View Full Version : Is the SP worth it?
hello all,
i'm fairly new to RFF but my history with the nikon RFs is longer.
the problem: the high price of SP. i need support from fellow RFF members prior to plungging deep into the pockets of my wallet to justify its acquisition.
i have been lusting after this camera for a good year and a half. despite all it's benefits: six built in, color coated framelines, titanium shutter on some, non-rotating shutter speed dial, brightline illuminator, etc. i have not yet bought one purely because of its rarity here in australia and the price. Is it worth it? (sadly one SP kit just went on ebay for a just little more than the S3 kit...still self flagellating myself for it) i hope it was to one of you lot. i didn't really need the lenses.
Having never actually held one in hand and played with one, I don't know what i'm missing. I'm awaiting some enlightenment.
At the moment i have 5 pairs of perfectly good pair of eyeglasses with scratched left lens due to my nikon S rounded viewfinder. I believe (and am trying to convice my wife to believe) that the SP may solve this problem. Come to think of it, I could've bought an SP for the price of my five ruined pairs of eyeglasses!!
The titanium shutter is what i desire most? does anyone know which models SP serial numbers have these shutters? should I just have one of my nikon S converted by S. Gandy to titanium shutter? one of them certainly could use a curtain replacement.
Thanks...i appreciate your input
having said all this, it would probably only take a good user brassed black nikon SP for me to sell my soul to the seller.
If you like shooting Nikon rangefinders, the SP is a major step up in usability.The S is a charming antique. The SP remains a fully functional modern camera. Other than a lack of light meter, is is on part with using a modern Leica M-series camera. Some (such as myself) would argue that it's better than an M.
Dim viewfinders are an issue. Brian has been lucky, and he may be onto something with the later finders ... the SP was criticized even during its production run for dim finders, so Nippon Kogaku may have improved the coatings toward the end.
Prices have been down on Nikon rf gear the past couple of years, making them again affordable for users.
Because they are scarce in Australia, I assume they would hold their local resale value there. You could get an SP off EBay and, if you decide it's not your cup of grog, you could probably resell it for very little if any loss.
EDIT: The SP will scratch your glasses, too. I know from experience. Get some O-ring material to glue on it. The back of the finder is comparable to a plain-prism Nikon F -- it is a flat metal plate. It's not as bad as the Contax or Kiev, but I use an SP/S3 daily, and my glasses are scratched.
Yes. I need to glue some felt on. I spent a few years not taking many pictures. When I started back up again about 18 months ago, I rediscovered what it's like to need a new pair of glasses every year.
Nikon S2 user. Not hard to tell which eye I use......
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=42376&d=1173885644
The S2 is wicked with its sharp circle. The S3/SP are much more gentle. They mainly scratched off the antireflective coating from glasses in about that same location (yes, my camera lenses convinced me, long ago, to always get multicoating).
xayraa33
03-14-2007, 07:57
get an SP if it is your hearts desire.
a Leica M4-P has framelines for 28mm to 135mm lenses and can be bought much cheaper, but it is not a Nikon SP and the Leica is too logical.
when you hanker for an SP, only an SP will do.
Leica M's don't handle the longer lenses as well because the viewfinder image is reduced. If you wear eyeglasses, an SP finder allows you to very easily frame 28 to 135 lenses without struggling.
I'll pass, thanks.
As digital becomes the norm and film retreats into a niche market, the cost of film gear, especially manual focus film gear has come down a great deal. Even Leica bodies can be purchased relatively inexpensively. However, the lenses are still a King's Ransom, which is another reason why I'll stick to Nikon for my rangefinder and SLR gear.
I'll pass, thanks.
As digital becomes the norm and film retreats into a niche market, the cost of film gear, especially manual focus film gear has come down a great deal. Even Leica bodies can be purchased relatively inexpensively. However, the lenses are still a King's Ransom, which is another reason why I'll stick to Nikon for my rangefinder and SLR gear.
