Which Canon RF camera to use? [Archive]

pdek

08-30-2007, 12:51

Collecting isn't everything. Many of us USE our cameras. Which Canon rangefinder cameras do you prefer when it comes to actually making pictures?
If I were to choose, it would probably be from one of these:

Canon 7sZ (for the back-loading afficianado)
Canon IVSB2 (for the guy who likes bottom-loading)
Canon VI-T (for whoever enjoys trigger-winding)
Canon VI-L (for a camera that has most of the 7sZ attributes but is smaller)
Canon IIB (for the person who really digs antique user-cameras)

But what do YOU think?
Peter

xayraa33

08-30-2007, 12:59

I will go with the IVSb2 and its kin in the "improved " bottomloader family.

rogue_designer

08-30-2007, 13:00

the P (I carry at least one with me everywhere... rain or shine).

Form follows function.

Simple, elegant, precise, indestructible.

Xmas

08-30-2007, 13:02

They sold a lot of Ps.

Noel

dexdog

08-30-2007, 13:23

My favorite user is the P, followed by the Canon 7sZ

jmilkins

08-30-2007, 13:38

excellent - just what i have been wondering. I'll be watching this thread for sure. thanks.:)

Bingley

08-30-2007, 14:04

I've got both a P and 7, and use them both. My P is definitely a "user" model (a number of dings and dents on the outisde, courtesy of a former owner), and is just back from the DAG hospital, with a repaired optic that had gotten loose inside the rangefinder. Don did a great job.

I tend to use the P primarily w/ a 50, or a 28 (add a brightline mini-finder). If I think I'm going to be using my 35 a good deal (e.g., for landscapes), I'll take the 7 b/c I can see the framelines better.

Steve Bellayr

08-30-2007, 14:06

I vote for the P also.

jlw

08-30-2007, 15:34

I've done a lot of shooting with both a P and a VI-T (still have the latter) but in this day and age, I think it's hard to take a rangefinder camera seriously for routine use if it doesn't have a projected-frame finder with a decent range of framelines.

That narrows the Canon range down in one fell swoop to the 7-series. I don't think there are any real usability differences among the 7, 7s, and 7sZ (other than the 7 model's lack of an accessory shoe, and that's only a factor for some users.)

xayraa33

08-30-2007, 15:41

I use a SBOOI 50mm finder on my Canon IIF when using a 50mm lens and a 35mm VF on the other IIF with the 35mm lens.
these have squinty finders that are now really bothering my aging eyes.
but I still like the feel and size of these bottomloaders.

Bill58

08-30-2007, 17:35

If you have a P, why would you want anything else? It does everything the unmetered Leica Ms do, except easier to load AND it goes for about $300!

rogue_designer

08-30-2007, 17:44

I think it's hard to take a rangefinder camera seriously for routine use if it doesn't have a projected-frame finder with a decent range of framelines.

Well, with an RF I currently don't use anything except a 35 or a 50.. so the range isn't as big a deal.

Projected framelines are nice. But I've never had an issue with the ones etched into the P. And the 1:1 viewfinder is a clincher for me.

But that's just me and the way i shoot.

LeicaTom

08-30-2007, 20:21

IIF2 is the Cadillac of "knob top" bottom loaders.......with a build quality equal to or slightly above the Leica IIIF of the same period

Matched up with the F1.5 50mm lens it`s a real working tool as much as it`s a collectors item

It does takes some getting used to the single view eyepiece (after so many years using a Leica IIIC/IIIF) but the x1 and x1.5 magnification in the viewfinder is really helpful and the rangefinder patch seems much brighter than the Leica`s
(and there`s a built in contrast enhancer in the view finder as well)
with Leica you have to buy that crazy $50+ orange rangefinder filter to give you the same effect

I`ll be shooting with one the FIRST time this weekend, but I`m sure the results will be great, I`ll post some samples at my IIF2 thread :)

Tom

wlewisiii

08-30-2007, 20:51

Well, I had and used a IVSb & a 7 and should have never sold either. Especially the 7... Argh! Another IV with a 50/1.9 (or 50/3.5?) as a pocket camera and the 7 for the rest of my Canon lenes.

