Previous Page Home Contact
 |
May 2002 - Fred Krughoff Why
Is Nikon Building A New S3? When Nikon announced the release of the Millennium S3 I thought it odd after all these years Nikon would choose to simply reissue the camera unchanged from its original design. Now that they have released a new black model it is time to look at this "classic" again. When Nikon quit making the "S" series of cameras they had a number of designs for an advanced model of the SP in final prototype, so it seemed strange that Nikon would choose to reissue one of their least interesting cameras. After all the S3 was designed to be a cheaper alternative to the SP. The original S3 came with a serviceable, but primitive, viewfinder by SP standards. While the SP had advanced to selectable, projected (and color!) frame lines, and included a 28mm finder built in, the S3 still had fixed etched frame lines for only three lenses. The S3 also lacked a titanium foil shutter (except for the Olympic model) and so was saddled with the easily burned cloth shutter (still a "feature" of the Leica M6 and M7).
Nikon made the new S3 for reasons that have little to do with photography. It represents the dream of Japanese collectors to have a new Nikon rangefinder, and seems to be aimed directly at the collecting market. The important collectors of Japan influenced Nikon's final decision to reissue the S3. Also Nikon chose to produce a camera that would require no research and development other than training employees to build it (which apparently was no small task in itself). Nikon retained much of the original equipment and engineering designs for the S3. The S3 viewfinder was also much easier to produce than the much more complicated SP viewfinder. The details of the decision are not really that important, the fact is that Nikon decided to produce a 40 year old model without any changes. While it is a beautifully made camera, which reportedly cost Nikon in the range of $6000 US to produce each unit, should you buy one? Collectors like Mr. Shibata predicted that they would be in great demand, but that has not proven to be the case. You can now easily buy a new, unopened example, on eBay, for as little as $4000. I have seen wholesale prices down as low as $2600 US. From a purely personal point of view, I am disappointed in Nikon's choice to make an S3 rather than an SP, or better still an SPX. I already own many Nikon rangefinders that work perfectly, I am using a Nikon SP with the three new Voigtlander lenses, so I was hoping for something new. I have been using my Nikon rangefinders for 25 years, so I am ready for a change in design. Some photographers will want the new S3 to use. How practical would it be to consider buying a new S3 instead of a new M6 for instance? I chose the M6 because it is a classic mechanical design from the same era as the original S3. First, how does it compare with an M6 technically? (Contax shown for comparison with a modern auto-focus design)
Both the S3 and the M6 (based on the Leica M4, 1957) were designed over 40 years ago, and the changes in both, from the original designs, are minor. The Leica M6 comes with a zinc top plate, while the S3 is fitted with a brass top plate. The Nikon is about the same price as new M6, mostly because Nikon has been kind enough to take a $1000 loss on each body sold. The weakest point on an M6 is its poorly sealed electronics, so perhaps the lack of a meter on the Nikon is an advantage. The two cameras differ radically in basic design philosophy. The closed-casting design of the M cameras is a direct descendent of the earliest Leica designs. The Nikon uses the more common external body-plates over a central aluminum chassis, used by almost all modern cameras. How does an S3 compare in use? I have used the both the S3 and the M6 extensively. If you like the F, which I, and many photographers consider the best handling camera ever made, you will like the S3. The S3 has a better feel in my hands, than the M6. There are those who say exactly the same thing about a Leica M, but this is the Nikon Historical web site, some bias is to be expected! Loading film into both cameras is awkward, since neither has full swing-back. The M loads by blindly dropping the film in the bottom, and saying a little prayer to Oscar Barnack. The Nikon loads easily, and unlike the M, you can see exactly what you are doing, but you have to hold the entire back/bottom in your hand while you load (a use for the front pocket in a dress shirt?). To be charitable, the M6 loads a lot more easily than past models. The M6's center flip-up back lets you check to make sure that the film will not be shredded as you advance it, or pick out pieces of film if you do. Both of these cameras are in the dark ages of film loading, when compared to modern auto-load designs. The shutter speed selector on the S3 is made for large hands like mine. The single-stroke advance feels more positive, and I like having the Contax-style focusing wheel. The S3 has a straight shaft rewind (the SP is geared), like the S2. The awkward angled rewind, on the M6, is a vestige of the discontinued Leicameter (does allow use of attached SF20 flash). To mount a lens on the S3 requires that both the lens and mount be in infinity position, but on the plus side the safety catch is extremely positive. I have never warmed up to the 1/4 turn lens mount on the M6 with it's shallow catch (after you drop a 75mm lens while focusing you will want a more positive catch). The viewfinder on the M6 (from the Leica M3) is brighter and certainly easier to focus due to its split image. The Albada type frames lines on the S3 (etched not projected), are adequate, but they get in the way of "seeing" since they are always all present in the viewfinder. The M6 indexes the proper frame line when a lens is mounted. The M6 also offers parallax correction (The Nikon SP was the only "S" to offer parallax correction), but I think this is an overrated feature on any rangefinder. Rangefinders are, by their nature, a bit of a guess, based on experience. The shutter noise on the S3 is a bit louder than the Leica. Frankly there is simply no camera with a quieter shutter than a Leica M. The S3 is very quiet, but might be too loud to be considered totally invisible. While the original S3 offered a motordrive, the current model does not. Leica offers a winder for the M6 which is small and quiet. The motordrive for the original SP-S3 will work on the S3 2K. While I own a motordrive for my Leicas, I have never used it. A rangefinder is not my choice for high speed sports or action photography. The 50mm lens that comes with the S3 is a great 40 year old design, but most likely does not measure up to the standards of the new SUMMILUX-M. However again I consider this rather a moot point. The "Olympic" 50 1.4 is a classic 7 element Nikkor, based on the "F" designs of the early '60s and I doubt many will be dissatisfied with the contrast or sharpness of this lens. The current model has improved coatings. The mystique of Leica lenses and B&W film has always eluded me a bit, but some users believe there is no equal, and I bow to their feelings on the subject. Fact is you either like Japanese glass or you don't, I do. Disadvantages of the S3 - no meter and no additional Nikkor lenses. First the meter, this is a matter of personal taste. The M6 comes with a TTL meter with a utilitarian set of three red lights inside the viewfinder (no green for go). It is amazing Leica was able to fit this meter into the M4 body, so it is understandable it is a simple design (for those of you who don't keep up with Leica news, Leica has just introduced an aperture priority automatic M4, the M7). I have tested the Leica internal meter, it works accurately, but I don't use it myself since it has such a clumsy display (I never even put batteries in my M6 bodies). I prefer a Gossen Luna Pro. Call me old-fashioned but I like a meter where I can see some information. Voigtlander makes a nice clip-on meter for the S3. For quality new lenses you are limited to the 3 Voigtlanders for Nikon Rangefinder, 21/4, 25/4, 35/2.5. Used lenses are available, but with the exception of the 35 1.8, and the 105 2.5, most users will not find that the old Nikkors hold up well to modern standards. However most of the worlds greatest 35mm photographs have been taken with lenses in the range available from Voigtlander. So
should you buy one? Will
it increase in value?
|
