Thinking about switching - what should I keep in mind? [long]

[jlw]

Note that this would be a big, big decision for me, and I haven't definitely made up my mind to do it, but...

I'm thinking of switching from Canon RF to Nikon RF.

Any thoughts from the collective wisdom of the group on what I should know if I take the plunge?

Background: I've happily used Canon RFs for more than 20 years, starting with a VI-T, working my way through a 7, IVSb2, 7s, P, and eventually back to the VI-T.

My basic shooting outfit now consists of a VI-T with either a 50/1.4 or 50/1.2 lens, and an 85/1.5 lens. (I've also got a 100/2, but this has migrated more or less permanently to my Epson R-D 1.)

So, why switch? Well...

-- Nikon is the only one of the "Big 4" classic RFs I've never really experienced in depth. (I owned an S2 and a couple of lenses for a few months, but couldn't deal with the lift-and-turn shutter dial and lack of multiple finder frames; I need these "modern conveniences" for the kinds of shooting I do.)

-- As I've reached bifocal age, I find that Canon RF viewfinders, which generally have a fairly strong negative diopter, are getting less comfortable for viewing. I'm hoping Nikons have a more neutral viewfinder... any thoughts on this?


Since I can't afford to be anything other than a "serial collector," and since I now have the luxury of shooting film rather than digital only for occasional fun, the VI-T outfit would have to go if I do decide to switch to Nikon. That's why this is such a fraught decision -- if I discover I don't like the Nikon side and decide to go back to Canon, it's unlikely that I'll be able to find pieces quite as nice as the ones I've got now.


Things I've already figured out:

-- Based on my S2 experience, the only models I can consider are the S3 and SP, since they're the only commonly available ones that have a single-pivot shutter speed dial and multiple finder frames.

-- I know the S3's frames are reflected rather than projected (like my VI-T's) and that they don't have parallax compensation (unlike the VI-T) but I don't see that as an issue IF the S3 frames are nice and clear; would appreciate any expert opinions on that issue. (I'm a little worried by the article about the S3 2000 that I read on the NHS website, in which the author noted that even his brand-new S3 2000's finder seemed a bit dim, as if it needed cleaning.)

-- I'm not a wide-angle guy; most of my shooting is done with a normal and a medium tele lens, so the SP's use of a "sidecar" finder for 35 and 28 isn't an issue either.


Now, available-darkness buff that I am, I'd love to start out with an external-mount 50/1.1 and a mint 85/1.5 Nikkor -- but those would be 'way beyond my budget even if I could find them. Again, since I'd be using this outfit only for occasional recreational shooting, I'm thinking all I might need would be a 50/1.4 and a 105/2.5 (I used to own the LTM version of this lens and liked it a lot.) Any contrary opinions or additional advice on this?


And in general:

-- Do you think a Canon shooter can learn to love Nikon?

-- Any particular "gotchas" or cautionary areas I need to watch out for when searching for these camera and lens models?

-- Any educated guesses as to what I'm going to have to pay for an immediately usable, clean-but-not-mint setup?

-- Can you suggest any other Nikon options that I should be considering or that might fit my tastes better?


Thanks for any and all help!

 

[SolaresLarrave]

Why the switch? Is there something in Canon you don't like? Or something Nikon has that Canon lacks? To me, it's a costly move and I wouldn't do it, but then, I'm happy with the stuff I have and the thought of "entering" another system gives me the willies. I just have too much invested in my current gear... and I'm not talking about money, but rather skill and reliance. Since I know how my cameras will react and the things they can do, I'm very confortable with them.

Again, just for the sake of argument, why is that you want to abandon a system you have for another you don't know? Don't get me wrong, I simply want to understand...

Merry Christmas! 🙂

 

[ferider]

I have played with the idea, too, mainly to get access to the modernized 35/1.8 and 50/1.4,
and maybe a classic wide angle.

But since you have these great 50, 85, 100mm lenses, and an RD, why
don't you keep compatibility and just switch to an M3 ?

For longer lenses, parallax correction is a must, IMO.

