rfaspen
[insert pithy phrase here]
I think some of these "off brand" lenses (like Komura) are sleepers. We know that the Pentax 43/1.9 LTM lens is supposed to be excellent. Same with the Olympus 40/2.8. Oh, and the Fujinons...I dream of the 50/1.2, or how about the Konica Hexanon 60/1.2? All these and more are true world class, top-level lenses. And they'll work just fine on a Zorki-C provided the RF is in adjustment
More "down to earth" lenses of very high performance might include the Nikkor 50/1.4, the Avenon 21/2.8, or even the Canon 35/2 which is a pretty decent lens that compares very favorably with early Leica offerings.
And then......there's the "modern" stuff from Cosina/Voigtlander. Even MORE choices! Wow! And the CV lenses are wonderful. (How do I know?)
OP, I really think you should consider an LTM body. Get into this system. You can just grab a Fed-3 and Jupiter-8, start shooting great photos, and work on the next addition to the family at your leisure. Lenses and bodies, accessory viewfinders, maybe a decent meter to along with all this stuff. Sure, some day add a Leica to the clan, maybe some Leica lenses too (e.g., a classic Elmar 50/3.5).
ColSebastianMoran
( IRL Richard Karash )
Twins? Separated at Birth?
Twins? Separated at Birth?
Strictly FWIW... I don't know anything about the other two. But, the Kiev sure is mighty similar to the Contax. Soviet engineers, designers, and manufacturing people made a pretty good copy. Also, FWIW, the Kiev is working today. The Contax is not (shutter hung-up, part-way open).
Both cameras have excellent feel in the hands. So does my Bessa R2S.
Good luck with your choice which ever way you go... or ways.
Twins? Separated at Birth?
Strictly FWIW... I don't know anything about the other two. But, the Kiev sure is mighty similar to the Contax. Soviet engineers, designers, and manufacturing people made a pretty good copy. Also, FWIW, the Kiev is working today. The Contax is not (shutter hung-up, part-way open).
Both cameras have excellent feel in the hands. So does my Bessa R2S.
Good luck with your choice which ever way you go... or ways.
David Murphy
Veteran
David I can definitely understand the desire to experiment with gear, FSU made or whatever, that's part of the fun of this hobby no doubt, and in fact that's why I went through a FSU camera era myself so-to-speak. I had the best luck with a Kiev 4.
I had better luck with the lenses actually, especially the J-8 and J-12 in Contax mount --
both good lenses, especially for their low cost.
I had better luck with the lenses actually, especially the J-8 and J-12 in Contax mount --
both good lenses, especially for their low cost.
rfaspen
[insert pithy phrase here]
I'm surprised at how much love and satisfaction I'm seeing here with the Contax/Kiev. Apparently many of you can do the complicated hand yoga required to use them. What's your secret?
I can see the attraction of that long-base RF. And there's no fiddly difference in the specs (base focal length, register distance, etc.) between Kiev and Contax lenses, so they should all be spot on all the time regardless of the body used. Can't always say that about the FSU and Leica/Canon/clone worlds. The J-9 is notorious for that. The J-3 too, but folks have worked out compromise. The shimming only addresses part of the mismatch from what I understand...
So, I can't get on with the Contax hold, but I'll agree the lenses are a big positive for the system. I wish the Helios-103 was made in LTM like many other FSU rangefinder lenses. I've heard of a rare LTM version H-103, but that doesn't do me much good if I can't find one, or afford it.
I still have my Kievs (4 and a 4a). Both still work (of course) and they look nice on the shelf. I honestly don't have that many working cameras that just sit on the shelf. Typically, if they work, they'll see sunlight at some point.
I can see the attraction of that long-base RF. And there's no fiddly difference in the specs (base focal length, register distance, etc.) between Kiev and Contax lenses, so they should all be spot on all the time regardless of the body used. Can't always say that about the FSU and Leica/Canon/clone worlds. The J-9 is notorious for that. The J-3 too, but folks have worked out compromise. The shimming only addresses part of the mismatch from what I understand...
So, I can't get on with the Contax hold, but I'll agree the lenses are a big positive for the system. I wish the Helios-103 was made in LTM like many other FSU rangefinder lenses. I've heard of a rare LTM version H-103, but that doesn't do me much good if I can't find one, or afford it.
