Finally saw a Canon P today...

Rob · 01-11-2005

I have never seen or handled one of these before but at my
good camera shop they had 2 P models and 1 P L? model
(I think it had a lightmeter) Nice heavy cameras with good
viewfinders. Not sure what they should sell for but these
were $600 each with lens...One of their collector customers
has them on consignment. Thats about $580 more per camera
than the fixed lens Konica, Yashica and Canonets I find.

Played with a Leica III with lens for $250...one worker there
just had his Leica M3 serviced by Leica in NJ for over$500..Sounded like they rebuilt it!
There was an M3 there I did not play with..
Rob

rover · 01-11-2005

$600 for a Canon P with a Canon Lens, run away, that's really high.

FrankS · 01-11-2005

Rob, how much was the M3 they had?

back alley · 01-11-2005

i don't think the p ever had a meter, other than the external one that sat on top of the body.
600 is high, unless of course, it had the dream lens on it.

joe

peter_n · 01-11-2005

$500 for a CLA seems like a lot too. That sounds like an expensive shop Rob!

When it is CLA time for my M6 I will not be sending it to Leica in NJ!

Rob · 01-11-2005

Sorry I did not see a price on the M3...it had a lens on it and
some kind of accessory viewfinder attachment...
I think the P with the meter was an attachment device...
I did not handle that one. The lenses looked like 50mm F1.8
one was black, cant recall the others. By Dream I guess you
mean the .95 lens?
According to the owner of the M3 that got the CLA it was much
more than that. They replaced the shutter, upgraded the winder,
adjusted and lubed everything, upgraded a few more parts,
buffed the chrome parts and removed several marks on the chrome somehow. It was basically a rebuild...

jlw · 01-11-2005

Quote:

Originally posted by backalley photo
i don't think the p ever had a meter, other than the external one that sat on top of the body.
600 is high, unless of course, it had the dream lens on it.joe

50/0.95 'dream lens' won't fit on a P unless someone has transplanted a 7 mounting flange onto it. And then you won't be able to focus, because it's so fat it blocks off the RF window!

The only P meter was that selenium one that slid into the acc shoe on the top and had its own shutter speed dial that coupled to the camera dial. It's pretty well integrated with the top cover, so easily could be mistaken for a built-in at a distant glance.

back alley · 01-11-2005

you are so right - don't know what the h i was thinking!

joe

taffer · 01-12-2005

Phew ! I could think of $600 for a minty one with the 50/1.2, the 35/2 or something like that but for the 50/1.8 seems way expensive...

d30gaijin · 01-12-2005

If anyone is looking for a P I know where there's one at for US$350, and that includes a Canon 50/1.8 black body lens. The condition isn't anything like near mint but it didn't look all that bad. I'd be happy to check it out more closely and report back, if anyone is interested.

hans siddharta · 01-24-2005

Whoa, is this camera starting to become a Leica (pricewise)? Or probably the lens that makes the kit so special?

Canon P + 50/2.8

Honestly, I am considering to get a canon P, but at that price, I would probably get a Leica M3/M2 + CLA.

What do you think?

hans

back alley · 01-24-2005

man that camera looks brand new!
but it's still overpriced.
and the 50/2.8 has a poor reputation as well, at least from some user comments that i have read.

joe

btw- that price has nothing to do with me.

xayraa33 · 01-25-2005

I have to agree that Canon P with the 50mm 2.8 was overpriced ($770 US) , but that same sellers IVSB2 body went for $720 USD! Earlier on he sold a rarer IIF2 for half that price, that was in equal condition to the IVSB2, go figure? I guess collectors will pay allmost any price for minty condition, and auctions create bidding wars that can inflate prices. Thankfully there are plenty of these cameras in user condition for us users to afford.

FrankS · 01-25-2005

At the camera show where I bought my M2, I saw a Canon 7s with 50mm f1.2 lens for $730Cdn. Lens was very clean, camera was not mint.

taffer · 01-25-2005

That seller looks pretty much collector-oriented. When collectors take out the check book you can forget about reasonable prices...

xayraa33 · 01-25-2005

I thought that I was the only one who had a bad Canon 50mm 2.8 My Industar 61 L/D is a much sharper lens, but prefere the Jupiter 8 on my Canon P, overall.

tedwhite · 01-26-2005

(In me humble):

The bolt-on meter for the Canon P absolutely ruins the camera's elegant look.

So there. I've come out of the closet. I really care deeply about how a camera looks. We''re talking aesthetics here. The Canon P appears virtually identical to the Leica M3. Thus, although the 7S is probably a better camera, and Canonets are great cameras also, I'd buy the Canon P and suffer with the viewfinder's inadequacies because I just like its looks and feel.

(Probably get drummed out of the corps for this post).

wlewisiii · 01-26-2005

Nah, I think aesthetics is what drives most of us in one way or another. It's just that there are quite different ideas of what is aesthetically pleasing.

I far prefer, aesthetically and ergonomically, the Contax II/Kiev series to any of the Leicas. I can appreciate the Leicas and could consider an M2 or Canon VI, P or 7 LTM quite easily for a user camera. But for me, if it comes to one camera for look and feel, I'd go with a Contax II or unmetered Kiev instead. (Now the III's meter is butt-ugly even though it was the ultimate high tech gadget when released)

Just my own two cents.

William