Canon RF- please educate me

[g0tr00t]

Ok, now I have a nice assortment of fixe lens RF's. I have been looking...yes just lookin :angel: at ebay's Canon RF's with Leica mounts....hmmmm - me thinks.

What are the "must have" Canon RF's with interchangeable lenses?

[back alley]

where do i start?

first check out cameraquest site for some info.
then the stella boys sites and then maybe karen nakamura's site.

do you need the links?

joe

[FrankS]

There you go again Joe, letting out the secret and driving up RF prices!

[back alley]

damn, i never thought...

[rover]

I saw that a Canon 50/1.4 is listed on Ebay today by Adorama. They rate it as a 9, I would question them to make sure you have confidence in what is being offered as I have read some negatives about their used stuff.

David, check out the cameraquest.com camera articles too.

[Brian Sweeney]

Canon 7 is the best bargain going due to its Selenium meter which fails in about 1/3 of the cameras and is not that sensitive (EV6) even at its best. It makes the camera look ungainly. As a shooter, it is a great camera. Frame lines for 35; 50; 85/100; and 135mm. Parallax corrected brightline finder with a focus spot that is bright and a finder that is close to Leica. It is about 1/4 of the price of a similar condition Leica M and has a metal foil shutter that does not burn. It is not as quiet as a Leica M, but than again only broken cameras are quieter than an M.

The Canon P has fixed "brightline", ie painted on, framelines and does not have a meter. It is a much more classic looking camera than the 7. It is like looking at a streamline cruiser built for speed rather than a Dreadnaught with guns sticking out everywhere. The P goes for more, even though it was the economy model, because of Joe.

Lenses: the 50mm F1.8 is the sharpest of the bunch and the 50mm F1.4 is close behind. I use a Canon 50mm F1.4 on my Canon 7 and somehow have let TWO Canon 50mm F1.8's through my hands.

[back alley]

The P goes for more, even though it was the economy model, because of Joe.
it's nice to have some kind of impact on the world.

and somehow have let TWO Canon 50mm F1.8's through my hands.
and we love ya for it.
(not like frank's happy to see you kind of love...more like...well, you know...)

joe

[g0tr00t]

Oh, I get it now....The Canon 7/7s/7sZ are so nice....


Thanks! :)

[back alley]

the 7s is more $$ than either the 7 or the p usually.

the p is like the sports car, i love the look and feel of the camera.

i will soon be fondling one of brian's 7s so will be able to give a first hand impression then. it does look ugly compared to the p (in pics, anyway), but feature wise has more. i want a 7 cause i have the 85 and 135 lenses and don't want to use aux finders.

generally the 7 and p and the vi series cameras are quality built bodies, the lenses are excellent, mostly and cost way less than comparable german made cameras.

joe

[g0tr00t]

Originally posted by backalley photo
the 7s is more $$ than either the 7 or the p usually.

the p is like the sports car, i love the look and feel of the camera.

i will soon be fondling one of brian's 7s so will be able to give a first hand impression then. it does look ugly compared to the p (in pics, anyway), but feature wise has more. i want a 7 cause i have the 85 and 135 lenses and don't want to use aux finders.

generally the 7 and p and the vi series cameras are quality built bodies, the lenses are excellent, mostly and cost way less than comparable german made cameras.

joe

Thanks joe! MMmmm....Please do share the experience.... :)

Looking forward to to the "review". Thanks again!

[rover]

I have this book

CANON RANGEFINDER CAMERAS 1933-68 by Peter Dechert
You can see the cover here about 2/3 down the page
http://www.hovebooks.com/collect/

It contains all the info you could imagine about the Canon Rangefinders. If it were me, and it often is, who was looking for a Canon Rangefinder, I would look at anything from the V series forward. That includes the L and P. The book gives production numbers and complete descriptions of the cameras as some of the early models were more or less identicle on the outside.

[taffer]

Yup, that book is a must have for anybody serious about Canon rangefinders...

Of course, I DON'T have it :p (yet)

The 7 may be the great deal on the whole lot, I got mine for $135 (!) with a broken meter and capping 1/1000 speed but otherwise very nice.

Yep, it's not as stilish as the P, but with some home made make up you can cover those meter bugeyes (asuming they aren't working in first place) and give the camera a new silverish more classic appearance.