The problem here lies in the fact that the Leica lenses are usable on the RD-1 and the M8. The lenses are snapped up by the owners of these. The Nikkors in S-mount are still bought by filmusers (or those of us who have Orion or Orion copy adapters). The good news with this is that Nikkor Rf lenses are getting relatively cheap compared to Leica M and LTM mount lenses.
As for buying a 2005 SP - my only reason for getting one was to get the 35f1.8 that comes with it. Once I got that lens, my desire for the SP 2005 subsided considerably ( it is not completely gone though!). The S3's that I have get more use than the SP's. My black S3 Millenium is one of the smoothest cameras I have ever had. The release is so soft and quiet that sometimes I wonder if it even released!
I am mainly a 21/35/50 user and the S3'x covers that nicely. Once you have all the framelines dialled in on a SP - it looks like a videogame! When I use a longer lens on the Nikon's it is the 105 that I grab and the S3 has good frames for that.
I'm near-sighted and nowadays use bifocals. I think the Nikon RFs work well with glasses, other than the scratching issue, which can be resolved with glued felt or stick-on felt.
I've never felt a desire to use diopters, because I need my glasses to see everything else, so I really only take them off at the end of the day.
BillBingham2
03-14-2007, 09:19
I use my Leica M6 as my main camera because I have a wider range of lenses choices than on my S2. Now it must be said, I got my S2 about a year and a half ago and love it. I am lusting for an SP or S3, but finances are dry for awhile (about another year) so I will enjoy what I have.
I have a 105/2.5 and 85/2 in LTM and love them. Automatic parallax correction is a WONDERFUL thing for longer lenses. The SP led the world there. While I have never used an SP, being able to dial the correct frame line for the lens you want is way better than sharing between a wide and a long lens. I hate seeing a 135 frame line when I am using a wide angle lens.
As my S2 carry kit is a CV 25/4, Nikkor 50/1.4 and Nikkor 105/2.5, moving to an SP is not a pressing issue for me. My 25 requires an external finder, even on the SP and I have a brightline finder for my 105.
I think I will be sitting around waiting for a new SP to come down in price (read sitting around a LONG time).
Remember, your mileage may vary.
B2 (;->
ZivcoPhoto
03-14-2007, 09:25
Winoto
There are still some very nice, original SPs to be gotten. I bought one on that big auction site last week from a buyer I have had previous dealing with. Not only did I get a cosmetically very nice camera, but it is a mid production run model with cloth shutter and a very bright viewfinder with excellent rangefinder patch....on par or better than either of my S2s which work swell.
So I would not discount buying a used SP just yet.
After several years experience with S2s I would have to say the SP is a must for multiple lens shooters. I find the mini viewfinder for 28 and 35 a pleasure to use instead of a viewfinder mounted on top of the camera.
Not only are the viewfinders and rangefinder patch bright and easy to use but the other mechanics work as they are supposed to..including self timer. So this used purchase was a home run....I was lucky.
As the NikonHS webmaster states...many people who have used Nikon F or Nikon RF cameras wear glasses and don't have glass scratch problem.
I wear glasses all the time and I have never scratched a pair of glasses on any Nikon I have ever used (since mid '60's).
My glass-scratch problem is caused more by the S3 than the SP. I like to use the S3 with a 28mm lens and so am always pressing my glasses hard up against the viewfinder.
>>A 28 finder would also be a huge improvement for you<<
I'm too set in my ways at this point. I have a truly wonderful CV 25/4 lens with one of the best viewfinders ever, but I don't like using a separate viewfinder. So I still mostly use the 28mm lens, about half the time on an SP, half the time on an S3 (I used my SP for black and white and my S3 for color, mostly ... no reason, just the way I do it).
I breifly owned the 2005 SP kit but returned it to the dealer for a few reasons:
1.) Lens mounting on the 35/1.8 was not as fast as my Leica M as you must remember to reset the camera's focus wheel and lens to infinity for proper rf coupling.
