cassel
Well-known
Canon 7 and Leica M4-P Reflections and Comparisons
I was robbed last November and the thief stole my collection of vintage Leica screwmount cameras and lenses. I was understandably upset but I was happy to have decent insurance. I learned about the claim process and while I would not wish the experience on anyone, I came through the ordeal in OK shape. My wife and daughter also had to deal with the loss of precious and irreplaceable jewelry.
The insurance company was willing to work with me when it came to replacing my Leica Gear. They allowed me to combine the value of multiple items instead of exact replacements. While I will miss my beautiful black paint IIIa conversion camera, I wanted to try an M camera. But that would have to wait.
While I was waiting for my claim to be settled, I was impatient for a rangefinder. I found a fairly cheap Canon 7 on a certain auction site. It was shipped with a Canon 50mm f1.8 lens with bad fogging. When it arrived, I loaded it with some cheap film and tried it out. The results showed some problems! The pictures were all badly out of focus, more than just fogging could show. Also, the shutter was dragging at high speeds.
So I took the camera to Camera Techs in Ballard for some service. They were able to overhaul the shutter and give it a good cleaning. They also cleaned up the lens pretty well and were able to remove about 80% of the fogging. Tried it out again and once again the results were not good; pictures just as badly out of focus as before, but the shutter/exposure looked good. Clearly, the lens had serious issues. To confirm that the lens was no good, I shot another roll with an old Leitz Elmar 5cm (the only lens that the thief left behind). Those shots turned out fine. Plenty sharp, just a bit of glow in the highlights and colors a bit muted – typically for an old uncoated Elmar in so-so shape. So there I was with a good camera body in need of an appropriate lens or two.
I found a cheap example of a Steinheil Culminar 85mm f2.8 lens and tried it out. Pretty good! Nice to have the framelines built in with the Canon 7; should work well as a medium telephoto/portrait lens, did I mention it was cheap?
Then I finally received reimbursement from the insurance company. I started shopping for a Leica M and a lens. I did a lot of reading and research and finally found what I was looking for at Glazer’s Camera in Seattle. I like dealing with them; they have fair prices and often can be talked down a bit on prices; knowledgeable and helpful salespeople as well. They had several Leicas to choose from. Long story short, I settled on a body with the combination of features and price that worked for me: a black M4-P from late 1982 early 1983. My other contender for about the same price was an M-3 with M-4 finder. Something about the look and feel of the M4-P won me over. Then I needed a lens.
They happened to have in stock a like-new, black Zeiss ZM Planar 50mm f2 complete with box and paperwork. Fit and looked great on the M4-P and the price was right, so I was set. For the price of an M-6 body I was able to buy the M4-P and lens. Seemed like a good deal.
I was happy to try out my new-to-me Leica and quickly shot a test roll. Everything turned out nice (except when I forgot to remove the lens cap). I also picked up a replacement Canon 50mm f1.8 to try out on the Canon 7.
So that’s the story of how I came to acquire a Canon 7 and a Leica M4-P along with a few lenses. I’ve had a chance to shoot a few rolls with both cameras and here are my initial impressions. I should mention that both cameras have been reviewed by others on the web (Stephen Gandy’s reviews at cameraquest.com and Karen Nakamura’s review at photoethnography.com come to mind) and I will not call myself an expert, just an amateur (ex-pro) photographer with some simple reflections and observations. This is a somewhat unusually comparison because the cameras are not contemporaries, but they both represent something of a bargain when it comes to entry-level interchangeable lens rangefinders.
Feel, build quality, layout of controls: The Canon 7, which predates the 7S and the 7SZ, represents the logical conclusion of a long line of Canon Rangefinders with the Leica Screwmount lens system. Some say the 7 series is a slight step-down in quality from the previous models, but it is still a solid, well-made machine. My example has a fair number of scratches but everything works as it should. The large shutter speed dial is easy to use and is not blocked by the advance lever. Bonus features such as shutter lock and film-transport indicator are nice touches. The built-in selenium meter is a good idea but not very practical, I prefer to use my hand-held meter (a Luna Pro SBC).
The Leica represents the last of the all-mechanical cameras. Its Canadian made and some say it is a slight step-down from the earlier cameras in quality. It feels very solid and professional. My example is in great shape with just a small amount of wear. The shutter speed dial clicks nicely into position but it’s slightly blocked by the advance lever if it is in the retracted position. The features are fairly bare-bones: no self-timer, no meter, and no shutter lock. The canted film rewind works great and is smooth.
Loading: The Canon is a back-door loader; definitely a nice feature. It also features a safety lock on the bottom plate to make sure you don’t accidently open the back with film inside. I thought this would be a huge advantage over the bottom-loading Leica (of course there is the door/flap that opens as well), but loading the Leica is easier than I thought it would be. The “quick load” spool of the M4-P grabs the film leader nicely and it is fairly easy to engage the sprockets on the first try.
