My Canon Sure Shot Ace croaked a few days ago - it rewound the film about half way through shooting a 36 exp roll, and got worse from there on.
I loaded the roll of Lomo 800 that was in the Canon into my Leica M7. Fired off blank capped shots until I had passed the number of shots that were from the Canon, then was good to finish the rest of the film
Which I did the very next day, and about the same time of day. Taking very similar shots as I was curious as to the difference.
The high serial # (and thus more desirable) M7 with CV 35 1.4 II Nokton in total cost around $4000 used.
The Canon Sure Shot Ace cost $13 used/ebay.
So, same roll of film (so no differences in developing/chemical/temps), same time of day, same subject, 1 day apart:
100% crop:
The most noticeable difference is the difference in exposure, as well as the difference in warmth/saturation. But that could also be a result of exposure difference. I have noticed that the Sure Shot Ace really does saturate colors in an almost Lomo-esque Minitar 32mm fashion.
Then when you pixel peep, the obvious difference in sharpness.
May 27, 2024 at 11:53 PM
Previous versions of Desmolicious's message #16558160 « $4000 Leica M7 vs $13 Canon Sure Shot Ace »