2.) My sample although new, had the 1/30 speed a stop slow measuring 1/15 instead of 1/30.
3.) I prefer a built in meter as I shoot mostly slides and don't feel like using an external meter.
4.) 35/1.8 not very sharp by todays standard. Needs to be stopped down to at least f/2.8 or f/4 before performance is decent. Contrast to the new 50/1.4 on the 2000 S3 which is the best 50/1.4 Nikon's ever made and is only beat by a small degree by the 50/1.4 asph. Summilux.
5.) Like the old Nikon F, the shutter release is set closer to the rear and slightly less comfotable in location for my finger.
Fit and finish is outstanding on the SP 2005 especially the black enamel.
I've worn glasses (as I am nearsighted) for many years, and have progressed to the stage where I now wear bifocals. Over the years I've tried contact lenses, custom ground prescription lenses that fit into Nikon diopter corrector screw-ons, as well as the more mundane, just wear my glasses when shooting.
Everything else I tried had drawbacks, and simply wearing my bifocals when I shoot seems to work very well, regardless whether I'm using SLR's or my S3. On the SLR's I have rubber-ringed screw in lenses on the cameras, and nothing on the S3. However so far, I've not scratched my left eyeglass lens, so may just leave the S3 viewfinder alone.
xayraa33
03-14-2007, 12:19
You just don't like Nikon RF... what I am amazed by is that a dealer would take a camera of this type back, this is what I really hate these days about credit card sales. Your camera is bound to be sold [misrepresented] as new, if you kept all the packing.
I am shocked by the huge shutter error, since this camera only has two speeds, and varies exposure by slit width. If 1/30 was so far off, everything would be off. Sounds like you got a really awful example. I have never seen an F or SP off like this, something really dreadfully wrong in assembly, or the previous owner did something.
maybe it was one of the first reissue Sp's , as the assemblers had to learn how to do it , as the original SP assemblers have long retired or are now ashes in an urn.
NIKON KIU
03-14-2007, 13:50
get an SP if it is your hearts desire.
a Leica M4-P has framelines for 28mm to 135mm lenses and can be bought much cheaper, but it is not a Nikon SP and the Leica is too logical.
when you hanker for an SP, only an SP will do.
To you the Leica may be logical but this is the Nikon forum, the Leica is not logical at all...everything turns the wrong way,the lenses have the engraving in the wrong place, the lens realease is in the wrong place:eek:
Shall I go on?
Kiu:)
xayraa33
03-14-2007, 14:05
I do use an S2 Kiu.
The bottom falls off when the back should?
wes loder
03-14-2007, 14:50
Some peopel find the positon of the release set to the rear of the deck to be uncomfortable.
If you place your index finger on the release and your middle finger on the focus wheel, it is not that unnatural.
Remember, all the Leicas prior to the M3 also had the release to the rear, as did the many Leica copies. Since the Nikon's internals are almost pure Leica, the placement of the release makes sense. From a mechanical point-of-view, it makes even more sense. The shutter release is connected to a rod that goes directly through the advance spocket wheel shaft. The shutter is actually released in the bottom of the camera. Mechanically simple and reliable. Moving the release to the front of the deck requires an additional linkage and would place the fingers of the right hand too close together for the "1-2-3-shoot" operation. Cheers, WES LODER
wow, thank for the advice everyone. especially advice on something simple for protecting my glasses from the grinding nikon S viewfinder.(thank you nikonhswebmaster) an easy solution that has eluded me all this time. will have to go to the hardware store tomorrow.
after reading this thread, i feel more inclined to invest in an SP for ease of use with multiple lenses when travelling/shooting mostly wide angle lenses. rather than carrying 3 RFs (2x nikon S loaded with B/W and one S2 with color) when travelling, i can just carry an SP and one other. i've been keeping an eye out for a good Biogon 21/4.5 or CV 25/4....as well as an SP.
and as vince said, if i don't like it, i'm sure another aussie would not hesitate to buy one off me.
