270 degrees Kontax

[cmedin]

Hi Philipp,
Including your price reduction I am still a symphatetic expectator at the stadium.
Nevertheless, in principle, it sounds to me somewhat anachronistic to pay such amounts of money and left with a mirror slap, or loose the Kiev silence. I think you may be doing street photography occasionally. Had you concentrated on street photography and its diverse variable situations, the silent operation of the camera is a factor of primary importance.
Thanks for your encyclopedic knowledge.

Cheers,
Ruben

Hi Ruben,

I would highly recommend that you check out one of these beasts in person and experience this mirror slap for yourself. A lot of people seem to be under the impression that it's like a shotgun going off, but even a 10D which isn't the quietest is not particularly disturbing.

Of course, if you want a quiet DSLR, pick up an old Olympus E-1. They should be pretty cheap now.

It sounds like you're looking for a fast autofocus low light capable digital that is like a Kiev in every aspect including price though, and such a beast simply does not exist.

 

[ruben]

Hi cmedin,
You could save me some time in case you are able to compare what you mean by quiet dSLR to an Olympus OM1, which I know and own.

Cheers,
Ruben

 

[cmedin]

Hi cmedin,
You could save me some time in case you are able to compare what you mean by quiet dSLR to an Olympus OM1, which I know and own.

Cheers,
Ruben

Ruben, I do not own an OM1, but it is definitely less noisy than an OM2. Not sure how those two compare. Unfortunately the camera must've been reviewed at DPreview before they started doing recordings of the shutter noise. Part of the reason is probably the smaller 4/3 sensor requiring less of a mirror, but no doubt Olympus put some effort into making it as quiet as possible. To give you an idea, the mirror is about 1/4 the surface area of that in a 35mm camera. Now consider the difference in noise between a 35mm and a MF SLR and you get the idea. 🙂

 

[ruben]

Hi sitemistic,

I think between us here, there is a problem of common language, making us to project different situations.

In general, a silent or noisy camera, is from our angle, related to the issue of conspicuity. And how each of us behaves in this broad issue.

I am ready to accept that the relatively sound of a camera is an element of conspicuity, but not the only one. There are other factors as well. Thus for example how much you subject is or is not half alert of your presence, How much he/she is concentrated in his/her own issues and thoughts, or chatting with another person, how abruptely or smoothly you raise the camera to eyelevel, etc, etc.

With some level of ambient noise, the Kiev will be unaudible. Nevertheless in a quiet room, rather small, even the Kiev will be audible. Some times I want the subject to be aware of my presence, if I look for eye contact. Other times I don't want it.

It all is relative to your shooting temperament, dexterousity and the subject situation.

Cheers,
Ruben

 

[ruben]

Ruben, I do not own an OM1, but it is definitely less noisy than an OM2. Not sure how those two compare. Unfortunately the camera must've been reviewed at DPreview before they started doing recordings of the shutter noise. Part of the reason is probably the smaller 4/3 sensor requiring less of a mirror, but no doubt Olympus put some effort into making it as quiet as possible. To give you an idea, the mirror is about 1/4 the surface area of that in a 35mm camera. Now consider the difference in noise between a 35mm and a MF SLR and you get the idea. 🙂

To my estimation, an OM1 is 1/3 less noisy than an OM2, and this due to a special noise reduction piston found at the OM1. Yet far far more noisy than a Kiev.

Anyway, too much money for me.

Cheers,
Ruben

 

[rxmd]

Hi Ruben,

I think you may be doing street photography occasionally. Had you concentrated on street photography and its diverse variable situations, the silent operation of the camera is a factor of primary importance.

It's not as easy as that. Firstly, I find that I'm simply a mediocre street photographer and that there's other things I'm better at. I've done a fair bit of street photography, but my photography tends to improve if I put some time into composition, and that makes certain styles of street photography a rather, let's say non-obvious choice. (In that aspect RFF has actually been bad for me to some extent, because street photography tends to get so overhyped here.) I agree that there's some pictures I couldn't have taken with a noiser camera. But then there are others which I couldn't have taken with a non-SLR, or where the quietness of the camera was unimportant but the possibility of quick focusing was. Of course we can always say that this is a question of lack of skill, but firstly that works both ways, and secondly we can also say that there are simply better and worse tools for the job at hand. It's not the same pictures and situations in the end, of course.

Including your price reduction I am still a symphatetic expectator at the stadium. Nevertheless, in principle, it sounds to me somewhat anachronistic to pay such amounts of money and left with a mirror slap, or loose the Kiev silence.

