Nikon RF vs Leica RF
- Thread starter LChanyungco
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 47
- Views 21K
Highway 61
Revisited
Same here. The lack of parallax correction is not a problem. And the Leica M (and Nikon SP) parallax correction system can't be compared with a 100% SLR viewfinder as for precision, because it's not tridimensional. Better than nothing, but it has its weak points too.
ChrisLivsey
Veteran
rbsinto
Well-known
- Local time
- 9:32 PM
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2006
- Messages
- 1,598
Never used Leicas, because I was scared off by the price and turned off by the hype. But the one thing I do like about them is their very strong rangefinder spot. I shoot with Nikons and like them very much. They're rugged, reliable and affordable with a good selection of available lenses, but the diffuse, indistinct rangefinder spots are their biggest shortcoming, in my opinion.
Erik van Straten
Veteran
The rangefinder spot of the S2 is the best, in my opinion. When clean, it is very clear and because it is 1:1 it is incredible precise.
Erik.
robklurfield
eclipse
I use both and switch back and forth. I was surprised at the ease I found switching. I don't imagine it's that way for everyone. I spent two weeks on vacation last summer switching continuously between an M2, M8 and S2 and didn't find myself as flummoxed as I expected. Perhaps, I am equally clumsy with either system. Even the different focusing directions/methods don't bother me.
The Nikon feels as natural in my hand and at my eye as an M. Not better or worse; just different. They are both solid, well-built machines.
The Nikon feels as natural in my hand and at my eye as an M. Not better or worse; just different. They are both solid, well-built machines.
enasniearth
Well-known
I started out with Nikon , still the s2 with a 5cm 1.4 lens can be had for $450-$550 .
The nikkors in Leica screwmount are quite a bit more , any large aperature leitz lens is very costly now .
The Nikon s2 is a very basic camera with a good finder , bright rf spot , and accurate focus .
It can not beat the Leica m series , the leicas parrelex corrected finder is nice , if you shoot the 35 focal length - well the m2/m4 finder is better than a sp or s3 . Just an opinion - I've used both . The s2 with a brightline 3.5 shoe mounted finder is better but slower .
The leitz lenses focus quick with the finger lever and reduced rotation .
The nikkors have a longer throw . The advantage is the nikkors single focus helicoid with coupling ring , most leitz lenses have two helicoid s in the lens with a key way - in time they wear . The nikkor hold its flatness to the film plane .
The Nikon s2 is my favorite rf camera - perhaps since I started out on it in 1974 . A Leica was a lot more money and most had 3.5 aperature elmars .
So I bought the black dial s2 with the 1.4 lens .
The nikkors in Leica screwmount are quite a bit more , any large aperature leitz lens is very costly now .
The Nikon s2 is a very basic camera with a good finder , bright rf spot , and accurate focus .
It can not beat the Leica m series , the leicas parrelex corrected finder is nice , if you shoot the 35 focal length - well the m2/m4 finder is better than a sp or s3 . Just an opinion - I've used both . The s2 with a brightline 3.5 shoe mounted finder is better but slower .
The leitz lenses focus quick with the finger lever and reduced rotation .
The nikkors have a longer throw . The advantage is the nikkors single focus helicoid with coupling ring , most leitz lenses have two helicoid s in the lens with a key way - in time they wear . The nikkor hold its flatness to the film plane .
The Nikon s2 is my favorite rf camera - perhaps since I started out on it in 1974 . A Leica was a lot more money and most had 3.5 aperature elmars .
So I bought the black dial s2 with the 1.4 lens .
Highway 61
Revisited
Actually what is "strong" with the rangefinder spot of the Leicas are the rangefinder patch edges, and the rangefinder patch contrast in comparison with the rest of what you see in the viewfinder.
BUT the Leica rangefinder patch is so bright that it works well for very contrasty subjects with very defined vertical lines so that you can focus quickly.
The shortcoming of the Leica rangefinder patch is that you don't really see what is inside the patch if your subject isn't contrasty.