I still have my Kievs (4 and a 4a). Both still work (of course) and they look nice on the shelf. I honestly don't have that many working cameras that just sit on the shelf. Typically, if they work, they'll see sunlight at some point.
rbiemer
Unabashed Amateur
I will likely get an Helios but the J-3 is a Sonnar.
I hope we haven't overwhelmed the OP with all our varied enthusiasms here!
komunjist, hopefully you've seen that we are all opinionated but friendly!
Rob
Daryl J.
Well-known
Oleg's cameras are good?
farlymac
PF McFarland
Dave Murphy questioned a few posts back as to why anyone would want to mess around with FSU gear in the first place.
I have quite a few. First, it was a cheap way to see if I liked a Barnack style camera (Zorki-1). I also learned a thing or two about camera repair by having to constantly fix the burn holes in the shutter curtains.
Then there is the shear variety of models from which to choose. Zorki and FED both did a good job in improving on the original design, to the point where you could no longer call them Leica clones.
They can be had cheap, if you don't mind doing the CLA's yourself. Actually, the ones purported by the seller to have been CLA'd are likely the ones most in need of it.
Lens quality is top rated for most versions. It's the miles, and where they have been stored that causes most issues.
I like the overall design of the various models, as long as they aren't all corroded. If you get one that has nice chrome, and a minimum of dings or dents, they look really good.
I also like to think I can drag out a good photo from just about any camera, even if it needs a bit of work in post. So there is the challenge aspect to consider.
They make good conversation pieces. Especially after someone has just come running up to you from across a field because he thinks you have Leica with you, and then you get to explain to him how all the innovative improvements make it much better than a Leica.
They make it much easier to blame the camera for not being able to get the photo. But then, if you had CLA'd it correctly, it would have.
It's just totally amazing that a camera line which so many people disparage day in and day out can still hold it's own against the one it was made to emulate more than 70 years after first appearing on the scene.
PF
I have quite a few. First, it was a cheap way to see if I liked a Barnack style camera (Zorki-1). I also learned a thing or two about camera repair by having to constantly fix the burn holes in the shutter curtains.
Then there is the shear variety of models from which to choose. Zorki and FED both did a good job in improving on the original design, to the point where you could no longer call them Leica clones.
They can be had cheap, if you don't mind doing the CLA's yourself. Actually, the ones purported by the seller to have been CLA'd are likely the ones most in need of it.
Lens quality is top rated for most versions. It's the miles, and where they have been stored that causes most issues.
I like the overall design of the various models, as long as they aren't all corroded. If you get one that has nice chrome, and a minimum of dings or dents, they look really good.
I also like to think I can drag out a good photo from just about any camera, even if it needs a bit of work in post. So there is the challenge aspect to consider.
They make good conversation pieces. Especially after someone has just come running up to you from across a field because he thinks you have Leica with you, and then you get to explain to him how all the innovative improvements make it much better than a Leica.
They make it much easier to blame the camera for not being able to get the photo. But then, if you had CLA'd it correctly, it would have.
It's just totally amazing that a camera line which so many people disparage day in and day out can still hold it's own against the one it was made to emulate more than 70 years after first appearing on the scene.
PF
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
This thread made me thinking more.
With only few if not only one service person for Leica in my area left and no new names coming, what are my options? Spend just 100 USD on shipping to/from USA? And another 300 for CLA. How many independent Leica services still left in USA... Like three? Are they going to be around in five years?
LTM FSU is nowhere near to Leica. But... I looked and IIf service manual and ... forget it. I looked at M2 service manual... no way I'll do it by myself. FSU... I completely rebuild two Zorki. I did the same with FED-2. And If I screw it next time and broke something, something like three millions of FED-2 were made.
I have curtains materials and ribbons as well for another five or more repairs and this material and ribbons are sold new on eBay.
Where is big difference in the confidence of the future. I'm not so sure how I'll be able to afford CLA for two film M in next five years, but if FED-2 needs it, I'll do it again and if I don't remember, where is three different books in Russian I could read and Internet is full of it in English....
What is more pleasant and practical? Have something super, but with unknown future for service or have something much more simple but DIY?
