View Full Version : Black 7sz - is it real?
Is this real? I did not think Canon made any. The viewfinder dial, strap lugs, and ST lever don't look like the ones on a legit black 7. Where the paint has worn, it is silver, not brass.
I don't know if the 7sz is real... but I looked at the sellers other offerings. One is a nice appearing 35/2, the scarce Type 2 lens being talked about on another thread.
Be interesting to see what happens. I note the vultures are already circling, as the item has 6 bids.
Looks pretty real to me. If it's a fake, they've perfected the art of making fakes.
I've owned a Canon 7 (not the 7sz) before, and the brassing doesn't look like "brass" (i.e. yellowish) but more silverish like you see there. I did own my Canon 7 for a whole week and a half...so I am certainly no authority on this.
The black paint doesn't look like it's a recent job, at least. I don't know if that's what you're asking is real (the title sounds like you're asking if the camera itself is real), because the 7sz is pretty much real.
But what is real? Caveat emptor -- it's ePrey.
I'm profoundly skeptical. In the wear areas around the top cover, you can see brushed-chrome finish. Factory-black Canons were NOT chromed before painting -- they were lacquered over the plain brass stamping.
(Supposedly it's not all that hard to de-plate a chrome camera via "reverse electroplating" -- don't know why forgers don't bother.)
Also, legit factory-black Canons I've seen pictured have a white dot in the self-timer lever; this one doesn't.
These hints, plus the fact that the various documentary authorities don't recognize factory-black Canons, would make me leery of paying "collector prices" for this one.
On the other hand, a 7sZ is worth having, and if the price were reasonable, it might be a sensible buy even with a post-manufacturer paint job. I wonder how practical it would be to strip the paint off one of these to get back to the original chrome finish...?
Bookmarked it last night. It should be an interesting auction.
Holy, it went for a penny! US $1,126.00
Here's the image for posterity's sake.
I can't get at the auction page, is it down already? Were there any other photos with a serial number?
Serial No.: 122550
Cool. I'd love to see some more photos of it.
Cool. I'd love to see some more photos of it.
Yeah - a nice big one for desktop wallpaper , like the images of the VI-T in the 'Portrait of the Pioneers' (http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/design/pioneers/index.html)series at the Canon Museum .......
It appears the black finish is applied directly over chrome. Is there any brass visible where the black paint has wore off?
Wes, I'd actually look it up in some books. If Dechert says that no black bodies of these cameras were made, there's a good chance that he's right.
Refinishing the camera wouldn't really be 'disfiguring' it...many people prefer black cameras. It was probably a camera made for use and therefore the photographer decided to make it black because that was his preference. A camera should be lovingly taken care of and used...and this one probably was.
But find an expert and ASK before you jump to conclusions that it's real. We're skeptical because we've seen other people buy things that they obviously thought were rare collector's items only to find out later that they're just normal things.
Edit: I really need to learn to type faster.
A couple more notes, though:
Does the meter on it work? Is it acurate? And also, I see that's the 50/1.4. Very nice lens. PLEASE tell me that you will actually use this occasionally, even if only so that it stays in good shape...it's a real waste of that lens if it isn't used.
it's a real waste of that lens if it isn't used.
Amen, sister, amen.
Seriously, I'm a believer in using cameras. To me the worst blasphemy I have every heard of is those who x-ray a box to be sure a camera is in it without having to touch the shrink wrap... :bang: :bang: :bang: Foo that! If I ever won a big lotto, I'd go to many of these places that sell to collectors, buy stuff in boxes and the break the seals, throw in a roll and start using it while still in the store... :D might cause a couple of heart attacks, I suppose ;)
Holy crap, I'd do that, too. I'd grab a black M3 and go to town. :D
I am not in any way trying to discredit your camera, but I will say that in 1968 I (as a just out of college wannabe photographer), had a Nikon SP disassembled and painted black.
It came out looking pretty good- however I must have angered the Nikon gods as the camera (along with 25, 35, 50, 85 and 105 lenses plus motor drive!!) was stolen from my apartment shortly thereafter.
Karma I guess. Anyone on the Nikon list got a motorized SP with peeling black paint?