somebody has a 21/4.5 SC for sale in the classifieds. If it is the same formula as the 21m CV in LTM, it is a great performer for the money. I tested the 21mm Biogon in Contax mount against the 21CV in LTM, and the CV exhibited better resolution, while the lenses were about equal in flatness of field and contrast.
hello all,
i'm fairly new to RFF but my history with the nikon RFs is longer.
the problem: the high price of SP. i need support from fellow RFF members prior to plungging deep into the pockets of my wallet to justify its acquisition.
i have been lusting after this camera for a good year and a half. despite all it's benefits: six built in, color coated framelines, titanium shutter on some, non-rotating shutter speed dial, brightline illuminator, etc. i have not yet bought one purely because of its rarity here in australia and the price. Is it worth it? (sadly one SP kit just went on ebay for a just little more than the S3 kit...still self flagellating myself for it) i hope it was to one of you lot. i didn't really need the lenses.
Having never actually held one in hand and played with one, I don't know what i'm missing. I'm awaiting some enlightenment.
At the moment i have 5 pairs of perfectly good pair of eyeglasses with scratched left lens due to my nikon S rounded viewfinder. I believe (and am trying to convice my wife to believe) that the SP may solve this problem. Come to think of it, I could've bought an SP for the price of my five ruined pairs of eyeglasses!!
The titanium shutter is what i desire most? does anyone know which models SP serial numbers have these shutters? should I just have one of my nikon S converted by S. Gandy to titanium shutter? one of them certainly could use a curtain replacement.
Thanks...i appreciate your input
having said all this, it would probably only take a good user brassed black nikon SP for me to sell my soul to the seller.
Considering the fact that a new SP will cost about as much as a new Leica M8 and that the SP will last for at least 50 years whereas the M8 will last for considerably less....
You tell me, (provided your kids won't starve) is the SP "worth" it? :cool:
Rob Skeoch
03-14-2007, 15:50
Is it possible to buy the 35mm lens that usually sells with the new SP or are they only available as a package?
-Rob Skeoch
>>I breifly owned the 2005 SP kit but returned it to the dealer for a few reasons<<
Nikon RFs are very different from Leica RFs. Different ergonomics, different approach, different quirks. Just as I feel lost the couple of times I've handled a Leica, so I am very surprised by those people who switch back and forth between the two systems.
I do find Nikon bayonet lenses very fast to change. As you get familiar with a system, learn to do some things by habit, like always setting the lens to infinity. Once I've removed the lens, I leave the focus ring set to the 2:30 position and place the new infinity-set lens on -- I can tell by feel and sound if it fit in correctly.
If you don't use your middle finger on the focus wheel, you can place it on the front plate directly in front of the focus wheel, next to the RF window. This makes for an extremely strong, steady grip on the camera. It's a different hand position than the Leica. That's because it's not a Leica copy. It's its own camera.
>>Is it possible to buy the 35mm lens that usually sells with the new SP or are they only available as a package?<<
Only as a package, unless you find someone who is breaking up the set. That's been done with the S3-2000. Haven't seen it done with the SP-2005.
BillBingham2
03-14-2007, 16:08
I would bet that the CV 21 resists flare much better than the Biogon too (based upon several CV samples and never having touched a Biogon).
When I was swaping lenses on and off my Nikkormat, I had to do something simular. Make sure the fstop was at 5.6 or faster as I started to unmount it. I did it in sleep and wondered what the big deal was when Nikon came out with AI (I still wonder). I do not look at changing lenses on my S2 as a big deal at all.
B2 (;->
That's right. For my Nikomats, I have to set the lens to f/16 to mount an unmount. For the Nikon F with an FTn meter, you have to do a quick back-and-forth twist of the f/stop ring to get the meter lined up correctly.
As for metering, nothing is as accurate as a handheld incident. Every advance in through-the-lens meter techology since 1965 has been aimed at trying to make TTL as accurate as incident.
