bluesun267
Well-known
I think it's important to note the base chassis of the P, 7/7S, L1, & VL are all identical. The Canon 7 weighs barely 20-30 grams more than the P or L1. Only the top plate of the 7 adds a couple extra mm height (& beauty is in the eye of the beholder). Despite the lack of smooth, rounded edges, the volume and weight of these cameras is virtually identical to an M2--where a Leica M will fit, so will a late model Canon RF.
The L1/VL is my favorite, followed by the 7, and then the P last. The P feels the least well-built to me. I've had several examples, all were the same. It was their budget model after all. A properly serviced L1/VL is just as quiet and winds as smooth as a serviced Leica M3. The Canon 7 can come close (if not abused) and is an imminently usable camera. The selenium meter on my 7 is accurate but to be honest I never even look at it. It is useless in situations where I might want it (low light).
The viewfinder experience between the L1 and 7 is very different. How important are accurate framelines to you? The L1 offers a clean, clear (and fast focusing) viewfinder without clearly delineiated edges. The 7 has amazing bright lines but is prone to distracting reflections if you spend a lot of time looking through it. Neither VF is 'squinty' to me.
Don't judge these cameras against Leicas. Accept them for what they are: little miracles! 60 year-old precision rangefinders that (mostly) still work and can be used freely knowing they are easily and cheaply replaced if destroyed or stolen.
The strap lug placement is the only real downer with these cameras and here's my solution (from 2014): https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=145014 I'm still using it today
The L1/VL is my favorite, followed by the 7, and then the P last. The P feels the least well-built to me. I've had several examples, all were the same. It was their budget model after all. A properly serviced L1/VL is just as quiet and winds as smooth as a serviced Leica M3. The Canon 7 can come close (if not abused) and is an imminently usable camera. The selenium meter on my 7 is accurate but to be honest I never even look at it. It is useless in situations where I might want it (low light).
The viewfinder experience between the L1 and 7 is very different. How important are accurate framelines to you? The L1 offers a clean, clear (and fast focusing) viewfinder without clearly delineiated edges. The 7 has amazing bright lines but is prone to distracting reflections if you spend a lot of time looking through it. Neither VF is 'squinty' to me.
Don't judge these cameras against Leicas. Accept them for what they are: little miracles! 60 year-old precision rangefinders that (mostly) still work and can be used freely knowing they are easily and cheaply replaced if destroyed or stolen.
The strap lug placement is the only real downer with these cameras and here's my solution (from 2014): https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=145014 I'm still using it today
Bingley
Mentor
This ^^^^^. I've had the P, 7, and L1, and now own a VI-L and a IVSB2. If you wear glasses, I'd avoid the P, unless you only shoot 50mm or 100mm lenses. The L1, VI-L, and IVSB2 had nice vfs with adjustable magnification. And as for the comparison with Leicas... I think the M2 beats the P or any of the late 50s Canon RFs hands down, but if you think you might like to try a "Barnack-style" bottom loader I'd choose a IVSB2 over a Leica IIIf any day.
bluesun267
Well-known
Agreed Bingley! Judged on their own merits Canon RFs occupy a middle ground between the cantankerousity of the Barnack experience and the svelte modernity of an M.
Also if you can live with a 1/500th top shutter speed there are numerous iterations of the "IV" and "V" series: IIs, IId, IIf, L2, L3, VL2--all can be found for wonderful prices
Also if you can live with a 1/500th top shutter speed there are numerous iterations of the "IV" and "V" series: IIs, IId, IIf, L2, L3, VL2--all can be found for wonderful prices
ChrisPlatt
Thread Killer
All this recent Canon P talk reminded me how much I miss mine, so I bought another one.
This particular one is a very late SN, so likely made in 1961, the year of my birth.
I purchased it along with a Canon 50/1.8 lens from an eBay seller in Japan.
For many years I had considered purchasing a Leica M2 made in 1961.
The doubling of Leica M2 prices in the last year ruled that out for me.
Chris
This particular one is a very late SN, so likely made in 1961, the year of my birth.
I purchased it along with a Canon 50/1.8 lens from an eBay seller in Japan.
For many years I had considered purchasing a Leica M2 made in 1961.
The doubling of Leica M2 prices in the last year ruled that out for me.
Chris
Mackinaw
Think Different
This is wrong. The VL, P and L-series are based on the same chassis. The 7 and 7s are based in a different chassis.
Jim B.
bluesun267
Well-known
Sorry Jim, I've worked on many of these and the base chassis is the same; the back door and bottom plate can be exchanged between the 7 and the L1, or P
bluesun267
Well-known
The 7s moved the tripod socket in order to accommodate the battery but otherwise the dimensions of the chassis, (i.e., the area below the top plate) of the VL, L1, L2, L3, VI-L, P, and 7/7s remained identical
Jeremy Z
Well-known
I need a 2nd LTM body without shelling out Leica money.
There are a few guys in this thread who seem to have Canon Ps in their sock drawers, in good condition without getting any use. (preferring Canon 7s and Leicas)
Would those guys please PM me?
There are a few guys in this thread who seem to have Canon Ps in their sock drawers, in good condition without getting any use. (preferring Canon 7s and Leicas)
Would those guys please PM me?
