Whateverist
Well-known
Hello all - I'm new here.
Lately I've been thinking of buying a 35mm camera to go alongside my digital compact. Partly it's because I'd like to try taking photos with something that takes a bit more thought than "set to Auto, point, shoot", partly it's because "older" technology has always fascinated me. Since my budget is limited and I have very little experience with non-digital photographs, I figured I'd try a relatively inexpensive camera, and the FSU ones seem to fit the bill.
More specifically, I'm interested in buying a Kiev 4, mainly because of the looks; from what I gather, the '60s models have somewhat better quality control, so that's what I'm after.
Now, being new to this, I've got a handful of questions and I would very much appreciate it if any of you would be kind enough to answer them, and perhaps correct any misconceptions I have. Some of them are probably no-brainers, but, well, better to ask...
- Is a Kiev a valid choice for a beginner? I am not looking to make gorgeous pictures, but I would like to get decent ones with some practice, and ideally I'd like the camera to last a while.
- Is http://www.sovietcamera.com.ua/ a reliable seller? I have seen it mentioned as being reliable, but I'm always weary about stores I'm not familiar with. They seem to have good prices and cameras come CLA'd (which is, I gather, shorthand for serviced and lubricated) with warranty. Are there better sellers out there?
- Perhaps a stupid question, but I was hoping to use the camera on trips, so will it take modern, off-the-shelf 35mm cartridges or does the film need to be loaded in a special cartridge of some kind?
- From what I understand after googling, the shutter curtains of the Kiev wear out over time. Would a CLA'd camera have new curtains? Are they expensive to replace?
- How difficult is it to maintain the camera? What sort of tools or materials would I need for regular maintenance? Are there websites or other resources explaining the process?
Finally, is there anything else I should know before I take the plunge? If this whole endeavour goes pear-shaped, all's not lost, as I'll still have a good-looking camera as a display piece; but I would really like to do this right.
Lately I've been thinking of buying a 35mm camera to go alongside my digital compact. Partly it's because I'd like to try taking photos with something that takes a bit more thought than "set to Auto, point, shoot", partly it's because "older" technology has always fascinated me. Since my budget is limited and I have very little experience with non-digital photographs, I figured I'd try a relatively inexpensive camera, and the FSU ones seem to fit the bill.
More specifically, I'm interested in buying a Kiev 4, mainly because of the looks; from what I gather, the '60s models have somewhat better quality control, so that's what I'm after.
Now, being new to this, I've got a handful of questions and I would very much appreciate it if any of you would be kind enough to answer them, and perhaps correct any misconceptions I have. Some of them are probably no-brainers, but, well, better to ask...
- Is a Kiev a valid choice for a beginner? I am not looking to make gorgeous pictures, but I would like to get decent ones with some practice, and ideally I'd like the camera to last a while.
- Is http://www.sovietcamera.com.ua/ a reliable seller? I have seen it mentioned as being reliable, but I'm always weary about stores I'm not familiar with. They seem to have good prices and cameras come CLA'd (which is, I gather, shorthand for serviced and lubricated) with warranty. Are there better sellers out there?
- Perhaps a stupid question, but I was hoping to use the camera on trips, so will it take modern, off-the-shelf 35mm cartridges or does the film need to be loaded in a special cartridge of some kind?
- From what I understand after googling, the shutter curtains of the Kiev wear out over time. Would a CLA'd camera have new curtains? Are they expensive to replace?
- How difficult is it to maintain the camera? What sort of tools or materials would I need for regular maintenance? Are there websites or other resources explaining the process?
Finally, is there anything else I should know before I take the plunge? If this whole endeavour goes pear-shaped, all's not lost, as I'll still have a good-looking camera as a display piece; but I would really like to do this right.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Yes, they take standard cassettes.
The 'roll-top-desk' shutter relies on silk tapes to stop side-shift. These die with time and are surprisingly difficult/expensive to replace.
