I do believe that they are better th
Printable View
I do believe that they are better th
I have been shooting with Nikons since the early 1960s, but if I ever get around to buying a pricey vintage rangefinder it would not be a Nikon it would be a Canon 7s or P. Not that the Nikon rangefinders are shabby. It's just personal preference.
I've always wanted a Canon rangefinder but just can't justify it as I rarely shoot 35mm these days, I much prefer them to Nikons, if money was no object I'd bo gor a Reid though with a TTH lens, the best of all the Leica thread rangefinders.
Ian
what?Quote:
Originally Posted by puketronic
Years ago I had a Canon 7s. It always seemed overly large for a 35mm RF, so I sold it. Stupid, stupid, stupid.
I have never had a Nikon RF, but did have both a L IIIG and a Canon 7s. Both were ripped while living in Italy. I really liked the 7S, meter was not bad, easy to use, much better view finder than the IIIG or a IIIF. I had both Canon and Litz glass as well as a minolta 90mm, which was also very sharp. The 7S was larger than the IIIG as it has 2 mounts, the screw mount and an outside mount for the massive 50mm .90. But I always lusted after a Nikon SP with motor drive. I think it was the SP with the drive.
I'm sort of curious as to the original question. Please return and complete your thought.
In the early days, Nikon used the Zeiss Ikon Contax as its model, while Canon replicated the Leica. Over time, both cameras changed their physical appearance, although the Nikon RF changed much less than the Canon.
As to your question ... well, hard to say.
http://www.apug.org/forums/forum65/1...ngefinder.html
lol. I must've accidently submitted this thread, sorry.