ColeCole
Member
I feel like I owe you all a conclusion to this inquiry... I ending up going with a P! Feels great in the hands though I feel like my lanky hands would like a taller camera. The focusing patch is a little bit smaller than I expected but it's plenty bright. The only other rangefinder experience I've had is with an Olympus XA, and honestly, I think the viewfinders/focusing is pretty comparable. I started off with a 50mm lens and I'm not sure if I'll end up picking up a 35mm. The 50mm frame line definitely seems to be the natural view-- I feel like I'd have to keep reminding myself if I had a different focal length. Thanks all for the help!
Beemermark
Mentor
Canon P has the 35mm FL. I've had both the P & 7 and not much difference to me. The 7 doesn't have a hot (or cold shoe) and the 7S is uncommon and goes for a very high (not justifiable) price to me. The 7s and P aren't that much difference in dog years so the important thing is to find one in good shape.
Dustfinder
Member
I have the P and the 7s, both in good shape. Used continuously for 30 days during my vacation. The Canon P is the better one, if you like 50mm better, but the 7s is not bad, I'm just hooked to the 1x magnification and the larger rangefinder patch of the P. The three framelines don't bother me at all. The Canon P also feels more solid. Liked it so much that I bought another. They are excellent cameras. I tried a Leica M and just couldn't get it. If I ever buy one it will be as an investment (and will be wary of using it much as a consequence...) . Aside from the rangefinder patch (and the much larger lens selection) I find the canons more practical cameras, especially for film changing, a thing that happens a lot in the field. If they were made with the leica bayonet mount, the history of rangefinders would be a whole lot different, IMO.
ranger9
Well-known
Interesting conclusion to the saga. I too have a P and a 7s. The 7s is a better camera in every way -- more finder frames and they're better-defined, much clearer and more contrasty viewfinder, about the same size, same solid feel and beautifully smooth operation, and the accurate and useful CdS meter means one less thing to carry when I just want to wander around with a camera. And yet I seem to reach for the P more often. I'm not sure whether it's the calming effect of the P's more spartan control layout (no finder selector or meter controls) or whether I'm just succumbing to peer pressure...
ColeCole
Member
Ha! I think I'd still like to try the 7s at some point for all of those reasons. Another piece I must admit and should have mentioned is that I really wanted the camera to be black... which certainly limited the search a bit. I toyed with the idea of getting a 7s professionally painted but the total would have been nearing Leica prices... it's a slippery slope that I'd love to recklessly fall down but, yeah, out of the question.
raid
Dad Photographer
I use whatever I happen to own. I have three Canon P
cameras. They were very practical to use in my case. I mostly used 50mm lenses.
cameras. They were very practical to use in my case. I mostly used 50mm lenses.
ACullen
Well-known
I have used P, 7sz and L2 Canon Rangefinders. I use glasses and struggled to see the 35mm frame lines in the 7sz -additionally it felt too big. The P I used had a pretty smeary low contrast finder. I'm not sure how typical that was but note that Dechart (writing in the 80s) indicated that even then the VF of the P hadn't aged well. The L2 is for me the sweet spot in terms of size, spec and VF/RF . The VF and RF in the L2 is small but bright with excellent contrast.
The Spastic Image
Established
Enjoy the P. Just finished my maiden roll of film in my L1, with Canon 50 mm/f2.8 lens. I enjoy how my L1 handles and feels, love the rangefinder/viewfinder. Easy for me to hold steady with a Cerebral Palsy body when muscle control must be gathered momentarily with a Zen-like approach, and careful focus on gaining fine motor control. My body feels more comfortable with rangefinders and scale focus cameras. We're glad you joined us and discovered the joy of Canon Rangefinder photography.
The Spastic Image
Established
My one misgiving about the 7sZ is it put on too much weight. It feels clumsy and awkward. I prefer the L1, L2, L3, and VL series for Canon's best compromise between Barnack and too heavy! The L1 I love, add a Canon 35 or 50, have fun! The P is nice, and abundant, the 7 save for last models abundant. What engages you, may be different. The love for Barnacks and Barnack-likes with upgrades is shared here.
Last edited:
The Spastic Image
Established
A note: The test roll got processed, got scans in my inbox late yesterday afternoon. The results were superb, even wide open. I enjoy my L1. Just Right!
das
Well-known
In my opinion, neither the 7 nor the P really offer anything that other better cameras do not. The P has a cluttered viewfinder like the Nikon S3. Any Leica M or Bessa is better than the 7. The most interesting model in that whole line for me is the VI-T. The integrated trigger wind and the separate viewfinder for 35 makes it somewhat unique in the history of M39 cameras. The VI is a better choice than the V or any of the L series. The VI can be a little hard to find though as not many were sold.
The Spastic Image
Established
Leica and Nikon S3 are better, but multiple times the price, especially when you buy a original lens with it. I could dig a M2 or M3 myself but I am not Rockefeller, or Elon Musk either. Note, for me, while I like Bessa the camera is not built rugged enough for my needs, remember there is Cerebral Palsy involved in my backstory. The Bessa is great, but more delicate. I admire and applaud Cosina's dedication and all their effort their head honcho put into their Neo RF cameras.