S3 2000 a good starter RF?

dave lackey · 03-02-2007

Hi,
With Nikon's as part of my life for 35 years, I am now thinking of a rangefinder. I love my F3 manual focus and for some reason am drawn even further back to the rangefinders.

I have an opportunity to buy a mint used S3 2000 and wonder if it would be a good starter?

thanks in advance,

xayraa33 · 03-02-2007

go for it, it would be like buying and using a high class version of the Zorki 4k or a Kiev 4a.
you would not lose any money on the resale if you decide the S3 is not for you.

Ken Ford · 03-02-2007

IMO, a *killer* starter RF!

VinceC · 03-02-2007

A great starter RF and, if you're like me, the one you just keep using for the next 20 years.

rbsinto · 03-02-2007

Just curious why anyone would consider the S3 to be a "starter" rangefinder. Other than amusing oneself by flipping the adjustable frame-lines back and forth, what can one do with an SP (and again forgive me if I've made an erroneous assumption that the SP is the rangefinder one graduates to after "starting out" with an S3) that can't be done just as well with an S3?

dave lackey · 03-02-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by rbsinto

Just curious why anyone would consider the S3 to be a "starter" rangefinder. Other than amusing oneself by flipping the adjusable frame-lines back and forth, what can one do with an SP (and again forgive me if I've made an erroneous assumption that the SP is the rangefinder one graduates to after "starting out" with an S3) that can't be done just as well with an S3?

Actually, the reasons I am asking about the S3 are:
1. It is a new camera, not 50 years old like my ol MG,
2. Great price! Great lens in the kit.
3. Should be able to re-sell relatively easily.

What else could I ask for?

VinceC · 03-02-2007

It's a great starter camera because you'll quickly find that you'll never really need another camera. So you save the money of working your way through S or S2 bodies and getting frustrated by their limitations.

The S3 is identical to the SP except for the ability to do parallax-corrected telephotos. The S3 has a direct, honest simplicity -- and perhaps the largest, widest life-size viewfinder ever put on a 35mm camera.

EDIT: In fairness, some people do dislike what they consider to be a cluttered viewfinder. So you do have to take into account your tolerance for always seeing the 35/50/105 framelines. I actually find them a great aid in composition as well as accurate guideposts for shooting other focal lengths, such as 28/85/135.

furcafe · 03-02-2007

I agree, & that's 1 reason why I sold my S2 to Joe (backalley). If the S3 had been easily available, or rather affordable, back in 2002, I would have never gotten the S2 in the 1st place (not that there's really anything wrong w/the S2).

Quote:

Originally Posted by VinceC

It's a great starter camera because you'll quickly find that you'll never really need another camera. So you save the money of working your way through S or S2 bodies and getting frustrated by their limitations.

The S3 is identical to the SP except for the ability to do parallax-corrected telephotos. The S3 has a direct, honest simplicity -- and perhaps the largest, widest life-size viewfinder ever put on a 35mm camera.

EDIT: In fairness, some people do dislike what they consider to be a cluttered viewfinder. So you do have to take into account your tolerance for always seeing the 35/50/105 framelines. I actually find them a great aid in composition as well as accurate guideposts for shooting other focal lengths, such as 28/85/135.

rbsinto · 03-02-2007

Not much.
I only questioned the "starter" reference because it reminded me of a "starter" home, for example: a low-cost, , smaller, less featured version of the home one hopes to acquire later on. Thus if the S3 is considered in this context, it's what one buys just to get into the game, and once established is put aside for something better.
Except for the bragging rights ("Yes, this is my SP. It's the Nikon PRO rangefinder, you know.") that seem to be very important to so many Gear Worshippers and Worshipper-Users, photographically, I think there is little to choose from between the two cameras.

dave lackey · 03-02-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by rbsinto

Not much.
I only questioned the "starter" reference because it reminded me of a "starter" home, for example: a low-cost, , smaller, less featured version of the home one hopes to acquire later on. Thus if the S3 is considered in this context, it's what one buys just to get into the game, and once established is put aside for something better.
Except for the bragging rights ("Yes, this is my SP. It's the Nikon PRO rangefinder, you know.") that seem to be very important to so many Gear Worshippers and Worshipper-Users, photographically, I think there is little to choose from between the two cameras.

