bobkonos
Well-known
Concerned about build quality and something breaking down? Hmm...My newish (less then 1 year old and 20 rolls of film in it) C/V R2S broke (film advance didn't) at the end of our trip to Japan in 2004. One of my Nikon S2 cameras, made in 1954, recently had a clean-lube-adjust due to age, an expected repair. Now age doesn't matter because it runs well again. So there are no guarantees on build quality and repairs happen, whether it is a new camera or a 55 year old camera.
I too highly consider the aesthetic appeal of a camera. So I can relate, believe me. The S2 and S3 and especially the SP have compelling designs. And a leica M2 or M3 or M4...simply beautiful. Heck, my problem is that I like the design aesthetic of too many cameras.
Well, this has been fun but you'll learn a lot more once you hop in and try out some cameras. Good luck on the S2.
I too highly consider the aesthetic appeal of a camera. So I can relate, believe me. The S2 and S3 and especially the SP have compelling designs. And a leica M2 or M3 or M4...simply beautiful. Heck, my problem is that I like the design aesthetic of too many cameras.
Well, this has been fun but you'll learn a lot more once you hop in and try out some cameras. Good luck on the S2.
Last edited:
kid_a
Established
I too highly consider the aesthetic appeal of a camera. So I can relate, believe me. Heck, my problem is that I like the design aesthetic of too many cameras.
Thanks for the advice. I'm just lucky that my income doesn't come near to allowing my desire for these sexy cameras to be fulfilled. I've got a pretty good collection of photo gear going for a 22 year old, anyway.
One day I'll be able to satisfy my camera lust, haha.
bobkonos
Well-known
Ah, to have a Nikon S2 at age 22? Wonderful-go for it! We'll remain here to help and hope to see it.
JohnM
Well-known
kid - the best thing about these old rangefinders is that if you buy it and don't like it, you can usually sell it and get most or all of your investment back.
snegron
Established
awilder
Alan Wilder
Without question you should consider a Leica M2 preferably a mid to later one with a self timer and lever rewind switch. It was the first Leica to include a 35 frameline and it's finder has changed little with the most current Leica RF models. Build quality equals the best Leica ever made (M3), exceeding (by a small margin) any Nikon RF and are reasonably priced in your bracket of about $700. There are plenty available in great user condition and will last a lifetime with proper care and service. The main advantage of using a Nikon RF is that some controls and focus orientaion feel more at home to old Nikon F users but I'm not sure it caries the same advantage wth DSLRs.
Last edited:
kid_a
Established
I'll check it out. I think the Nikon RF will seem pretty natural to me. I have a 55/1,2 and a Zeiss 25/2,8 that I use pretty regularly, both manual focus lenses.
back alley
IMAGES
if you are talking about wally at classic camera i would advise you to be careful.
he has lots of cool gear in his shop but lots of it doesn't work.
i've bought some gear from him at good prices and it was great but i have tried stuff out in store that didn't. and since he discovered the internet he knows the going rate for stuff and the great deals are long gone.
he has lots of cool gear in his shop but lots of it doesn't work.
i've bought some gear from him at good prices and it was great but i have tried stuff out in store that didn't. and since he discovered the internet he knows the going rate for stuff and the great deals are long gone.
kid_a
Established
Yeah, I'll go see Wally tomorrow.
He said it works fine, and also I know if something doesn't work, he'll take it back without much fuss. I'm gonna go see him tomorrow anyway.. I've got a bunch of stuff I'll try to trade, and he usually gives really fair value for trades
He said it works fine, and also I know if something doesn't work, he'll take it back without much fuss. I'm gonna go see him tomorrow anyway.. I've got a bunch of stuff I'll try to trade, and he usually gives really fair value for trades
awilder
Alan Wilder
Have fun, you'll be like a kid (pun intended) in a candystore with sensory overload when playing with classic cameras like a Nikon RF or Leica M.
kid_a
Established
I'm sure it's gonna be the same kind of situation as I faced with medium format..
I picked up a pretty modest Bronica with 80/2.8, and 2 months later I have a Hasselblad with 4 lenses and 2 backs. It escalates fast with me, haha.
