Sam R
Established
Hard not to love an SP
Hard not to love an SP
The SP was so ahdead of it's time.. The feature set it had were stunning in the photo workd. Much like the V8 Ford in 1932.
Hard not to love an SP
The SP was so ahdead of it's time.. The feature set it had were stunning in the photo workd. Much like the V8 Ford in 1932.
Sam R
Established
dreamsandart said:Thinking about a Nikon RF for years (being into Leica), the SP was really my only desire - and a black one of course - to go along with my BP M4 as the 'best of the best'.
Well, got the SP 2500 kit and a nice Zeiss Tessar for something 'classic' in look, and then split an S3 kit to keep the 50 millinium lens. But the past week found a nice S2 BD with a 2/50 Nikkor and now I feel 'complete'![]()
Both are different, and both have a style their own, a good couple in contrast - I'm a happy Nikon RF camper![]()
I love Nikon SP's, but NOTHING beat the "feel" of operating a Leica.
You haven't tried an SP 2005Sam R said:I love Nikon SP's, but NOTHING beat the "feel" of operating a Leica.
Last edited:
NIKON KIU
Did you say Nippon Kogaku
Sam R said:I love Nikon SP's, but NOTHING beat the "feel" of operating a Leica.
other than the fact that everything turns the wrong way
Kiu
NIKON KIU
Did you say Nippon Kogaku
I can't believe the Nikon I, the camera that started it all, didn't get a single vote
Since the poll is closed now, feel free to reply to this thread with your favourite choice.
Kiu
Since the poll is closed now, feel free to reply to this thread with your favourite choice.
Kiu
VinceC
Veteran
can't believe the Nikon I, the camera that started it all, didn't get a single vote
Really it was the lenses that started it all. The Nikon One was okay for its time, but nobody much wants to use one. You hardly even hear of anyone using a Nikon S as a daily user, even though they're so common and affordable. Instead, people prefer the S2 and later, because that's when Nikon really began refining the basic package into something unique and classic.
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
the S2 was a great design.
it really made a difference at the time of its introduction in late 1954 early 55.
there was nothing like it, and it even gave the Leica M3 a run for its money.
it really made a difference at the time of its introduction in late 1954 early 55.
there was nothing like it, and it even gave the Leica M3 a run for its money.
Sonnar2
Well-known
The S2 is the camera Zeiss-Ikon should have been made.
projectbluebird
Film Abuser
I'd have to go with the S2. It happens to be the only one I own, but I also specifically chose it when I decided to get a Nikon RF.
Something about the curve under the RF window makes it seem more elegant to look at. Even if the later models are more user friendly, and durable, they're more stark looking to me.
Something about the curve under the RF window makes it seem more elegant to look at. Even if the later models are more user friendly, and durable, they're more stark looking to me.
larmarv916
Well-known
I can only speak to the ownership of a S2, I tried a friends SP and while it was novel it was not anthing to kill for. The S2's I have found are always in good shape and seem to be like tanks. I like to use of the viewfinders as they seem to be accurate.
The biggest factor for the Nikons is the magnification factor, as I do not like to M2 style of diminished reproduction. I own a M3 and M6 .085 as well for the same reasons. I could only get a Nikon RF about a year or so ago. It is easier to focus and when many people see it almost beg to have a shot taken with such an old nikon.
When I send them the "snap" they seem to really get a kick out of it. the Nikon lense have a very visiblly different fee. A almost kind of grit texutre but sharp. A pronounced roundness to the subject. Also they seem do do a very good job of layers of deep tones that are distinct.
I just shot a test roll using both the F2 and F1.4 50mm lenses and also test shots with the 105mm From wide open on each down to F4 Moving one full stop at a time, while comparing the visual differences of each at same F stops.
I would like to have a modern SP with the 35mm F1.8 and compare it to the same lens I have from the old production series.
The overall feel and balance of the camer is better than my leica's and also quiter. However it is an arisitc tool and that complements my Leica's creative performance. Kind of like apples and oranges. Both from trees but worlds apart.
The biggest factor for the Nikons is the magnification factor, as I do not like to M2 style of diminished reproduction. I own a M3 and M6 .085 as well for the same reasons. I could only get a Nikon RF about a year or so ago. It is easier to focus and when many people see it almost beg to have a shot taken with such an old nikon.
When I send them the "snap" they seem to really get a kick out of it. the Nikon lense have a very visiblly different fee. A almost kind of grit texutre but sharp. A pronounced roundness to the subject. Also they seem do do a very good job of layers of deep tones that are distinct.
I just shot a test roll using both the F2 and F1.4 50mm lenses and also test shots with the 105mm From wide open on each down to F4 Moving one full stop at a time, while comparing the visual differences of each at same F stops.
I would like to have a modern SP with the 35mm F1.8 and compare it to the same lens I have from the old production series.
The overall feel and balance of the camer is better than my leica's and also quiter. However it is an arisitc tool and that complements my Leica's creative performance. Kind of like apples and oranges. Both from trees but worlds apart.
Last edited:
VinceC
Veteran
Well said. I like to observation about "grit" in the way the lenses handle sharpness. I also know from many portraits that their tones, and layers of tones, are quite pleasing. It's an interesting balance.
MikeL
Go Fish
The SP is catching up to the S2. Jarle, was that you?
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
the SP still has a ways to go to out pace the S2.
VinceC
Veteran
Well, if you add the original SP with the SP 2005 (an exact replica) they surpass the S2, 37 to 35. Go figure.
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
well , Nikon should have made an S2 2000 also.
MikeL
Go Fish
xayraa33 said:well , Nikon should have made an S2 2000 also.
Yes, but which lens with the S2 2000, the external f1.1 or f2?
MikeL said:Yes, but which lens with the S2 2000, the external f1.1 or f2?![]()
Nahhhh, the lens for a reissue S2 (black dial of course) would have to be the 50/1.1 internal
NIKON KIU
Did you say Nippon Kogaku
OK,
I have to edit my original post, as many know, this poll had an expiration date, which passed, but now, it's active.
go ahead and vote people...
Kiu
I have to edit my original post, as many know, this poll had an expiration date, which passed, but now, it's active.
go ahead and vote people...
Kiu
kevin m
Veteran
My favorite Nikon RF is the SP-D. It's got the sensor from the D-300, live view, dual card slots, weather sealing, dedicated iso dial and, best of all, it has the no-longer-patent-protected M-mount. A good deal for $2,395 with USA warranty. The SP-Dx is very nice, too, with its full-frame sensor and 10fps ability, but it's also $4,995. It's nice that Nikon offers a choice.

I voted for the S2.
I voted for the S2.
Last edited:
LeicaM3
Well-known
kevin m said:My favorite Nikon RF is the SP-D. It's got the sensor from the D-300, live view, dual card slots, weather sealing, dedicated iso dial and, best of all, it has the no-longer-patent-protected M-mount. A good deal for $2,395 with USA warranty. The SP-Dx is very nice, too, with its full-frame sensor and 10fps ability, but it's also $4,995. It's nice that Nikon offers a choice.
![]()
Hmm.
I prefer the S-D3 with the new sony ff sensor.
Kevin's SP-S sounds like the R-D1 :angel:
Share:
-
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.