Nikon S3 and S3 2000 Rangefinders

I’ve been thinking about trying a rangefinder. Any opinions or advice?

I’ve been looking at the S3 remake because one can be had without needing a CLA and I like the idea that the back is tight without seals to go bad.

Looking at having only one and want it to last.

 

Never owned a good rangefinder and I don’t see much discussion about these models here for some reason.

The guy who has written a lot about the various rangefinders is Stephen Gandy at Cameraquest.com. Classic Camera Profiles. He seems to end his survey of Leica rangefinders at the M6 TTL so not so much on their modern digital Rangefinders. He loves the Nikons as well and covers all of those. Its all camera porn but he has a lot of information. Also you might check out Golden Touch Cameras which is Sherry Kreutner. She is considered by most as one of the best Leica repair people and has been doing it for years. She also sells old Leica's and buying form her should negate the need for a CLA. I use a Leica M7 now and again, but am doing mostly digital these days. And if you like Medium Format Rangefinders, the Mamiya M7 or variants are awesome and easy to use.

Nikon made great RF cameras with fine lenses, but even the S3 2000 would now be pushing 17-18 years old and most of them were bought by collectors who probably didn't use them much. For all-mechanical cameras this can be a problem, with lubricants getting hard with age, etc. I'm not aware of any specific problems with Nikon for this, but I wouldn't be surprised if one of these needed a CLA to be fully functional.

My collecting/using vice has been Contax RF cameras. I was fortunate to buy a Contax III that had already been worked on by Henry Scherer so it works like it did in 1936 when it was made. I also have 2 Contax IIIa's that have been overhauled by him, and they also work like new. He has an enormous backlog and he isn't inexpensive, but his work is superb. The viewfinders on Contaxes are not going to be mistaken for Leica M series bodies, but the rangefinders are extremely accurate due to their long base length and they are less likely to go out of alignment than some other RF cameras. If you want to try out an RF for cheap, try a Kiev. The later ones are to be avoided. but the earlier (1950's vintage) are better built. The lenses are copies of Zeiss designs and are mostly pretty good for their day, although QC can be a little rocky and some of them have been dropped, etc. over their long life. But for under $100 you should be able to find a functioning example, where a Nikon RF in good shape with a lens will run a lot more.

Light seals on Contaxes shouldn't be a problem since they didn't use any foam in the first place. Of the 5 different Contax bodies that I've used, none of them have had any light leaks despite being used in bright sunlight.

Nikon made great RF cameras with fine lenses, but even the S3 2000 would now be pushing 17-18 years old and most of them were bought by collectors who probably didn't use them much. For all-mechanical cameras this can be a problem, with lubricants getting hard with age, etc. I'm not aware of any specific problems with Nikon for this, but I wouldn't be surprised if one of these needed a CLA to be fully functional.

 

I certainly wouldn't advocate NOT servicing them, but at the same time Nikon's very good about building things in such a way that the lubricants seemingly last forever. Look at the number of F2s, FM/FM2s and other all mechanical cameras that just keep going and going without service.

 

I'm on Sover Wong's waiting list and am going to ship him a bunch of F2s, but for the time being most of mine have likely never been serviced but work perfectly and are within 1/3 stop at the mid range speeds(and 1/2 stop at the extremes). They're not Leicas or Hasselblads that gum up and drift every 20 years...

Although it would cost more I would rather go for a brand new Leica M. Perhaps the M-A.

Found something fishy on EBay.

Imagine that.

Serial number on a Nikon S3 2000 of 211855.

Now all the reference I can find says the first two digits for that series should be 20, not 21.

Supposedly only 8000 were made. Did they extend production?

Anyone have a clue?

I have a Yashica Lynx 14. I warranty that it would work without CLA.

Do you want a rangefinder as a shooter or for a display case?

 

I always thought the Nikon rangefinders were attractive, especially the SP, which was introduced in 1957 as a lower cost alternative to the Leica M3. Eye candy aside, the M3 proved to be a much better camera, and remains so to this day. In the Contax tradition, Nikon RF focusing is geared via a small wheel mounted near the shutter release. In practice, it is more efficient to focus the lens barrel with your left hand, leaving shutter release and winding to the right. The Leica is simpler, and IMO, superior in this respect. The Leica M2 was touted as an entry level Leica, with fewer accouterments. However the native 35 mm viewfinder made it the most popular model ever among journalists and amateurs alike. Leica later added a self-timer, which closed the features gap with the M3. Handling is identical to the M3. Most important, Leica lenses from 1959 to the present can be used without adaptation. If you don't want to pay Leica prices, Zeiss ZM lenses are nearly as good at 1/3rd the price, and Voigtlander lenses cost even less. The used market is shrinking, but there are still many offerings.

 

In short, a Leica is a better choice if you want a shooter. Anything goes for a collector.

I resolved the question about the serial number.

The higher numbers are a result of manufacturing correction apparently and are legit.

The M3 is what started me on this kick about a year ago and I haven’t pulled the trigger yet.

I really like the M3.