Unless the camera has been cleaned, etc., you will probably find the focusing very stiff indeed.
They look gorgeous, and they're certainly vintage; but they were not reliable when I was playing with them 20+ years ago: they have not got more reliable with age.
As a usable camera, I'd back a Zorkii every time (preferably the Zorkii-4K) and I'd say that as a first film camera you have to ask yourself whether your retro enthusiasm outweighs your possible intolerance of a 1930s design with questionable quality control.
In fact I'd go for something more recent with a fixed lens -- something like a Konica -- but I am all too aware that this isn't the question you're asking: I don't want to be like the people who reply, when someone who asks about roll-film, "Why don't you try 4x5 instead?"
You might find this (and some of its related modules) interesting. Or you might not.
http://www.rogerandfrances.com/photoschool/ps how load 35mm.html
Cheers,
Roger
The 'roll-top-desk' shutter relies on silk tapes to stop side-shift. These die with time and are surprisingly difficult/expensive to replace.
Unless the camera has been cleaned, etc., you will probably find the focusing very stiff indeed.
They look gorgeous, and they're certainly vintage; but they were not reliable when I was playing with them 20+ years ago: they have not got more reliable with age.
As a usable camera, I'd back a Zorkii every time (preferably the Zorkii-4K) and I'd say that as a first film camera you have to ask yourself whether your retro enthusiasm outweighs your possible intolerance of a 1930s design with questionable quality control.
In fact I'd go for something more recent with a fixed lens -- something like a Konica -- but I am all too aware that this isn't the question you're asking: I don't want to be like the people who reply, when someone who asks about roll-film, "Why don't you try 4x5 instead?"
You might find this (and some of its related modules) interesting. Or you might not.
http://www.rogerandfrances.com/photoschool/ps how load 35mm.html
Cheers,
Roger
wolves3012
Veteran
To try and answer some of your questions:
They take standard film.
If looked after the actual curtains do not wear out ,on a practical level. The ribbons holding the second curtain can and do break. Not too bad if you are willing to DIY, a disaster if you can't/wont though. I've never had it happen (yet) but the expectancy is around 10 years (I think that's for a heavily-used camera). Mine are both 30 or so years old and on the original ribbons. They are not the easiest camera to work on but there are far worse ones. You won't need any special tools beyond the usual jewellers screwdrivers, small pliers etc. unless you fancy lens dismantling - then you'd need lens spanners and the like.
They can and do take great pictures (depending on the photographer/subject, of course!). For a beginner you may find them a bit fiddly to load and use but don't let that stop you. The so-called "Contax grip" required to hold and use the Kievs is not to everyone's taste.
Remember a Kiev will be 20 years old as a minimum and, being a cheap camera, will most likely not have been serviced - ever. Pay extra or be prepared to buy several or get one that is known to have been serviced. Can be fun along the way!
Opinion on here tends to be divided between the fanatics and those who wouldn't touch one!
By the way, welcome to RFF.
They take standard film.
If looked after the actual curtains do not wear out ,on a practical level. The ribbons holding the second curtain can and do break. Not too bad if you are willing to DIY, a disaster if you can't/wont though. I've never had it happen (yet) but the expectancy is around 10 years (I think that's for a heavily-used camera). Mine are both 30 or so years old and on the original ribbons. They are not the easiest camera to work on but there are far worse ones. You won't need any special tools beyond the usual jewellers screwdrivers, small pliers etc. unless you fancy lens dismantling - then you'd need lens spanners and the like.
They can and do take great pictures (depending on the photographer/subject, of course!). For a beginner you may find them a bit fiddly to load and use but don't let that stop you. The so-called "Contax grip" required to hold and use the Kievs is not to everyone's taste.
Remember a Kiev will be 20 years old as a minimum and, being a cheap camera, will most likely not have been serviced - ever. Pay extra or be prepared to buy several or get one that is known to have been serviced. Can be fun along the way!
Opinion on here tends to be divided between the fanatics and those who wouldn't touch one!
