Nikon SP vs Leica M for choice of lenses

On the Nikon F- total production was under 1M, there are gaps in the SN range. The 65 block has a gap at the beginning, due to the Nikon S4 also using the same 65 block. The 66 block was reserved for the S3M, which is odd as so few were made. There are some 66 block Nikon F's, they are rare. The production stopped about halfway into the 74 block. ALSO: Nikon produced spare body parts, The top left plate had a serial number stamped in it. Not all were used in cameras, so even within the SN b- not all were actually built as cameras. Some estimates are are closer to 850,000~900,000 Nikon F bodies manufactured. I picked up a couple of those spare top plates years ago when a camera repair shop went out. One was in the 67 block, others were in the 74 b- numbered both before and after regular production had ceased.

Be careful of vintage S3/SP. Not uncommon that their rangefinder patches are in sad state, even after cleaning the mirrors. I handled an SP once whose rangefinder was faint as a ghost. And old S3's can flare like a banshee. Even a good Nikon S3 will be vague and lack contrast compared to a Leica. But wow, is that 1.0x viewfinder addicting. Generally, the best viewfinder in the Nikon rangefinder lineup is the S2. I've owned three all over the years, but just shoot the Leica M2 model now.

flavio81 said:

The Nikon SP is better built internally, and has a rock-solid shutter (basically the same shutter as the one in the Nikon F). A tank.

But the lens choice will be limited. You're limited to the Nikon lenses, and in theory the Contax lenses (and Kiev RF russian lenses) will mechanically fit just fine, but they will need slight modification of focus distance to be able to focus sharply with the Nikon.

There are great lenses for the Nikon RF system (and very expensive btw), but far more choice for the Leica M system. If you want choice, the answer is clear -- Leica. But if you want a really unique object, the Nikon SP is the dream rangefinder of many collectors.

Click to expand...

I used to think that, from what everyone says, but every old Nikon I ever owned over the decades -- 8-9 F's, 4 S2's, 2 S3's, an SP -- they all needed service. Only a pair of F3's didn't need work. Not surprising; they were all old by the time I got them. Things go wrong with them too, just read the forums. A chap on the old photo.net owned an SP since introduced and had continual shutter issues, when compared to his Leica's . A sample of one means nothing, but this ultra reliability of Nikons versus [fill in the blank] ... involves a little hyperbole. I still own a couple F's, including a black 64 -- what a great, inexpensive system.