My concern was getting a camera with unknown issues resulting from a 40 year manufacturing difference.

The appeal of the S3 2000 is the much later manufacture of the high quality and foamless seal design.

The 50 1.4 lens seems to have a good reputation as well.

Never collected anything I haven’t used.

For me, the use and personal experience justifies the wear which does not detract from my appreciation.

The appeal is the quality and mechanical simplicity, in a later manufacture.

Edited July 28, 2018 by Moving On

Leica relies on labyrinth light traps for the back and bottom plate. There is a velvet liner in the back flap, which is probably more for dust exclusion. I believe the Nikon rangefinders use labyrinth light traps as well. The bottom and entire back remove in one piece, like in the early SLRs, using a tongue-and-groove arrangement.

 

My problem with the F was what to do with the back when loading. It was too large to fit a shirt pocket, so you learned to juggle it when changing film, or set it down on a table. The Leica bottom plate is about the size and thickness of a pocket comb, much easier to handle. Both Nikon and Leica pulled the film with the sprockets rather than the takeup spool. This is more accurate, less likely to scratch the film, and less likely to pull a chip out of the end when rewinding. That is true for all of the subsequent single-digit Nikons, but not for other models.

 

The long, curved leader on 35 mm film was instituted to accommodate bottom loading in pre-M Leicas. It is not needed with either M Leica or S Nikons. At the newspaper, we routinely used bulk film and cut the leader square. The paper had a Leica template for the long leader. I used it a couple of times just for fun. It was hard to get a smooth cut.

Yeah, the couple of times I used a pre-M Leica, I pre-cut the leader on a few rolls before going out. There actually is a Leica gadget that helps you cut it, but in reality, I just took the regular leader, used scissors and just lengthened the tab by a couple of inches and made a reasonable curve back to the full width of the film and never had any problem just eyeballing it. You can get a template to see the ideal lengths, but it doesn't require a great amount of precision, nothing you can't eyeball and works great. Saying all that, the M series cameras are easier to load, as you don't have to do all the trimming. The "newer" M's like the M6 classic (so called) are even easier to load as you don't have to remove the spool like you do in the M3. None of it is that difficult though.

My only Leica is a IIIc "bottom loader", although I've also had a few Canons IVs which have a lot of VERY obvious inspiration from the Barnack Leicas.

 

When I use any of them, I tend to have a rule of not reloading in the field. If I shot them more often, I'd do it but they're only used "when then mood strikes" so I always fumble the loading a bit even inside. I do seem to get it right on the first try more often than not these days, though, so I'm sure it's a matter of practice. One of the little "tricks" I have picked up(which is probably a no-brainer for regular users) is to not intentionally pull the film out a set distance but instead to bring the take-up spool up to the baseplate and then just pull the cartridge over to the supply side and let the film unwind only as much as it needs to so as to pass the film gate.

 

I keep meaning to get a Canon II/IV for parts as I definitely find the take-up spool better(I no longer have a Canon and haven't used my Leica in a little while, but I recall the Leica having just a sheet metal flap to tuck the leader under while the Canons have a hook) and I understand that they freely interchange.

 

I use to be careful about counting sprockets when I would cut the leader, but now I just eyeball "long enough" and pay more attention to getting a nice radius on the top edge-I've found that more important than getting a certain exact length. I use scissors. I've seen some folks talk about cutting with a knife. I'm of the school of thought that a gentleman should always carry a pocket knife :) and do just that(these days usually a Case Russlock, but whatever almost always some sort of slipjoint Case that I keep shaving sharp) but I've never been able to get a great cut with knife. Whatever the case, if I wanted to reload in the field, I'd carry whatever I intended to shoot pre-trimmed.

 

As far as the S3 and SP go-they've always looked and felt a lot to me like a non-reflex F, which I guess is kind of what they are(or rather the F is kind of sort of an SP with a reflex box permanently attached). As a somewhat frequent F user-or a guy that has a bunch of Fs and takes a notion to do a lot of shooting with one or two of them on occasion-I find the SP and S3 very comfortable and natural to use. Even though I prefer the F2 on the whole, I have always liked the fact that there's exactly one piece of foam to worry about on Fs, and it doesn't cause a light leak if it's bad(F2s don't leak BADLY even if the seals are shot, but it's hard to make a hinged back without some sort of foam). Still, like others said, I find the back a pain. It's not TERRIBLE unless you have a motor drive, though-but let's face it-if you need a motor driven 35mm all mechanical camera the FM/FM2 drive is just as fast as the F drive while the MD-2/MD-3 for the F2 are even faster and both are a lot less clunky to use(plus the latter gives you power rewind). That doesn't change the fact that I had to have a motor drive F in my collection, though :)

Well after a year of Leica Lust I pulled the trigger on the Nikon S3 2000.

Practicality won out for me over price and risk of sending off for maintenance/repair.

We’ll see how it goes.

This camera thing reminds me of the move from tac driving rifles with Nikon and Leopoldo glass, to a bare recurve and wood arrows for deer hunting.