And the Leica M4-2 / M4-P / M6 rangefinder patch flares very badly in any contrejour situation, making focusing almost impossible.
OTOH the Nikon rangefinder patch has fuzzy edges and less contrast versus the rest of what you see in the viewfinder, but allows you to see what is in the patch very clearly, so that you can focus on an eye iris for a portrait with no problem. Added to the 1:1 viewfinder, this makes close-up portraiting a breeze. Just try this out with a 0.72 Leica...
The main shortcoming regards the original Nikon S3 viewfinder, which can flare a lot due to desilvering over time, hence a RF patch with so little contrast than focusing gets very difficult if the subject isn't very contrasty.
As Erik said, the Nikon S2 rangefinder patch might be the best you can find on any RF camera, period.
Some people like to remove the square mask off their Nikon RF camera rangefinder secondary front window. I tried this out but didn't find that it brought any improvement.
sparrow6224
Well-known
From the M3 forward, in my experience, there are simply no VF/RF's that come close to Leica. Once you get used to the lesser clarity/brightness of other RFs, the Nikons are quite beautiful. I would also posit that the 50/1.4 S is the best 50mm of its era (among the Leica SUmmitar and Summicrons and SUmmilux, the various Canons, the Zeiss Sonnars). A really stunning lens. Sonnar fans would disagree. I had the 35/2.5 Voigtlander S mount which is also kickass. Same with the Voigtlander 90mm. The Nikon 85/2 is legendary and the 105/2.5 , if possible, is even more so.
In all -- go for it.
In all -- go for it.
VinceC
Veteran
The thing I like about the Nikon RF patch is that, once something is in focus, the rangefinder patch effectively disappears and you can concentrate on framing or waiting for the right (errr ... decisive ... ) moment to take the picture.
RObert Budding
D'oh!
Any system that you're unused to using will feel clunky at first. As for usability of Nikon RF cameras - they must be pretty solid since they were used to shoot the Korean War.
Regarding parallax error and correction, I agree its not a big deal with the Nikon RFs, because they just don't focus close enough for it to be much of a problem.
To explain further (and hopefully I'm remembering correctly)...
The minimum focus distance of Nikon RFs is 0.90m due to the design of the focus helicoid on the body (which all lenses must slot into regardless of focal length).
From infinity to about 1.30m to 1.20m, there's almost no parallax error so little correction is needed.
From about 1.30m to 1.20m down to 0.90m, there's some parallax error but not that much so its fairly easy to correct for.
From about 0.90m down to 0.65m to 0.70m (on rangefinders that focus that close, not the Nikon RFs of course) the frame movement to correct for parallax error is very pronounced. That's because the required parallax correction increases exponentially as you get closer so most of the correction happens in that last 20 to 25 cm or so.
Sonnar fans would disagree that the Nikkor-S 5cm f1.4 (which is a sonnar optical design) is the best 50mm lens of its era? I'm a little confused there... 😕
To explain further (and hopefully I'm remembering correctly)...
The minimum focus distance of Nikon RFs is 0.90m due to the design of the focus helicoid on the body (which all lenses must slot into regardless of focal length).
From infinity to about 1.30m to 1.20m, there's almost no parallax error so little correction is needed.
From about 1.30m to 1.20m down to 0.90m, there's some parallax error but not that much so its fairly easy to correct for.
From about 0.90m down to 0.65m to 0.70m (on rangefinders that focus that close, not the Nikon RFs of course) the frame movement to correct for parallax error is very pronounced. That's because the required parallax correction increases exponentially as you get closer so most of the correction happens in that last 20 to 25 cm or so.
Sonnar fans would disagree that the Nikkor-S 5cm f1.4 (which is a sonnar optical design) is the best 50mm lens of its era? I'm a little confused there... 😕
john341
camera user
Nikon vs Leica
Nikon vs Leica
I have a Nikon S2 and a Leica M2. The Nikon seems to me to be an old Leica with a contax mount. The shutter is a bit noisy but the viewfinder lovely. The M2 however has a sweet, quiet shutter, viewfinder nice but weight more than the Nikon. What a choice!