VinceC
Veteran
I would vote for the S2. If long life is your concern, the S2 is 55 years and going strong. It was built to be the highest quality professional camera in an era when durability was a benchmark. The repairs, if any, are basic. This camera is likely going to outlive the general availability of consumer film cassettes. The basic mechanisms within the camera are understandable to any repairman who does Leicas or other mechanical cameras.
The C/V R2S in a decade will be a 10-year-old camera that was never built to professional standards. Longterm,it will be harder to get repaired and will probably need more repairs. However, I have never owned one so am going by paying a lot of attention to others who post here.
Advantages of R2S:
- light meter (old RFs require you to use a handheld meter and to learn more about light)
- faster shutter shutter (there are times when 1/2000 is handy)
- faster flash sync - 1/125 vs 1/45 (outdoor fill flash is a little easier, though also a disappearing art for non-built-in flashes)
- More flexible viewfinder ... frames for 35mm and 85mm lenses
- What most people describe as the easiest to see RF focusing patch of any Nikon-related RF camera.
Advantages of S2:
- It's a classic, a fully functional piece of photojournalism heritage
- Owning an S2 with 50/1.4 gives you a direct link to the camera/lens that firmly established Nikon -the lens is a legendary part of 1950s photography that remains fully relevant today, and the camera is a direct ancestor of every modern professional Nikon.
- No meter wiring to break (however, its half-century-old flash-sync wiring might not work)
- One of the most durable shutters ever built
- life-size viewfinder -- this is a hallmark of Nikon RF cameras with the S2 and later. For some people it doesn't matter, but once you get used to it, it's a fantastic feature.
- Long RF baselength. The lifesize finder and the longer distance beteen the RF windows makes for extremely accurate focusing of fast lenses. This camera is a dream with a 50/1.4 and 85/2 and 105/2.5 -- my RF focusing is significantly faster and more accurate than with an SLR. The R2S has an easier to see finder but much much shorter baselength.
As for the 50/3.5 versus 5cm/1.4 -- with the Nikkor, you get 2 1/2 more stops of light, enabling the low-light shooting that is the hallmark of these camera. It's also a historic lens, what the majority of people considered to be the best of the 1950s (it's quality forced Leitz to improve their fast 50s). However, it has some quirks that show its age. it will flare in some backlit situations, and the design can show halo rings in harsh contrast such as bright streetlights at night. Wide open, it can have an antique effect as though you've put thin gauze over it ("veiling flare"), though this effect disappears with just a tiny bit of stopping down. Some of the out-of-focus areas in the background will be "harsh" with doubled lines that can be distracting (or show dynamic tension, depending on your taste). Obviously, the CV 50/3.5 will have modern optics, supreme sharpness, making it ideal for well-lit scenes and magazine-type photography. Its coatings will allow for the best color rendition. It should have the "snap" of a modern fixed-focal-length lens. Well-controlled out of focus areas.
S2 versus R2S is a bit like the difference between a classic and a classy curiosity.
I got an S2 because one was available and I liked that it was an ancestor to my SLR Nikons. Beware, though, I quickly got hooked on the Nikon RF system and found that it actually fit my shooting style better than the SLRs, but at a much higher financial cost.
The C/V R2S in a decade will be a 10-year-old camera that was never built to professional standards. Longterm,it will be harder to get repaired and will probably need more repairs. However, I have never owned one so am going by paying a lot of attention to others who post here.
Advantages of R2S:
- light meter (old RFs require you to use a handheld meter and to learn more about light)
- faster shutter shutter (there are times when 1/2000 is handy)
- faster flash sync - 1/125 vs 1/45 (outdoor fill flash is a little easier, though also a disappearing art for non-built-in flashes)
- More flexible viewfinder ... frames for 35mm and 85mm lenses
- What most people describe as the easiest to see RF focusing patch of any Nikon-related RF camera.
Advantages of S2:
- It's a classic, a fully functional piece of photojournalism heritage
- Owning an S2 with 50/1.4 gives you a direct link to the camera/lens that firmly established Nikon -the lens is a legendary part of 1950s photography that remains fully relevant today, and the camera is a direct ancestor of every modern professional Nikon.