 

[SolaresLarrave]

I re-read your post and saw some of your reasons... and one of them is the viewfinder, which you're not sure whether it'll fulfill your bifocal expectations.

I wear bifocals as well, and use Leicas. Have you looked into that?

At some point, I had a chance to handle a Canon P... and I found the VF a good rival of the M3. And it has multiple frames too! 🙂

In any case, I'd stay with what I know. But that's yours-truly. Again, good luck and happy holidays to you and your family! 🙂

 

[dexdog]

Prsonally, I don't see any advantage to switching to Nikons; I don't think that you would gain much in usability. The old Nikkor lenses are fine products, and would be the only reason to consider switching, but considering that you can get most Nikkors in LTM, I don't see the advantage of dumping your fine-condition Canon bodies for a Nikon body.

I have a Nikon SP, and while it is a fine camera, I the reason I bought it was because I can use my Contax 35mm lenses w/o an external finder, and not because it would deliver any usability gain over my Canon P, 7s or VI-L.

 

[jlw]

Thanks for all the replies so far. A few expansions:

-- Why not switch to Leica? Been there, done that. Since all my serious photography nowadays is digital and my film use is purely "experiential," I'm in interested in a different experience. Also, I hate loading through the baseplate.

-- Same thing with the S2: Great camera, by far the most reasonably priced intro to Nikon RF, but I've had one and didn't especially care for it. Also, I do a lot of photography in dark places where a lift-and-turn shutter dial is a deal-breaker.

-- A glasses-friendly finder is a very big deal for me. Is the SP finder really significantly better than the S3's?

It sounds as if what people here are telling me is that if I want to try a Nikon RF, fine, but don't ditch the Canon stuff. And if I'm hearing this on the Nikon forum, I guess I'd better take that seriously!


(PS -- Yeah, the easy fix would be to win a lottery and then go out and buy one of those nice SP re-issues, except that I'd really rather have the 50mm lens that came on the S3 re-issue rather than the 35/1.8 that came on the SP. But then, if I had won a lottery, I wouldn't have to worry about choices, would I?)

 

[Sonnar Brian]

I've got a number of Nikon RF's and a Number of Canons.

If you are going with a "vintage" piece, you'll need the SP to see an improvement over the Canons. And you will have to be picky on which SP. I've got three SP's all with bright RF spots and framelines. They are late-run with titanium shutters. I'm not sure if Nikon improved the prism silvering, but all three are much better than my cloth-curtain SP and S3's. The RF spot is brighter than my S3-2000. The RF spot in these SP's are as bright as my CLA'd Canon Vt RF spot. The finder does appear "neutral" to my eyes, easier with my thick glasses than the Canon VI-T or Canon P. The framelines and RF spot on the SP is brighter than either. The reflective framelines of the VI-T, P, and S3 are not as bright as those on the SP's.

There are other alternatives. The Zeiss Ikon in M-Mount has a bright finder and is not a bottom loader. The Bessa R2S is much cheaper than a Nikon SP.

Figure about $2,000 for a SP and 5cm F1.4 with a "like-new" viewfinder and EX+ cosmetics. If you want one with a finder that is better than the VI-T or P, you will need to handle the camera before buying it. Plenty of SP's out there with "faded finders".

 

[jesse1dog]

Hi
I've read this thread a couple of times now and am still puzzled.
I'm still not sure what the reason is for you wanting to do the switch. Is it a sense of nostalgia somewhere? Is it a desire for a new photographic experience?
If it's a bit of the later go buy a 'cheap' rangefinder like the Olympus 35RC - something you can stick in a pocket. If you really need a 1.8 lens pick up a 35SP or 35RD in good working condition. All these 3 will give you a new experience and won't cost you much. If you don't like them there are plenty of people who will take them off your hands at the end of your trial period.
And I suppose that is part of the issue - you need to try things before you commit yourself to a life affirming change such as the one you have been contemplating.

I was once given some interesting advice - 'if in doubt, don't' !

j

 

[jlw]

I've read this thread a couple of times now and am still puzzled.
I'm still not sure what the reason is for you wanting to do the switch.