>>I would bet that the CV 21 resists flare much better than the Biogon <<
I own an original Biogon 21/4.5; I don't think it ever had flare. It's an excellent lens. I don't care for its weight (10 ounces/275 grams), but I've never had any trouble with its image quality. I won't replace it with a CV, but if I were doing it all over again, I'd have bought a CV 21/4 instead. (These didn't exist when I bought the Biogon in the early '90s).
With regard to flare, I did not see a whole lot of difference between the 21mm Contax Biogon and the 21mm CV in LTM, although I did not point the lenses directly toward the sun, but at an acute angle. Not much flare in either case. I assume that the Biogon is only single coated and the CV is multicoated, and I would suspect the improved lens design and improved coatings would favor the CV in flare-producing conditions
>>for my money it is actually the best rangefinder 35 ever made<<
My professional portfolio and family albums are filled with almost two decades of technically fantastic photos taken with this lens.
As a user of Leica Ms and Nikon SLRs for roughly 35 years, I have to say...yes indeed, one or the other of them certainly goes the wrong way...but I've never really figured out which! ;) Nevertheless, it is possible to get on with both systems...:D
To you the Leica may be logical but this is the Nikon forum, the Leica is not logical at all...everything turns the wrong way,the lenses have the engraving in the wrong place, the lens realease is in the wrong place:eek:
Shall I go on?
Kiu:)
jonmanjiro
03-14-2007, 16:54
I breifly owned the 2005 SP kit but returned it to the dealer for a few reasons:
4.) 35/1.8 not very sharp by todays standard. Needs to be stopped down to at least f/2.8 or f/4 before performance is decent. Contrast to the new 50/1.4 on the 2000 S3 which is the best 50/1.4 Nikon's ever made and is only beat by a small degree by the 50/1.4 asph. Summilux.
I'm very surprised to read this! The 35/1.8 lens on the SP 2005 is THE reason I've gone so crazy over Nikon RF. I compared it to my AIS 35/1.4 and was astounded at how much better the 35/1.8 is both in terms of sharpness and colour rendition. Now I'm getting film scans that rival and even beat the quality I'm getting out of my D200.
As for the SP 2005 body, its the smoothest, nicest to use camera I've ever held or owned. Absolutely beautiful in every respect.
I'm sorry to hear you had a less than pleasing experience.
Jon
The 35/1.8 has a bit of diffuse flare wide open. At f/2 at smaller, I've always found it both sharp and surprisingly flare-free.
jonmanjiro
03-14-2007, 17:36
maybe it was one of the first reissue Sp's , as the assemblers had to learn how to do it , as the original SP assemblers have long retired or are now ashes in an urn.
The same team already had experience building over 8,000 S3-2000 and 2000 S3 Limited Edition Black cameras. I've had the opportunity to handle maybe a dozen S3-2000, several S3 Black Ltd, and several SP 2005 cameras and the S3 Black Ltd and SP 2005 cameras are noticebly smoother and a little quieter. The team definitely got better as they went along. As Kiu said, "awilder" was probably unlucky and got a bad example .... probably the only one in 2,500.
Jon
Yes, in that regard, it's more of Contax copy. [Ducks] :p
It's a different hand position than the Leica. That's because it's not a Leica copy. It's its own camera.
IMHO, the most ergonomic place to place the shutter release is in the middle of the winding knob or the axis of the winding lever, as Leitz finally got right w/the M3 . . . an idea they may have "borrowed" from Zeiss Ikon's Contax II/III or IIa/IIIa (on which you can obviously still use the "1-2-3" method).
Moving the release to the front of the deck requires an additional linkage and would place the fingers of the right hand too close together for the "1-2-3-shoot" operation. Cheers, WES LODER
Precisely. Since I started out w/the Zeiss Ikon Contax RFs as my 1st manually-focused system cameras, I have no problems using the Nikon RFs since they share so much of the same ergonomic DNA (except for the pesky location of the shutter release). What I find interesting is that Nikon stuck w/the Contax focus direction when they transitioned to the F system, something that Zeiss Ikon itself didn't bother to do when they abandoned the Contax in favor of the Contarex & Contaflex SLRs.