Shooting and viewfinder: The real surprise here is the Canon’s viewfinder- it’s really wonderful! The viewfinder has switchable 35mm, 50mm, 85mm/100mm, and 135mm framelines that are labeled. The view is nice and bright and the framelines are a joy. The rangefinder patch is sort of faded on mine but seems accurate enough. The camera is quiet and the advance is super smooth.
The M4-P has a nice viewfinder as well. The framelines are thinner but crisp enough to see easily, though I have a bit of fade-out on my 90mm lines. Also, I wear glasses and it is hard to see the 28mm lines. The camera has six framelines that are doubled up 28mm/90mm, 50mm/75mm, and 35mm/135mm. There is a preview lever to see these lines and framelines are brought up automatically with the corresponding lens (Leica users know what I mean). Some say the arrangement is “too cluttered” but seeing two at a time is really not a problem, at least not for me. Rangefinder patch is almost always easy to see and focus. The shutter and advance are sublime! Smooth and quiet for sure.
Lenses: OK, I’ll admit, this is a bit of an odd comparison, but it’s all I have for now. The Canon 50mm f1.8 is new and I’m still waiting for some test shots. It is an earlier vintage than the camera but it looks right at home on the chrome Canon 7 body. The compact size and solid construction are wonderful to behold. My example was cheap but that’s because it has a few “Cleaning Marks” and the f-stops are a bit tight. Takes the tough-to-find 40mm filter. All-in-all a nice lens and I hope a decent performer.
I have shot several rolls with the Zeiss 50mm Planar and it is a nice lens. Very crisp and the one-third stop clicks are great- matches the read-out on my light meter very well and allows for accurate exposures. The lens takes 43mm filters so finding a hood and a UV filter wasn’t too hard. The black finish on this lens matches the black M4-P perfectly.
Conclusions: The Canon 7 is a pleasant surprise. They did a lot right with this camera and I bet the 7S with its more accurate meter and accessory shoe is even better. This is a big camera and that’s about my only complaint. The viewfinder is fantastic; you really have to see it to believe it. They made about 100,000 of these so they’re not very expensive or hard to find. I would LOVE to have a black paint model with the f1.4 lens.
It may surprise you to learn that the Canon 7 is not left far behind in a head-to-head with the Leica M4-P. Of course, there are big differences here. The Leica is 20 years newer and costs 3X as much as the Canon. So what do you get with the Leica for all that extra money? I guess you get some of the Leica mystique and legendary quality though some may label the M4-P (and the M4-2) as the “worst” M cameras. I like the discrete black body and quiet, fast operation of the M4-P. I wish the Zeiss lens was a bit more compact, but it works great and the price was right. I would probably enjoy the M2 based on my limited “M experience” so far (or a M6).
I was robbed last November and the thief stole my collection of vintage Leica screwmount cameras and lenses. I was understandably upset but I was happy to have decent insurance. I learned about the claim process and while I would not wish the experience on anyone, I came through the ordeal in OK shape. My wife and daughter also had to deal with the loss of precious and irreplaceable jewelry.
The insurance company was willing to work with me when it came to replacing my Leica Gear. They allowed me to combine the value of multiple items instead of exact replacements. While I will miss my beautiful black paint IIIa conversion camera, I wanted to try an M camera. But that would have to wait.
While I was waiting for my claim to be settled, I was impatient for a rangefinder. I found a fairly cheap Canon 7 on a certain auction site. It was shipped with a Canon 50mm f1.8 lens with bad fogging. When it arrived, I loaded it with some cheap film and tried it out. The results showed some problems! The pictures were all badly out of focus, more than just fogging could show. Also, the shutter was dragging at high speeds.
So I took the camera to Camera Techs in Ballard for some service. They were able to overhaul the shutter and give it a good cleaning. They also cleaned up the lens pretty well and were able to remove about 80% of the fogging. Tried it out again and once again the results were not good; pictures just as badly out of focus as before, but the shutter/exposure looked good. Clearly, the lens had serious issues. To confirm that the lens was no good, I shot another roll with an old Leitz Elmar 5cm (the only lens that the thief left behind). Those shots turned out fine. Plenty sharp, just a bit of glow in the highlights and colors a bit muted – typically for an old uncoated Elmar in so-so shape. So there I was with a good camera body in need of an appropriate lens or two.
I found a cheap example of a Steinheil Culminar 85mm f2.8 lens and tried it out. Pretty good! Nice to have the framelines built in with the Canon 7; should work well as a medium telephoto/portrait lens, did I mention it was cheap?
Then I finally received reimbursement from the insurance company. I started shopping for a Leica M and a lens. I did a lot of reading and research and finally found what I was looking for at Glazer’s Camera in Seattle. I like dealing with them; they have fair prices and often can be talked down a bit on prices; knowledgeable and helpful salespeople as well. They had several Leicas to choose from. Long story short, I settled on a body with the combination of features and price that worked for me: a black M4-P from late 1982 early 1983. My other contender for about the same price was an M-3 with M-4 finder. Something about the look and feel of the M4-P won me over. Then I needed a lens.
They happened to have in stock a like-new, black Zeiss ZM Planar 50mm f2 complete with box and paperwork. Fit and looked great on the M4-P and the price was right, so I was set. For the price of an M-6 body I was able to buy the M4-P and lens. Seemed like a good deal.
