Show Off Your Nikon RF

[Erik van Straten]

Originally Posted by photomoof

There are a number of specific things one can check when confirming if an S2 has been repainted.

The best way is to look at the paint itself. The paint is over fifty years old. No matter how mint the camera is, this is visible.


Erik.

[goodtimes]

Here are a few pics of my S2


Nikon S2 Black by Wegothim, on Flickr


Nikon S2 Black by Wegothim, on Flickr

[Erik van Straten]

This is a repaint, Goodtimes.

Erik.

[RanceEric]

Originally Posted by maitani

why not a back for once...

That just isn't fair... So beautiful

[goodtimes]

Originally Posted by Erik van Straten

This is a repaint, Goodtimes.

Erik.

It was sold to me as original. If this was an original chrome body painted black, how do you see that ?

S/N is 6195952

[Highway 61]

Originally Posted by goodtimes

It was sold to me as original. If this was an original chrome body painted black, how do you see that ?

The paint is worn out where the previous owner's fingers rubbed it, but otherwise looks fresh without any surface oxydization due to its age.

Also, there does not seem to be some primer under the paint, the black paint was directly applied on the bare brass after dechroming.

Yes this is a repaint, no doubt.

[goodtimes]

Can the serial number not tell the truth ?

[enasniearth]

Rotolonis Nikon rf system lists the last verified black Nikon s2 cameras from
Numbers 6194001-6194297
The number you have listed is later than that .
Could be a special order camera or a batch not yet listed .
The other option is a repaint .
Still a very nice looking camera , one I would like to have .

[Erik van Straten]

Originally Posted by goodtimes

If this was an original chrome body painted black, how do you see that ?

Apart from the things Highway 61 said, the central moving part of the shutter speed dial and the small central bubble in the middle of the frame counter should both be chromed. This is only true for black dial black cameras. On chrome dial black cameras these parts are black.

Erik.

[Erik van Straten]

Originally Posted by photomoof

However the serial number is rather definitive.

Yes, the numbers quoted in Rotoloni's book are: 6140804-6140848, 6144454-6144574, 6144662-6144682, 6157502-6157588, 6170901-6170995, 6180604-6180987, 6194001-6194297.
The last two blocks are black dial cameras.

Erik.

[maitani]

I'll throw in another one of my latest addition, even if it is only a 'lowly re-paint'

four rolls on the first weekend, that is something



have a good week everybody

[Erik van Straten]

Originally Posted by photomoof

So unplated top plates just don't exist.

I think you wanted to write: So unengraved top plates just don't exist.

Interestingly Fuketa states in the interviews Rotoloni made with him that the black plates were first plated with "black nickel" before they were painted. I am very curious what this black nickel looks like.

Erik.

[Vickko]

Wow, it is beautiful from the top angle.

Vick

Originally Posted by maitani

I'll throw in another one of my latest addition, even if it is only a 'lowly re-paint'

four rolls on the first weekend, that is something



have a good week everybody

[Tom A]

Originally Posted by bobkonos

Just curious.

Bob, I haven't settled on the NHS kit yet. Shooting with various bodies to check them out. My S3 Olympic is going along, probably with the Zeiss S mount C Sonnar 50f1.5.
I am wavering between taking a 35f2.5 or a 35f1.8. The f2.5 is generally sharper than the f1.8, but that extra speed can come in handy. The 35 (whichever it is, will go on an other S3) and then a SP for 28/85 (85 will be the Apo Lanthar 85f3.5 - light and really good). Probably a 21 too - Voigtlander because it is small and compact. I was fondling a F today with the 12f5.6 on it - and if there is room in the shoulder bag - it comes along. Never had a chance to shoot Paris with an ultra-wide. Between 12mm and 85 mm as the longest, I should be well covered. Having lived in Paris a long time ago, I found that the 28 becomes on of the key lenses. Streets are cramped and though the f3.5 of the 28 might be a bit limiting - it should be OK.
As usual, all film will be Arista Premium 400 (TriX clone) and rated at 320/400 iso.

