Canon LTM Canon P Vs. Canon 7s - Looking for advice

[Coldkennels]

Easy solution. Don't use a strap. Or at least, a different strap. Problem solved..

That strap is too short to wear it diagonally like part of a Sam Browne belt, a Canon P would not fare any better in that situation.

That's the thing: I've tried multiple straps on this damn Canon 7, and nothing solves the balance issue (as Dave rightly pointed out). And this is the strap I usually use on a screwmount Leica... where it works perfectly to keep the camera tucked close to my body without much movement when walking. The Canon 7 is just a bulky unbalanced mess in comparison.

 

[xayraa33]

That's the thing: I've tried multiple straps on this damn Canon 7, and nothing solves the balance issue (as Dave rightly pointed out). And this is the strap I usually use on a screwmount Leica... where it works perfectly to keep the camera tucked close to my body without much movement when walking. The Canon 7 is just a bulky unbalanced mess in comparison.

I got one Canon 7 camera in the bottom half of a never-ready case with the Canon 50mm f1.5 lens and it balances fine and an other Canon 7 with a 1 inch wide nylon webbing strap and a Nikkor 50mm f1.4 lens and that combo balances fine too ...but then again I don't wear any camera in that diagonal Sam Browne strap fashion as I don't find it convenient for my style of toting a camera around, even a Barnack Leica.

 

[davhill]

That's the thing: I've tried multiple straps on this damn Canon 7, and nothing solves the balance issue (as Dave rightly pointed out). And this is the strap I usually use on a screwmount Leica... where it works perfectly to keep the camera tucked close to my body without much movement when walking. The Canon 7 is just a bulky unbalanced mess in comparison.

With the strap under tension, its a geometry issue, not a balance issue. I suspect letting out the strap a couple inches will let that relax against your ribs.

 

[Coldkennels]

No, it really doesn't. I tried it with a longer strap on a work trip to Vegas some years ago. Doesn't matter if it's on the shoulder, across the body, or hanging from the neck; without some serious weight in front of it, it just wants to tip backwards.

The half case option might be a suitable solution as it would change the weight distribution of the body, but then you've got a half case to deal with, and I've always hated those.

 

[raid]

I have three Canon P cameras, and I used to use them a lot. I own 3 of them because I enjoyed a lot using the first one that I got. It was my workhorse film camera for many years (with RF). It feels good in my hands, and I just used it and used it again.

 

[das]

I think that unless price is an issue or you really like Canon rangefinders, I would skip both the P and the 7. A Leica M3 is better than the P. Any Leica M body is better than the 7. Canons are restricted to LTM lenses while Leica M bodies can use both. Later Leica M bodies have the capability of focusing more closely than Canons as well. If you do not want a Leica body, consider an appropriate Voigtlander body. Film camera prices are steady so you should get back your investment in anything these days as long it is taken care of.

 

[tennis-joe]

I was lucky to get a Canon 7 that had the metal shutter replaced with a cloth shutter. I had an earlier one that had a wrinkled metal shutter probably because of a heavy thumb while loading the camera. The one with the metal shutter was stolen out of my car so I acquired another one.

 

[retinax]

I think that unless price is an issue or you really like Canon rangefinders, I would skip both the P and the 7. A Leica M3 is better than the P. Any Leica M body is better than the 7. Canons are restricted to LTM lenses while Leica M bodies can use both. Later Leica M bodies have the capability of focusing more closely than Canons as well. If you do not want a Leica body, consider an appropriate Voigtlander body. Film camera prices are steady so you should get back your investment in anything these days as long it is taken care of.

I doubt the OP would be asking if the price of a Leica M wasn't an issue. Of course they're better in most aspects, but cost about 10x as much nowadays (7s aside, then perhaps just 3x).
Are you trying to keep Canon prices low? The 7 does focus down to 0.7m. mine does anyway. The metal shutter is great, no fear of burning pinholes into it.
OP, get a 7. The finder is good for 35. It's extremely well made, no matter what the Leica snobs say. Yes, it's larger than a Leica M, so what? Neither fits in a pocket. The meter of the 7s wouldn't be worth the extra cost to me. Once you understand that there's no need to meter for every single shot because the light outside is usually fairly consistent, using a hand held meter becomes nbd.

 

[das]

Gotcha. I may have spoken too soon about the minimum focusing ability of Canon 7/P bodies -- I was thinking that almost no LTM Canon lens actually focuses more closely than 1.00m, but did not consider that the bodies may have been capable of using non-Canon LTM lenses that could be focused more closely. In any event, I have owned a P and an M3 -- and there is really no serious competition between the two. For the OP, I think that lots of people initially are attracted to Canon rangefinders for their relatively cheap prices today, but in the end, there is a reason why they are cheaper.

I doubt the OP would be asking if the price of a Leica M wasn't an issue. Of course they're better in most aspects, but cost about 10x as much nowadays (7s aside, then perhaps just 3x).
Are you trying to keep Canon prices low? The 7 does focus down to 0.7m. mine does anyway. The metal shutter is great, no fear of burning pinholes into it.
OP, get a 7. The finder is good for 35. It's extremely well made, no matter what the Leica snobs say. Yes, it's larger than a Leica M, so what? Neither fits in a pocket. The meter of the 7s wouldn't be worth the extra cost to me. Once you understand that there's no need to meter for every single shot because the light outside is usually fairly consistent, using a hand held meter becomes nbd.