Then the one with that Industar 26 looks quircky :) The tall lines on the 7 ASK for a fast big lens (1.4, 1.2 (!)) or a flat wide angle lens with a nice wide hood (I'm in love with vented ones) or a nice black Jupiter-9 which is built 'up to scale' to the 7.

If a P is a Range Rover the 7 may be between a Defender and a Lada Niva / Uaz Martorelli, depending on which lens you put on it ;) :p

PS: Remember that true beauty is inside, and there both P and 7 will you you their curtain wrinkles, lol !

[back alley]

my 'p''s curtain is as smooth as a, well, ya know.

and i too don't have that book.
i bid on a couple but they always go past my limit.

joe

[FrankS]

David, there's a good site with Canon rangefinder information, just Google: Canon Museum

[taffer]

Btw a friend sent me some scans of the Canon 7 chapter from that book. I OCRed it and turned it to PDF. If somebody is interested, let me know.

Oscar

[back alley]

pick me pick me!:)

joe

[taffer]

Check your gmail !

[Paul Connet]

Originally posted by taffer
The 7 may be the great deal on the whole lot, I got mine for $135 (!) with a broken meter and capping 1/1000 speed but otherwise very nice.

Yep, it's not as stilish as the P, but with some home made make up you can cover those meter bugeyes (asuming they aren't working in first place) and give the camera a new silverish more classic appearance.

I just bought a 7 from a fellow on the LUG. Have not received it yet, but have started lifting weights to get ready for the experience. I always passed on them before because of the size, but now with the experience of the Zorki 3C and 4, I think I'm finally ready. Even got out my old Canon FTbn to play with for a while in preparation.

All of you 7 owners are to blame for this and you will have to suffer the photos that come from it. :p

Paul C.

[back alley]

welcome brother!

oscar, i'm on my way to gmail.

joe

[g0tr00t]

Originally posted by taffer
Btw a friend sent me some scans of the Canon 7 chapter from that book. I OCRed it and turned it to PDF. If somebody is interested, let me know.

Oscar


I would be very interested. Thank you.

[Brian Sweeney]

Lifting weights for a Canon 7?!?! No need for that. It is taller than the L1 that I picked up, but is the same dimensions otherwise. The two cameras could change the baseplate. Even with the 50mm F0.95 lens it is no heavier than the F2AS with a 55mm F1.2 lens.

NOW My F2S+DS1+MD1+MB1 with its 10 AA batteries and the 300mm F4.5 Nikkor-H; Start curling with the 20lb weights...

[back alley]

i think the 7 weighs in at a bit more than the p.
i trust i will be able to handle it...;)

joe

[jlw]

I just now went into the kitchen and plopped my P and 7s (each with an identical neckstrap and body cap) on my trusty electronic postal scale. Tale of the tape:

P = 596g
7s = 667g

Incidentally, while the baseplate size of both cameras looks identical, the P "packs" a bit smaller because the 7/7s has more stickie-outie bits -- it's a bit over 1/4 inch taller and about 3/16 inch thicker, depending on how you measure.

But neither one is a problem to handle. When I'm not fortunate enough to be able to shoot an RF, I'm usually using a Nikon D100 electroplastodigital thingie, with a 70-200 VR Nikkor stovepipe hung off the front -- now THAT'S an arm-bruiser! By comparison, the 7s with 50/0.95 is just pleasantly hefty...

[back alley]

jlw, i don't believe we have met.
i'm joe and welcome to the forum.

i see by the (rf) cameras you use you are a person of good taste and most likely a gentleman as well.;)

joe

[Sonnar]

The Canon P *looks* small, but compared to a Bessa R you see why. Long, but low body leads to the elegant line... where is Bessa R looks pudgy...
Compare the P and a 7 face by face.. no difference that counts... put the selen meter on a P and the P is bigger, and weights the same... :-)
regards Frank

[Paul Connet]

Originally posted by jlw
I just now went into the kitchen and plopped my P and 7s (each with an identical neckstrap and body cap) on my trusty electronic postal scale. Tale of the tape:
P = 596g
7s = 667g
Incidentally, while the baseplate size of both cameras looks identical, the P "packs" a bit smaller because the 7/7s has more stickie-outie bits -- it's a bit over 1/4 inch taller and about 3/16 inch thicker, depending on how you measure.


I am still anxiously waiting for my 7 to show up. The seller emailed this morning that he had just posted it via USPS priority mail so it should be here shortly.

