Nikon vs Canon vs CV v FSU: Help!!

[gbb]

Hi, All

I've got the rf bug, been using a zorki 4 w j12 & 8, and want to get better gear. I'm considering the Bessa R and 35/2 from Camquest for $400, but am also curious about Nikon and Canon glass and bodies. If you were in my shoes, what would you do? What lenses & bodies partticularly stand out re value and performance compared to the cv equivalents? Thanks a lot,

GBB

 

[Sonnar Brian]

For Vintage Gear?

The Canon 7 with a 50mm F1.8 will run ~$400; if you are patient you could get the F1.4 on it for about the same price. The Canon 35mm F2.8 is a bargain at $125~$150.

As with any vintage gear, it is 40+ years of age. If buying "untested" figure in a $130 CLA into the price and bid/offer accordingly. Try to get one from a known entity. I use Canon, Leica, Nikon, Steinheil, and Schacht lenses on my Canon 7. Bring 'em on with framelines for 35mm, 50mm, 85/100mm, and 135mm. Long baselength finder with 0.8x magnification, stainless steel shutter curtains, and a selenium meter. Few appreciate the latter, and it tends to keep the price down.

For a modern piece of gear, you can't touch the price/performance of the Cosina setup.

 

[rover]

The biggest difference you will see between the Zorki and Bessa will be in the viewfinder. Night and day comparison in the Bessa's favor. I think this is a very important factor regarding the use of a RF. The difference will be less compared to a used Canon body, and most likely an even match with a used Leica. The longer baselength of the rangefinders in the other cameras, even the Zorki, are a disadvantage towards the Bessa. Not as big of a deal if you don't plan on using really fast long glass, but you do have to consider what lenses you plan on using. 50/2 (or the CV 50/1.5 I guess) and shorter you will have no problem. The CV 75 can be focused without a problem, but requiring a little more care, on the Bessa R.

What lenses to consider, well the 35/2.5 Classic in the kit is very well thought of, as is your Jupiter 8. Generally, all the CV lenses are considered decent performers, and as Brian mentioned the older Canon lenses are also very good, and often favorably priced.

 

[JoeFriday]

Canon? no respectable people that I know use that brand 😉

Nikon is interesting gear, but mostly collected rather than used.. it's also Contax rather than LTM or M mount, so your current lenses wouldn't be compatible.. but it would be compatible with Contax and Kiev (somewhat, but not completely)

as for 'if we were in your shoes'.. most of us are, or have been.. LOL

 

[dexdog]

Nikon is interesting gear, but mostly collected rather than used.. it's also Contax rather than LTM or M mount, so your current lenses wouldn't be compatible.. but it would be compatible with Contax and Kiev (somewhat, but not completely)

Contax and Nikon lenses are interchangeable up to 35mm or so, but beyond that point, differences in the threading of the focusing mounts make 50mm and longer lenses incompatible for focusing using the rangefinder. Nikon cameras and lenses are excellent quality, but expect to pay a premium due to collector interest.

If you are already using Zorki lenses, the Canon LTM mounts are great cameras, although I echo a prevous response about older cameras needing a CLA. I have number of Canon RFs, and particularly like the IV-Sb, L-1, and P.

I don't have any experience with LTM Bessas such as the R.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

The more common Nikon lenses go for less in S-Mount than in LTM. The body prices are higher than Canon. I suspect it is because collectors buy up the bodies and want the more rare lenses. I paid more for the chrome 85mm f2 in LTM than in S-mount. Usually 5cm f1.4 Nikkors in LTM command ~$300, but will go for ~$150 in S-Mount. I picked up a beater S2 with 5cm F1.4 for ~400. I picked up a mint- Canon 7 with Canon 50mm F1.4 for the same money. If you want vintage equipment at a good price, Canon is hard to beat. If you want to be different, the Nikon S2 is a great shooter with a 50. If you plan on using a lot of lenses, the S3 has frame lines for 35mm, 50mm, and 105mm. Prices of the SP are high, but they can be bought with a 5cm f1.4 lens for ~$1,200. Compare that with the price of a Summilux before pronouncing judgement. My user SP (8/10) was under $1,000 including cleaning and repairing on the lens, which needed the aperture blades reset. I adjusted the RF and cleaned the Helical myself.

