Canon LTM Canon P or Canon 7?

[antonandreas]

I am seriously considering obtaining a Canon P or 7 series camera, but would like the opinions of their users - especially if both are owned.

Is the difference in build quality all that different?
Do you feel the Canon P viewfinder is cluttered?
Do they usually remain light tight/do seals usually need to be replaced?
How easily does the rangefinder fall out of alignment?
What is their difference in size?
Is there anything I should be looking out for?

This would be my first interchangeable lens rangefinder system. Optimally I would like the Zeiss Ikon M-mount, but that is out of my price range - as are M-mount lenses. Current thinking (possibly flawed) is that I could find some nice screw mounts now for this camera and use an adapter should I ever get the Zeiss.

 

[Dave Wilkinson]

I've had both in the past, nice cameras - but I think you would probably be happier with a M2 (or M3) I was, and not too much price difference!....just my two-pennorth 🙂
Dave.

 

[pachuco]

I agree with Dave. I use a Canon P and although I like it, the viewfinder takes a little getting used to. Don't get me wrong, its a great rangefinder but compared to an M or Zeiss it feels different.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

I had them both and ended up with an M2. But I liked the P better.

 

[back alley]

i prefer the p to the 7.

as for the m2, i like and prefer a swing door for film changing so i owned 3 canon p bodies at one time and was quite content.
and yes, screw mount lenses will, with ltm adapter, fit a future m camera purchase.

i recommend starting with a canon 35/2.8 chrome version and/or the canon 50/1.8, both lovely lenses.

 

[Mablo]

I have a P and love it. I can easily load a new roll of film when walking. I cannot do that with my M4.

 

[wlewisiii]

joe, that is still an exquisite shot!

William

 

[raid]

I use the Canon P more than any other RF camera I own. I have two Canon P cameras and one Canon 7 and two Leica M (3 and 6). It is a workhorse for practical photography.

 

[back alley]

joe, that is still an exquisite shot!

William

thanks william.

 

[Bingley]

I was in your situation a number of years ago. The P was my first interchangeable lens rangefinder, and I still have it. I later bought a 7, used it for a couple of years, and then sold it to help finance the purchase of an M2. To answer your questions:

- They are both sturdy, well made cameras, every bit as solid as Leica M cameras of the same time period, but of course much less expensive. They have the advantage of metal foil shutters (can't burn a hole in them like you can a cloth shutter) and (as joe points out) easy-loading swing backs.

-- I never felt the P's viewfinder was cluttered, but then I use it primarily w/ 50 or 100 lenses. The 35 framelines are too hard for me to see (I wear glasses). The vf on the 7 is glorious, and if you prefer a 35 lens you should give it serious consideration.

-- Never had a problem w/ seals, but it would be worth budgeting a CLA.

-- I don't think the rangefinders fall out of alignment any more often than on M cameras. Any rangefinder can get knocked out of alignment if you bang it hard enough. Aligning the rf on the P is not hard to do, however, and there are threads here on RFF that describe how to do it.

-- Size: the 7 is a bit larger than the P, and feels much larger, and is heavier too. The P feels smaller, although it's actually slightly larger than a Leica M2 or M3.

-- Other things to note: The shutter curtains often have wrinkles: don't worry about it, this hardly ever affects performance. The meter on the 7, if it's still working, is not too bad for daylight use. The original 7 does NOT have an accessory shoe, which can be an issue if you want to use wider lenses with an accessory finder. Canon fixed this on the 7s, but that's a rarer, and more expensive camera.

Bottom line: they're both excellent cameras, particularly if you're just getting into rfs. They'll use any LTM lens, which gives you a lot of choices. If your preference is for 35, I'd go w/ the 7 b/c the 35 framelines are easier to see; if your preference is for 50, I'd go w/ the P.

 

[BillBingham2]

I thought the 7 had an accessory shoe for viewfinders that adjusted the frame lines for parallax as you focused the lens (very cool idea)? Was that a different camera in the Canon line?

B2 (;->

 

[John Shriver]

The auto-parallax finder shoe was on the V and VI series of models.

The light meter on the 7s is handy, although not TTL. I have no complaints with the construction quality of my 7s, and the finder is very nice, particularly the framelines.

 

[David Murphy]

They are both fine cameras with similar features. The thing to look out for on the P is shutter tapering. I think the shutter on the 7 is a bit more robust, but any old camera might need (or eventually should have) servicing. The 7 would probably be a better choice if you plan to use the 135mm focal length since it has internal 135mm frame lines.

 

[Bill58]

The P is the best value on the vintage RF scene. That's the reason Canon sold more of them than any other. It's trouble-free and as mentioned earlier, so easy to load/ unload.

It does everything you need it to do, if you get a competent CLA. The foam seals are two tiny pieces in the channels on the back at the hinge near the body.

Here's mine repainted in OD green here in Korea for a pittance: http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=canon model p&w=40264241@N00

 

[Mackinaw]

I'd go with the Canon 7 mainly in the strengths of it's superb viewfinder, but I actually agree with Dave W. If you can afford it, spend the few extra $$$ and buy a Leica M3 or M2.

Jim B.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

A good user Canon 7 goes for ~$200 these days, the Canon P for closer to $250 for a user. So it's a good bit less than an M2 or M3.

I have all four of the cameras mentioned, and grab the Canon P more than the others. It's a great camera for using with a fast 50. After that, I grab the M3. I like the high-mag finders.

I saw a Leica M2 in the Smithsonian today. It had been in space. It would go for more.

 

[Bingley]

I thought the 7 had an accessory shoe for viewfinders that adjusted the frame lines for parallax as you focused the lens (very cool idea)? Was that a different camera in the Canon line?

B2 (;->

The original 7 had no accessory shoe, Bill, although I understand that Canon made one that could be attached somehow. The later 7s had an accessory shoe.

 

[antonandreas]

Thank you all for your opinions and answers.

 

[rpj]

Reading this thread I remember discusions in the Nikon RF forum about putting some sort of filter over the rf window to increase the contrast of the rangefinder on the S series. My Canon P viewfinder is less contrasty and harder to focus than my M3, so I wonder if this would work on a model P viewfinder as well? Or is there a better solution?

 

[ItsReallyDarren]

I've done something similar to an M2. I used a gel filter from a video/cine lighting store, cut it to the same size as the viewfinder window and used a little bit of adhesive to keep it in place.

Helped boost the contrast.