Dan Chang
Established
Canon 7 is cheap. around $250, why they are so cheap? why 7s is more expensive?
Why Canon 7 is so cheap?
- Thread starter Dan Chang
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 23
- Views 3K
back alley
IMAGES
it's an ugly camera that garners no respect.
7s is more 'modern' with a battery operated meter, and prettier, more sleek looking.
the 7 is a good camera though, very rugged.
joe
7s is more 'modern' with a battery operated meter, and prettier, more sleek looking.
the 7 is a good camera though, very rugged.
joe
John Shriver
Well-known
No accessory shoe on Canon 7, making it almost usless with lenses wider than 35mm, unless you find the $200 accessory shoe bracket...
back alley
IMAGES
i saw one go on ebay for 60 bucks but i don't use flash or wider than 35.
i should have bought it & sold it later for that 200.
doh!
joe
i should have bought it & sold it later for that 200.
doh!
joe
Dan Chang
Established
backalley photo said:
Do you mean the meter on 7 made it ugly? 7s base is the same camera with Cds and shoes right?
aizan
Veteran
yeah, it's ugly! and doesn't have as nice build quality as the p.
back alley
IMAGES
i do think the meter helps to decrease it's beauty in that the lines of the camera are made to 'look' more bulky than it really is.
the 7s has a sleeker look, the metering cell is moved down the body a bit and is smaller or closer to the body.
i think the 7s has a hot shoe but i can't remember at this moment.
as i said before i don't have a need for a hot shoe.
joe
the 7s has a sleeker look, the metering cell is moved down the body a bit and is smaller or closer to the body.
i think the 7s has a hot shoe but i can't remember at this moment.
as i said before i don't have a need for a hot shoe.
joe
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
All those are factors, but the BIG one (IMO) is simply supply. It is by far the best-selling interchangeable-lens Canon RF, with nearly 138,000 produced. (The P is second, but only came in at about 88,000.)
And a lot of those 138,000 cameras were sold through the military PX system, meaning they were lightly used by fastidious amateurs rather than banged around by professionals. That, plus the fact that it was an extremely solid and well-made camera (even if not quite as prettily finished as the older ones) means that many of them have survived in good shape.
If somebody were to offer a clean-but-not-mint 7 body for, say, $500, we'd all pass on it, because we'd know that we wouldn't have to wait long before another one just as nice became available at a more reasonable price.
That's tough on sellers, but good for Canon fans who want an excellent user camera (for 35-135mm lenses, anyway) at a good price.
And a lot of those 138,000 cameras were sold through the military PX system, meaning they were lightly used by fastidious amateurs rather than banged around by professionals. That, plus the fact that it was an extremely solid and well-made camera (even if not quite as prettily finished as the older ones) means that many of them have survived in good shape.
If somebody were to offer a clean-but-not-mint 7 body for, say, $500, we'd all pass on it, because we'd know that we wouldn't have to wait long before another one just as nice became available at a more reasonable price.
That's tough on sellers, but good for Canon fans who want an excellent user camera (for 35-135mm lenses, anyway) at a good price.
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
backalley photo said:
The 7s has an accessory shoe, but it's not "hot" (no flash contact.)
back alley
IMAGES
many thanks.
joe
joe
SolaresLarrave
My M5s need red dots!
Agree, the Canon 7 is unappealing. I just don't really like the big meter window, and that's why I really like Joe's cameras.
However... don't old classic Leicas look neat with a Leica-meter hat? 😛
However... don't old classic Leicas look neat with a Leica-meter hat? 😛
back alley
IMAGES
did you want me to lie francisco?
sell the meter buy another lens, my friend.
joe
sell the meter buy another lens, my friend.
joe
taffer
void
Just do like me, and if the meter is dead cover the bugeyes with silver tape that matches the color of the body...
Takes MUCH better pictures since I did that...
😛
Takes MUCH better pictures since I did that...
😛
Sonnar2
Well-known
Aizan, I own a P and a 7, both in equal (dentless) condition. I can tell you, both are very well build. I don't have measured the thickness of the top-plate, but in an emergency I wouldn't hesitate to use both as a hammer to throw a window.