I'll try to make this a bit more clear by means of an analogy:

I'm also interested in vintage sports cars. I like the feel of driving them, and as a somewhat technically-minded person I'm interested in how different manufacturers engineered their solutions to the various problems of designing a sports car.

So, naturally, when the opportunity arises to drive a car I haven't driven before, I want to take advantage of that. (Being able to own a range of interesting cars would be better yet, but that's out of my price range.)

It's the same thing with classic RF cameras:

-- I've owned Canons for years and have made extensive use of the more evolved models: IVSb3, VI-T, P, 7, and 7s. I know a lot about how these cameras work and handle. I feel I "get" Canon's design philosophy and engineering approach.

-- When I worked for a newspaper I went through a series of M Leicas: an M4-2 (probably my favorite, if only for the fun of showing the "Made in Canada" engraving to twits who had started gassing on and on about "German quality") plus an M4-P and and M3. I feel I "get" the Leica mystique and have fully experienced their approach to cameras.

-- I did almost my entire photojournalism minor in college with a Contax IIa, a 50/1.5 Sonnar, and an 85/2 Nikkor, and later I owned a Contax III for several years and shot quite a few photos with it. I think I "get" the appeal of Contax and that I can now count myself an experienced Contax user.

-- But, my only Nikon RF experience was owning that S2, a 50/1.4 Nikkor, and a 135/3.5 Nikkor for a couple of months. The S2's finder and shutter controls just didn't work for me, so I didn't use it much and traded it away fairly quickly. Obviously people get very worked up over the Nikon RF experience (there has to be some reason Nikons command such a steep price premium over comparable Canon models with arguably superior features) but I just don't get why. I don't feel I've used Nikon RFs enough to understand what's so special about them.


So, that's why I'm interested. I guess the discussion so far has talked me out of the "switching" idea, so the VI-T will stay, but I'd still like to live with one of the later-model Nikons long enough to see what the big deal is.

I think what I've learned from this so far is that I'd be better off with an SP than an S3, and that I need to watch out for ones with dim viewfinders (do they have any other common issues of which I should be aware?) and that I'll need to be prepared to spend about two grand to get into a good one with a lens. So, it's not going to be a near-term project, but at least now I know what it will take.

Good discussion! Thanks, all...

 

[jesse1dog]

I like and can appreciate the analogy.
I think I understand something of your standpoint.
But now I am a bit curious.
How would a really experienced photographer react to an Olympus OM1 or a 35RC where the philosophy of camera seems so different to me. Taking your analogy - does an early Mercedes sports car have quite the same philosophy behind it as a 2007/8 model? How do the drives compare?

Isn't it a good thing that we are all different.
I'm in the process of getting an Olympus Trip in working order - now there is a camera with a history and some interesting users. And I'm not David Bailey!!

 

[Captain]

I can perfectly understand wanting to try things out for the sake of trying them. I have Leica, Canon, Contax and Nikon Rangerfinders and holding and using the Nikons are different from the others. The solidness of the body is truly something. I have a preference for S3's myself but wouldn't say no to an SP either. A friend who is a forum member here did the switch from a Canon P to Nikon for a reason I hadn't considered previously. He wanted a set of modern rangefinder lenses and basically bought Voigtlander as that was the only type available in various focal lengths, he was most satisfied by the optics but not overly happy with the build and sometimes strange shapes and sizes and handling of some of their lenses. He happened to handle an SC Voigtlander and was impressed by the better build and handling of them. He switched and purchased a set of the SC Voigtlander lenses and is very happy with that kit. I purchased a SC Voigtlander 21mm off another forum member and I too was surprised at the better build and handling to its LTM siblings. I do like the finger wheel focus.

In your shoes would I sell? Thats tough. I would not sell unless you were absolutely sure. Forum members sometimes have get togethers, I will try arrange something like that and handle one of their cameras for the day and see how you take to it before selling of your gear. That way you would be sure. Trying one out the shop window isn't really going to give you a reasonable idea. I personally prefer Nikon Randefinder cameras to canons and its good that I can obtain other brands to fill gaps like 21mm for complete my kit where 10 years ago you simply couldn't do that. The other side of the coin is that there are so many different LTM options you can also try with your canon.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

> (do they have any other common issues of which I should be aware?)

