LeicaTom
Watch that step!
Why was`nt the IIF2 mentioned..... not rare enough?
I have (2) of them and they are somewhat uncommon and I have one of them employed as my weekly shooter
I really enjoy using the chrome f1.5 and f1.8 50mm`s on it, lovely FUN little camera
Tom
I have (2) of them and they are somewhat uncommon and I have one of them employed as my weekly shooter
I really enjoy using the chrome f1.5 and f1.8 50mm`s on it, lovely FUN little camera
Tom
Last edited:
harry01562
Registered semi-lurker
LeicaTom said:
I think that's exactly the reason, Tom. My choice was for a Hansa, because I can't afford, or justify one. I could manage a IIF2, if I really "needed" one. I don't lack for shooters, and frequently my Leica's are carrying Canon glass!!! And they seem contented.
Harry
pdek
"Dekkam" as was
Canon IIF2
Canon IIF2
***
The IIF2 is a fine camera if you don't need 1/1000 or strobe synch. I believe I've already said somewhere else that any of the -2 models is great, just depending on what your particular needs are. The IVSB2 can satisfy everyone's needs, which would be my only reason for ranking it above the IIF2.
Carry on! Peter D
Canon IIF2
LeicaTom said:Why was`nt the IIF2 mentioned..... not rare enough?
I have (2) of them and they are somewhat uncommon and I have one of them employed as my weekly shooter
I really enjoy using the chrome f1.5 and f1.8 50mm`s on it, lovely FUN little camera
Tom
***
The IIF2 is a fine camera if you don't need 1/1000 or strobe synch. I believe I've already said somewhere else that any of the -2 models is great, just depending on what your particular needs are. The IVSB2 can satisfy everyone's needs, which would be my only reason for ranking it above the IIF2.
Carry on! Peter D
pdek
"Dekkam" as was
Kwanon
Kwanon
***
I not only examined the 15 or so pix that the Skinner folk sent me, but I also saw more than 60 additional photos made by an expert in whose whose judgment and knowledge I have entire faith. In all these photos, which showed the insides as well as outsides of the Kwanon, it is very clear that it is an early prototype (probably, as marked, the second such) of the line. It was never fully operational (the film counter, for example, is simply fastened to the front of the body: there was no internal mechanism to make it work), but this Kwanon was capable of making photos. (The counter and wind knob, by the way, seem to have been "borrowed" from a Leica.)
All told, I have talked with two people whose backgrounds are full of expertise and who have handled the Kwanon and examined it closely: both agree that it's old, and in no way a fake made later, say in the late 1940s or early 1950s. At that time, indeed, no one knew or cared anything about old Canon cameras, and there was absolutely no incentive to make fake ones! And the verbal history of the camera states that it was acquired by its second-to-last owner in California in the early 1950s; if true (and there's no written documentation) this rules out a recent fake, such as might have been made after my book came out in 1985.
Finally, the Kwanon shows many signs of actual use as a picture-maker, presumably during testing but also perhaps in the hands of someone who had acquired it after Goro Yoshida was fired in 1934: Yoshida may have taken this camera with him, and it could have been, in fact, the Hansa-like Kwanon that was advertised for sale in Tokyo in 1938 or 39.
Anyway, it's the real thing, and I believe there's adequate proof!
Peter D
Kwanon
Sonnar2 said:
***
I not only examined the 15 or so pix that the Skinner folk sent me, but I also saw more than 60 additional photos made by an expert in whose whose judgment and knowledge I have entire faith. In all these photos, which showed the insides as well as outsides of the Kwanon, it is very clear that it is an early prototype (probably, as marked, the second such) of the line. It was never fully operational (the film counter, for example, is simply fastened to the front of the body: there was no internal mechanism to make it work), but this Kwanon was capable of making photos. (The counter and wind knob, by the way, seem to have been "borrowed" from a Leica.)
All told, I have talked with two people whose backgrounds are full of expertise and who have handled the Kwanon and examined it closely: both agree that it's old, and in no way a fake made later, say in the late 1940s or early 1950s. At that time, indeed, no one knew or cared anything about old Canon cameras, and there was absolutely no incentive to make fake ones! And the verbal history of the camera states that it was acquired by its second-to-last owner in California in the early 1950s; if true (and there's no written documentation) this rules out a recent fake, such as might have been made after my book came out in 1985.