By the way, welcome to RFF.
Spyderman
Well-known
I have to disagree Roger. They are surprisingly simple to replace. Much easier than replacement of curtain or strap on a Leica or Leica copy (FED/Zorki).
As with any old gear - buy from trustworthy seller. If you buy cheap, you get what you pay for.
BTW: Kiev Survival Site
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Ondrej,
Clearly you know more than I. I have not tried it myself but was told that the side-tapes are retained by the bent-over edges of the slats of the roll-top desk. Trying to unbend these quite often causes them to snap -- again, this is second-hand information from camera repairers.
I am pleased to discover that I was misinformed, but also a bit surprised, as that was the received wisdom among professional camera repairers when I wanted a Contax shutter repaired some 25 years ago.
Cheers,
Roger
BillBingham2
Registered User
Get a Nikon S2. Much the same look, world class quality control, lots of great lenses with the same available for her.
I went down the same road. Spend more on trying to get a few FSU bodies working than I did on my S2.
If you fiddle with cameras, FSU is fun. While I think I have the skills, I do not have the time at this point in my life to tinker.
You might have great luck with FSU cameras and lenses, I didn't.
B2 (;->
I went down the same road. Spend more on trying to get a few FSU bodies working than I did on my S2.
If you fiddle with cameras, FSU is fun. While I think I have the skills, I do not have the time at this point in my life to tinker.
You might have great luck with FSU cameras and lenses, I didn't.
B2 (;->
Whateverist
Well-known
Thank you for the replies so far, it's been enlightening. The links especially are going to be a great help.
Perhaps I'm looking in the wrong places, but the price of an S2 on eBay is in the $600 range - way over my limit. It does look very interesting...
Outside of Fedka, are there other good sellers? I prefer not to have to have anything shipped overseas, so a mainland European seller would be preferable, which is how I ended up at the site in my OP.
On the contrary, I appreciate the voice of reason. I considered getting something more modern, but then again, I have the digital if I want to take good shots. A large part of me choosing something vintage is because it's got character. Rational? Not really. Will it end in tears? Probably. But I'll be damned if I'm not tempted to give it a try.
Is there any specific reason to go for this camera, or is it just a good design all-round? Personally I prefer the look of the Zorki-2, but that's a lot older (and I presume more error-prone because of that?). And aesthetics are probably not the best criterion to judge by.
BillBingham2 said:
Perhaps I'm looking in the wrong places, but the price of an S2 on eBay is in the $600 range - way over my limit. It does look very interesting...
Outside of Fedka, are there other good sellers? I prefer not to have to have anything shipped overseas, so a mainland European seller would be preferable, which is how I ended up at the site in my OP.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
The Zorkii-4 (and its lever-wind companion, the Zorkii-4K) have better finders, but no, the old Leica-like ones are fine too.
Where in Europe are you?
Cheers,
Roger
Where in Europe are you?
Cheers,
Roger
payasam
a.k.a. Mukul Dube
You might consider Oleg Khalyavin, www.okvintagecamera.com.
Are you seriously making a distinction between "good pictures" and "pictures with character"?
Are you seriously making a distinction between "good pictures" and "pictures with character"?
Whateverist
Well-known
Not at all - one flows from the other automatically, doesn't it? I was making a distinction between a hassle-free camera like a digital, and an older one that might not be ideal for headache-free holiday snaps but, as a device, has more character than its modern counterpart. Purely subjectively, of course.
Roger Hicks said:
Belgium.
pesphoto
Veteran
is it really hassle free.........
Oleg is a good suggestion to buy from. Also try Alex-photo on ebay.
Whateverist
Well-known
is it really hassle free.........
Oleg is a good suggestion to buy from. Also try Alex-photo on ebay.
Thanks for the suggestions.
