Zorki S - ugly sister ?

dee

dee

Well-known
Local time
6:31 AM
Joined
Dec 9, 2006
Messages
1,925
Location
M25 south UK
View My Gallery
I don't seem to see much interest in the Zorki S and 2S .

I have an altai restored , therefore , not original example of each , and both seem smooth and useable.

Frankly , I much prefer my '' Leica'' version with new satin chrome and exquisitely , if imaginatively , engraved faux Olympic games 1936 gloss black top.

I have 3x [ don't ask ] and all are as smooth and quiet [ given variations in all cameras ] as my Oleged Fed 2 '' Leicas ''

Were the Zorki S much less well made than their prdecessors ? I know very little about these cameras , but I quite like the simplified profile .

Or are they simply overshadowed by their predecessors ?
 
The C and 2C are a bit underrated IMO. They aren't quite as pretty as the 1 or 2 and are a touch larger but they're just as good. I have a 2C and quite like it. The self-timer never gets used and I rarely want or need flash but the two-piece shutter dial is better, in my view.
 
wolves3012 said:
The C and 2C are a bit underrated IMO. They aren't quite as pretty as the 1 or 2 and are a touch larger but they're just as good. I have a 2C and quite like it. The self-timer never gets used and I rarely want or need flash but the two-piece shutter dial is better, in my view.
Click to expand...

Agreed, and the strap lugs on the 2S are useful. They don't seem to be inferior to the original Zorki in construction. They are normally cheaper.
 
This is my point a younger , simplifed , camera with strap lugs , providing the same experience as a more expensive and older Zorki 1 ... but underated .

dee
 
I liked it instantly: the rangefinder was better that the one on my Leica IIIc and it was nice to have a system camera with the authentic feel of having to use RF and VF separately.
 
Another point. The Zorki-S was fitted with the collapsible !-22. Buying one of these cameras is usually little more expensive than buying this desirable lens alone.
 
It seems that the "C" (substitutes for "S", which they say doesn't exist in Russian) gets downgraded in some websites because of its appearance. As if that had something to do with performance. It's largely nit-picking.

The one "C" I have came with the collapsible lens, but for some reason it is impossible to remove it from the body. Apparently it was jammed somehow somewhere along the line. It's the only Zorki I have (one of several) that has this problem.
 
"It seems that the "C" (substitutes for "S", which they say doesn't exist in Russian"
Well that´s....not quite correct the Russians and the other people using the Cyrillic Alphabet do have an "S" actually even 2 if you count in the reversed 3 (Z).
Also the fake Leicas made out of C´s aree very easy to spot
 
I have a triple of .. '' Leica tributes '' in new matt chrome , thick gloss black topplates - and they look and perform superbly .All have refinished '' Elmar '' I 22 s .

But , it seems for many , all Zorki S are an aquired taste ! I quite like that , like my Zenit 1 twins and Zenit S twins , they are no longer straight Leica clones .

And it extends the genre somewhat !
 
I had a Zorki S (C), but most of the times I don't flash at all, and if I want to I use my Zorki 4 instead. I'm not missing the self timer either, I can use a cable release with the 'autoknips'.
The top of the 1C is just a little too large for its advantages. Good point is, that the 1C is very well built mostly like the rest of the late 1 models. Pity the plain Zorki 2 is so hard to find, and expensive.
 
The Z2 supposedly had the smallest production run, which is why it's pretty scarce. On the other side of the coin, the Z4 saw some 1.75 million copies made. So it's the old supply & demand story.

As for the "C" vs. "S", I am totally in the dark when it comes to Russian. In fact, one Z3 I bought came with an instruction manual, which happens to be in said language. I can't read anything but the illustrations!! All I know is that I've read in some websites that we call those models "Zorki-S" because there's no "S" in Russian. But who am I to argue??
 
It's called the 1S, like the 2S and the 3S, because the S/C stands for synchronised. I think it has nothing to do with the fact that the S would or would'nt appear in Russian.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought "C" was cyrillic for "S". Have just sold my Zorki "C".... a non export model with "Made in Russia" (in cryllic) on the back. It was a bit beat up and also have nice Zorki 2"C" which is in top shape and has the smoothest film advance of any of my cameras... definately one of my favorite users with a collapsible 50mm... 😎
 
Just pleased that the Zorki S / C finds favour with other users ... even though I prefer ID stolen versions !
I would love a brass and black covering version - ironically , as Zorki 1 's dry up , more and more '' Leica-ised '' Zorki S are being re-made .
somehow it has a hint of Leica M about it ...
 
A native speaker of Russian tells me that, if we wish to simply transliterate, C is more appropriate.

Personally, I dislike the aesthetics of the later FED and Zorki bodies - my preference is very much to the first of the FED and Zorki models.

Thus I prefer the non-synced models, as I do very little shooting with flash and I'm not a fan of the extra height it requires in the body, not as much from a physical size perspective, but rather one of the camera's look and proportion.

In a side-by-side comparison I find the Zorki-2 to look appreciably better than the -2C, for the above reasons.

On its own though, the difference isn't as noticeable - and, in any case, I prefer the look of the -2C to the 3, and so on.

Maybe I should just shoot with the things 🙄
 
I'd go along with prefering the Zorki 1 to the Zorki S - and both to any later Russian camera - including the much favoured , and seriousy lopsided , Zorki 3 !

Ok , it's an advance , but I prefer my twin Leica I to the twin IIIc's , but ASdee messes up stuff .

Again , I think that the Zorki S and 2S generally escaped the deteriorating quality control of the later Zorki 4 / 4k .

It is however , a means of making the most of what , by that time , a supposedly '' outdated '' camera ... which is still going strong decades later .

[ i am still amazed that my 1933 Leica II with inexpensive cv 35 mm f 2.5 Colour Scopar creates such excellent slides .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom