Canon P vs. Canon 7

[paulfish4570]

It did not take long to get over the inkling of saving for a Leica II or III body. As I quickly found out, they are just too lightweight for my shooting situation.

I have stoopid hand tremors and I have lost some fingertip feeling and micro-motor skillage due to a neuropathy. I write this only as background germaine to the discussion I hope this engenders.

Weight helps mitigate the tremors A LOT. Going from a 12-ounce Bessa R body to a Lynx 14E and a Konica SIII much improved average photo sharpness. I have a FED-2d, which is a little heavier than the Bessa R, and which I shoot pretty well because of ergonomics. I also have three fsu lenses for the FED, which brought me the search for an interchangeable lens LTM body in the first place.

The earlier Canon roman numeral series cameras are about as lightweight as the Leica II and III series, if what I found via Google is remotely correct. Which brings me to this forum where Raid so kindly started a thread with photos of his personal Canon Ps.

So, which do y'all prefer? The P or the 7?

From an aesthetics standpoint as seen in photos only, the P is better looking without the selenium meter. In any case, I much like the elongated octagonal shape of the P and 7 bodies, which is the same for my Pentax and Fujica SLR bodies, and my lone Canon, the EX SLR with the interchangeable lens fronts. (Anyone fancy it? It is an excellent shooter; I have only the normal lens ...)

 

[raid]

I have both. The 7 is ugly while the P is elegant.

Both have excellent viewfinders. The 7 allows you to switch to different focal lengths VF. In the P, there are frames.

The 7 allows the use of the Canon 50/0.95.

 

[gilpen123]

I once had the P and IMO it's one of the prettiest RF I've used. I never liked the 7 and the meter most of the times goes wonky. I would prefer the P anytime, I had the VCII meter with it and it's a great combo.

 

[raid]

I agree with Gil.
The P looks better than the 7.
I can show you both, Paul.
I could also bring with me a IIIf.

 

[xxloverxx]

I haven't held either one of them before, but if I had to choose, it'd be the P, just because there's no meter.
I just don't like meters in cameras these days, for some reason.

 

[raid]

Paul,
Would having AF improve sharpness for you?
It helps with weaker eye sight.

 

[John Shriver]

Both have the same nice knobby shutter speed dial. The wind lever is really nice too.

The finders are very different.

The P's finder is still quite simple, with parallax-corrected Albada reflected framelines for 35mm, 50mm, and 100mm, and the whole field of view for 35mm. It is a 1:1 magnification finder, which makes the 35mm framelines very hard to see if you wear glasses. But, the plus of a 1:1 finder is that if you're right-eyed, you have the option of shooting with both eyes open, giving you great peripheral vision.

The 7 and 7s have a true bright-line finder, with brilliant white parallax-corrected frame lines, with a dial to select the frame lines. The magnification of the finder is lower, at 0.8x, making the 35mm framelines easier to see. (Still not easy with glasses.) The only compromise in the framelines is that 85mm and 100mm are up at the same time.

But the Achilles' Heel of the 7 is the lack of an accessory shoe. Not the camera if you ever want to use a lens wider than 35mm.

The 7s solves this accessory shoe problem, and gives you a far more useful meter, but it's more expensive.

 

[raid]

This is a good point, John. I have faced it several times when reaching for the Canon 7 (because it had film in it) and a 21mm lens with VF.

 

[paulfish4570]

I am a normal lens guy; 35mm is as wide as I would go on an RF.
I also am right-eyed, and I need 1.5+ - 2+ reading glasses to focus well on some rangefinder and SLR patches. I used cheap glasses, so pushing up to a viewfinder is nothing to worry about.
For example, I need reading glasses for my Yashica Lynx. I do not need glasses for my Konica SIII.
As for AF, Raid, I just do not like depending on a battery. There are too many things that can go wrong, from circuitry to mechanics. With these manual cameras, the possibly of something going wrong is mechanics only. (Battery-powered maters do not count; I can go meterless.)
And as long as I have a $6 pair of reading glasses, I can focus well ... 🙂

 

[Ranchu]

I would suggest you might want to lean toward the P if the holding steady is your main concern. The 7 has a top that sits proud of the film door in back, and the meter cell projects in front where your middle finger rests. I found these projections a little awkward to settle into. I prefer flat, so I can grip between my middle finger in front and my thumb and thumb pad in back. I don't want to blow this out of proportion, but I thought it would help to mention it.

 

[paulfish4570]

I think that is a very important point, Ranchu, and hardly out of proportion. I am leaning toward the P also, without having handled either. Anything I use has to feel right for me to use it habitually. Balance is crucial.
Choosing a carry camera is like choosing a hunting rifle or shotgun, or a handgun. (I hope this does not offend too many of you. Besides, I do not carry a handgun any more precisely because of the neuropathy.) I want something that comes to hand - and eye - like it is part of me.
My Pentax SP1000 is like that.

 

[Ranchu]

My Nikkormat, too. Just did an eyeball comparison between the 7 and the Nikkormat. From above they're nearly identical in shape aside from the projections.

 

[Bingley]

Paul -- Raid and John Shriver have identified the salient differences between the P and the 7. I'd only add that the P rocks w/ a 50 lens (think of it as a poor man's M3) b/c of the size of the framelines in the 1:1 vf, which are easy to see. And if you ever do want to use a wider lens, there's an accessory shoe on the P. I had a 7 and a P at one point; I sold the 7 and kept the P. But both of these camera bodies are solid, hefty (they each weigh more than an M2), and sturdy.

 

[raid]

I even traded away a mint Canon VI-L but kept my P.

 

[Pico]

I have familial tremor. Sometimes it is so bad I cannot type.

Short answer - and not pretty or clever - add weight to the camera. Have someone cut a chunk of steel that conforms with the bottom of the camera with a tripod mount to fasten it.

 

[paulfish4570]

Pico, I considered that, but doing so throws away all aesthetic and handling appeal. I sold my Bessa R and a Canon 50/1.8 to someone who does not have to worry about weight. That way, it can be used as it is intended.
Steve, the 50mm focal length is my photo best friend forever. You know, PBFF ... 🙂

 

[raid]

Paul,
The Canon 50/1.8 is heavy. Why did you sell it?
Was it the only way to sell the Bessa ?

 

[paulfish4570]

I just thought it would bring a quick sale, and it did. Now, of course, I miss that lens. That is OK. I did not lose money on the lens or the body. 🙂

 

[John Shriver]

If you want the heaviest Canon 50mm lens for the P I suspect you'll buy, get the 50/1.5. It's dense.

 

[Bingley]

If you want the heaviest Canon 50mm lens for the P I suspect you'll buy, get the 50/1.5. It's dense.

No kidding. I weighed mine last night, and the lens alone is abt. 10 oz. It is a great combination on the Canon P, however, and if you want an aesthetically pleasing kit w/ some heft to it, this may be something to consider.