spiderfrank
just a dreamer
A question to all the friends that shoot with a Kiev rangefinder:
please, write here why did you choice a Kiev and not a Fed, a Zorki, a Leningrad, etc...
Let me know your experience and feelings with your Kiev, or, if you have several cameras of different brands, say what are the main feelings with all of them, why do you prefer a Kiev, or some other of your cameras...
Ciao
Franco
please, write here why did you choice a Kiev and not a Fed, a Zorki, a Leningrad, etc...
Let me know your experience and feelings with your Kiev, or, if you have several cameras of different brands, say what are the main feelings with all of them, why do you prefer a Kiev, or some other of your cameras...
Ciao
Franco
rolleistef
Well-known
why? ah tough question!
A question of design first. The design of the Kiev, or rather the design of the Contax is different. Why that? Well, a bit of history : when ZeissIkon designed the contax in the late 30s, everything had to be different from the Leica, for patent reason. So they studied how the Leica was built and for each part they did something else : the general design, the RF and its long prism (not for the contx I but w're talking about Kievs so it doesn't matter), the shutter system, unbelievably advanced for its time and in advance to its time etc.
The Kiev is a silent camera too, somebody descrbied the sound as a "mechanical sneeze" but I think it rather sounds like paper sheet you rip.
The ergonomics are just perfect : its was made to be used single-handed and it actually works! Well, for the slower speeds it will cause blurry pics but if your name is Frank Capa, that you're in a para-loaded C47 and that you're going to jump over France within 10 minutes, it's damn convenient!
But :
On the Zorki, you've got a brighter rangefinder with diopter adjust (Z4), the realese button is located closer to the center of gravity and then you're much more stable, and you can mount LTM lenses (not all). But still, I prefer my Kiev with its squinty VF and its focusing wheel that locks everytime you get to infinity!
(Avrei possuto scrivere in Italiano ma i lettori inglesi avrebero smarito il cammino della discussione in quella selva oscura... parlando della divina comedia, Lei ha visto le trasmissioni "Tutto Dante" con Begnini su Rai Uno? E' ogni giovedi alle 11 nella serata e è un momento proprio magico!)
A question of design first. The design of the Kiev, or rather the design of the Contax is different. Why that? Well, a bit of history : when ZeissIkon designed the contax in the late 30s, everything had to be different from the Leica, for patent reason. So they studied how the Leica was built and for each part they did something else : the general design, the RF and its long prism (not for the contx I but w're talking about Kievs so it doesn't matter), the shutter system, unbelievably advanced for its time and in advance to its time etc.
The Kiev is a silent camera too, somebody descrbied the sound as a "mechanical sneeze" but I think it rather sounds like paper sheet you rip.
The ergonomics are just perfect : its was made to be used single-handed and it actually works! Well, for the slower speeds it will cause blurry pics but if your name is Frank Capa, that you're in a para-loaded C47 and that you're going to jump over France within 10 minutes, it's damn convenient!
But :
On the Zorki, you've got a brighter rangefinder with diopter adjust (Z4), the realese button is located closer to the center of gravity and then you're much more stable, and you can mount LTM lenses (not all). But still, I prefer my Kiev with its squinty VF and its focusing wheel that locks everytime you get to infinity!
(Avrei possuto scrivere in Italiano ma i lettori inglesi avrebero smarito il cammino della discussione in quella selva oscura... parlando della divina comedia, Lei ha visto le trasmissioni "Tutto Dante" con Begnini su Rai Uno? E' ogni giovedi alle 11 nella serata e è un momento proprio magico!)
Last edited:
spiderfrank
just a dreamer
"Nel mezzo del cammin di nostra vita, m'imbattei in una selva oscura, ché la diritta via era smarrita" !!! ;-)
E' una bella cosa che Benigni faccia queste letture di Dante, per tanta gente che non lo conosceva. Io ne ho visto una puntata sola, non mi è piaciuto molto il suo modo di recitarlo, ma sono uno dei pochi.
Au revoire!
Franco
E' una bella cosa che Benigni faccia queste letture di Dante, per tanta gente che non lo conosceva. Io ne ho visto una puntata sola, non mi è piaciuto molto il suo modo di recitarlo, ma sono uno dei pochi.
Au revoire!
Franco
Roger Vadim
Well-known
Very long RF baselength. Therefore very acurate in focusing. Feels just right. A jewel. solid. Clever. The Jupiter 8 is rendering the world just perfect.
Get one, you have to see it. In comparison to a Kiev every other FSU camera (later than the 1's) is looking very simple and cheapish.
-Michael
Get one, you have to see it. In comparison to a Kiev every other FSU camera (later than the 1's) is looking very simple and cheapish.
-Michael
chair_man
Member
spiderfrank said:
I think that Kiev has the most completion in FSU cameras. Kiev is not copy but the remakes of the Zeiss ikon Contax.
For example, the fastest shutter speed is 1250s. Other FSU cameras has not achieved this speed. The rangefinder accuracy is tough on precision, that's the superiority of Kiev/Contax over Leica. Many others has grumbles about the finish or less smoothness of movements. I don't regardless the fault, rather lens quality as the same as Zeiss is preferable.
whitecat
Lone Range(find)er
Good information. As long as we're on the subject, which is the preferred body/lens combo?