Direction of focus all depends on what you began with. In 1968 when I bought my first Nikons, a used F and SP, there was simply no other pro choice, so for me the Nikon moved in the right direction. I just never saw any other cameras being used, although I am sure there were pros using Pentax.
If your first pro camera was in the 80s you might have bought a Canon or a Leica SLR.
NIKON KIU
03-14-2007, 19:55
Lets not gp too much off topic.
The man asks if buying the original SP is worth the money.
Let me tell you...the SP sells around $1200 to $1500 with the lens,you have been using Nikon S's!!
My friend,when you hold a Nikon SP in your hands,you will never ever use the S again!
Difference is day and night...get my drift?
Buy the SP,you will never regret!
For those who have been using Nikons SLR's for 35 years, I say...shame on you! you used Nikon SLR's and Leica but NO RANGEFINDER Nikons?
How lost can you be?
Kiu
I find that the ergonomics of the Contax II are related to, but different from, Nikon ergonomics. I base this on my Kiev II. Compared to the Nikon, the Kiev/Contax rf window is right on the edge of the camera, and the focus wheel on the Kiev/Contax is much further from the edge. This makes 1-2-3 Nikon-style shooting impossible for me, and my fingers are pretty average sized. It also makes it impossible to hold the Kiev/Contax in the most stable logical manner, with your middle finger on the top corner of the front plate.
In fact, if you try 1-2-3 with a Contax/Kiev, you really are giving someone "the finger". So watch out.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=42392&stc=1&d=1173931123
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=42393&stc=1&d=1173931163
Compared to a Nikon S3, which has the same ergonomics as an S2 and SP.
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=42395&stc=1&d=1173931591
>>Lets not gp too much off topic.<<
That's true. An original SP is a terrific purchase these days.
NIKON KIU
03-14-2007, 20:59
I breifly owned the 2005 SP kit but returned it to the dealer for a few reasons:
.
3.) I prefer a built in meter as I shoot mostly slides and don't feel like using an external meter.
You prefer a built-in camera light-meter?
You need a light meter?
No wonder!!
Kiu
NIKON KIU
03-14-2007, 21:47
A lot of users switch films so they need a meter.
For twenty years I used Tri-X so I never used a meter, but just took photos. But when I started shooting color positive in the 80s, I needed a meter for a almost a year to get the hang of it.
I would need a meter if I started again today with film I am not used to (which would be everything).
Come on Fred...if he needs a meter...
Kiu:D
Now, now, Kiu. We here on the Nikon forum don't judge others. Being judgmental is for forums devoted to that other top-of-the-line rangefinder camera system.
There was understanably, a reasonably small return fee and the camera was not represented as brand new when advertised for sale. I use to own the 35/1.4 Nikkor AI and found it to be one of Nikon's best optics especially stopped down to f/2.8 and rivaled my 35/2 'cron. Since I prefer slide shooting and am a stickler for accurate exposure, I use a meter to avoid blown highlights or extremely dark shadows. The built in meter with the current M's has never let me down although a good hand held or clip on meter would have been fine if I kept the SP.
I've shot virtually nothing but 100 ISO colour slide film for over 25 years, and I wouldn't dream of going out on the street to shoot without my incident meter in my left breast pocket. In open shade or on an overcast day, I trust the meter on my F2, or the matrix in my FA, but in contrasty light, when time permits I confirm exposure with the incident meter. And of course when shooting with my meterless F I take an incident reading whenever possible.
I usually guess the exposure before checking it against my meter to see how close I am.
And as I walk, I continuously monitor the light, adjusing aperture and shutter speed on all three cameras, so when a scene appears, I can see it, grab it and move on. Situations on the street are too fleeting to leave anything to chance, and miss a great shot.
