Nikon S3 or SP

[Range-rover]

Hi all,
As I sit here at home, with Sandy blowing around outside, I'm thinking
about getting another Nikon rangefinder either a S3 or SP, I have two lenses
a Nikon 35mmf2.5 and a Voigtlander 25mmf4 both with their finders which
should do it for me??? I have a S2 already so I'm thinking.

Range

 

[Vickko]

I vote for SP. Better and more-featured rangefinder.

 

[enasniearth]

The s3 has the 35 frame however you have to roll your eye to see it all ,
If you wear glasses forget it .
The sp has the combined 35/ 28 finder , however the view is small .
You still have to move your eye from the main finder after you focus
To frame in the smaller finder .

The s2 you can use the external finders for 35 and 25 , they are brighter and
Easier to see , get the later leitz or voightlander bright line finders ,

Haveing had both the s3 and sp , if you want a different camera buy the sp
The main finder with the projected lines is easier to focus with than the s3 .
There is a lot going on in the s3 and it is prone to flare .
Neither one has as bright a spot as a good s2 .
The s2 is a bit noisier with the shutter though .

I have gone back to two s2 cameras ,
It is my favorite Nikon rf , I didn't really bond with the s3 , I enjoyed the sp
However the small 35/28 finder is not as nice as the external finders .
The sp is a nice camera , most you will buy will need serviced and that can be a bit of money .

 

[Erik van Straten]

One S2, one 35 brightline finder and two lenses, 50mm and 35mm, is all you need. Leave the other stuff to the collectors.

Erik.

 

[jonmanjiro]

Meh, I'll take an SP thanks. I have no problem framing with the internal 28/35 finder and hate the added bulk of external finders, so it's a no brainer for me.

 

[Range-rover]

Thanks enasniearth for your advice, I was thinking the finder in the S3 and SP were
better than the S2 but from what you say no, have to think about that then, anyone
one else have anything to add.

Range

 

[splitimageview]

The 25 will need a finder no matter what, unless you are ok with guesstimating based on the 28mm of the SP.

I’m with Jon, I’ll take a built-in 28/35 with the 1:1 primary viewfinder of the SP.

Owned many SPs, none ever needed service, for what that may be worth.

 

[Erik van Straten]

I hate the added bulk of external finders.

Yes, an external finder is extra bulk, but it provides the precision that is very important to me.

What about the VC mini-finder?

Erik.

 

[Range-rover]

I never had a problem with extra finder bulk, the 35 finder is a Leica and the 25 is a
Voigtlander. Never seem to add anything to the weight of the cameras.

Range

 

[jonmanjiro]

Yes, an external finder is extra bulk, but it provides the precision that is very important to me.

What about the VC mini-finder?

Erik.

Precision <> external finder sounds like an oxymoron to me 😛

FWIW I have no trouble framing with the internal 28/35 finder. Its just as precise as any external finder I've used. Also, the amount of eye movement required to switch between the 28/35 finder and the main finder is much less than required for an external finder, which is a nice plus in my book.

Never bothered with a CV mini-finder because its basically the same thing as the SP's internal 28/35 finder, and also ridiculously priced these days.

Have you ever shot with an SP, Erik?

 

[enasniearth]

Nikon s2 & sp

Nikon s2 & sp

As I said I like the s2 .

The sp is a great camera , about half will need the finder cleaned to brighten up the rf spot . If you get it serviced it is about the best Nikon .

The s2 is a pretty basic camera , it shortcomings are the shutter is not as quiet , the main finder is only for one lens the 5 cm and there is no parrelex correction . You have to use external finders .



If you use only normal and wide angles lenses the s2 is a good choice .
If you intend to use 85 and longer lenses the sp is the best choice , it also has parrellex correction ( moving bright frames ) for the 50 and up so is more accurate with the standard lens . As I mentioned before the 28/35 finder is small , it is very useable however not the nice view of the single external finders ( easier to see all the details in the frame )

These are just observations ,
Try the sp .

 

[Erik van Straten]

Have you ever shot with an SP, Erik?

No, I did not, mainly because of the non-availability of diopters for the finders. I know it is possible to make something out of EM-diopters, but I would like to see through such a thing before committing myself.

I also think the rangefinders of the S2's are better than those of the SP's. The SP rangefinders are often very dim.

However, both the Leitz and Nikon brightline 35mm finders are very precise. The Leitz is better because the lines curve to anticipate on the barrel distortion of the finder. The lines of the Nikon finder do not, but they show up really good. It is also smaller than the Leitz.

Erik.

 

[jonmanjiro]

I also think the rangefinders of the S2's are better than those of the SP's. These are often very dim.

I'm curious to know what you're basing your assertion on, Erik. Did you examine some SPs to reach this conclusion? Or is it based on comments on forums like this?

Having examined many SPs and S2s firsthand, my personal experience is that S2s finders do have a little better focus patch, on average. But I would not go as far as to say SP focus patches are often dim. Some are dim, but often they're just fine. There are also S2s out there that have dim focus patches.

There are more glass surfaces in the SP finder compared to the S2 finder, so there's more to get dirty over time and decrease the amount of light transmission. But a clean SP finder has a focus patch every bit as good as a clean S2 finder in my experience.

I have cleaned several SP and S2 finders. Before cleaning, one SP finder was so bad that the focus patch was almost invisible. After cleaning, it was amazing. Really easy to focus with.