My M4-2 is on local service since 2016. I used my FED-2 multiple times. And Kiev-2. And Smena-8m. Yes, it is nowhere near to my M3 ELC, but I'm getting pictures with it. One print from Smena-8M taken negative went to Australia and I just re-printed from FED-2 negative to post it to Russia.
Actually, M3 is with I-26M now, because I'm so afraid to burn Leica curtain and face 300$+ bill, but I already burned FED-2 curtain with J3 wide open and ... changed it to new one within three days...
With only few if not only one service person for Leica in my area left and no new names coming, what are my options? Spend just 100 USD on shipping to/from USA? And another 300 for CLA. How many independent Leica services still left in USA... Like three? Are they going to be around in five years?
LTM FSU is nowhere near to Leica. But... I looked and IIf service manual and ... forget it. I looked at M2 service manual... no way I'll do it by myself. FSU... I completely rebuild two Zorki. I did the same with FED-2. And If I screw it next time and broke something, something like three millions of FED-2 were made.
I have curtains materials and ribbons as well for another five or more repairs and this material and ribbons are sold new on eBay.
Where is big difference in the confidence of the future. I'm not so sure how I'll be able to afford CLA for two film M in next five years, but if FED-2 needs it, I'll do it again and if I don't remember, where is three different books in Russian I could read and Internet is full of it in English....
What is more pleasant and practical? Have something super, but with unknown future for service or have something much more simple but DIY?
My M4-2 is on local service since 2016. I used my FED-2 multiple times. And Kiev-2. And Smena-8m. Yes, it is nowhere near to my M3 ELC, but I'm getting pictures with it. One print from Smena-8M taken negative went to Australia and I just re-printed from FED-2 negative to post it to Russia.
Actually, M3 is with I-26M now, because I'm so afraid to burn Leica curtain and face 300$+ bill, but I already burned FED-2 curtain with J3 wide open and ... changed it to new one within three days...
rfaspen
[insert pithy phrase here]
Ya know, I've been inside my Leica IIIa, IIIc, and IIIf, and I've been inside my FSU cameras (Fed-3, Zorki-C, Fed-1, Fed-2, Zorki-6) and they're really similar. If you can repair your Fed-2 or Zorki-1, you can repair your Leica III. As you know, it all comes down to having the correct set of tools, an appropriate work space, and some guidance (instruction manuals, etc.). As with all repairs, I also document the work in regular intervals with photos. Very useful!
Canon RF is also in your skills to repair. I know cuz I've done that too. I guess I've mangled some Canon RF too, but not too bad because I know when to stop before causing irreversible damage. Don G. (DAG) has Canon RF parts.
But, now we're getting off track. The OP just wants to know which body(s) to get for first RF camera.
Canon RF is also in your skills to repair. I know cuz I've done that too. I guess I've mangled some Canon RF too, but not too bad because I know when to stop before causing irreversible damage. Don G. (DAG) has Canon RF parts.
But, now we're getting off track. The OP just wants to know which body(s) to get for first RF camera.
Sid836
Well-known
Strictly FWIW... I don't know anything about the other two. But, the Kiev sure is mighty similar to the Contax. Soviet engineers, designers, and manufacturing people made a pretty good copy. Also, FWIW, the Kiev is working today. The Contax is not (shutter hung-up, part-way open).
Both cameras have excellent feel in the hands. So does my Bessa R2S.
Good luck with your choice which ever way you go... or ways.
A wonderful prewar Contax II you have! They have become scarce at conditions like this.
(Lots of envy from here!
)
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
I was lucky, when my Contax II (1936) failed I sent it off and prepared for the worst and the technician rang me to say that both ribbons had failed (a weak spot) and it was very badly worn but he had one or two Kiev shutter cradles (?) and so could replace it all as they were identical. And he did and I have a working Contax II again.
FWIW, a lot of Japanese cameras were made in Japan and then production moved to China, Hong Kong etc; I see the Contax this way but with a name change after the move.
Now I've posted this people will start talking about Chinese clones of my Olympus µ-I in which I use a Japanese clone of Agfa film...