Finally, the Kwanon shows many signs of actual use as a picture-maker, presumably during testing but also perhaps in the hands of someone who had acquired it after Goro Yoshida was fired in 1934: Yoshida may have taken this camera with him, and it could have been, in fact, the Hansa-like Kwanon that was advertised for sale in Tokyo in 1938 or 39.
Anyway, it's the real thing, and I believe there's adequate proof!
Peter D
pdek
"Dekkam" as was
Canon and Kwanon
Canon and Kwanon
***
Canon didn't bid because their president forbade them to do so, citing as his reason the fact that there are no "Canon" or "Kwanon" engravings on the Kwanon. At least, this is what I've been told. They made a huge mistake, but that's their problem.
The front-driven gear train is there to accomodate the front-mounted wind knob. Obviously it was cumbersome and didn't work very well, having to go through too many directional changes with the necessary gearing, but it was once workable on this and other prototypes. One can understand, however, why it was dropped before the Hansa-types were built!
Peter D
Canon and Kwanon
Sonnar2 said:
***
Canon didn't bid because their president forbade them to do so, citing as his reason the fact that there are no "Canon" or "Kwanon" engravings on the Kwanon. At least, this is what I've been told. They made a huge mistake, but that's their problem.
The front-driven gear train is there to accomodate the front-mounted wind knob. Obviously it was cumbersome and didn't work very well, having to go through too many directional changes with the necessary gearing, but it was once workable on this and other prototypes. One can understand, however, why it was dropped before the Hansa-types were built!
Peter D
Sonnar2
Well-known
Maybe the shutter travels vertically??
Until this camera appeared, they were very questionable and most people believed that KWANONs with front-driven geartrains just existed as sketch, or wooden models. Do you believe now they were more than one?
Until this camera appeared, they were very questionable and most people believed that KWANONs with front-driven geartrains just existed as sketch, or wooden models. Do you believe now they were more than one?
pdek
"Dekkam" as was
Kwanon shutter
Kwanon shutter
***
On this Kwanon the cloth shutter curtains travel horizontally. The necessity for a number of carefully beveled gears in the winding train was a decided handicap.
This Kwanon actually exists, and I believe there were several of them, since two were said to have been taken to Nippon Kogaku so that the latter could work out a non-Leica-type rangefinder coupling. Might have been as many as maybe 10 or 12 test prototypes made? We'll never know for sure.
Peter D
Kwanon shutter
Sonnar2 said:
***
On this Kwanon the cloth shutter curtains travel horizontally. The necessity for a number of carefully beveled gears in the winding train was a decided handicap.
This Kwanon actually exists, and I believe there were several of them, since two were said to have been taken to Nippon Kogaku so that the latter could work out a non-Leica-type rangefinder coupling. Might have been as many as maybe 10 or 12 test prototypes made? We'll never know for sure.
Peter D
mach37
Newbie
Was there a Canon V, with no other letters?
Was there a Canon V, with no other letters?
In late 1960 I bought a Canon that I only remember as "V," that seems to most closely match (in my memory) the specs of the better-known Canon P, rather than the Vt. It had the lever film advance on the top deck, and I THINK, metal shutter blades (could be wrong on that). I didn't keep it very long, due to the SLR craze that hit me. Curiosity on the model number/name is driving me crazy.
Was there a Canon V, with no other letters?
In late 1960 I bought a Canon that I only remember as "V," that seems to most closely match (in my memory) the specs of the better-known Canon P, rather than the Vt. It had the lever film advance on the top deck, and I THINK, metal shutter blades (could be wrong on that). I didn't keep it very long, due to the SLR craze that hit me. Curiosity on the model number/name is driving me crazy.
Mackinaw
Think Different
Take a gander at the Canon Museum and see if anything rings a bell.
http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/film/chrono_1933-1955.html
Jim B.
http://www.canon.com/camera-museum/camera/film/chrono_1933-1955.html
Jim B.
raid
Dad Photographer
I would love to get back my clean VI L that I traded off. This is a very functional Canon RF camera, and it may be the best of all.
David Strachan
Member
bobkonos
Well-known
Collectible Canon? I now have an original black paint P. But more special to me are the L1 brothers:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/45903545@N06/9389095416/in/set-72157626779705055
https://www.flickr.com/photos/45903545@N06/9389095416/in/set-72157626779705055