I don't know where the rumor is coming from, the build quality of the 7 is poorer than the P, maybe Stephen Gandys website has spread it. But I allow to disagree at this topic! If Canon changend the quality during the run of the 7, the 7s should be even worse build.
The reason for cheap price is 1) hig production run and still a lot cameras on the market (they don't going dead) 2) the camera don't look so nice like the P, V, VI or L because of the meter. Essentially they use the same backplane so the 7 isn't essentially "bigger" than the others. Nor is it more heavy (when compared with a P and coupled Canon-Meter, which is essentially a small one)
Why is Leica M5 the cheapest Leica? I suspect same reason. "Too big" feel.
Even the P isn't a small camera compared with the Leica M2-3 or Bessa-R. It's longer, but looks more "sleek".
The 7 isn't the best wideangle camera, true. Can't effort a second body?, the Bessa-R is quite as cheap nowadays
The selenium meter of course isn't as precise as the TTL Bessa-R meter. Who cares? It works in daylight precise enogh for neg. films. And it doesn't need that crap 1.35V batteries, beware of... ;-)
Anyway if cheap or expensive, have fun with it 🙂
I don't know where the rumor is coming from, the build quality of the 7 is poorer than the P, maybe Stephen Gandys website has spread it. But I allow to disagree at this topic! If Canon changend the quality during the run of the 7, the 7s should be even worse build.
The reason for cheap price is 1) hig production run and still a lot cameras on the market (they don't going dead) 2) the camera don't look so nice like the P, V, VI or L because of the meter. Essentially they use the same backplane so the 7 isn't essentially "bigger" than the others. Nor is it more heavy (when compared with a P and coupled Canon-Meter, which is essentially a small one)
Why is Leica M5 the cheapest Leica? I suspect same reason. "Too big" feel.
Even the P isn't a small camera compared with the Leica M2-3 or Bessa-R. It's longer, but looks more "sleek".
The 7 isn't the best wideangle camera, true. Can't effort a second body?, the Bessa-R is quite as cheap nowadays
The selenium meter of course isn't as precise as the TTL Bessa-R meter. Who cares? It works in daylight precise enogh for neg. films. And it doesn't need that crap 1.35V batteries, beware of... ;-)
Anyway if cheap or expensive, have fun with it 🙂
Sonnar Brian
Established
The real reason that everyone BASHES the Canon 7 is because it can use the Canon 50mm F0.95 lens, the fastest regular production lens known to mankind. They are just jealous. They feel compelled to put it down because it is faster than any lens that they can mount on their camera.
A Good Selenium Lasts Forever. Outlasts poor little wimpy CDS Bullseye cells that loose responsiveness is the upper and lower ranges with age.
And if the metering cell is bad and you don't want to replace it? Pop the top, remove the meter mechanism, and put a cold shoe on the camera.
Build Quality? Don't even get me started! I have never seen a camera take such a heavy impact and still operate.
Shutter: Stainless Steel that does not burn through.
Viewfinder: Better than my Nikon SP that cost 10 times as much.
Sleek? I like the way the RF window Blends into the Selenium Bug-Eyes much more than the CDS Bullseye meter.
The Canon 7 is the best bargain out there for classic high-quality LTM cameras.
Canon 7 Gallery:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php/cat/544
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php/photo/2024/size/big/sort/1/cat/575
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php/photo/2025/size/big/sort/1/cat/575
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php/cat/569
Need to make a clip-on accessory shoe bracket? Buu and old Canon bulb flash that uses the bayonet mount and convert it to a shoe.
A Good Selenium Lasts Forever. Outlasts poor little wimpy CDS Bullseye cells that loose responsiveness is the upper and lower ranges with age.
And if the metering cell is bad and you don't want to replace it? Pop the top, remove the meter mechanism, and put a cold shoe on the camera.
Build Quality? Don't even get me started! I have never seen a camera take such a heavy impact and still operate.
Shutter: Stainless Steel that does not burn through.
Viewfinder: Better than my Nikon SP that cost 10 times as much.