William

pdek

09-18-2007, 13:46

Actually, I thought that I answered the question when I mentioned those five cameras. But a lot of you opted for the Canon P, and I did indeed use a P for quite a while back when it was current. My only objection to it was the multiple finder outlines: I have never liked them unless, as in the Canon 7-types, you're only going to use the innermost of the lines that are displayed. That's one of my big gripes about the later Leica M-cameras: you've always got two sets of lines unless you have your camera modified, and if you do this your choice of lenses that couple to the finder is limited to half as many.
So my answer is any one of the five I listed, depending on your preferences, to which you might well add the P and substitute any of the -2 type bottom loaders if you didn't need as many features.
Peter

Original Question:

Collecting isn't everything. Many of us USE our cameras. Which Canon rangefinder cameras do you prefer when it comes to actually making pictures?
If I were to choose, it would probably be from one of these:

Canon 7sZ (for the back-loading afficianado)
Canon IVSB2 (for the guy who likes bottom-loading)
Canon VI-T (for whoever enjoys trigger-winding)
Canon VI-L (for a camera that has most of the 7sZ attributes but is smaller)
Canon IIB (for the person who really digs antique user-cameras)

But what do YOU think?
Peter

Spider67

10-06-2007, 11:29

the x1 and x1.5 magnification in the viewfinder is really helpful and the rangefinder patch seems much brighter than the Leica`s
(and there`s a built in contrast enhancer in the view finder as well)
with Leica you have to buy that crazy $50+ orange rangefinder filter to give you the same effect
Tom

Just what I thought except that I could say the same thing about the IV SB.
My IV SB is great in handling and feeling...alas the shutter curtains need to be changed!
I am just adapting myself to the IIIc's needs and would gladyly use the IV SB that could adapt to my needs.

Best regards from Vienna:rolleyes:

raid

10-06-2007, 11:57

I am still using a Canon IVSB(2?) and a P. Both are in user's condition, and both are accordingly "used". The IVSB looks and feels like a Leica IIIc.

I used to own a mint VI-L that was in a beautiful leather case. It just sat there; it was to good looking for use. I traded it for a Leica Standard.

leica M2 fan

10-06-2007, 12:09

I love using my 7s with the Canon 1.4 50 and various screw mount lenses. If I needed another I would really like the V1-L. The VF in the 7s is superb and I also like the 1:1. Hard to go wrong with these.

caila77

10-06-2007, 15:14

1) P
2) IVSb
3) 7

peterm1

10-06-2007, 15:31

They are all good, goldarn it. I must admit however that I have never been a fan of the bottom trigger winder on some later cameras as I would have only used it (for preference) on a few occasions given my style of photography - my view is that they would have done far far better had they provided both a top lever and bottom wind on these cameras - how good would that have been? I have owned a IVSB2 with a 50mm f1.5 and more recently a IVSB with the 50mm f1.8. Both were nice. I have also owned several Canon lenses including the Serenar 35mm f 3.5, the later chrome and black 50mm f 1.8, the later chrome and black 50mm f1.4, the chrome 85mm f1.8 and both the black / chrome and chrome versions of the 135mm f 3.5. In general I have an extremely high opinion of the cameras and lenses.

leif e

10-06-2007, 15:59

For me the choice is simple; I have only the one P - and I love it. Today I was at a football match, carrying two cameras. M8 on the right shoulder, P on the left, loaded with HP5+. Safe and sound? ;-)

ferider

10-06-2007, 16:02

The only one I have:

http://ferider.smugmug.com/photos/204793891-M.jpg

Love this combo.

Roland.

Solinar

10-06-2007, 16:47

Man, that 105 Nikkor makes the Canon P look tiny. I must say - that is one gorgeous lens.

rbiemer

10-06-2007, 16:57

I have owned three Canon RF cameras; QL17 GIII, IV SB(2, I think, based on your book Mr. Dechert:) ), and a P.