 

[goamules]

Canon Ps are about half price from where they were 10 years ago. Leica Ms are about 1/3 higher. Some are comparing a $175 camera to a $1,200 one.

Get a Canon P or L and try it for a few years. You're only out the cost of a few rolls of film and processing costs.

I shot all of them. I never felt the proverbial "feel of quality...doesn't fit my hand...fits like a glove...hangs funny...hangs just right...exudes reliability" type silliness with any of them. They're cameras, all those emotions or problems are imaginary, just trying to rationalize why you love/hate one type. Finder brightness and frame lines aren't.

For Barnacks, I like the Canons and other Japanese better than Leica. But for the bigger last rangefinders, I ended up with M3s.

 

[ColeCole]

The Canon L1. The ergonomics are about the same as the P, but it uses a viewfinder similar to the 7. There are no frame lines, the entire image in the viewfinder is what will be in the photo. Unlike the 7 though, the L1 is limited to 35mm, 50mm, and a magnified view that appears close to 135mm, but can be used to nail focus for any lens.

The viewfinder/rangefinder optics are coated in gold, not silver like the other bodies, so they are less susceptible to oxidation over time.

Do you know if the optics are the same for the VL or did it change for that model?

That dang viewfinder just looks so small! It looks very uncomfortable to use(in the squinty sense) but of course it might be totally different once I put my hands on one.

 

[Mackinaw]

Do you know if the optics are the same for the VL or did it change for that model? That dang viewfinder just looks so small! It looks very uncomfortable to use(in the squinty sense) but of course it might be totally different once I put my hands on one.

The viewfinder optics are the same for the L1 and VT, both of which are much larger, and usable, than earlier bottom-load Canons.

Jim B.

 

[DavidC]

I have both the 7 and P and prefer the P for size. They will both focus down to .8 meters with Skopar lenses. The viewfinder/rangefinder is another matter, they are both kind of fuzzy edged with the P slightly better. The 7 patch is surrounded by a halo (flare?) at all times (irritating) and the fuzzy edge loses hands down to any Leica. They will both last another generation if taken care of properly.

 

[hilltime]

IMHO, I have a 7SZ with a accurate meter and wouldn't trade it for anything.
To me it is the quintessential RF camera and being one if not the last one built by anyone in the mid 60's, it has it all. I've owned an M3 and it is nothing to sneeze at, but at this time, overpriced and if you're going to use 35mm lenses, plan on an external finder. I also have a P, the second I have owned and again, IMHO, doesn't hold a candle to the 7S or Z.
Certainly less expensive and smaller but to me, is way inferior.

 

[davhill]

The viewfinder optics are the same for the L1 and VT, both of which are much larger, and useable, than earlier bottom-load Canon's.

Jim B.

He asked about VL, not VT.

“In features (quoting Dechert) the VL was simply an L1 with metal curtains, delayed action similar to that of the VT series, and silver-coated optics”. This gives a cold bluish cast compared to the very warm/golden cast of the L1. “Both coatings have stood the test of time well, unlike those on the VI series... and ones choice between them must be subjective.”
“A very good case can be made that [the L1] and the VL are today the best of the Canon rangefinders for actual use..” (though note the finders are optimal for 35 and 50mm, and not 100 like the model P.)

Yeah. I want to find either one.. Someday, budget permitting.

 

[ChrisPlatt]

I too am a 35mm shooter. The Canon P viewfinder is not the best but usable.

Overall it's really a wonderful camera. Embrace it, warts and all! 🙂

Chris

 

[rbiemer]

Between the P and the 7, I preferred the 7. I've not used a 7s so I can't offer an opinion on that. But, of all the Canon rf cameras I've owned, I liked the Vt best of all. I have had the P, the 7, a IV sb2, and a Canonette.

Ultimately I didn't keep any of them, I ended up with a Bessa R.

The viewfinder is better for me with the R than almost any other camera I've had. Good enough to outweigh the typical modern construction and I don't care that it isn't very much a classic rangefinder. It is good enough and lets me use all my LTM lenses.

Rob

 

[DavidC]

The P excels in being smaller and having an easy to focus rangefinder patch.
The 7 on the other hand has a better uncluttered viewfinder but the rangefinder patch is fuzzy edged and sometimes hard to focus. Its big body size can be tiresome if you are lugging it all day. Both are rugged and their metal shutters are sun-proof.

 

[mike rosenlof]

I have both the P and 7sz. I think the 7 viewfinder is a plus without multiple framelines visible, but that the P has a better feel, and looks better. The meter on my 7 is not accurate even though it does respond to light. I consider the metal shutter a plus. Neither has serious wrinkles in the shutter.



Between the P and 7sz, I don't have a strong preference toward either. The aesthetics of the P more or less balance the better viewfinder of the 7.

 

[Goody]

I have a 7 and a P and I like both. The P is a little more attractive and better in the hand; the 7's viewfinder is superior. My plain 7 has, of course, no mount for an aux viewfinder so if I am using anything wider that a 35 I use the P. The RF in my 7 is a hair better, but I don't know if it's a design issue or just the particular cameras. Both are great cameras. I am happy shooting either. BTW I wear glasses but adapted a Nikon diopter to the eyepieces of each, cutting off the flange and attaching it with removable double face foam tape.