Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Coffee With Mentors > Canon Rangefinders - Peter Dechert and Peter Kitchingman

Canon Rangefinders - Peter Dechert and Peter Kitchingman Peter Dechert is best known for his Canon Rangefinder, Canon SLR, and Olympus Pen books, the latter two long out-of-print. He was a monthly columnist for many years for SHUTTERBUG magazine, and has contributed to many others. Most recently he has written about the pre-WW2 Zeiss 35mm cameras, but his interests in camera equipment and optics are many and varied. As a pro protographer and honorary life member of ASMP, Peter is also expert in using the gear! Peter Kitchingman - author of Canon Rangefinder Lens book Peter Kitchingman's 'Canon M39 Rangefinder Lenses 1939-71' book is the definitive source on these very interesting optics. His interests also go to the entire Canon Rangefinder system and beyond.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes

Old 04-23-2008   #51
lawrence
Registered User
 
lawrence's Avatar
 
lawrence is offline
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: London, UK
Age: 63
Posts: 1,414
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.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-23-2008   #52
Bill58
Native Texan
 
Bill58's Avatar
 
Bill58 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: So. Korea
Posts: 2,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawrence View Post
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.
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.
__________________
My images of a strange land-So. Korea:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wrs111445/
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-24-2008   #53
januaryman
"Flim? You want flim?"
 
januaryman's Avatar
 
januaryman is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Earth
Posts: 1,451
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogue_designer View Post
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.
__________________
Jim

"There is no special way a photograph should look."
- Garry Winogrand

Flickr - PhotographicIntrigue - NAPP Portfolio


  Reply With Quote

Old 05-31-2009   #54
kansas_parker
Registered User
 
kansas_parker is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Warner Robins, GA
Age: 35
Posts: 52
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.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-31-2009   #55
Bill58
Native Texan
 
Bill58's Avatar
 
Bill58 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: So. Korea
Posts: 2,983
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.
__________________
My images of a strange land-So. Korea:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/wrs111445/
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-31-2009   #56
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is online now
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 23,315
Quote:
Originally Posted by januaryman View Post
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.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-02-2009   #57
Sonnar2
Registered User
 
Sonnar2's Avatar
 
Sonnar2 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Germany
Age: 49
Posts: 1,413
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill58 View Post
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.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-02-2009   #58
lawrence
Registered User
 
lawrence's Avatar
 
lawrence is offline
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: London, UK
Age: 63
Posts: 1,414
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonnar2 View Post
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:



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

Old 02-27-2010   #59
N. Bruce Nelson
Canon L1 user
 
N. Bruce Nelson is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: San Francisco Bay area
Age: 65
Posts: 55
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
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-28-2010   #60
lawrence
Registered User
 
lawrence's Avatar
 
lawrence is offline
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: London, UK
Age: 63
Posts: 1,414
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.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-23-2010   #61
kkdanamatt
Registered User
 
kkdanamatt is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 218
I vote for the P as a user and the VI-T as a looker.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-23-2010   #62
rbsinto
Registered User
 
rbsinto is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Thornhill, Ontario, Canada Thornhill is a suburb of Toronto
Posts: 1,258
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.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-24-2010   #63
harry01562
Registered semi-lurker
 
harry01562's Avatar
 
harry01562 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: central MA
Posts: 635
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
__________________
<a
Leica M3, IIIf RD ST, IIIa, Summar and Summitar
Canon 7, 7s, 7sz, P, VI-T, plus 10 from SII to IV-Sb2, + 14 50's for body caps
Contax IIa, IIIa, Rollei 2.8f, Ansco Auto Reflex, Crown 2x3, Speed 2x3, Busch 2x3, Mamiya G
So many cameras, so little time

Last edited by harry01562 : 06-24-2010 at 07:58. Reason: addition of motor drive info
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-08-2010   #64
Pico
Tropics of MinneSnowta
 
Pico's Avatar
 
Pico is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Driftless Zone
Posts: 215
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.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-08-2010   #65
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is online now
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 23,315
I totally forgot my Canon 7, which I hardly ever use. It looks not as nice as the P or a Leica M.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-05-2010   #66
Joe AC
Registered User
 
Joe AC is offline
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 241
Does anyone know if there is a modification that can be made to the squinty viewfinders of a IIIa
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2012   #67
kkdanamatt
Registered User
 
kkdanamatt is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 218
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.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2012   #68
Red Robin
It Is What It Is
 
Red Robin is offline
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Wrinkle City, Fla.
Age: 64
Posts: 638
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 .
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2012   #69
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is online now
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 23,315
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.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2012   #70
Mackinaw
Think Different
 
Mackinaw is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: One hour south of the Mackinaw Bridge
Posts: 2,125
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.
__________________
My fancy-schmancy gallery:

http://snowcountryphotography.com

My RFF Gallery:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/phot...user=1453&sl=m
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2012   #71
hausen
Registered User
 
hausen is offline
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Auckland
Posts: 887
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..
__________________
David
Auckland, NZ

Far too many cameras & lenses!
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-02-2012   #72
Bingley
Registered User
 
Bingley's Avatar
 
Bingley is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sacramento, California
Posts: 4,646
I've been enjoying shooting a IVSB2 recently. It's the same size and quality feel as a Barnack w/ a nicer vf (IMO).
__________________
Steve

M2, M4-2, IIIc, IVSB2, & T, and assorted LTM & M lenses
XD-11, X700, and assorted MD Rokkor lenses, Rolleicord III, Rolleiflex Automat MX-EVS




My Flickr
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-27-2012   #73
rcbooth
Registered User
 
rcbooth is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: central NY
Age: 70
Posts: 16
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.
__________________
RCB
http://rcbooth.zenfolio.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-25-2012   #74
cassel
Registered User
 
cassel is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 235
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
  Reply With Quote

Which Canon?
Old 02-28-2012   #75
Red Robin
It Is What It Is
 
Red Robin is offline
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Wrinkle City, Fla.
Age: 64
Posts: 638
Wink Which Canon?

It's the P for me I have a 7, a VI-T, a III, and when I want to have the feel of a bottom loader I pick up my Canon IIF or a Canon III. Mostly it's one of three P's I'm lucky to own.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:10.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.