Kalli
Hobographer
I'm in a similar position as the thread starter as I want to get a rangefinder to supplement my DSLR. I've pretty much settled on getting a Zorki-4 with a Jupiter-8 lens (I'm also hot for the Canonet QL17 GIII but getting a good Zorki seems both easier and cheaper) and now I'm deciding on where to get one from.
Oleg's website, already mentioned above, is one place I've considered but I notice Alex Photo on eBay charges a bit less, shows more photos of the cameras and posts more details of the their condition. The cameras I'm interested in are all in "very good" condition at Oleg's and look quite decent. I'm at least as interested in the condition of the lens as the camera since there might be more rangefinders in my future. Nothing wrong with putting a Jupiter-8 on a Bessa or a Leica, right?
I guess what I'm trying to glean from you is what I can expect if I pay a bit more and buy from Oleg?
Oleg's website, already mentioned above, is one place I've considered but I notice Alex Photo on eBay charges a bit less, shows more photos of the cameras and posts more details of the their condition. The cameras I'm interested in are all in "very good" condition at Oleg's and look quite decent. I'm at least as interested in the condition of the lens as the camera since there might be more rangefinders in my future. Nothing wrong with putting a Jupiter-8 on a Bessa or a Leica, right?
I guess what I'm trying to glean from you is what I can expect if I pay a bit more and buy from Oleg?
40oz
...
I've got both a Canonet and a Kiev 4 with working meters, and I'd take the Kiev every time if i had to choose between them. The Canonet's meter has a bit wider range, but the Kiev can mount different lenses. The Jupiter 8 is fantastic as lenses go, regardless of price. The Jupiter 3 is by all reports the full equal of the Zeiss Sonnar 50/1.5, which was recently re-issued by that company for a reason. The Jupiter 9 [edit] - an 85/2 Sonnar portrait lens for under $200 in like-new condition: anyone, anyone? The Jupiter 12 [edit], a 35/2.8 Zeiss Biogon clone for only $100 is a steal considering that same lens from the Zeiss East German factory will cost 2 to 3 times that and likely be decades older.
These are coated lenses which don't lose value with time. Older lenses are not less expensive than newer models. That should tell you something about the original quality. You aren't going to find a lot of ebay listings mentioning cleaning marks when discussing Kiev-mount lenses. It just doesn't happen because the coating isn't melted butter.
I fully endorse buying an FSU body with the intention of moving into mroe expensive brands. There are plenty of cameras out there, and a person should use whatever they fancy. But the accessability of FSU models is in no way an indictment of their quality. It's just a testement to the volume of production. Plenty of sellers offer clean, usable models. Not many offer recently CLA'd models, but that's not exactly unusual. If the seller is on the same continent, sending it back is at least a reasonable option, so the incentive to lie about that is low.
These are coated lenses which don't lose value with time. Older lenses are not less expensive than newer models. That should tell you something about the original quality. You aren't going to find a lot of ebay listings mentioning cleaning marks when discussing Kiev-mount lenses. It just doesn't happen because the coating isn't melted butter.
I fully endorse buying an FSU body with the intention of moving into mroe expensive brands. There are plenty of cameras out there, and a person should use whatever they fancy. But the accessability of FSU models is in no way an indictment of their quality. It's just a testement to the volume of production. Plenty of sellers offer clean, usable models. Not many offer recently CLA'd models, but that's not exactly unusual. If the seller is on the same continent, sending it back is at least a reasonable option, so the incentive to lie about that is low.
Last edited:
MartinP
Veteran
I would suggest a Leica-thread-mount ("ltm") camera rather than a Kiev, because you can use the same lenses if/when you get an M-mount camera (which includes those currently in production of course). It is also convenient to buy new, very high-quality, Voightlander lenses for ltm, if you want to use the older body with a non-contemporary focal-length. Simply put, the leica-thread-mount is currently used in lens production, while the contax/kiev/nikon bayonet is not.
For style and performance I would recommend the FED-2, a later model with the "new" wind-on knob and "modern" shutter-speed series.