The QL17 was nice but I'm not such a fan of fixed lens cameras so I passed it along. No regrets.

The P was a camera I really wanted to like but with my particular eyesight, it was difficult to use. I'd got a good deal on a beater and had it re-habbed so it was a good user though a bit scuffed. I sold that one and, once again, no regrets.

But the IV SB...I found an amazing deal while looking for the 85mm/f2; at some small antiques auction site I found the 85 for very little $, bid on it and got an email from the person selling it that they also happened to have "the old Canon camera that this goes with. How about buying the whole set?" I thought about it for a short while and went for it. Got the kit and that set I really liked. Stupid me, I decided that I didn't want to have the camera sit idle while I saved my nickels for the CLA that it did need, so I sold it.:bang: :bang: :bang: That one I miss. The VF was dusty and a little dim but it "fit" me very well and the rest of the camera was just pleasing to me; great size, beautiful proportions, lovely weight in my hands or around my neck, even the bottom loading wasn't as fiddly as I'd thought it might be.
That one I will have again.

Oh yeah, my vote for "Which Canon to use?": IV SB.:D

nodyad

10-06-2007, 18:50

Honestly, my Kodak camera passion (which includes demonstrating use of those cameras again after as much as a century) consumes most of my film-based picture taking. But of the Canons I own, the IVSB2 that I bought in high school is my favorite. It's not that I love bottom loading, or even peering into the tiny viewfinder hole with glasses, but this was my yearbook camera, so I love it, not for any particular utility of it, but for the history we share.

Not long ago, I bought a Canon 7 in the expectation that I would find liberation in the outstanding viewfinder in that model. Looks matter, however, and whenever I put my older long lenses on that model, it reminds me of a black plank with a candlestick stuck on the side, unlike the form of the older, more slender models.

raid

10-06-2007, 21:04

Roland,
I love the grip. Which type is it?

Mackinaw

10-07-2007, 04:49

I am surprised to see no one mention the L1. The cloth shutter on the L1 was very quiet and the finder like the VI-T.

Well the L-1 is one of my Canon favorites. Relatively small and compact and it is pretty quiet as you suggest. I'm going to NYC in a few weeks and will probably take the L-1 around for the ride. I also like the Canon 7, not for its looks, but for its excellent finder. As for the P, I owned one many years back and sold it, just didn't like the cluttered and flary viewfinder.

Jim Bielecki

ferider

10-07-2007, 05:07

Roland,
I love the grip. Which type is it?

Hi Raid,

this is the old GMP Leica grip, slightly modified to fit. Best,

Roland.

raid

10-07-2007, 08:51

ferider

10-07-2007, 09:17

Roland,

What is GMP? [eidted: I found stuff on it at PN]
Is this one similar?

http://cgi.ebay.com/Silver-Hand-Grip-for-Leica-M-Series-Camera-Photography_W0QQitemZ290168161471QQihZ019QQcategor yZ15234QQrdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZViewItem

Maybe I can find a used one here?

By the way, I have the Canon Holder L. Does it count as a camera grip?

Don't know about the Canon holder and the Chinese copy.
But photovillage still has some of the old GMP grips. B+H has a chrome
one, too.

Best,

Roland.

raid

10-07-2007, 09:43

Don't know about the Canon holder and the Chinese copy.
But photovillage still has some of the old GMP grips. B+H has a chrome
one, too.

Best,

Roland.

The Canon Camera Holder L seems to be meant for Tripod use:
http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t261/raidamin/P1010073.jpg

It may provide some assistance with holding a camera.
I will check out photovillage and B&H. Danke.

ferider

10-07-2007, 09:46

Ahh ...

Here is the BH catalogue reg, Raid:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/800368656-USE/Photo_Equip__M_Grip_Aluminum_Accessory_Grip.html

Roland.

raid

10-07-2007, 09:50

Now we're talking. It is for $59 plus shipping.