Thanks
Thanks
giovatony
Well-known
I have 3 Zorki`s , a Fed , and 2 Kiev`s and they are all fun to shoot but the Kiev`s are just different in so many ways . I think shooting an unconventional camera such as the Kiev adds something to the experience. I`m getting superb pictures from my Kievs and therefore use them more often.
Of course the key to success and enjoyment with any of these old cameras is to have them working properly. They are ceratinly cheap enough to come buy and almost always worth a good CLA.
John
Of course the key to success and enjoyment with any of these old cameras is to have them working properly. They are ceratinly cheap enough to come buy and almost always worth a good CLA.
John
oftheherd
Veteran
I don't have any other FSUs to compare to. And I only recently got a Kiev. I do like the feel of the Kiev, and the infinity lock just doesn't bother me since when putting my finger on the focus wheel in automatically releases the lock with no hassle. Mine seems to have some random light leaks on the back I need to fix, but that should be minor. The only other concern I have is the lack of easily obtainable wide angle lenses wider that 35mm. That just isn't wide to me and I like wide.
Ducky
Well-known
I'm not sure there has to be a "why". I use a 4am with Helios 103. I'm still relearning all manual but that's part of the charm of RF.
julio1fer
Well-known
I got a Kiev 4M with a Helios 103, and later bought additional lenses (Jupiter-12 and -9).
I fell in love with the camera. I believe part of the attractive is the design - they are beautiful. Another factor is that they look complex, so you look as a serious amateur when using those
.
The ergonomics are quite good once you get used to them. There seem to be less problems with rangefinder offset or adjustments than is the case with Feds and Zorkis, since Kiev lenses were designed for a single camera. The optics are excellent to outstanding, and cheaper than those for M39 mount.
I alternate the Kiev 4M with Zorkis (4 and 6).
I fell in love with the camera. I believe part of the attractive is the design - they are beautiful. Another factor is that they look complex, so you look as a serious amateur when using those
.The ergonomics are quite good once you get used to them. There seem to be less problems with rangefinder offset or adjustments than is the case with Feds and Zorkis, since Kiev lenses were designed for a single camera. The optics are excellent to outstanding, and cheaper than those for M39 mount.
I alternate the Kiev 4M with Zorkis (4 and 6).
dee
Well-known
With Autistic stuff , I kinda connected with my Leica II and it's Fed / Zorki cousins - even the Zorki S and Zenit S . This was mindblowing for me , so I was reluctant to follow the advise of many and indulge in a kiev , I bought a k 4 and 4m from oleg - with new meter cells and I loved them !
it's a different experience - the Fed 1 are tiny , light , compact and dee-lightfull ... but the Kiev is substantial , vintage in feel - like an old Praktina or early SLR - with a bright finder , more typical bulk ... and the option of the crisp Helios with proper click stops for the aperture , not to mention extended shutter speeds ... as for comparison with a Zorki 4 , even a Kiev 4m seems better finished made , though that's personal ...
A really well cla early K 2a or 3a is a really beautifully finished vintage camera in a way that a Zorki can't quite match .
dee
it's a different experience - the Fed 1 are tiny , light , compact and dee-lightfull ... but the Kiev is substantial , vintage in feel - like an old Praktina or early SLR - with a bright finder , more typical bulk ... and the option of the crisp Helios with proper click stops for the aperture , not to mention extended shutter speeds ... as for comparison with a Zorki 4 , even a Kiev 4m seems better finished made , though that's personal ...
A really well cla early K 2a or 3a is a really beautifully finished vintage camera in a way that a Zorki can't quite match .
dee
giovatony
Well-known
I just shot a roll of film with my Leica IIIf and another roll right after with my Kiev 4 and I can say the Kiev would be the camera to use if I had to choose just one.
The Leica VF and RF simply cannot come close to what is in the Kiev for useability and speed not to mention the ease of loading the Kiev. I can use the large shutter speed / wind dial with gloves on. It`s a camera made for the cold I think.
I also find the Barnack style Leica a tad too small. It`s more like a lady`s handbag camera to me. The Kiev is kinda large but I do feel there is a limit to how small a camera should be for ease of use. The combination shutter speed /wind dial is a real pleasure to use. Lenses made for this camera seem to be mostly excellent.
Yes, I have many reasons "why".
John
The Leica VF and RF simply cannot come close to what is in the Kiev for useability and speed not to mention the ease of loading the Kiev. I can use the large shutter speed / wind dial with gloves on. It`s a camera made for the cold I think.
I also find the Barnack style Leica a tad too small. It`s more like a lady`s handbag camera to me. The Kiev is kinda large but I do feel there is a limit to how small a camera should be for ease of use. The combination shutter speed /wind dial is a real pleasure to use. Lenses made for this camera seem to be mostly excellent.
Yes, I have many reasons "why".
John
ErnestoJL
Well-known
The reason why I choose a Kiev was that I fell in love with the Contax at 15 y.o.