 

[VinceC]

Brian and the others are right, the best value is Cosina-Voigtlaender, probably followed by Canon RF.

My experience is primarily with Nikon RF, and it's also true you can build up an extremely versatile Nikon RF camera kit for less money than comparable early M Leicas. The S3 is something of a sleeper, an eminently usable camera with a huge 1:1 finder. The SP is just one of history's great classics.

But you also have to be a little offbeat to invest in the system. Most of the lenses are exceptional buys for the qualilty -- chrome 28mm 3.5 / 35mm 2.5 / 50mm 1.4 / chrome 85mm 2 / 105mm 2.5 and 135mm 3.5. On the other hand, the chrome versions are pretty heavy and for the lighter black versions you're competing with collectors. You're also just investing in an essentially dead-end system that was the best thing available in 1958 but which as since been surpassed by Leica. CV does have some close-out prices on their Nikon mount lenses, but these cost more than the Leica screw equivalents.

 

[dostacos]

Hi, All

I've got the rf bug, been using a zorki 4 w j12 & 8, and want to get better gear. I'm considering the Bessa R and 35/2 from Camquest for $400, but am also curious about Nikon and Canon glass and bodies. If you were in my shoes, what would you do? What lenses & bodies partticularly stand out re value and performance compared to the cv equivalents? Thanks a lot,

GBB

I just got my first rolls of film back using a Bessa R and the 35mm lens. I am very impressed with the combo. [ I also have the 75MM lens and the 50 1.5 is on order] I was at the Mirage in Las Vegas and took some hand held shots of the waterfalls and volcano at night at a 15th of a second and they were sharp...well execpt the moving water 😀

 

[raid]

Canon RF lenses seem to grow on me. I love them. Nikon lenses are more expensive but not necessarily better in any way. I have two Nikon lenses in LTM; a 135mm/3.5 that looks like a piece of art and a 50/2 lens. I was curious about Nikons and got these two lenses, but I still use mostly my Canon lenses. The 35mm/1.8 is a tiny lens with excellent overall optical qualities. Some state that the Canon 135/3.5 is sharper than the Nikon 135/3.5, but the nikon lens selles for more. It is a matter of preference in the end.

 

[BillBingham2]

More info

More info

GBB,

Bang for the buck, CV bodies rule at this point in time. Do not forget about the built in meter in all of them, very handy. I do not have any Rs, I have Ts and Ls. I love my T, but with its requirement for all external viewfinder (it does have a built in rangefinder), it is not for everyone.

My most carried camera is a Bessa L with a 25/4 on it. It is a razor and have only had one photo out of focus in two years now (it is not RF coulpled in the LTM mount). When I am carrying a bag, I carry a T body and winder combination with a 15/4.5, 40/1.4, 105/2.5. The 15 and 40 are CV lenses, the 105 is a Nikkor LTM.

I've just got my first Nikon rangefinder, an S2 and love it, but finding lenses (at the price I want to pay) is challanging. I am looking to build a three lens kit, a CV 25/4 (coupled to the RF in the Nikon mount), Nikkor 50/1.4 and Nikkor 105/2.5. I have yet to find a good affordable 105, so I have a 135 for now.

Take a look at www.cameraquest.com, there is a CV users group that is very active online. Good info and different opinions, very few crackpots.

IMHO, there is a feel to a Nikon RF, just like there is to a Leica, not the same, but unique. I went down the Bessa road to find a camera I could carry with very young kids and not worry about if it broke (used Leica M's prior to that). I'm very happy with my Bessas and would not part with them. Their lenses are as good as preASPH Leica glass at 1/3 of the cost.

If you are into fast wide angle RF photography, CV holds the record for 28 and 35mm lenses. 1.9 and 1.2 respectively.

I am excited about getting back to the Nikon feel (I grew up on Nikkormat FTns), but to start, go CV.

Another thing about CV lenses is that they hold their value. If you get a lens that is just not you, want to go faster or something, you can sell them for very close to the new price from Stephen (CameraQuest) on ebay with ease.