Rob,
Stay tuned, if I buy a RF, I am gonna have more questions that you answer. Not quite ready to pull the trigger yet.

But, I gotta tell ya, these older "tech" cameras are like my old cars. Seems like I see a trend here as even I get older!

Not sure if I understand that trend...but, it's a fun ride!

Take care,

BillBingham2 · 03-02-2007

Dave,

It’s a killer place to start. While you might say cluttered, it’s not that much worse than my M6. While the SP has parallax correction (very hand with closeups and telephotos) you have a NEW, bright clean viewfinder (IMHO, worth it’s weight in gold). You do not need to do a CLA on her (saving perhaps $200 USD).

Over the past two years, I could have gotten a good S3 or perhaps an SP user for what I have spent on Kiev bodies and lenses and my S2. I love my S2, but dollar cost averaging into used cameras is not the way to go.

Take a look at www.cameraquest.com for deals on great CV lenses in S mount. I have the 25/4 and love it. You can find good 105/2.5 out there, you just need to look. I think you would be set with those three lenses. While I have a Russian 35/2.8, she never gets used. The CV 25mm is a great people lens, much better than the 24/2.8 Nikkor I have for my SLRs (and used for years and high school).

Many of us long to find a deal on an SP or an S3, I know I would. I use my Nikon F2AS for an 180/2.8ED when I need to reach out, but other than that, I shoot RFs and love it.

Welcome and please ask questions, it’s the best way for all of us to learn something new.

B2 (;->

cherrysoul · 03-02-2007

Does anyone know exactly how many S3 2000s were produced? I saw many chrome S3 bodies with serial S3 21xxxx instead of S3 20xxxx recently, are they still in production and are there any differences between early and late S3 2000s?

NIKON KIU · 03-02-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by cherrysoul

Does anyone know exactly how many S3 2000s were produced? I saw many chrome S3 bodies with serial S3 21xxxx instead of S3 20xxxx recently, are they still in production and are there any differences between early and late S3 2000s?

Welcome cherrysoul,

Nikon claims on their website there are 8000 chrome S3 2000's in addition to 2000 black cameras.
The production ended in 2001. There has been no reports of any variations.

BTW..starting with the S3 2000 is a sure way to hook-in a 35 year Nikon user

Kiu

VinceC · 03-02-2007

Welcome, Cherrysoul.

I don't think there are any differences in the production run except for the finish on the later black-body camera. The cameras are surprisingly similar to the 1958 version, too, considering that many of the components had to be reverse engineered. I got my orginal S3 around 1989 and have given it years of hard use ever since, so it was a real treat to be able to have a brand new one.

Charlie · 03-02-2007

Dave,

I'll second everything everyone here has said about the S3 2000. The only drawback is that with Cosina ending production of their Nikon rangefinder mounts, lenses may become harder to find. With that in mind, you might consider a Zeiss Ikon. You'll have more choices of more modern lenses.

Regards,

Charlie

VinceC · 03-02-2007

Cherrysoul,

The S3-2000 was built in 2000-'01. It is no longer in production. (The same techs who built it went on to build the SP-2005).

A recent posting on the Nikon Historical Site says the camera serial numbers run in two batches with a gap in the mid-20XXXX range. Therefore, some of the final bodies are in the 21XXXX range.

cherrysoul · 03-03-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by VinceC

The S3-2000 was built in 2000-'01. It is no longer in production. (The same techs who built it went on to build the SP-2005).

A recent posting on the Nikon Historical Site says the camera serial numbers run in two batches with a gap in the mid-20XXXX range. Therefore, some of the final bodies are in the 21XXXX range.

