIm B.