Vics

10-07-2007, 10:31

I had one back in the '60s that I thought was called a V-T. Maybe it was a VI-T. Anyway, it had switchable finders for 50 and 35, and a separate RF window, I THINK. Hard to remember, but I know it was LTM and had a trigger winder on the bottom and a knob wind that lifted up. Pretty nice camera, but I remember it being quite large for a LTM RF camera. I had problems loading, but that may have been my fault. Got all my money out of it when I sold, though.
Vic

pdek

10-08-2007, 10:26

Gee -- I had thought this thread was dying, and suddenly here you all are again!
Actually, I don't see many issues that need responses from me. That handgrip (the silver one) looks neat, if you want a handgrip; I do find them useful these days, since my fingers don't work as well as they used to.
And the Canon Camera Holders were indeed designed to make it easier to use the camera on a tripod or microscope stand, etc., simply by providing a secure and centered tripod socket instead of the offset one, as well as providing additional possibilities for the attaching point (several threaded positions). They were not intended for handheld use.
The L1 was a great camera; but then there were so many great and quite similar Canons in those days that it's hard to pick one over the rest. So far as finders go, the VI models had silver-toned finders that haven't stood up in the long run as well as the gold-toned ones from the V-type cameras. But no question the finders on the 7-types were the best.
For pocketable cameras, the bottom-loading types, I would favor the IID2, IIF2, IIS2, and IVSB2. All four are essentially equal, depending only on what top shutter speed you need and on what type of synch you may want to use, if any (none available on the IID2). The finders are improved over the ones made earlier, especially the larger eyepiece opening; and the fast shutter speed dial doesn't spin when the shutter is released; indeed, the shutter mechanism itself is an improvement on what came earlier. Problem is, the 50/1.8 and 50/1.5 lenses that belonged on these cameras are not retractable, making the camera suitable only for a very large pocket. I used them, when I wanted pocketability, with a collapsible Summicron 50/2 in thread mount: not a totally Canon system, but the Summicron has always been a good lens.
Peter D.

peterm1

10-08-2007, 13:59

These cameras are all so competently made that its hard to distinguish between them on these grounds. I must admit it would be fun to own a 7 with an f0.95 or f1.2 lens but I must say that this camera looks less elegant than the others although it is just fine in functionality terms. I have several Canon lenses which I happily use on my Leica cameras and must say that the lenses are every bit as good as the cameras. I presently only own a IVSB and like it, having previously owned a IVSB2 which was not in such good condition as the current one. These cameras really give the Leicas a run for their money and are really very well made.

raid

10-08-2007, 14:49

How do you differentiate the IVSB and IVSB2?

Mackinaw

10-08-2007, 14:56

How do you differentiate the IVSB and IVSB2?

The eyepiece on the "2" models is slightly larger. There's also a "scalloped" ornamental trim ring at the base of the rewind knob of the "2" models. If you have Peter D.'s rangefinder book, look at pages 136 and 137.

Jim B.

Roger Vadim

10-08-2007, 15:05

damn, now I want a "P" or 7... (can't decide. any comments?)
Really bad for the purse to hang out with you guys;)
Unfortunately the Canons are extremely rare here in Germany, due to the obvious Leica dominance back in the days. And shipping over from the US costs a fortune in taxes.
Mhm, anybody in Europe selling a P? (love the look of it)
Cheers, Michael

xayraa33

10-08-2007, 15:15

How do you differentiate the IVSB and IVSB2?

The high shutter speed dial can be set before or after winding and has a central axis marker, the speed progression is in the modern 1/30 1/60 1/125 etc. fashion. There is the very visable serrated washer under the wind knob that is a dead give away for the so called improved models.

Which brings me to say, that I was out shooting this morning with my IVSb2 and my Canon VT.
The VT is definatley easier to focus than the IVSb2, so called improved model.
It is just my aging eyes, but these bottomloader are getting harder to use now.

rover

10-08-2007, 15:39

xayraa33

10-08-2007, 15:50

Well, the eyepiece in the VT is still larger than the IVSb2, but I think the finder itself is the same. The improved finder moved up to the V series.

I think that is correct, oh well, another reason to pick up Peter's book again and do more re-reading.