My concern over the size-weight is based on an understanding from some source that the body shell of the 7 is the same as the original Canon F1, which I know to be a big camera. My sources show the size of the F1 to be 146.7 x 99.5 x 49.5mm, with a weight of 820g. I am most happy to hear the 7 weighs a good bit less at 667g.

None of this really matters except that if I were to loan it to my friend, (pic below), where would she carry it? :rolleyes:

Regards, Paul C.

[pshinkaw]

Around her neck?

My Canon 7 which I just acquired a few weeks ago uses many of the same components as my Canon FX and Pellix. The wind levers and shutter speed dials look identical. The metal shutter curtains of the Pellix look almost identical to those of the 7.

It is a heavy camera, but pales in comparison to the Kiev 60 and and C330 which I use a lot. I'm sure it is also diminutive in comparison to a Fujica G690.

-Paul

[Pherdinand]

She should have a guy around that is happy to carry the camera for here, everywhere she wishes... :)

[taffer]

Amén.

BY THE WAY. One of the Forbidden lenses for the Canon 7 (and P) is the well known Jupiter-12 35/2.8 FSU lens. It is known to collide with the light baffles on these cameras.

MY experience however, with a '89 version of this lens is that in fact it mounts ok. The rear of the lens barrel/cam doesn't touch the baffles, the edge of the huge rear glass ALMOST touches the top of the film chamber but again does not.

If you ever try that REMEMBER TO SCREW IT IN CAREFULLY, and always looking through the camera back with the shutter opened in bulb setting.

And have your fingers ready for any friction and stop screwing inmediately if so, if in doubt, DON'T do it.

But I thought I had to post my experience, as there are so many variations of these lenses and I always heard it wasn't safe to mount them. There also a JP page showing a P with a J-12 on it.

So I'm afraid I need that P after all to try, bad luck that I must look for a new computer just to be able to play Thief III (Deadly Shadows), a b'day gift from my friends (GREAT friends indeed! :D)

[back alley]

does brian have a p, soon to be for sale?

there are some nice ones out there. i might save my money to buy a really mint one should it come along.

joe

[Brian Sweeney]

Sorry Joe,
I do not have a Canon P, just the L1. And it is not for sale. I was thinking of a "P", but really need to use what I have. That "P" is "P"retty. Let us know what you think of the Canon 7 finder in comparison of the P.

The L1 is a good shooter; I cleaned up some of the finder but will need a manual to "pop the top". I may send it to Essex. Some "separation" that will not clean up, but not too bad. About the same as my user S3 and SP.

[pshinkaw]

I tried my black barreled J-12 on my Canon 7 right after it arrived. I locked open the shutter (it has a T setting!) and VERY CAREFULLY inserted the J-12. It came very close to the upper baffle, but did not touch it. Once it was screwed in, there was about a credit card thickness separating the two. The back of the rear element looked perilously clos to the focal plane as well.

I noticed that the camera with scratches on the upper baffle right where the lens comes close to it. Someone previously must have tried this as well.

Anyway, I figured that was enough experimenting and I removed the lens without taking any pictures. I already have a good 35/3.5 Summaron which fits without any risks. The J-12 is really reserved for permanant use on a Zorki-1(e).

The black barreled version is newer than the aluminum/chrome version.

-Paul

[taffer]

Yes Paul, that's my experience as well.

Btw, here another one...

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=30027&item=3852515966&rd=1

Oscar

[Sonnar]

Finder of Canon P vs. 7 (have both):
7:
- better with 85 or 135mm lenses (frame included)
- better focussing high-speed lenses (longer RFB)
- better sight of 35mm frame with eyeglasses (0,8x minfication)
- frames better visible (projected)

P:
- no minification (1:1), better shooting with two eyes open
- large 100mm frame, no 85/135mm
- with eyeglasses 35mm frame not fully visible at a glance

Both finders are equal in brightness (a bit duller than new Bessa-R) and parallax corrected.
With my "P" the framelines are good visible, but sources say they dissociate over the years

Some people don't like to see the 3 frames permanently in the P viewfinder - I personally prefer this to manual switching. Also the eyestick of the P is smaller than the 7 (VI, V, or L) thanks to the simpler construction. The eyestick of the 7 is metal (scratches eyeglasses) where the P is plastic.

There is no clear "winner is..." Depends on...

cheers, Frank