Nikon SP rangefinder assembly

 

[enasniearth]

Precision <> external finder sounds like an oxymoron to me



The main finder on the sp is very accurate with the moveing bright line projected frames .
In the 28/35 finder both frames are present , there are parrelex lines for the 35 lens which show close up down and to the right .
The external finder mounts directly over the lens so the correction in only vertical . I find this more accurate for framing , and the larger view is a plus .
That is an opinion and perhaps many will differ with it .

The sp is a great camera able to use 6 lenses without external finders , it was nikons response to the Leica m3 .
I shot with an sp for many years in the mid 1980's mostly with the 28 mm lens and the in camera combined 28/35 finder .
I find now that I like the larger view of the leitz 28 mm bright line finder .
Of the Nikon finders the 3.5 cm bright line is the best , the chrome finders are more difficult to use and I don't recommend them .
If you are using telephoto lenses you can not beat the sp , also it has the advantage of the moving bright line for the 50.

The reissue sp 2005 has the advantage of the newest optics and coatings , added to the original design . I had a chance to shoot with one , the finder is just beautiful .
The original 28/35 finder usually has black spots ( deteriation of the black optical paint ) and haze
that make it difficult to use . Many have average rf spots . A servicing makes the difference . However
Even a serviced one is not up to the sp2005 .


You should try the sp it is a great camera.

 

[Erik van Straten]

I'm curious to know what you're basing your assertion on, Erik. Did you examine some SPs to reach this conclusion? Or is it based on comments on forums like this?

Yes, Jon, I've examined quite a lot of them, at Peter Lownds' shop in Rotterdam and at the Photographica Fair in Houten in The Netherlands, twice yearly. My problem with it is the lack of diopters and the often dim rangefinder spot. I've never seen one with a rangefinder spot as clear as the ones on my S2's. (I have three of them.)
I've never examined an SP 2005.
Doubtless cleaning helps a lot, but even then I think it is not better than a M3 finder.
To me, the simple but precise 1:1 50mm finder of the S2 is a miracle. There is no parallax-correction, but you'll never notice that, so well proportioned and placed is the frame.

Erik.

 

[maitani]

if you can find one, go for the 2005 SP, it's a fantastic camera, viewfinder (green/blueish tint)is the best of any Nikon RF i've had.

if you're more into the 35 mm focal lenght (as you said you have the 35 2.5 nikkor..) and prefer an uncluttered viewfinder (yellowish cast) go for the S3 it's perfect for 35 imo (check the contrast of the patch before you buy, make sure it's a good contrasty one). my re-edition S3 is the smoothest shutter release of all nikon RF's almost inaudible. also the S3 is great for low light focusing.

S2 is perfect if you prefer the 50 FL, and don't mind the louder shutter, the S4 is as good, my late S4 copy has a very contrasty patch.

 

[rbsinto]

Hi all,
As I sit here at home, with Sandy blowing around outside, I'm thinking
about getting another Nikon rangefinder either a S3 or SP, I have two lenses
a Nikon 35mmf2.5 and a Voightlander 25mmf4 both with their finders which
should do it for me??? I have a S2 already so I'm thinking.

Range

Just my two cents:
I use S3s, an SP and a Voigtlander R2S, and as far as the viewfinder is concerned, in my opinion the R2s is by far the best of the three. Unfortunately R2S bodies are very hard to find now, and I'm sorry I didn't buy two, when I bought mine from Steven Gandy.
Yes, the SP is more whiz-bang with all those framing lines, but I find that for my needs, the S3s are simpler and just as good.
And they are less expensive to purchase that the SP.
With respect to my needs, I'd rank them R2s>S3>SP.

 

[Highway 61]

(...)the S3s are simpler and just as good.
And they are less expensive to purchase than the SP.

The problem with the vintage S3s is that they've now become very hard to find if you want one in excellent plus/mint minus condition at a reasonable price (<=$1000 USD with a 50mm lens).

I just got one eventually (to replace the one I had to sell out two years ago, and the new-to-me camera is in better condition than the one it replaces : good) but it's been a very very long chase.

Nice classic SPs have become way easier to grab. Quite logical if you consider the production run of resp. the two models.

 

[rbsinto]

The problem with the vintage S3s is that they've now become very hard to find if you want one in excellent plus/mint minus condition at a reasonable price (<=$1000 USD with a 50mm lens).

I just got one eventually (to replace the one I had to sell out two years ago, and the new-to-me camera is in better condition than the one it replaces : good) but it's been a very very long chase.

Nice classic SPs have become way easier to grab. Quite logical if you consider the production run of resp. the two models.

We've had these discussions before, and for me it's all about optical and mechanical considerations, not aesthetics. I've got a perfectly good chrome beater that cost me less than $600.00, that takes equally as good photos as any of my other more expensive rangefinder bodies.
Besides, and I don't mean to cause an argument here, but where did this <$1,000 for body and lens for an excellent/mint minus set come from? I would assume that unless one is dealing with a spouse or family members who have no idea of the value of the disceased person's gear, you're not likely to to find the quality you desire at the price you've decided.

 

[dufffader]

What about the new S3 2000? How do they handle compared to the original S3 in mint condition? Is it possible to tell the difference? Same goes with the SP & SP2005.