Bear in mind that these things are all decades old so you will need to buy a serviced camera, or be prepared to do it yourself (in which case buy two, one for practicing). I would add blyatnikov to the list of reliable *bay sellers, mentioned in the posts above. If you might even consider a medium-format camera (very interestingly different to digital) then you can look at twin-lens-reflex models such as the Flexaret (Rollei if you are rich) but the same servicing requirement will apply (try cupog on *bay).
Good luck !
For style and performance I would recommend the FED-2, a later model with the "new" wind-on knob and "modern" shutter-speed series.
Bear in mind that these things are all decades old so you will need to buy a serviced camera, or be prepared to do it yourself (in which case buy two, one for practicing). I would add blyatnikov to the list of reliable *bay sellers, mentioned in the posts above. If you might even consider a medium-format camera (very interestingly different to digital) then you can look at twin-lens-reflex models such as the Flexaret (Rollei if you are rich) but the same servicing requirement will apply (try cupog on *bay).
Good luck !
Whateverist
Well-known
It was never my intention to buy a large number of lenses, so the mount is not a deciding factor for me. If at any point I decide I want to take this further, I can always invest in a Leica-type camera.
After a few more days of research I've decided to take the plunge and order a serviced Kiev. From what I've read in other threads here it can take a while to get delivered, but when it arrives and I can get it to work I promise I'll post my first pics here.
Thank you all for the advice and especially for the links. I know it can be infuriating to have a newbie pop up...
After a few more days of research I've decided to take the plunge and order a serviced Kiev. From what I've read in other threads here it can take a while to get delivered, but when it arrives and I can get it to work I promise I'll post my first pics here.
Thank you all for the advice and especially for the links. I know it can be infuriating to have a newbie pop up...
fidget
Lemon magnet
I have had issues with each of my 4 Kievs, although none of these were shutter ribbon problems. Most faults were overcome except the infamous frame spacing, this just did it for me eventually.
I am sure that plenty here will have never come across this, or have fixed theirs, so my experience may be unusual. Perhaps you have read some of the frequent posts on these issues. I will say that the lenses have been very good indeed.
I too would recommend that a FED or Zorki would make a better intro to FSU RF-dom, all will allow a nice and sometimes nostalgic trip into useable and tactile instruments from the past (but be prepared to tinker with them yourself).
If taking pictures has priority, then you might consider as Roger has suggested, if only for the very necessary improvement in the viewfinder.
I am sure that plenty here will have never come across this, or have fixed theirs, so my experience may be unusual. Perhaps you have read some of the frequent posts on these issues. I will say that the lenses have been very good indeed.
I too would recommend that a FED or Zorki would make a better intro to FSU RF-dom, all will allow a nice and sometimes nostalgic trip into useable and tactile instruments from the past (but be prepared to tinker with them yourself).
If taking pictures has priority, then you might consider as Roger has suggested, if only for the very necessary improvement in the viewfinder.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
No, not all reports. I've had lots of Jupiter-8s -- the last couple I gave away -- and although they are very good for the money, they really are nothing remarkable. As for the Jupiter-3 being the 'full equal' of the current C-Sonnar, which is not 're-issued' but recomputed, it cannot begin to compare.
While the Jupiter-11 [EDIT -- see below -- should be Jupiter 12] is OK for a 60-year-old 35/2.8 design (it was redesigned in 1945/6), anything from the current Voigtländer line-up will wipe the floor with it. Zeiss redesigned it again for better performance in the 50s or 60s. Bear in mind also that there are quite a few variants on the Biogon design: the 21/4.5 Biogon bears almost no resemblance to the 35/2.8.
These lenses all have plenty of character; are cheap; can be great fun; and suit some people, for some subjects, very well; but to compare them with current lenses (or even with good lenses from the 1950s and 1960s) is not very realistic.
Cheers,
Roger
Last edited:
payasam
a.k.a. Mukul Dube
One Jupiter 11 spoken of here is actually the J-9, while the other is actually the J-12.