In any case I just wanted to confirm that this sort of thing is doable and has been done and didn't even cost all that much (around $150-in '68 $ of course).
Enjoy your camera
I have myself dechromed, denickeled and black paint a VT de Luxe. Following details of this 7sz indicate a fake for me:
- The brassing on the lever shows silver color below. Thats wrong it should be brass color. The lever as well as many body parts are made in brass. Original black Canons had the paint directly over the brass. This camera has eventually been dechromed, but then not denickeled, as the chrome is not applied on the brass directly.
- When the black paint is directly on the ground brass, the edges look sharper, and you see every unevenness of the brass through the thin color layer. I can tell that as I have such an example in front of me.
- The bottom of the back door, see pic 4, is strongly used and shows strong wear. But very sensitive places like bottom surface and the shutter lever look much newer.
- the two horiz. stripes in the front side, same as the mentioned one at the bottom of the back door, are black on the chrome Canons, too. They show the black color Canon really used. The other black color looks newer, too matte to me. The original color has another gloss after 50 years.
- The two engraved holes on the selftimer lever are usually white on the original black canon RFs. I have never seen an original black canon with that lever without white dots.
Some will now ask: How he got the brassing? Easy: Paint it with a cheap color, one layer only, use it for a year and here we go. But next time better not forget to denickel, too.
BTW: Dechert was not always 100% correct about black Canons, it is possible that Canon made single samples in black on demand of pro photogs. But this 7sz is faked anyway. My word...
Why would a forger want to invite suspicion by creating a black example of a model in which all the books say no black examples would exist?
First, as already posted, Dechert had no knowledge about single black versions of Canon rangefinders that were made on special request for professional photographers. His book is not an absolute reference, neither for bodies nor for lenses, as well as the Canon museum isn't. And maybe the seller does not know about Dechert's book at all.
Second, I have seen a genuine, brassed, but CLA'd Canon P going for $3200 not so long ago. Chromes usually sell for approx. a 1/10 if it. A real black 7sz, if there is one, might give even more than this P. If you have the skill to make such a project, you can easily make money: Buy a beater body for $250, denickel & dechrome it for 30$, disassemble the parts to be painted, paint them with one layer (color $10), get the camera assembled and cla'd by a pro (add $160), use it for a year, and sell it.
Read my previous post; there are other sigificant indications that this camera is probably faked black. People do stuff like that - including me! Except that I would never sell my blackies!...
I find Wes's reasoning convincing, although I still think it's possible that the finish could have been EITHER a factory prototype job OR applied post-manufacture (most likely by someone with access to stocks of unfinished Canon parts -- maybe a subcontractor trying to interest Canon in this type of finish?)
Wes, you mentioned you're a manufacturer of high-end audio equipment -- no doubt you'd have knowledge about the types of finishes available for industrial metal products. Maybe it would help inform the doubters if you could briefly explain the processes that would be involved in producing this type of finish.
I know how anodizing works on aluminum (briefly, it's an electrochemical process that produces an oxide coating that's porous enough to accept a dye, yielding a hard durable colored finish) but I don't think it can be done on brass (from which Canon top and bottom plates usually were stamped) so I'm guessing that the brass either would have been aluminum-plated first, or possibly blackened by some other process such as chromating...?
I'm willing to accept the scenario that Canon could have made some 7sZ's in other finishes, such as the black one discussed here.
Not to hijack the thread, but I have what I believe is an example of a factory modification that was later released to production. It's a very early 50/0.95 modified for TV use, but with the markings of the regular lens. Peter K. has seen photos of it, and hasn't really made a definite statement as to it's being a prototype, which is my opinion. This lens has also been used, but the glass and mechanics are fine. The work of the conversion are just too simple and well-done, and look like what I'd expect of a factory job. The 7sZ is very possibly another example of this type of "tinkering" by the production guys during the actual period they were produced.
In any case, an interesting camera, and nice to see it's in good hands...
To my knowledge, black anodized cameras came up not before middlle 70's. Before that, black cameras were painted black (i.e. Leica, Rollei etc.)
As far as I know, black Canon cameras from the early 70's, i.e. Canon F's, are also painted black, not anodized.
The black on anodized cameras of the 70's tends to bleach. So my suggestion is the black of the 7sz was made later.
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.