No Ralph, the finder is not the same, the VT's finder is larger at both openings front and back (eyepiece).
it is not a Canon P or a VIT finder, yes, but the VT is a real improvement over the so called improved bottomloader Canons.

Canon should have made a bottomloader with a Zorki 3 type Viewfinder.

surlysimon

10-08-2007, 16:24

I have a P, L1 and VT and tend towards the L1 as a true user, the only downside for me is the two shutter speed dials. The P is also a gem and I do tend to pick it up quite often but only because I know if it gets lost or broken I can replace it easily whereas the L1 is rarer. The VT is for those more playful days. All i need now is a 50 1.2 for my P!!!

raid

10-08-2007, 17:26

I have the IVsb and not the IVsb2 since the speeds are 25/40/60/100/...

Sonnar2

10-10-2007, 09:40

With a L-1, VI (L), P and 7, beeing an eyeglass-wearer, I found the minifiying finders and small metal eyepieces annoying. I don't care much about finder brightness but with my cameras it is all comparable, and the etched framelines are visible good enough. Even with a 35mm attached, the P (with attached meter) and 7 are still the Canons I use most. Who cares which is the most "collectable"? As far as aesthetics are concerned, the "last" to chose is obviously the 7, but the first? I cannot decide.

xayraa33

10-10-2007, 10:02

fehutchings

10-12-2007, 11:38

harry01562

10-15-2007, 10:33

I have an SIIB (I think) s/n is 37113 and top shutter speed is 1/500. Has the "made in occupied japan" written out onf the bottom and top reads CANON CAMERA COMPANY LTD. Also has 3 position setting for the viewfinder (if you can call it that) - F 1x 1.5x...

I'm guessing 1949; Anybody know for sure???

I'm betting you have a IIB, rather than an SIIB. SN is too late, and the position setting started on that model. Also, MIOJ engravings are seen on those, as well. That would date it to 1950, possibly 1951. Nice camera, and usable if recently CLA'd.

Harry

pdek

10-16-2007, 07:15

I have an SIIB (I think) s/n is 37113 and top shutter speed is 1/500. Has the "made in occupied japan" written out onf the bottom and top reads CANON CAMERA COMPANY LTD. Also has 3 position setting for the viewfinder (if you can call it that) - F 1x 1.5x...

I'm guessing 1949; Anybody know for sure???

*****

Your camera is in fact a IIB, and was probably made toward the end of 1949, as you suggest. The serial number is too early for it to be the improved version of the IIB that was made from sometime in 1950 until 1952. The "Occupied Japan" engraving was required by the occupation forces at that time, and is entirely proper on your camera. Thanks for getting in touch!
Peter D

fehutchings

01-25-2008, 15:20

Thanks for the help. Took me a while to get back to the forum The IIB works fine. Put a 35 summaron on it and a canon viewfinder. It travels with me every day. Sorry about the delay. We're still involved in the post Katrina stuff here. Nuff said. Just wanted to say Thanks.

M like Leica M6

03-28-2008, 11:17

The only I have is a Vt de luxe with a 2/35... and I love it. The finder is the old-fashioned version before the P and other cameras came, but it has that wonderful "RF" feature: I can enlarge the rangefinder spot and focus very exactly. My camera has a lot of sign of use, but it works like a new camera.

lawrence

04-23-2008, 14:14

I have an L and have owned a 7 and a P. I like the L best because it is smallish and quiet. I think the P is over-rated, with an unusable (to me) 35mm finder with too many frame lines and the 7 is just too big. Also, I like the look of the L with its funky slow-speed dial on the front and I like the cloth shutter too. I've got the Canon 35mm f1.8 but tend to use an Ultron instead because it's got better performance at wide apertures, quicker focussing and better balance. The L is a terrific little camera and the best of the Canon rangefinders.

Bill58

04-23-2008, 18:10

januaryman

04-24-2008, 11:14

Well, with an RF I currently don't use anything except a 35 or a 50.. so the range isn't as big a deal.