To be honest if you want to get into a new, more or less modern camera system (outside the Soviet Union) with a two-body, three-lens setup it is not really that outrageous a price. I wouldn't expect a comparable Contax G system to be significantly cheaper, for example. The body alone is something like $600 for the G2.

The Kiev is one of the quietest cameras I know, at least at 1/25 and 1/10, and certainly the quietest with interchangeable lenses. It will be very difficult to find a similar camera.

However, I agree that if your main goal is silence and low price, turning towards a system SLR might not be the best solution. In that case, if quietness remains your main objective, why don't you drop the interchangeable lens requirement and try a fixed-lens leaf shutter camera? On the Canonet, which was my primary user camera for some years, focus throw is maybe 60 degrees from 0.8m to infinity, you get a pleasant finder for focusing, a good, fast lens, a quiet shutter, and the camera is small and cheap. If you want autofocus, the obvious choice would probably be the Hexar AF with its fast lens and quiet shutter and film transport. The nice thing is that both are cheap enough (or rather keep their resale value well enough) that you can just try out if it works for you. Or try a TLR.

Thanks for your encyclopedic knowledge.

That's a piece of praise I certainly don't deserve, but thanks anyway.

Philipp

 

[ruben]

Hi Philipp,
As you have gone somewhat personal, I will follow you here so that we remain even.

All of my photographic life, untill some months ago, I have been more of the gear minded photographer, than the one seeking for the final image.

Since some months ago I accepted to face the challenge of the artistic side of photography as my main target from now on, after finding myself the arena of street photography is the one I want to fight on.

This situation catched me highly invested in Kiev gear hours of research and knowledge, as well as with many of the fixed lens cameras. In principle, a compact RF of the 70's would be a better gun and I tryied several of them, until I found that contrary to my previous assumptions I need the 50mm focal length.

At this stage, as a newbie of street photography, I am doing fine with the Kievs.

However when the moment comes, if it comes, in which I will feel I am loosing time and again fine images due to the camera I am using, you will see me mooving away to another camera by hook or by crook.

So far I have introduced many changes in the ways of exploiting my Kiev gear, and the more time I spend in the streets, the more I appreciate the Kiev. This is a living process that may come to an end.

Let's things develope by their own pace, and remain with an eye open for change.


Cheers,
Ruben

Hi Ruben,


It's not as easy as that. Firstly, I find that I'm simply a mediocre street photographer and that there's other things I'm better at. I've done a fair bit of street photography, but my photography tends to improve if I put some time into composition, and that makes certain styles of street photography a rather, let's say non-obvious choice. (In that aspect RFF has actually been bad for me to some extent, because street photography tends to get so overhyped here.) I agree that there's some pictures I couldn't have taken with a noiser camera. But then there are others which I couldn't have taken with a non-SLR, or where the quietness of the camera was unimportant but the possibility of quick focusing was. Of course we can always say that this is a question of lack of skill, but firstly that works both ways, and secondly we can also say that there are simply better and worse tools for the job at hand. It's not the same pictures and situations in the end, of course.

To be honest if you want to get into a new, more or less modern camera system (outside the Soviet Union) with a two-body, three-lens setup it is not really that outrageous a price. I wouldn't expect a comparable Contax G system to be significantly cheaper, for example. The body alone is something like $600 for the G2.

The Kiev is one of the quietest cameras I know, at least at 1/25 and 1/10, and certainly the quietest with interchangeable lenses. It will be very difficult to find a similar camera.

However, I agree that if your main goal is silence and low price, turning towards a system SLR might not be the best solution. In that case, if quietness remains your main objective, why don't you drop the interchangeable lens requirement and try a fixed-lens leaf shutter camera? On the Canonet, which was my primary user camera for some years, focus throw is maybe 60 degrees from 0.8m to infinity, you get a pleasant finder for focusing, a good, fast lens, a quiet shutter, and the camera is small and cheap. If you want autofocus, the obvious choice would probably be the Hexar AF with its fast lens and quiet shutter and film transport. The nice thing is that both are cheap enough (or rather keep their resale value well enough) that you can just try out if it works for you. Or try a TLR.


That's a piece of praise I certainly don't deserve, but thanks anyway.

Philipp

 

[Quercus]

Hi,

To me the point of owning any camera is to use it and every camera needs a very different approach - you have to serve an apprenticeship - I tend to spend most of my time between a ZI paired mainly with CV lenses and a now by digital terms an old Pentax ist*D. With both I feel fairly confident that I can use either of them for 90% of the situations that I ever find myself in - though after 4 years of use i still find scrolling through aperture and shutters speeds on a grip function unintuitive - lens barrel and shutter speed dial will always feel more natural - but I have used both of these camera a lot - therefore they become a sort of extension of my hand and my brain has little processing to do from short term memory as opposed to conditioned memory.