At 27 I got my first Kiev and at 52 my first Contax.
They are not exactly equal instead, the Kiev shows some evolution over Zeiss original design.
But anyway, The Kiev keeps the original Contax feel and is a pleasure to shoot with it. It proves also that even being a 1936 design, it still valid as well as good enough to avoid the need for deep modifications.
I shoot regularly with both the two Kievs and the Contax, they´re the same userwise.
Thinking about Barnack´s design, It´s slso very good and I like it, but Zeiss designers did an excellent improving over the original idea, bringing a camera which preceded Leitz counterpart (M2 / M3) for about 20 years.
Cheers
Ernesto
At 27 I got my first Kiev and at 52 my first Contax.
They are not exactly equal instead, the Kiev shows some evolution over Zeiss original design.
But anyway, The Kiev keeps the original Contax feel and is a pleasure to shoot with it. It proves also that even being a 1936 design, it still valid as well as good enough to avoid the need for deep modifications.
I shoot regularly with both the two Kievs and the Contax, they´re the same userwise.
Thinking about Barnack´s design, It´s slso very good and I like it, but Zeiss designers did an excellent improving over the original idea, bringing a camera which preceded Leitz counterpart (M2 / M3) for about 20 years.
Cheers
Ernesto
Semushkin
Established
dee said:
Them's fightin' words Dee!
Just kidding.
Have you tried a well CLA'd Zorki 3M though?
Semushkin
Established
Roger Vadim said:
FED-2 has same.
Zorki-3,4 use J-8.
Zorki 3M has superb build quality, better than Zorki-1. Nothing cheap about it.
Early model Zorki 4 not bad either. And viewfinders are superb.
skahde
V for Victory!
I have an early Zorki 4 and a Kiev 4am. The finder of the Z4 is bigger and brighter, yes. I find it much easier to focus the Kiev in low-light conditions, however. Its rangefinder has much more contrast, a better outlined patch and shows smaller deviations in distance with bigger patch-offset. In my book, there simply is no contest and focussing the Kiev compares favourably to even much more modern and famous rf-cameras I used to have.Semushkin said:
In addition, framing in the Zorkis finder seems to depend more on the position of ones behind the finder than with the Kneb. My first rolls with the Zorki 4 ended up really funny as the framing looked more than what my 4 year old usually does. I had to compare the cameras finder to the turret finder to better learn, what the cameras finder really does. No problems with the Kiev in that respect.
Stefan
Dogman
Veteran
Honestly?
I started reading about Robert Capa. I re-read the Whelan biography, a more recent biography, read Capa's WWII memoir, bought several books of his photos. I was intrigued with the Contax, since that's the camera he used the most over his career. I wasn't interested in buying a Contax at the going prices, so I went with a Kiev. I now have four and I particularly like the 4A models. I mostly use two 4A bodies, one with a Zeiss Jena collapsible 50/2 Sonnar, the other with a Zeiss-Opton 50/2 Sonnar.
It's a fun camera, sort of clunky and heavy but I like it. I like the focus wheel. It makes one-handed use possible.
I started reading about Robert Capa. I re-read the Whelan biography, a more recent biography, read Capa's WWII memoir, bought several books of his photos. I was intrigued with the Contax, since that's the camera he used the most over his career. I wasn't interested in buying a Contax at the going prices, so I went with a Kiev. I now have four and I particularly like the 4A models. I mostly use two 4A bodies, one with a Zeiss Jena collapsible 50/2 Sonnar, the other with a Zeiss-Opton 50/2 Sonnar.
It's a fun camera, sort of clunky and heavy but I like it. I like the focus wheel. It makes one-handed use possible.
Semushkin
Established
skahde said:
That varies a lot between individual cameras of the same model. My Zorki 3M has a contrasty patch.
True! You are right about the Zorki 4 here Comrade Stefan. I will concede this point, but it takes a few days to figure out. Anyway I take photos like a 4 year old, so I have no problem.
By Lenin's beard and Dzherzhinsky's goatee! you Comrades will make me go get a Kiev. And then I will want another one. And then lenses. And then the first one will break a ribbon so I will need a third one...
Yes, a Soviet camera is cheaper than a capitalist one but 10 are not!
btgc
Veteran
Time ago I went to man selling Z4 and Z5, if memory serves me, and....left without cameras. Maybe I were wrong, but...something just didn't connected inside me. But now...that look of Kiev....I already adore it
T
tedwhite
Guest
My Kiev 4AM initially had slight light leaks and frame spacing problems. I put in new light seals and the frame spacing problem seems to have sorted itself out.
However, my viewfinder - unlike the positive comments of others - is not up to standard. The patch is virtually impossible to find. The eyepiece is microscopic.
So I usually guestimate distance or zone focus. All of which is a pain, so I rarely use it.
ON the positive side, the Helios 103 is top quality.
Ted
However, my viewfinder - unlike the positive comments of others - is not up to standard. The patch is virtually impossible to find. The eyepiece is microscopic.
So I usually guestimate distance or zone focus. All of which is a pain, so I rarely use it.
ON the positive side, the Helios 103 is top quality.
Ted