I admire anyone who has the skill to determine accurate exposures by sight. I'm pretty good, but not good enough to do it as much as I'd like, so I fall back on my meter "crutch".
NIKON KIU
03-15-2007, 13:36
OK...I was just kidding, I have a meter:o
Can a man create some controvery around here without being "attacked":D :D
Kiu
Meters? We don't need no stinkin' meters!
NIKON KIU
03-16-2007, 09:31
Meters? We don't need no stinkin' meters!
My Man,
:D :D :D :D :D :D
Kiu
Parker51
05-21-2007, 07:18
HI ALL
I am a new member and i'm still a leica M user
But buy recently one,then two,and then 3 nikons RF...
It means I fall for these cameras. They sure have something special
My last one ,a SP with number 6214075 has a titanium shutter...
loneranger
05-21-2007, 09:29
Vow! that's a beautiful combo. Is that lens hard to find?
HI ALL
I am a new member and i'm still a leica M user
But buy recently one,then two,and then 3 nikons RF...
It means I fall for these cameras. They sure have something special
My last one ,a SP with number 6214075 has a titanium shutter...
Yep. that how it starts! It was a Nikon S in my case - 8 years ago! At this time of writing it is now more than 12 Nikon Rf's and a Bessa R2S!. As for lenses, i dont even want to go there!. Nikoholics Anon unite!
I've seen this one in person, and it's a beauty. Very nice lady selling it. I almost bought it and the 35mm f1.8 she just sold, but my meetings at Nikoholics Anon have been going well, and I resisted!
3 hrs to go:
28mm (http://cgi.ebay.com/Nikon-W-Nikkor-28mm-f-3-5-Lens-for-Nikon-Rangefinder_W0QQitemZ250115576823QQihZ015QQcategor yZ30039QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem)
It was said earlier that the Original SP with lens can be bought for $1,500 - if you can find one
What price would you have to pay for the SP2005 Kit, (with the 35/1.8) - presumably it is the same camera but built in 2005
Thanks
Parker51
06-01-2007, 07:22
Yep. that how it starts! It was a Nikon S in my case - 8 years ago! At this time of writing it is now more than 12 Nikon Rf's and a Bessa R2S!. As for lenses, i dont even want to go there!. Nikoholics Anon unite!
Hello all
Yes Tom
I know how it starts, but how the story finish?
By the way,I got yesterday a SP 2005 black set...I gonna use it tomorrow
But now I have to STOP buying Nikon.....my two old brassy black M2 are not that happy..;
Euh...There is an old black S3 in" classified" sold by "bruni" in italy,it will be my last one...but I'm anxious...He has no feedback and I can't find his name in the member's list.
Anybody who knows "bruni" ?
About $4500-5000 for a new one. Really about the same as if you bought a new one in 1960, when it would have set you back about $600 ($4000 in inflation adjusted dollars) for the kit.
It is very much the same camera, but it is NOT built using the original dies, and machines, but it an all new camera, built from scratch as a very faithful copy of the original.
Thanks
I guess that a good original SP with a 50/1.4 for about $2,000 to $2,500 here in Europe is a better buy then.
Although if they sell in the US for $1,500 that's quite a difference
Thanks
In answer to the original question, yes, and no.
As with many things, it's worth it if you can't live without it, And it's not worth it if you can.
Like many others, when I first became aware of the Nikon rangefinder cameras, I lusted after an SP. However, after a lot of searching on ebay, camera brokers, stores and camera flea markets, I realized that I probably couldn't afford a well-maintained user without factoring in Alimony payments as well. So in the end, I "settled" for a very nice S3 user that was quite affordable. And as a user, I've come to realize that the S3 does everything I want, and the extra-spiffy double view-finder and the switchable finder lines, and secret de-coder ring are extras I can and do live without quite nicely.
If a user grade well maintained SP fell out of the sky, I'd only take it if it was very, very reasonably priced. Otherwise I'll stick with the S3.
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.