[Erik van Straten]

Originally Posted by photomoof

I always say that on the rff but I am always told that I am WRONG by one of the "experts" who are convinced they know better than me. I have grown tired of hearing the S2 has primer rather than nickel. I have torn down many black S2's, I know exactly what it (nickel) looks like.

But I surrender to the "experts," one on the rff recently pointed out that I and Fuketa San are wrong since nickel is too hard to wear off.

Well, nickel is very hard. I use for 21 years a nickel-plated key to open my front door and the nickel is still on it.

The nickel on the knobs of the early black and nickel Leicas stays there even after many years of use.

I have never seen "black nickel". When I take off the front plate of my BP S2 and look at the non-painted back of it, I see a chemically blackend surface, more or less brown. Is that the black nickel?

Erik.

[Tom A]

I have no problem with "repaints", "replicas". or fakes - as long as they ate not passed off as the real thing. I have both original paint Nikon Rf's and repaints and as I am a user, it doesn't really matter yo me. I just prefer black cameras. Probably a force of habit - started with Leica's long time ago.
The cost of the "collectibles" have gone through the roof - if you as a user want an original black paint S2 or SP. A black paint S2 @ $6-8000 versus a chrome S2 @ $5-600 - takes the same pictures, uses the same lenses, so I rather have the S2 repainted and buy film for the balance!
As with any collectible - provenance is important. If you are spending 000's of dollars on something - have it checked out by an expert before you put the money down. If you just want the camera to use and enjoy - get a "replica" or "fake" and shoot away.

[enasniearth]

Originally Posted by photomoof

I always say that on the rff but I am always told that I am WRONG by one of the "experts" who are convinced they know better than me. I have grown tired of hearing the S2 has primer rather than nickel. I have torn down many black S2's, I know exactly what it (nickel) looks like.

But I surrender to the "experts," one on the rff recently pointed out that I and Fuketa San are wrong since nickel is too hard to wear off.

Were the late sp and s3 black painted in a different manner ?
I have always liked the black s2 just not in the cards for the cost .
So I have a black s3 olympic , perhaps the least desirable black paint
Nikon rf .

As far as the experts , I would give creedance to the designer of the Nikon
Camera as to the construction 60 years ago .
One of the experts insisted that many black 5 cm 1.4 fakes exist since the front ring removes easily , if you have taken apart a 1.4 the chrome ring is part of the mount that positions the glass . It is removable on the 5cm f2 , however he insisted the 1.4 screws right off , which is not the case .

Roberts book Nikon rangefinder system has perhaps the best information available at this point . As more cameras are collected this information is updated in new books . It in perhaps the best most complete Nikon rf resource . It is worth it just for the interviews with Nikon's designers and factory information not available elsewhere .
Robert and the Nikon historical society have collected a wealth of data in many years . Sharing and information has been collected worldwide .

The trouble with the Internet is that words repeated often enough are taken as truth ,

[maitani]

Originally Posted by Tom A

I have no problem with "repaints", "replicas". or fakes - as long as they ate not passed off as the real thing. I have both original paint Nikon Rf's and repaints and as I am a user, it doesn't really matter yo me. I just prefer black cameras. Probably a force of habit - started with Leica's long time ago.
The cost of the "collectibles" have gone through the roof - if you as a user want an original black paint S2 or SP. A black paint S2 @ $6-8000 versus a chrome S2 @ $5-600 - takes the same pictures, uses the same lenses, so I rather have the S2 repainted and buy film for the balance!
As with any collectible - provenance is important. If you are spending 000's of dollars on something - have it checked out by an expert before you put the money down. If you just want the camera to use and enjoy - get a "replica" or "fake" and shoot away.

Tom hits the nail here, I have the exactly same opinion. I bought my S2 as 'my main user nikon rf' therefore I went for a repaint because I prefer black cameras (and can't afford an original anyway..), I'm more 'cautious' with my SP2005 than I am with a repaint S2. If one is strictly collecting it's another story, so the story and provenence of the camera count.