Sleek? I like the way the RF window Blends into the Selenium Bug-Eyes much more than the CDS Bullseye meter.
The Canon 7 is the best bargain out there for classic high-quality LTM cameras.
Canon 7 Gallery:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php/cat/544
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php/photo/2024/size/big/sort/1/cat/575
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php/photo/2025/size/big/sort/1/cat/575
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php/cat/569
Need to make a clip-on accessory shoe bracket? Buu and old Canon bulb flash that uses the bayonet mount and convert it to a shoe.
Last edited by a moderator:
taffer
void
Amen !!!!!
So imagine my happiness when I found one with all the nice things Brian says for $135 😉
So imagine my happiness when I found one with all the nice things Brian says for $135 😉
JohnS
Member
I was wondering about this. I see a lot listed as having dead meters. Can these be rehabbed?
JohnS
Sonnar Brian
Established
I have found that if the camera is kept in an ever-ready case that the Selenium Cells are usually still good. I just repaired a Canon 7 with a "dead" meter. Rurned out that the light baffle was causing the meter needle to stick. It worked quite well and was accurate after removing the "warped" baffle. No real effect on the finder.
I am running about 80% on the number of cameras with good working selenium meters; 3 Canon 7 good, 4th was dead; 3 Retina IIIS cameras, and I replaced the meter on the 4th using a meter from a Reflex-S; Retina Auto-3 one good, 2nd dead; Retina Reflex-S, 2 Retina Reflex-IV's; Retina IIIc one good one dead; Vitessa-T good; Nikon Meter-3 clip on for the F;Kodak Motormatic 35; Contax IIIa, and several more RF's and SLR's with good meters. If the old camera sat for years in a showroom case with meter pointed into the lit room, I would not trust it. Kept in a case or other dark place while not in use, should be good.
I am running about 80% on the number of cameras with good working selenium meters; 3 Canon 7 good, 4th was dead; 3 Retina IIIS cameras, and I replaced the meter on the 4th using a meter from a Reflex-S; Retina Auto-3 one good, 2nd dead; Retina Reflex-S, 2 Retina Reflex-IV's; Retina IIIc one good one dead; Vitessa-T good; Nikon Meter-3 clip on for the F;Kodak Motormatic 35; Contax IIIa, and several more RF's and SLR's with good meters. If the old camera sat for years in a showroom case with meter pointed into the lit room, I would not trust it. Kept in a case or other dark place while not in use, should be good.
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
Sonnar2 said:
All that Gandy says is that the 7 and 7s aren't quite as well finished as their predecessors:
Fit and Finish: While the Canon 7/7s/7sZ are wonderful machines and the best classic Canon Rangefinder shooters in terms of great features,* when placed side by side to the earlier Canon RF bodies, it's obvious they* represent a downgrading of fit and finish.* Even as late as the economical P, Canon RF bodies have thick chrome top* and bottom plates. The 7 and later have a thinner chrome with thinner plates.** I am not saying these are poorly finished cameras,* just that the earlier Canon's are heavier built.* Put them side by side and see for yourself.*
In terms of mechanical construction, remove the covers and you'll see that the insides are the same as the V/VI/P series: i.e., designed and assembled by raving nut cases whose obsessive pride of craftsmanship led them to lavish maniacal detail on parts that they fully expected that no one would ever see.
chendayuan
Established
We have see too many 'internet experters claim this claim that. One is the canon VF/RF not aged well, sliver coating ruined et al, I have see a few Canon ViL VT 7/7s, all the silver frame lines are clear. the glued rotated VIL viewfinder is aged very good compare to the same aged other FR. If you dip you camera into fresh or salt water or store it in a humid basement for few years everything can be ruined even Leica. The Leica M2/M3 RF/VF can de-cement or fall apart, do we say Leica VF/RF are not aged well? you have to use your brain to analyze these claims, not just base on how fancy his/her webpage. most of these information can be copied from books megazines. these dealers/collectors runned webpage usually do not have very good first hand experience some of them are just skin deep fondlers/dealers/collectors, may be camera repairman has more autherity on build quality.
Similar threads