Nikon vs Leica
I have a Nikon S2 and a Leica M2. The Nikon seems to me to be an old Leica with a contax mount. The shutter is a bit noisy but the viewfinder lovely. The M2 however has a sweet, quiet shutter, viewfinder nice but weight more than the Nikon. What a choice!
Highway 61
Revisited
Well the Nikkor-S 5cm f1.4 is a Sonnar optical design but it might have been tweaked so that it opens at 1.4 instead of 1.5.
Actually none of the several Nikkor-S 5cm f1.4 I used to own (I still have one) proved to be as good as my Zeiss Opton Sonnar 50mm f1.5 T.
The Nikkor vignettes while the Sonnar doesn't ; and from 1.4 to 2.8 the Sonnar is noticeably sharper in the corners... and the overall sharpness gap is still in favor of the Sonnar at f/4 and above.
The Nikkor-H 5cm f/2 is another story as it blows all my Sonnars 5cm f/2 away (and the Sonnars are excellent nonetheless !).
And this is a Sonnar design too...
Oh I agree with you Nicolas! I just understood that comment as saying in a round about way that the Nikkor-S 50/1.4 is not a sonnar, when of course it actually is a sonnar 😉
It took me four tries to find a Nikkor-S 5cm F1.4 that performs to a level I'm happy with. Center sharpness is amazing (a shade better than my now sold Millennium even) and corner sharpness is pretty good too. Noticeably better than the other three samples I tried. The bokeh is still the same old busy ni-sen bokeh as the other samples but I can live with that.
rbsinto
Well-known
- Local time
- 9:32 PM
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2006
- Messages
- 1,598
I added a clear transparent piece of blue Lee filter gel behind one window in my S3 with the most indistinct patch and it improved the contrast of the image.
furcafe
Veteran
Not sure I agree w/the 1st statement, though I have experienced the patch flare mentioned in the 2nd sentence in my M6 TTL & M7 before having the flare-reduction parts installed by DAG. Aside from the patch flare on those models, I haven't had any more of a problem seeing what's inside the patch on any of my M bodies (M3, M2, M4, M5, M digitals), even w/low-contrast subjects, than I 've had w/any of my Nikon RFs (S2, S3 2000, SP, & SP 2005).
Now if you're referring to the contrast between the RF patch & the rest of the VF, I think that's a wash as it works better for some people to have that contrast, not so much for others (including myself). Personally, I like the untinted VF like on the modern M bodies & S3, but if you prefer a tinted VF, like on an M3, Contax II/IIa, or S2, you can always add a gel per rbsinto's post (#37) (IIRC, jonmanjiro did the same w/his S3).
Now if you're referring to the contrast between the RF patch & the rest of the VF, I think that's a wash as it works better for some people to have that contrast, not so much for others (including myself). Personally, I like the untinted VF like on the modern M bodies & S3, but if you prefer a tinted VF, like on an M3, Contax II/IIa, or S2, you can always add a gel per rbsinto's post (#37) (IIRC, jonmanjiro did the same w/his S3).
Last edited:
furcafe
Veteran
I've mentioned it before in another thread, but I've experienced a lot more sample variation in the S mount version of the 5cm/1.4 Nikkor-S than in the LTM version (had experience w/3 LTMs, 4 S mounts). Not sure why, but perhaps Nippon Kogaku upped the quality-control for the LTM versions because they were marquee/export products?
Highway 61
Revisited
For those who wouldn't find that old thread by themselves :
www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=74127
Range-rover
Veteran
That's two of the reasons I sold my S2, it was noisy with that wack of
the shutter and the spinning shutter dial kept getting in the way of my
fingers, it's a great camera but I like the S3 more.
Range
Similar threads