Now, if you want to standardize on Nikon RF mount lenses, Bessa made (have stoped new production) a Nikon mount Bessa R2. I think Stephen still has a few, same body and feel as the LTM, but add the finger focus wheel. That might be an option if you want to use Nikon rangefinders in the future and not buy lots of lenses.

Hope this helps.

B2 (;->

 

[raid]

This is not proven yet. We will have to wait another ten years or so before knowing whether VC lenses hold their value or not.


"Another thing about CV lenses is that they hold their value"

 

[ray_g]

This is not proven yet. We will have to wait another ten years or so before knowing whether VC lenses hold their value or not.


"Another thing about CV lenses is that they hold their value"

I agree that CV lenses gives you the best "bang for your buck" but I disagree about their holding their value. Used prices on CV lenses have gone down significantly lately. Noktons are going for $200 on ebay, and up until recently, 35 Ultrons, new old stock, were selling for $249 on Photovillage.

That being said, it makes even more sense to buy CV now at the lower prices, if you are looking to build a system.

Regarding your particular situation, if you want to keep your J-12, bear in mind that it cannot be used with a Bessa body. You can keep the J8, but you will need a new 35mm. The choices mentioned are all great. I would add the Canon 35/2 to the mix. It is small and balances well on the Bessa R.

 

[ZivcoPhoto]

VinceC


You forgot to mention perhaps Nikons greatest accomplishment of the 50's that is the development of the 35mm F1.8. In my opinion this is perhaps one of the finest lenses ever made by anyone.

I got one this past summer and have used it quite a bit with my S2. Its performance is phenomenal. It utilizes rare earth glass Lanthanum and a unique breakthrough optical formula that is the basis for many of todays most modern lenses.

The trouble is that out of the 6,000 or so made in S mount most are held by collectors and never used. What a shame. I have to force myself to use my year old ASPH Summilux 35mm lens with my M4 Leica after getting this Nikkor lens. Black and white is high definition and full range of tones....out of focus is very smooth....color is equal to the Summilux....only the aspherical element in the Summilux makes the Summilux unique to shooting in low, low light (something I like to do).

The Nikkor is not that expensive, I paid less than $651 for a late serial number sample (I did have to have it CLA'd though for mechanical reasons) with beautiful glass. It is a non-retrofocus design so it has no distortion to speak of.

 

[VinceC]

ZivcoPhoto>>the 35mm F1.8. In my opinion this is perhaps one of the finest lenses ever made by anyone.<<

I won't disagree with you there. I never shot with a 35mm lens in SLR, but the 35mm f/1.8 absolutely won me over to that focal length. I'm a compulsive 28mm shooter, but I've been carrying and using the 35mm alongside my 28mm since the day I got the lens. It's one of those pieces of glass that makes you want to start using wine-tasting terms to describe its optical qualities. Mine's in definite user condition (or I've turned it so) and I think I paid about $400 or $500 in 1990. Today's prices seem to be in the $600-$700 range you mentioned.

To be fair, the lens can be found (rarely) in Leica screwmount, but it remains one of the world's undiscovered gems.

For the 99.95 percent of those who have no idea what we're talking about, here are a couple of shots with the 35mm -- one from Iraq in 1991 and one from this past summer.

 

[VinceC]

Oops, forgot to add the pictures.

 

[ZivcoPhoto]

VinceC

Two really outstanding examples of this lens....the one in the desert is gripping, I have saved it for further thought.

The picture of my grandson holding on to the kitchen cabinet door (below my user name) also was with this - 35mm F1.8 - lens.

 

[ZivcoPhoto]

Heres a couple more samples

 

[gbb]

Hey, Vince

Was that pic in the desert shot in Iraq?

I should update my old thread by saying I got a Bessa R+35 kit a month and a half ago, and have been using it non-stop since. Great gear, am now looking for an L+25. Thanks for all the great advice.

 

[VinceC]

ZivcoPhoto's shots also nicely show off the lens's sharpness and lack of distortion.

Looks like gbb made a good choice. If the CV Bessas had been available 15 or 20 years ago, I may well have ended up with that system insted of the Nikons -- at the time, I was looking for an affordable rangefinder system.

The desert photo was shot in southern Iraq in February 1991. Nikkor 35mm mounted on a Kiev 2