HuubL
hunter-gatherer
Anybody mentioned shutter noise?
Shutter noise: my cloth-shutter SP is super-quiet, as quiet as any M. A different sound, but just as quiet.
HuubL
hunter-gatherer
furcafe
Veteran
That's because the S2's shutter works/sounds more like a thread mount/Barnack Leica: the slow speeds in particular make that "buzz-thwack" sound.
But my CLA'd S2 fires like a gun.
David Murphy
Veteran
Brian I agree that they are very well made and stand the test of time. I can tell you for sure though that the shutter on the S can cap (and drag, etc.). However I've noticed something else, and I'm sure you know more about this than me, my camera tech can fix an S or S2 rapidly and cheaply, so there may be something about them that makes them relatively easy to work on (good engineering?).
Also, my experience points to light leaks being common on Kiev's, but not on genuine Contax or Nikon RF bodies - better design and implemenation?
Last edited:
Sonnar2
Well-known
Ok, I admit it Kiu
I was a Nikon SLR shooter before becoming a Nikon RF shooter, and despite all the rows of Leicas on display in the shops in Tokyo, it was always the Nikon RFs that caught my eye. And the Nikon RFs even focus the same way as Nikon SLR. No more reason that needed than that
Funny, with me it was the opposite. In my school days I always shot with PENTAX SLRs. Any heard of a Pentax guy who likes NIKON SLRs? I didn't liked them either...
Anyway, I'm now having some Nikon film SLRs, and like my black Nikon F most, as a classic, even if I prefer my early Pentax SLRs in terms of beautiful design.
But my first Nikon ever was... a S2! It looks so beautiful and small I couldn't believed in that it costs just 300 USD. In fact I've paid more for some of my CANON RF.... probably it was just one reason why I've bought it, as well as my even cheaper Leica III... and some years before a "standard" S2 in beautiful condition (not "mint") was much more expensive.
I personally don't give much on rareness. I don't need a 5,000 USD hood. If you like it and have enough money left, buy it. One can be a collector without buying such kind of stuff. Yes they can be USED for photography, of course they can. Take them out of the shelf and click on them. My S2 is ALWAYS filled with film. Some other of my 50+ cameras are not... The 50/1.4 is a fine portrait lens, the 35/2.5 is a great universal lens... my third lens is a 85/2, and enough. And I like them in black because I just LOVE the Nikon RF black enamel. Just that: they were the most beautiful made lenses of that time, together with PENTAX SLR ones... we will NEVER see like them again. And I don't give much on REMAKES too... they will miss some of the authenticity.
cheers, Frank
Why? It's a nice camera, and you use it.
I use Leica's and Nikon's on a regular basis. To me, the appeal is there for both lines. Add to that the Canon Rangefinders, especially the Canon P.
Who thinks that Zeiss lenses won't work on a Leica???
I have eight of them for my Leica's.
Platinum RF
Well-known
In the bands Leica feel better than Nikon RF, the focus tooth wheel is a lousy design.
Most Nikon and Contax users learn how to use the focus wheel. You can always focus by turning the lens.
Now: Voigtlander Prominent focus knob. That takes a little getting used to. And took a little while to find it at all.
Now: Voigtlander Prominent focus knob. That takes a little getting used to. And took a little while to find it at all.
furcafe
Veteran
Or try the Kodak Ektra, where the focus wheel is on the bottom left side. On the plus side (for me, anyway) is that the Ektra's focus wheel is not linked to an infinity lock, so it's completely optional. Same goes w/the Bell & Howell Foton, which has the focus wheel near the Contax/Nikon position, but facing forward & operating vertically.
I modified the infinity lock on one Nikon S2 where it does not automatically engage. You push it into place when you want to lock the mount.
Just thinking of down sizing. If I had GAS for something else my S2 would be on the block for sure, but I guess right now it is like $ in the bank, assuming someone will want to buy it when I get around to selling it.
I'll try sum this up.
Appeal of a Nikon.
Quality, reliability, form, and function
In the right hands, it delivers photographs with quickness and ease.
The same can be said of Leica, Canon, and many other cameras. The same qualities are present in all of them. I see no need to select one and denigrate the others. Unless the only feature about a camera that appeals to you is its name.
Appeal of a Nikon.
Quality, reliability, form, and function
In the right hands, it delivers photographs with quickness and ease.
The same can be said of Leica, Canon, and many other cameras. The same qualities are present in all of them. I see no need to select one and denigrate the others. Unless the only feature about a camera that appeals to you is its name.
Al Kaplan
Veteran
It's unfortunate that the reason for so much of the "inovation" in camera design was for no better reason than to avoid infringing on another company's patents.
ferider
Veteran
That obviously wasn't a problem until the early 50s ....
> That obviously wasn't a problem until the early 50s ....
