More Heresy - Why Not A Nikon RF?

J

jyl

Just learning to focus
Local time
4:16 PM
Joined
Aug 6, 2004
Messages
119
Location
SF Bay Area
View My Gallery
My wife got me "The Nikon Compendium". Very interesting section on the Nikon rangefinders.

I started thinking - how come I never see them? I don't see them at the local camera swaps, no-one posts about them on RangeFinderForum.com or photo.net, I've never seen anyone actually using one.

How come? Does anyone here have a Nikon RF? Is it a camera I'd enjoy using?

I realize I just swore off buying new cameras, but - well, I swore off carbs too.
 
The only thing they did wrong was make the mount incompatable with the Contax lenses. If they were compatable, I'd love to have one. But as a result, I'd have to get new lenses for it as well rather than share my CRF russian and Zeiss lenses with it.

OTOH, if you don't already have an investment in longer glass...

There are some real good articles on the practicality of them at www.cameraquest.com/classics.htm.

William
 
I think there are some Nikon RF owners in the Leica forum on photo.net. I hadn't noticed it before but you are right, no-one rants on about Nikon RFs the way they do about Canon RFs here... 😉
 
I daresay that most Nikon rangefinder cameras reside in someone's collection, likely viewed as too valuable to use much. A pity because they are top-drawer quality capable of taking superb pictures. Lenses for them are difficult to find as well and probably for the same reason.

BTW, there's no heresy here when discussing rangefinder cameras of any and all marques. Some get more "ink" than others but if you have an old Flappenwheezer 9x9 rangefinder with interchangeable lens and want to talk about it, someone here will be interested. I know I would! 🙂

Walker
 
Just scanning on eBay: The S and S2 seem more common than Canon (interchangeable lens) RFs but command somewhat higher prices. The SP is very expensive. The lenses seem to be 1.5X-3X Canon RF lens prices. Interesting.
 
As others have pointed out already, of the "Big 4" RF systems, Nikon RFs are significantly rarer (& therefore more expensive) than Leica, Canon, & Contax. I can only guess that they're probably more plentiful in Japan, although the U.S. was probably their biggest market. Take a look @ Stephen Gandys Cameraquest site (http://www.cameraquest.com/classics.htm) for more info. Nothing heretical about 'em. I have an S2 & a few lenses, & wish I had an SP, but I think Brian has more than 1 SP, which makes him the Nikon RF king on this forum. FYI, the wides do interchange w/Contax bodies.
 
Re: More Heresy - Why Not A Nikon RF?

jyl said:

How come? Does anyone here have a Nikon RF? Is it a camera I'd enjoy using?
Click to expand...

As others have said, they're not common and they're VERY expensive. I'd love to try one out for a bit!


I realize I just swore off buying new cameras, but - well, I swore off carbs too.
Click to expand...

What, only fuel injection from now on? 😀

Cheers,
Steve
(twin DCOE does it for me!)
 
I think for the money a used Leica M is a better buy and user. I also think the Leica is better built and quieter in use. Would you like using a Nikon rangefinder? Oh yeah, the S2 I have is very nice to take out and use.

Bob
 
I have both an S2 and an SP, with a Nikon 50mm f1.4, Nikon 105mm f2.5 and Nikon 135mm F3.5. I also use a Jupiter 8 50mm f2.0 and the Jupiter 35mm f2.8 wide angle on them. The problems with using Contax lenses is not with the physical mounting. It is with the fact that the focusing helix is different. This shows up with the lenses above 50mm, but I find no problems with 50mm down, and in fact my Jupiter 85mm f2.0 works fine at 10 feet or over. This allows you to get at least some useable lenses at very inexpensive prices. In fact the Jupiter 8 is my usual lens on my SP. Nikon 135mm lenses are very reasonable. I think I paid about $100 on the auction site for a user grade. 135s are apparently out of fashion. It is true that the other lenses can be quite expensive. The cameras are entirely useable today and are great shooters.
 
They are out there if you look. I know of three S2's in Camera shops in Sydney at the moment, going for around AUD$2000-2200 with 50mm lens.
Had a play with one of them a month or two ago, nice enough but at least in Aus for the price it's a bit of a steep ask - as there's few lenses, accessories or spares available. Whereas Leica stuff is everywhere. So as a usable camera they fall down a bit.....
Mind you, I wouldn't mind owning one, just to have.

Sounds like they are a bit more plentiful in the USA, and in Japan tho.

tim
 
Just had a passing fancy - since the main difference between the Nikon S series and the Contax was in the helical, I wonder if it would be possible to fit a Nikon body (S2 or SP perhaps) with the helical from a trashed Contax and thus get the best of both worlds?

Doubt it could be that simple, but it'd be neat if it were.

William
 
I believe Brian had 1 of his S2's modified in some way, see his post on the reissued SP thread:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=3002

wlewisiii said:
Just had a passing fancy - since the main difference between the Nikon S series and the Contax was in the helical, I wonder if it would be possible to fit a Nikon body (S2 or SP perhaps) with the helical from a trashed Contax and thus get the best of both worlds?

Doubt it could be that simple, but it'd be neat if it were.

William
Click to expand...
 
I see that for a mere $6700 I can order a brand new limited re-issue Nikon SP. Very tempting - not.

Well, maybe my aunt will bequeath me her Nikon RF w/ f1.1.
 
Karen has an interesting point about Nikon being the last camera company developing Pro level film cameras. At the Photo Plus Expo in NYC a Nikon Rep told Huck Finn and me (or should it be I?) that Nikon saw film based cameras as a niche market. We saw Canon update the electronics of the Elan 7, but it is far from a new camera. So if it is a niche they want, why not offer a RF camera based on the FM3a which will mount AI lenses? I know, the whole retrofocus thing, but wouldn't there be some lenses that could be shared? That would mean they don't have to design an entire line of lenses, just those to deal with the retrofocus issue, and still have an extensive selection.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

CameraQuest
My first Nikon ONE
Replies
11
Views
951
NIKON KIU
NIKON KIU
Jake Mongey
My Undying Affection Towards The Nikon F2
2 3 4
Replies
76
Views
5K
Alpsman
A
A
Nikon S2 Compartment Case
2
Replies
39
Views
4K
38Deardorff
38Deardorff
J
Did Nikon really blow Leitz and Zeiss out of the water in 1950? Not quite, but....
Replies
9
Views
1K
aoresteen
aoresteen
B
New year resolutions (photo-centered) for 2025
2 3
Replies
41
Views
2K
JohnGellings
J
Back
Top Bottom