Thanks Vince, I recently got mine from a Japan seller, the body is 213xxx and the lens is 208xxx, comes with Japanese papers. As long as there's no internal/cosmetic differences between early and late S3 2000s, these number mean nothing to me really.

VinceC · 03-02-2007

>>you might consider a Zeiss Ikon. You'll have more choices of more modern lenses.<<

There are definitely more choices in M mount. With Nikon RFs, I kind of like the fact that there isn't a new lens every year. Let's me concentrate on taking pictures with what I've got instead of wishing I had the latest lens to make my life easier.

BillBingham2 · 03-02-2007

Charlie,

They seem to not be drying up at www.cameraquest.com. I do wish they would come out with special lenses (say like the 35/1.2 or a fast telephoto (85/2 might be nice), but that will never happen for the masses.

B2 (;->

Charlie · 03-02-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by BillBingham2

Charlie,

They seem to not be drying up at www.cameraquest.com. I do wish they would come out with special lenses (say like the 35/1.2 or a fast telephoto (85/2 might be nice), but that will never happen for the masses.

B2 (;->

I'm with you Bill. Bought a Voigtlander 35/2.5 for my S3 2000 from Cameraquest a while back and it is a sweet lens. As long as we're wishing for things that will not be, let's wish for Nikon to release the 35 that comes with the new SP.

Charlie

VinceC · 03-02-2007

B2,
Cosina only made a few hundred Nikon S-mounts. They didn't sell well so are still in stock (with the exception of 21mm and 25mm lenses, the CV lenses duplicate original Nikkors that remain very affordable).

Two items have sold out -- Nikon-S-to-Leica adapters; and Nikon-F-to-Nikon-S adapters, allowing the ultrawide F-mount CV lenses to be used on Nikon RF cameras.

Xmas · 03-02-2007

Vince

The 35mm seem to be near the end of the line... Robert White none...

Noel

rbsinto · 03-02-2007

I wonder how many people here would purchase an F-S adapter if they were made available again at a reasonable cost?
We should take a survey here, (and at any other relevant sites) and then ask Mr. Gandy r...e...a...l nice if he would speak to the folks at Cosina about making up some more. I'd buy one in a heartbeat. Then I could mount my F-mount 19, 24, 35, 50, 85, and 105 AI & AIS lenses on my S3.

VinceC · 03-02-2007

Buy the S3. Buy Nikon. Buy the S3. Buy Nikon. Buy the S3. Buy Nikon. Buy the S3. Buy Nikon.Buy the S3. Buy Nikon. Buy the S3. Buy Nikon.Buy the S3. Buy Nikon. Buy the S3. Buy Nikon.Buy the S3. Buy Nikon. Buy the S3. Buy Nikon.Buy the S3. Buy Nikon. Buy the S3. Buy Nikon.Buy the S3. Buy Nikon. Buy the S3. Buy Nikon.Buy the S3. Buy Nikon. Buy the S3. Buy Nikon.Buy the S3. Buy Nikon. Buy the S3. Buy Nikon.Buy the S3. Buy Nikon. Buy the S3. Buy Nikon.

dave lackey · 03-02-2007

Quote:

Originally Posted by VinceC

Buy the S3. Buy Nikon. Buy the S3. Buy Nikon. Buy the S3. Buy Nikon. Buy the S3. Buy Nikon.Buy the S3. Buy Nikon. Buy the S3. Buy Nikon.Buy the S3. Buy Nikon. Buy the S3. Buy Nikon.Buy the S3. Buy Nikon. Buy the S3. Buy Nikon.Buy the S3. Buy Nikon. Buy the S3. Buy Nikon.Buy the S3. Buy Nikon. Buy the S3. Buy Nikon.Buy the S3. Buy Nikon. Buy the S3. Buy Nikon.Buy the S3. Buy Nikon. Buy the S3. Buy Nikon.Buy the S3. Buy Nikon. Buy the S3. Buy Nikon.

Ha, ha, ha, ha....that is cool!!!