[Erik van Straten]

Originally Posted by maitani

If one is strictly collecting it's another story, so the story and provenence of the camera count.

I am not a collector, but I enjoy shooting with vintage black paint cameras. Therefore I prefer using an original instead of a repainted one. It gives just a different feeling.

Erik.

[japancamerahunter]

Oh, go on then. Here is my little one. This is one of the few cameras that I would never sell.

[rbsinto]

Originally Posted by Tom A

I have no problem with "repaints", "replicas". or fakes - as long as they ate not passed off as the real thing. I have both original paint Nikon Rf's and repaints and as I am a user, it doesn't really matter yo me. I just prefer black cameras. Probably a force of habit - started with Leica's long time ago.
The cost of the "collectibles" have gone through the roof - if you as a user want an original black paint S2 or SP. A black paint S2 @ $6-8000 versus a chrome S2 @ $5-600 - takes the same pictures, uses the same lenses, so I rather have the S2 repainted and buy film for the balance!
As with any collectible - provenance is important. If you are spending 000's of dollars on something - have it checked out by an expert before you put the money down. If you just want the camera to use and enjoy - get a "replica" or "fake" and shoot away.

As a user and not a collector, I agree.
I've never liked chrome cameras, and managed over the years to use only black SLRs, going so far as to buy a black parts F and swap shells with my chrome street beater.
Unfortunately, the prices of the black S3s and SPs mean that my rangefinder bodies are chrome. However, in a moment of madness, I recently bought a re-issued black S3 and am using it as part of my rangefinder kit.
It doesn't take pictures any better than a chrome body, but I like it much better in black. Really nothing more than a personal affectation, I guess.

[Tom A]

When you are buying "collectibles" - it is very much "buyer beware. You are spending from $2000 and up to $10 000 for a camera body, thai in chrome might be worth 10-20% of that cost. You better check every listing available and talk to the experts such as Robert Rotoloni and here on RFf.
The same thing is going n with Leica M's. Leica's "list" of black paint cameras is reasonably correct - but Leica also did conversions for users and often these cameras do not show up on the "official" list.
Case in point: 51 Leica M3 DS in black paint with MP case hardened steel gear in them. Made for Brandt Optik in Sweden (official Leica importer at the time). Special order in 1956/57 for the Swedish Press-photographers Association. Never showed up on the offiicial list - but discovered on the shipping document to Brandt.
I suspect that "friends of Nikon" could get there cameras converted to black if they wanted - or simply made up in black at the time of purchase.
When you are dealing with high priced collectibles - do your research before putting down the money. If you just want a user - get a repainted one - but base the price on what a chrome would cost and add a bit for the paintjob if it is good.
We are not talking about 'defacing" the ceiling in the Sixtine Chapel or putting a beard on Mona Lisa. It is in the end just a box that transports film and gives you shutter speeds and focus.

[Tom A]

My Nikon Historical Meeting kit. SP (repaint) and 28f3.5, S3 Olympic with 35f1.8 and S3 Millennium in black with the C Sonnar 50mm f1.5. I am also taking along a F with the F mount 12f5.6 and a VC 21f4 + a 85f3.5 Apo Lanthar. Strictly Nikon and in formal black!
ORWO UN 54 (movie stock) in Beutler 1:1:10 for 7 min. Leica MP and Visoflex III with the V-Elmar 65mm f3.5

[mynikonf2]

Very nice kit Tom. Wish all of you the best in Paris. I really would have liked to make it but we have a daughter getting married this summer. Even so, I could have covered the wedding & Paris trip costs for the price of that new Leica 50mm lens.
...and probably had some spending money left over.

[Tom A]

Mike, you should have your daughter getting married in Paris instead! Romantic city and NHS meeting to boot - and the Bievres Swap meet for wedding presents.
The Summicron 50f2 Apo is nuts pricewise. No lens i that good - and most film and just about all sensors are lower resolution - at least for now. Unless the rumored M10 is a 45-50 mp sensor - who is going to be able to tell the difference anyway.