I would also make sure that the helical has been well-kept. The original instructions for Nikon repair state that the helical should be cleaned and NOT lubricated. Watch that they are squeeky, which is easy to fix with a good CLA. Check that the focus gears have not been "blown", but I have yet to see that. I've bought all but three Nikon RF 's "in person". Two on Ebay, one from a forum friend who CLA'd it before selling it.

One of the Ebay cameras was perfect, the second required a Shim job and the helical to be cleaned out. It was grimy, from a prior lube job. The helical was loose, and missing a spacer (shim) under one of the three screws that holds it in. I took it out, cleaned it, and shimmed it for a Sonnar.

 

[SolaresLarrave]

Brian, Brian... what would this forum be without your expertise? 🙂 If anything, your post above just convinced me of my initial position: never switch systems, not even for curiosity sake.

As a disclaimer... I was very powerfully lured to the Nikon RF for a while. I kept watching prices, bid on a few sales, but for some reason I never really went for the kill and try aggressively to buy one. Now I'm glad I didn't!

Now, jlw, if you do switch... please, keep us posted! 🙂 Good luck and have fun hunting for bargains! January is coming... it should be easy to shop now more than in December.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

When I got the S2 it could not be used with any lenses as the mount was not flat with respect to the film plane. It was bought from an NHS member.

Future owner? The camera even works well with a 8.5cm f2 'C'ontax Nikkor and a 13.5cm F3.5 'C'ontax Nikkor. And the Contax lenses. I would not sell this camera, I like the Sonnar too much and the Contax IIIa finder "not enough". It does not get as much use after modifying another Sonnar for the Nikon RF; changed the element spacing and main shim. That lens was given to me as it could not be focussed "at all". the elements were mis-spaced and the shim was way-off.

 

[BillBingham2]

JLW,

Can you be happy, YES, I am, but I'm going from Leica, not Canon.

I started down the Nikon road with an S2, liked it, but wanted the non-rotating shutter speed dial. Combined with the 50/1.4 it is a wonderful camera. While I was there I got a 25/4 CV, a 105/2.5 Nikkor.

I was just spoiled growing up on an Nikkormat. I also wanted a different finder, a bit more. While I lusted for an SP and still do, I'm very happy with my SP-2000.

I looked for a long time, went through dozens of web sites, reading everything I could find. Asking questions of everyone and came to the realization I really wanted to buy new. I got one that had never seen film before from a great guy. Combined with the 50/1.4 Mil lens, it's a great kit. I've added a CV 35/2.5 and now have a four lens kit. I think my love for the 25 has me shying away from the SP, price might have something else to do with it. The second finder in the SP will do a 28 at best, so if I went that way I would have needed an external finder anyway, so no big plus there (IMHO).

She loads just like an Nikon F, not an F2, but I've adjusted back without problems. I still have my M4-P, I think for two reasons. First because I can not get a rapidwinder for the S3. I love the rapidwinder for some stuff, best accessory ever. Second is the lack of F to S adapters. I love the 15/4.5 lens from CV and would miss it. I could live without one or the other, but both have me hanging in there for a bit longer. My Leica kit is a 15/4.5, 40/1.4 and 105/2.5, with a 25/4 in the bag some times.

The guy I bought the S3-2000 comes across them from time to time and I would highly recommend him. Honest and very much a straight shooter. If you would like his name, drop me a PM.

The S series has a wonderful long RF base and great feel. Go for it!

B2 (;->

 

[VinceC]

Bill,
If you don't wear glasses, you might to compare the full-frame view of the entire S3 finder to the field of view in your 25mm finder.

(Also, you wrote that you'd bought an SP-2000, when you meant S3-2000).

I go back and forth on the S3/SP. I'm heading out this morning to shoot some portraits for the office. Mostly digital, but I want a few film shots too. I still haven't decided if I'll use the SP or the S3.