As I understand it, there was a problem with that before WW-II. I wonder if the Leica IV would have made it to market if there was not an infringement on the combined VF/RF of the Contax II and III. The prototype Leica IV was produced not long after the Contax competition. After WW-II, the patents held by German and Japanese companies were "nullified" (right word?) and the innovations of one company made it into others. I've read that the post-war Japanese government would not let one company hold exclusive rights to a "break-through" innovation. Otherwise, features like the instant-return mirror on an SLR would have been patented and held by the inventing company.
As I understand it, there was a problem with that before WW-II. I wonder if the Leica IV would have made it to market if there was not an infringement on the combined VF/RF of the Contax II and III. The prototype Leica IV was produced not long after the Contax competition. After WW-II, the patents held by German and Japanese companies were "nullified" (right word?) and the innovations of one company made it into others. I've read that the post-war Japanese government would not let one company hold exclusive rights to a "break-through" innovation. Otherwise, features like the instant-return mirror on an SLR would have been patented and held by the inventing company.
micromontenegro
Well-known
This:
lead to this:
which in turn lead to this:
It was an ergonomic breakthrough, it only needed time to develop!
lead to this:
which in turn lead to this:
It was an ergonomic breakthrough, it only needed time to develop!
VinceC
Veteran
Just to answer Al Kaplan's first post, about the reputation of German products among American Jews after World War II, Leica and the members of the Ernst Leitz family have quite an honorable record before and during World War II, saving hundreds of Jewish employees and their families by transferring them to "ghost" positions at overseas subsidiaries in safe countries.
I backwards evolved from Nikon Fs and F2s and had been shooting for awhile with Nikon RFs before I found out, at a FotoKina, that Leica's do not have 1:1 viewfinders. From that day forward, I never had any interest in Leica. I'm a writer-photographer, and the 1:1 finder creates, for me, a framing of the real world rather than a miniaturized picture of it. I don't fondle. In the 1990s I published quite a few images taken with Nikon RFs. They are great photojournalism cameras -- Leica users say telephotos aren't really suited for RF cameras, whereas Nikon users find that their 105/2.5s and 135s are easier to frame and focus in RF mount than in F-mount SLR versions. The Nikon lenses may be out of date, but they are nonetheless excellent. Yes, the 21/4 Nikkor is crazy expensive, so I used a 21/4.5 Zeiss Biogon in Contax mount, regarded by many as one of the finest lenses ever. The 35/1.8 remains a remarkable lens. In real-world usage, the 85/2, 105/2.5 and 135/3.5 are indistinguishable from modern lenses and are workhorse focal lengths for photojournalism (carry either the 105 alone or a two-lens combo of 85/135). The early 1960s final version of the 50mm 1.4 has been tested alongside the latest computer-designed Leitz 50/1.4 and found to be its optical equal. Advances in lens technology since about 1980 have all been in the field of coatings and zooms. And even then, the Vivitar Series 1 35-85/ 2.8 and 75-205/3.8, both from late 1970s, were some of the optically most advanced lenses ever.
I backwards evolved from Nikon Fs and F2s and had been shooting for awhile with Nikon RFs before I found out, at a FotoKina, that Leica's do not have 1:1 viewfinders. From that day forward, I never had any interest in Leica. I'm a writer-photographer, and the 1:1 finder creates, for me, a framing of the real world rather than a miniaturized picture of it. I don't fondle. In the 1990s I published quite a few images taken with Nikon RFs. They are great photojournalism cameras -- Leica users say telephotos aren't really suited for RF cameras, whereas Nikon users find that their 105/2.5s and 135s are easier to frame and focus in RF mount than in F-mount SLR versions. The Nikon lenses may be out of date, but they are nonetheless excellent. Yes, the 21/4 Nikkor is crazy expensive, so I used a 21/4.5 Zeiss Biogon in Contax mount, regarded by many as one of the finest lenses ever. The 35/1.8 remains a remarkable lens. In real-world usage, the 85/2, 105/2.5 and 135/3.5 are indistinguishable from modern lenses and are workhorse focal lengths for photojournalism (carry either the 105 alone or a two-lens combo of 85/135). The early 1960s final version of the 50mm 1.4 has been tested alongside the latest computer-designed Leitz 50/1.4 and found to be its optical equal. Advances in lens technology since about 1980 have all been in the field of coatings and zooms. And even then, the Vivitar Series 1 35-85/ 2.8 and 75-205/3.8, both from late 1970s, were some of the optically most advanced lenses ever.
Last edited:
This shot does it for me.
Nikkor 50mm F1.4, wide-open on the S3-2000.
Nikkor 50mm F1.4, wide-open on the S3-2000.
These shots do it for me!
Millennium 50mm f1.4 at maybe f2(?) on an S2.
Look how the lens handles the backlight in the first photo. Isn't even breaking a sweat!
Millennium 50mm f1.4 at maybe f2(?) on an S2.
Look how the lens handles the backlight in the first photo. Isn't even breaking a sweat!