I was happy to try out my new-to-me Leica and quickly shot a test roll. Everything turned out nice (except when I forgot to remove the lens cap). I also picked up a replacement Canon 50mm f1.8 to try out on the Canon 7.
So that’s the story of how I came to acquire a Canon 7 and a Leica M4-P along with a few lenses. I’ve had a chance to shoot a few rolls with both cameras and here are my initial impressions. I should mention that both cameras have been reviewed by others on the web (Stephen Gandy’s reviews at cameraquest.com and Karen Nakamura’s review at photoethnography.com come to mind) and I will not call myself an expert, just an amateur (ex-pro) photographer with some simple reflections and observations. This is a somewhat unusually comparison because the cameras are not contemporaries, but they both represent something of a bargain when it comes to entry-level interchangeable lens rangefinders.
Feel, build quality, layout of controls: The Canon 7, which predates the 7S and the 7SZ, represents the logical conclusion of a long line of Canon Rangefinders with the Leica Screwmount lens system. Some say the 7 series is a slight step-down in quality from the previous models, but it is still a solid, well-made machine. My example has a fair number of scratches but everything works as it should. The large shutter speed dial is easy to use and is not blocked by the advance lever. Bonus features such as shutter lock and film-transport indicator are nice touches. The built-in selenium meter is a good idea but not very practical, I prefer to use my hand-held meter (a Luna Pro SBC).
The Leica represents the last of the all-mechanical cameras. Its Canadian made and some say it is a slight step-down from the earlier cameras in quality. It feels very solid and professional. My example is in great shape with just a small amount of wear. The shutter speed dial clicks nicely into position but it’s slightly blocked by the advance lever if it is in the retracted position. The features are fairly bare-bones: no self-timer, no meter, and no shutter lock. The canted film rewind works great and is smooth.
Loading: The Canon is a back-door loader; definitely a nice feature. It also features a safety lock on the bottom plate to make sure you don’t accidently open the back with film inside. I thought this would be a huge advantage over the bottom-loading Leica (of course there is the door/flap that opens as well), but loading the Leica is easier than I thought it would be. The “quick load” spool of the M4-P grabs the film leader nicely and it is fairly easy to engage the sprockets on the first try.
Shooting and viewfinder: The real surprise here is the Canon’s viewfinder- it’s really wonderful! The viewfinder has switchable 35mm, 50mm, 85mm/100mm, and 135mm framelines that are labeled. The view is nice and bright and the framelines are a joy. The rangefinder patch is sort of faded on mine but seems accurate enough. The camera is quiet and the advance is super smooth.
The M4-P has a nice viewfinder as well. The framelines are thinner but crisp enough to see easily, though I have a bit of fade-out on my 90mm lines. Also, I wear glasses and it is hard to see the 28mm lines. The camera has six framelines that are doubled up 28mm/90mm, 50mm/75mm, and 35mm/135mm. There is a preview lever to see these lines and framelines are brought up automatically with the corresponding lens (Leica users know what I mean). Some say the arrangement is “too cluttered” but seeing two at a time is really not a problem, at least not for me. Rangefinder patch is almost always easy to see and focus. The shutter and advance are sublime! Smooth and quiet for sure.
Lenses: OK, I’ll admit, this is a bit of an odd comparison, but it’s all I have for now. The Canon 50mm f1.8 is new and I’m still waiting for some test shots. It is an earlier vintage than the camera but it looks right at home on the chrome Canon 7 body. The compact size and solid construction are wonderful to behold. My example was cheap but that’s because it has a few “Cleaning Marks” and the f-stops are a bit tight. Takes the tough-to-find 40mm filter. All-in-all a nice lens and I hope a decent performer.
I have shot several rolls with the Zeiss 50mm Planar and it is a nice lens. Very crisp and the one-third stop clicks are great- matches the read-out on my light meter very well and allows for accurate exposures. The lens takes 43mm filters so finding a hood and a UV filter wasn’t too hard. The black finish on this lens matches the black M4-P perfectly.
Conclusions: The Canon 7 is a pleasant surprise. They did a lot right with this camera and I bet the 7S with its more accurate meter and accessory shoe is even better. This is a big camera and that’s about my only complaint. The viewfinder is fantastic; you really have to see it to believe it. They made about 100,000 of these so they’re not very expensive or hard to find. I would LOVE to have a black paint model with the f1.4 lens.
It may surprise you to learn that the Canon 7 is not left far behind in a head-to-head with the Leica M4-P. Of course, there are big differences here. The Leica is 20 years newer and costs 3X as much as the Canon. So what do you get with the Leica for all that extra money? I guess you get some of the Leica mystique and legendary quality though some may label the M4-P (and the M4-2) as the “worst” M cameras. I like the discrete black body and quiet, fast operation of the M4-P. I wish the Zeiss lens was a bit more compact, but it works great and the price was right. I would probably enjoy the M2 based on my limited “M experience” so far (or a M6).