At the other extreme I use occasionally a range of cameras from a rollei 2000 (a noisy shutter and motor) to a british MPP VII 5x4 press camera on a tripod and various RF and MF camera in between - each is great at certain jobs - but that is because I tend to use them only for certain jobs so my larger apprenticeship has not been served.

I use a 5x4 static for landscapes on a tripod and take anything upto an hour to "construct" the shoot but weegee used one for street pics - amazingly quiet syncrocompur shutter but massive camera

My Mamyia 645 oddly tends to be used more for reportage/street than it does for landscape i is very good at it - with a camera that big no-one ever thinks i am taking a pic of them it must be the buildings - so i tend to use 80 and 120 mm lenses but focusing can be a pain if it is low light even using a pentaprism

But my favourite street camera is a Mamiya 330 exceptionally quiet - much easier to focus on the fly than a lens barrel big big view finder with magnification - but ok stuck with limited number of shots and no meter

To me it is about how I use my cameras not about - what has become a general urban myth about what a certain type of camera only does

I love using my dSLR for landscape - for me it works - if I could get a K mount 10mp none burst - non-programmed push button (like a ME super) with lens barrel aperture recognition and yes still autofocus because it works for me then I would bite the Pentax arm off to get one

For general purpose everyday picture taking well then nothing suits me more than a ZI in ap with a CV 25mm skopar wiset at f11 and zone focused because I can still handhold it at about 30th and get decent results - but that is not because i chose a RF specifically to do that - it is because it a a bloody great lens at doing that - use my rollei with a 21mm rolleinar in exactly the same way but from wait level (well actually chin level)

Its horses for courses but we have to learn how we want to use our own equipment not maybe how some dictated idea says we should - to achieve that we have to use the cameras we own

Bresson used leicas in a particular way that probably did leica and RF in general a dis-service - they became to associated with the the "decissive moment" and hence street photography but they can do what ever you really want them to - within limits - as can any camera

 

[rxmd]

Hi Ruben,

This situation catched me highly invested in Kiev gear hours of research and knowledge, as well as with many of the fixed lens cameras. In principle, a compact RF of the 70's would be a better gun and I tryied several of them, until I found that contrary to my previous assumptions I need the 50mm focal length.

OK, given your situation it does not make sense to invest into gear heavily.

Have you tried out a compact rangefinder with a 50mm lens? I'm not sure if there were many of those, but one I know is the Soviet Sokol-2. It's not as compact as a Canonet, more on the scale of a Yashica Electro, but it has a good meter, a very good finder and a lens with a focus throw of something like 90 degrees or slightly less. And it has a leaf shutter and a 50/f2.8 lens. Given that it's a Soviet camera it should be reasonably cheap. I saw one in Tashkent for something like $20, and there's one on eBay at the moment for $30 (270199249765, a present to a certain A. G. Kovaliov on the occasion of his 50th birthday). For that kind of money I think you might just try it out!

Philipp

 

[ruben]

Hi Philipp,

Sokol-2 50/1:2,8 ?

Wasn't you supposed to recomend me a Draug with a J=3 ?

Cheers,
Ruben

 

[rxmd]

Hi Ruben,

Sokol-2 50/1:2,8 ?

Wasn't you supposed to recomend me a Draug with a J=3 ?

Yes, I know my role model would have required it, but I had a bit of a bad conscience 😉 Anyway they wouldn't really fit your requirement - the Soviet LTM cameras are a lot louder than Kievs and the lenses have a 180 degree focusing throw, so you don't win a lot.

The Sokol looks nice though. There is another Sokol (without -2) on German ebay for 10 EUR with some days to go, maybe I'll bid on it just to give it a look if it stays in a reasonable price range (sub-20 EUR, that is). If the lens is anything like other 50/f2.8 Soviet lenses of the period it could be rather nice 🙂

Are there any other compact RFs with a 50mm lens and a leaf shutter? I just googled a bit but didn't find anything. I can't really imagine that a Soviet camera should be the only one.

Philipp

 

[varjag]

Would throw in that J-12 in LTM has focusing throw about 110 degrees.

 

[rxmd]

Would throw in that J-12 in LTM has focusing throw about 110 degrees.

True. I was only talking about 50s, there it seems to be true in general (just looked at an I-22, I-26, I-61, J-3 and J-8)

Philipp