Regards, David
farlymac
PF McFarland
My "new" Zorki-1D arrived today. I know I recommended the OP to get a Zorki-6, but I've wanted to replace my Z-1D/B for a long time (a 1D with the rangefinder unit off a 1B, which gave the camera two serial numbers).
Postage coming from Ukraine was reasonable ($19.00), the seller has a 100% rating, the photos showed the take-up spool, and a new printed instruction book to go with it. Along with having been CLA'd, and including a 90 day warranty, I figured why not.
It looks great (I think the vulcanite has been painted), speeds sound good, mechanical parts are all working, and the action is smooth. The rangefinder is a good match with my I-22 for close distances inside the apartment.
I'm going to load a roll of Acros 100, and go out to give it a test run this afternoon. But from what I've seen so far, I feel I can recommend the seller to the OP.
On eBay: ussr-time-machine
Synoptics Camera Service Shop
Andrey Shilov
http://www.ebay.com/sch/ussr_time_m...e=STRK:MEBIDX:IT&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2562
He's got some of the colored FEDs, but they are paint-overs, as the metal trim is also the same color, unlike the originals where the color is in the vulcanite. Other than that, all his stuff looks good, and he even has some clocks and watches for sale.
PF
Postage coming from Ukraine was reasonable ($19.00), the seller has a 100% rating, the photos showed the take-up spool, and a new printed instruction book to go with it. Along with having been CLA'd, and including a 90 day warranty, I figured why not.
It looks great (I think the vulcanite has been painted), speeds sound good, mechanical parts are all working, and the action is smooth. The rangefinder is a good match with my I-22 for close distances inside the apartment.
I'm going to load a roll of Acros 100, and go out to give it a test run this afternoon. But from what I've seen so far, I feel I can recommend the seller to the OP.
On eBay: ussr-time-machine
Synoptics Camera Service Shop
Andrey Shilov
http://www.ebay.com/sch/ussr_time_m...e=STRK:MEBIDX:IT&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2562
He's got some of the colored FEDs, but they are paint-overs, as the metal trim is also the same color, unlike the originals where the color is in the vulcanite. Other than that, all his stuff looks good, and he even has some clocks and watches for sale.
PF
nukecoke
⚛Yashica
My KIEV-4A with Arsenal version J-12 + Rostov 35mm viewfinder. Made in 1969 but looks so new. The sheepskin on the camera body is still shining.
webOSUser
Well-known
I have been very happy with my FED2 that I bought from Yuri Boguslavsky at Fedka.com. The FED2 with a I26m lens came to $125 shipped.
Yes, you may pay more than if you buy through EBay, but I think it was worth it.
Steve W
Yes, you may pay more than if you buy through EBay, but I think it was worth it.
Steve W
Daryl J.
Well-known
Thank you, Steve. I have purchased lenses from Yuri before and he went the extra mile.
css9450
Veteran
Another satisfied Fedka customer here. My camera and three lenses came from him.
Philip Whiteman
Well-known
Talking of lenses, one important point here is that the Russian Zeiss copy lenses - Jupiter 3, 8, 9, 11 & 12 etc - are cheaper in Kiev/Contax mount form that they are in Zorki/FED/Leica screw mount. Jupiter 9s (85mm f2) are about half the price in Kiev/Contax form.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Zorya with Russar might be not cheaper, but better for street photography, instead of Kiev with J-9.
Daryl J.
Well-known
Let's see how a FED 2 with an Industar 26m does. And a Jupiter 12. I'm thinking yellow filter and HP5 or FP4.
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
A while ago I was wondering about the Industar-61 in the M9 and took this picture of the first thing I saw at about 3 or 4 ft range with the lens at f/2.8 Both are at 1024 x 682 and the second is 1:1 and the first was originally about 18 megapixels.
The Industar-61 had the curly FED logo and was dated May 1969. Its passport showed its registration as 28.78mm, which is why I was curious...
Regards, David
A while ago I was wondering about the Industar-61 in the M9 and took this picture of the first thing I saw at about 3 or 4 ft range with the lens at f/2.8 Both are at 1024 x 682 and the second is 1:1 and the first was originally about 18 megapixels.
The Industar-61 had the curly FED logo and was dated May 1969. Its passport showed its registration as 28.78mm, which is why I was curious...
Regards, David