- No meter wiring to break (however, its half-century-old flash-sync wiring might not work)
- One of the most durable shutters ever built
- life-size viewfinder -- this is a hallmark of Nikon RF cameras with the S2 and later. For some people it doesn't matter, but once you get used to it, it's a fantastic feature.
- Long RF baselength. The lifesize finder and the longer distance beteen the RF windows makes for extremely accurate focusing of fast lenses. This camera is a dream with a 50/1.4 and 85/2 and 105/2.5 -- my RF focusing is significantly faster and more accurate than with an SLR. The R2S has an easier to see finder but much much shorter baselength.
As for the 50/3.5 versus 5cm/1.4 -- with the Nikkor, you get 2 1/2 more stops of light, enabling the low-light shooting that is the hallmark of these camera. It's also a historic lens, what the majority of people considered to be the best of the 1950s (it's quality forced Leitz to improve their fast 50s). However, it has some quirks that show its age. it will flare in some backlit situations, and the design can show halo rings in harsh contrast such as bright streetlights at night. Wide open, it can have an antique effect as though you've put thin gauze over it ("veiling flare"), though this effect disappears with just a tiny bit of stopping down. Some of the out-of-focus areas in the background will be "harsh" with doubled lines that can be distracting (or show dynamic tension, depending on your taste). Obviously, the CV 50/3.5 will have modern optics, supreme sharpness, making it ideal for well-lit scenes and magazine-type photography. Its coatings will allow for the best color rendition. It should have the "snap" of a modern fixed-focal-length lens. Well-controlled out of focus areas.
S2 versus R2S is a bit like the difference between a classic and a classy curiosity.
I got an S2 because one was available and I liked that it was an ancestor to my SLR Nikons. Beware, though, I quickly got hooked on the Nikon RF system and found that it actually fit my shooting style better than the SLRs, but at a much higher financial cost.
awilder
Alan Wilder
Vince is right about the S2 over the CV R2S in terms of build quality but the M2 is a notch higher still than the S2 particularly in terms of the VF/RF. The Leica M rf patch is brighter and easier to detect the slightest misfocus even in poor light due to it's unique optical design that's never been beaten by it's competetors then or now. These older Ms were also very easy for the owner to adjust both vertical and horizontal rf alignment if it ever goes out, something that can't be said on the most current Leica M cameras.
micromontenegro
Well-known
Take a freshly serviced M2 and a S2, shoot the daylights of each one, and see which one needs service sooner :angel:
VinceC
Veteran
Old Nikons are famous for never needing servicing. I never even heard the term "CLA" until I started hanging out online with Leica users
awilder
Alan Wilder
I'll concede the point of Nikon shutter/film advance mechanics requiring fewer service intervals but I was mainly referring to vf/rf optics being a notch above, especially if you shoot in low light which is the rf forte and want a camera with built-in 35 framelines. Choice and availability of lenses are greater with the M series as well.
VinceC
Veteran
I'll certainly concede the far greater availability / affordability of quality cameras and lenses for Leica.
eavis
Member
The Nikon lenses are great but the RF cameras aren't that user-friendly. The biggest drawback is the feint RF patch -- even on new models -- compared to a Leica body or the Voigtlander Nikon-mount. You will need a top-mounted viewfinder to go wider than 35mm on a Nikon RF camera, which is always a pain. Granted, they look beautiful -- and if you typically photograph things that give you lots of time to focus, then pull the trigger. Otherwise, stay away.
JohnM
Well-known
The Nikon viewfinder is fine in low-light. The focusing patch in the M3 is brighter than in the S2, but in my experience, (and I am relatively new to Nikons), it does not translate as being easier or more accurate.
The M3 is still my favorite camera on the planet, but the brightness of the viewfinder is somewhat offset by the S2's 1:1 finder -- that is a feature that I did not expect to like as much as I do.
The M3 is still my favorite camera on the planet, but the brightness of the viewfinder is somewhat offset by the S2's 1:1 finder -- that is a feature that I did not expect to like as much as I do.
VinceC
Veteran
SP is fine with a 28mm. For that matter, so is the S3.