I guess it is a byproduct of age. Wanting to simplify things a bit.

For some reason my view of Life, and the world around me continues to change.

Of the three digital cameras I own the G9 gets infinitely more use than the DSLR.

The RF is a move to simplify a bit.

Probably never have more that the 50 lens for it.

I still like the compact simplicity of the old ME Super with the 40 Pancake lens and belt clip.

And I am growing more and more fond of Black and White film as well.

The S3 is a classy camera. Does it have the titanium foil shutter of the F? Hopefully not the classic but fragile metal slats of the contemporary Contax.

The S3 is a classy camera. Does it have the titanium foil shutter of the F? Hopefully not the classic but fragile metal slats of the contemporary Contax.

 

From what I can find, the ORIGINAL S3 started off with cloth curtains, but switched to metal(are the F curtains titanium? I seem to recall them being rubberized stainless, but I've never actually checked) in the same vein as the F. BTW, very early Fs are cloth also, or at least I've been told that-I have a couple of 6.4 million Fs, but my pockets aren't deep enough at the moment for the super early ones.

 

Also, at least Ken Rockwell(who owns one) says that the S3 2000 uses silk curtains rather than foil.

 

On the F curtain material-I unfortunately don't have easy access to XRF, which would be the easiest way to do it. I have one where someone put a thumb through the curtain-I'm no longer authorized on SEM but our SEMs have EDX and AES attachments. I can PROBABLY snip off a piece of curtain, dissolve the rubber, and get a friend to stick one in the SEM and do EDX.

Titanium foil curtains were a major selling point for the Nikon F in 1962, as their popularity exploded. Inlike the rubberized silk curtains used by Leica and others, it wouldn't burn through if pointed toward the sun, nor suffer ozone attack. That continued through the F3 and possibly the F4. The F5 has a vertical bladed shutter, similar to that used in Nikon's digital cameras. The F was introduced in 1959, and may have changed the shutter in that time.

I watched this a few times as I was learning about what was available......

Pretty informative and I like the accent.

possibly the F4.

 

The F4 has a Copal-type vertical shutter. The F3 was the last Nikon with a "traditional" titanium horizontal shutter.

Not sure about accuracy, it but I found this......

“Out of curiosity, I asked the Nikon RF specialist at Kiitos Camera in Tokyo if titanium shutter curtains from a Nikon F can also be installed in the reissue Nikon RFs (S3 2000, S3 Ltd. Black, SP 2005), and he said there was no problem at all. FYI Kiitos Camera is the famous Nikon camera repair shop run by ex-Nikon guys and located just a stone's throw from the Nikon 101 building where all the rangefinders were manufactured.”

 

Nikon SP -- how good are the cloth curtains? [Archive] - Rangefinderforum.com

 

Report: Nikon Repair Gods (Kiitos)

 

It looks like if you needed to replace you could go with the metal.....

Edited July 30, 2018 by Moving On

The F4 has a Copal-type vertical shutter. The F3 was the last Nikon with a "traditional" titanium horizontal shutter.

According to Gandy, which may or may not be correct, the original S3 switched to titanium shutters in later runs. If its titanium, those are great, but be careful not to touch the shutter, it easy to bend them and you're screwed. Rockwell does seem to say the S3 2000 has a silk shutter, but I guess Moving On will be able to tell. Leica's have used cloth shutters for a long long time and they have always lasted reasonably long. Well congrats on the new toy...errrrr tool M.O. Hope you really enjoy it.

I convinced the Wife it was absolutely necessary.....

From all I’ve gathered, the later original S3 cameras went titanium.

Then the 2000 edition reverted to silk, rubberized.

I expect it to be good to go for some time.

We’ll see.

Silk can last forever if you keep the lens cap on when you're no using it.

 

The curtains in my IIIc are good, and I'm equally diligent about capping the lens. I've rid myself of all the Canons I've had because they had pinholes-of course I sold them with full disclosure of that-but it was too expensive to get them fixed. The Leica clone Canons have a lot to like vs. a Leica III(combined viewfinder/rangefinder, zooming rangefinder, and even the nifty optional rapid winder) but they're as expensive to fix as a Leica if not more so and I'd rather have the Leica body. Of course, the Canon lenses are a different story, and the 50mm f/1.8 in particular is a little gem and a real bargain vs. Summicron.

The S3 Y2K arrived today along with case.

New and in pristine condition.

I can see the appeal.

I can’t seem to find where to put the batteries......

After getting some hay in this weekend I’m going to feed it some film and light.

The S3 Y2K arrived today along with case.

New and in pristine condition.

I can see the appeal.

I can’t seem to find where to put the batteries......

After getting some hay in this weekend I’m going to feed it some film and light.

 

It has permanent rechargeable battery. Every time you wind the film it turns a generator to produce electricity to charge the battery.

It has permanent rechargeable battery. Every time you wind the film it turns a generator to produce electricity to charge the battery.

 

Hmm... I KNEW it!!!...

http://bayouline.com/o2.gif