Projected framelines are nice. But I've never had an issue with the ones etched into the P. And the 1:1 viewfinder is a clincher for me.

But that's just me and the way i shoot.

What he said. The 35 is my perfect lens, but I love the 50 as well. So I bought a second P and will mount a CV Ultron 35/1.7 on one and a Canon 50/1.4 on the other. I think it's perfect that way. For me, anyway.

kansas_parker

05-31-2009, 04:28

The only 35mm rf I have is a Canon L1, but with a metal shutter. I really enjoy shooting with it, but being a glasses wearer, the viewfinder can be a little tricky. I put some masking tape over the wheel beneath the viewfinder that changes the focal length.
The only lens I've got for it (so far) is the 50/1.2. I would like to find a decent collapsable 35mm lens.

Bill58

05-31-2009, 06:24

My L1 VF eyepiece scratches my glasses unmercifully. I've found out that the various Leica M eyepiece protectors on the market don't fit. What can we do? I like my Model P too, but my L1 is my favorite due to a brighter RF patch and vintage looks.

raid

05-31-2009, 12:30

What he said. The 35 is my perfect lens, but I love the 50 as well. So I bought a second P and will mount a CV Ultron 35/1.7 on one and a Canon 50/1.4 on the other. I think it's perfect that way. For me, anyway.

Jim,

I have two P's for a very practical set of cameras. I have a wide angle lens on one P and a 50mm lens on the second P. It is just great.

Sonnar2

06-02-2009, 13:30

If the Model P is "overrated", it was also oversold w/ 100,000 purchased. There's a reason-it is simply the sturdiest, best engineered, and simplest to use non-metered RF ever made IMHO.

Good said. If you don't like the 35mm finder on a P, or want a 85mm, buy a 7 and don't complain: about size, weight, the 100mm frame too small, or other stuff.

Buy a P as FIRST rangefinder camera with changable lenses. I can highly recommend that. You can buy 10's of other cameras in addition LATER ONE, but you will hardly find a (alltogether) "better" one...

I thought it until I bought my L1 and VI. Both have good finders but smaller eyepiece and eyeglass killers. Alltogether they aren't "better". Different taste, best. And of course, no cloth shutter (my L1) is a match for the metal shutter of a P or VII.

lawrence

06-02-2009, 13:56

I thought it until I bought my L1 and VI. Both have good finders but smaller eyepiece and eyeglass killers.

The solution to the eyepiece problem for spectacle wearers is to find a small rubber washer:

http://www.lawrenceimpey.com/images/L1washer.jpg

This works perfectly, though perhaps it is not for the purist...

N. Bruce Nelson

02-27-2010, 15:06

Thanks for that, Lawrence. I glued a washer on my L1, and it works great, even with plastic glasses lens. This solves my major issue with the camera.

I have a Canon III that I often use with Voigtlander 21 and 25 mm lenses and the respective external finders.

I have a Canon 7 that I take when I know am going to use an assortment of lenses in one day.

I just got my first parallax corrected 100 mm brightline finder, and if I can find these for my other focal lengths, I may go back to my L1 in preference to the 7 for the longer lenses. I also got the sport finder, but haven't had a chance to use it yet. These appear to be fairly rare, after doing an internet search. Does anyone else use one?

I really enjoy all three cameras.

Bruce

lawrence

02-28-2010, 13:41

Glad it works! I hope you enjoy your L1 as I think it's a camera with 'soul'. I've had the P and the 7 but the L1 is the one I kept.

kkdanamatt

06-23-2010, 09:45

I vote for the P as a user and the VI-T as a looker.

rbsinto

06-23-2010, 09:58

This thread allows me to bring up a question about the Canon rangefinders that no one has yet answered to my satisfaction.
I'm a life-long Nikon manual focus film camera / lens shooter (SLRs and rangefinders) so I know very little about Canon cameras.
In the Nikon world, the SP is/was the epitome of their rangefinder development, and seems to have been (along with some S3s) the choice of the pros.
Is there a similar top-of-the-line, choice-of-the-pros body in the Canon rangefinder line-up?
And did Canon make a motor-drive for any bodies?
Sorry if I'm asking stupid questions, but I am a Stanger in a Strange Land here among the Canonvolk.

harry01562

06-24-2010, 06:54

Interesting question, but I don't think Canon pursued this market during most of the RF period. Canon did very well selling to their home market, and through the Military Post Exchange system into the 1950's. When they entered the US market, their emphasis was on cameras like their late Barnack-type, and the huge success, the Canon P.
The closest thing to a pro camera, IMHO, would have been the model 7 and the later 7s, where they featured the unique f0.95 lens. That lens was extensively modified then, and later, to work with the M3 and later models of the M-series. The same lens was also produced for a number of years for the TV and movie industries, with apparent success. It seems to be still a cult favorite, and is a better lens than its reputation.
So, in my considered opinion, the 7s, or last model 7sZ, would probably be as close as they came in the RF era.
Later, of course, they emerged into the SLR's, with the several models of the F-1, another story, for another forum. That was also when they produced their first motor drive, AFAIK. They did make winders for the Barnack tyhpes, and the trigger wind, like the VI-T.
Their lenses were practically all of high quality, and are mostly bargains in today's market, compared to the Leica, especially.
Brian Sweeney, who is a Nikon collector, and quite familiar with many things Canon may have opinions that he will share. Of course, Peter Kitchingman, who wrote the lovely book on the lenses and Peter Dechert who wrote the seminal book on the cameras are also major figures who, hopefully, will give us some thoughts.

Harry

Pico

07-08-2010, 19:25

If you get the 7s then you are set to get the 50mm F1:.95 lens.

Man, I wish they had made the .95 in LTM instead of external bayonet.

raid

07-08-2010, 20:02

I totally forgot my Canon 7, which I hardly ever use. It looks not as nice as the P or a Leica M.

Joe AC

09-05-2010, 20:12

Does anyone know if there is a modification that can be made to the squinty viewfinders of a IIIa

kkdanamatt

01-02-2012, 10:51

I'd vote for the Canon P if the 50mm and 100mm lenses were my favorite focal lengths.

I wear glasses and I can't see the 35mm frame of the Canon P.

If the 35mm focal length were my "standard", then I'd opt for the VI-L.

If the 25mm or 28mm were my "standards", then it matters not.

To me, the lens most frequently used usually determines what RF body I choose.

Red Robin

01-02-2012, 17:38

The Canon P times three. Next the Canon IIs2 or the III, I also have a 7 and a VI-T but neither of the two get much use. Lens use includes Canon, Jupiter, a single Minolta and a CZJ .

raid

01-02-2012, 18:34

Canon P is my choice. I sold the mintish VI-L and kept a user P (chrome). Then came along an olive P, followed by a black P. Life is good. I use all three cameras a lot.

Mackinaw

01-02-2012, 19:30

For me, it's the Canon 7s first followed by the L1. I had a P many years back but sold it. Just couldn't stand the viewfinder.

Jim B.

hausen

01-02-2012, 19:48

I have a mint Canon P but find myself most often reading for my M6 which currently has Canon 50/1.4, and yesterday with Canon 35/2.8. Maybe I should move 50/1.4 to the P. Is gorgeous and this thread reminds me I should use it more..

Bingley

01-02-2012, 19:57

I've been enjoying shooting a IVSB2 recently. It's the same size and quality feel as a Barnack w/ a nicer vf (IMO).

rcbooth

01-27-2012, 17:09

It would be any variety of the 7 - the viewfinder is the best for me. But lately I've been using a VT Deluxe quite a bit.

cassel

02-25-2012, 16:57

Recently bought a Canon 7. Got a good price on it, but I had to spend another couple hundred to have a CLA. LOVE the viewfinder, nice and bright and the switchable framelines are great. Compares favorably with my Leica M4-P.

Years ago I had a Canon VT deluxe (good cold weather camera- I could operate it with gloves on) and a Canon L1- wonderful, wish I had kept it, I don't remember exactly why I sold it:bang: