bobby_novatron
Photon Collector
I apologize in advance if this post is in the wrong forum or needs to be moved. I thought I'd share this information with fellow RFF'ers -- many of us own different camera systems, not just rangefinders. I somehow ended up owning two Kiev 88 cameras -- both are quirky but functional.
I was using my Kiev 88 today, and I got to wondering: how exactly did this camera come into existence? Why did the Soviet camera designers decide to copy the Hasselblad? What were the design features that they copied, and which features did they modify?
I found a website with a concise history of the Kiev 88, here's the link:
http://www.russianplaza.com/salut%20kiev%2088%20c%20cm.htm
Interestingly, the Kiev 88 is not an outright copy of the Hasselblad, although at first glance they look very similar.
The Hasselblad 500 series diverged greatly from the earlier 1000 camera, and the Kiev 88 kind of went off in its own direction. The Soviet designers stuck to their guns and made small "improvements" to the Kiev 88 through the years. But with time, the actual similarities between the 'Blad and the Kiev 88 were really quite minimal.
Case in point: the 'Blad 500 series had integral shutters in each lens, not in the body itself. The Kiev series kept the shutter in the camera housing.
Useless but interesting fact #1: the Kiev 88 shutter is made of small strips of Beryllium-coated ribbons, assembled together to form a vertically-traveling shutter curtain. Beryllium! Who knew?
Useless fact #2: the price of the Salyut camera (precursor to the Kiev 88) was $100. Foreigners could purchase the camera in hard currency shops. That sounds like a pretty good deal for a 6x6 medium format camera.
Anyway, I'm quite fond of my Kiev 88 system despite its quirks. Here's a picture of my Kiev with some East German + Soviet 120 roll film. Sometimes I think I'm a little nostalgic about the old East-West rivalry.
I was using my Kiev 88 today, and I got to wondering: how exactly did this camera come into existence? Why did the Soviet camera designers decide to copy the Hasselblad? What were the design features that they copied, and which features did they modify?
I found a website with a concise history of the Kiev 88, here's the link:
http://www.russianplaza.com/salut%20kiev%2088%20c%20cm.htm
Interestingly, the Kiev 88 is not an outright copy of the Hasselblad, although at first glance they look very similar.
The Hasselblad 500 series diverged greatly from the earlier 1000 camera, and the Kiev 88 kind of went off in its own direction. The Soviet designers stuck to their guns and made small "improvements" to the Kiev 88 through the years. But with time, the actual similarities between the 'Blad and the Kiev 88 were really quite minimal.
Case in point: the 'Blad 500 series had integral shutters in each lens, not in the body itself. The Kiev series kept the shutter in the camera housing.
Useless but interesting fact #1: the Kiev 88 shutter is made of small strips of Beryllium-coated ribbons, assembled together to form a vertically-traveling shutter curtain. Beryllium! Who knew?
Useless fact #2: the price of the Salyut camera (precursor to the Kiev 88) was $100. Foreigners could purchase the camera in hard currency shops. That sounds like a pretty good deal for a 6x6 medium format camera.
Anyway, I'm quite fond of my Kiev 88 system despite its quirks. Here's a picture of my Kiev with some East German + Soviet 120 roll film. Sometimes I think I'm a little nostalgic about the old East-West rivalry.
farlymac
PF McFarland
Back when I probably could have afforded a new one, the plan was to buy from the US importer who then would give the camera a good going over to fix all the manufacturing faults. This of course added to the price, so I stuck with the Mamiya C330F I already had. But I've known plenty of folks who are very happy with their Kiev 88. Oh well, if I had gotten one, it would have gone in the Big Survival Auction, like all the rest.
PF
PF
Pioneer
Veteran
Interesting information. I have an ARAX 60 which is a rebuilt Kiev 60.
Despite all the horror stories that are circulating on the internet mine has been reliable over the past 8 months, even the film transport system.
Of course, to be honest, I have been using a Pentacon 6 for several years which is also considered a bit fragile. My experience has been the opposite.
And the Zeiss lenses that are available in the P6 mount are relatively inexpensive and very, very good.
There are certainly better systems out there but for a very minimal investment (less than one Hasselblad lens) I have 4 Zeiss lenses and two medium format bodies that provide great photographs if I do my part. I don't know that I would rely on it for professional work, but if I were a professional I probably would never have experienced this system at all.
EDIT - Sometimes we are so willing to kick the inexpensive options down the street that we overlook their relative value.
Despite all the horror stories that are circulating on the internet mine has been reliable over the past 8 months, even the film transport system.
Of course, to be honest, I have been using a Pentacon 6 for several years which is also considered a bit fragile. My experience has been the opposite.
And the Zeiss lenses that are available in the P6 mount are relatively inexpensive and very, very good.
There are certainly better systems out there but for a very minimal investment (less than one Hasselblad lens) I have 4 Zeiss lenses and two medium format bodies that provide great photographs if I do my part. I don't know that I would rely on it for professional work, but if I were a professional I probably would never have experienced this system at all.
EDIT - Sometimes we are so willing to kick the inexpensive options down the street that we overlook their relative value.
bobby_novatron
Photon Collector
bobby_novatron
Photon Collector
Sounds pretty similar to what ARAX does nowadays with the Kiev 60 and Kiev 88. Their Kiev refurbs looks pretty good.
p.giannakis
Pan Giannakis
I always liked the Kiev 88's. I remember my local photography shop having one on the display window when I was kid - it was part of the decoration i suppose, he was using a Mamiya RB67 for pictures. Years later I approached the owner and asked him if he would sell it to me and he refused. That shop has closed down since.
CliveC
Well-known
The Kiev 88 was my first medium format camera. Winding the thing really feels like using an elaborate nutcracker. The scary thing is you always feel like the next firing could be the camera's last.
I've since added a Salyut to my collection and it's surprisingly a smoother camera overall.
I've since added a Salyut to my collection and it's surprisingly a smoother camera overall.
Pioneer
Veteran
The other day I accidentally left my ARAX 60 in the garage. The temperature dropped to about 4 degrees F that night. When I found it in the morning it was a very cold brick. Rather than bringing it inside I kept shooting the roll I had in it along with a second roll. Other than a serious bulge in the first picture everything worked great! I realize that isn't 40 below (C or F) but it speaks well to the camera working on my upcoming winter campout in the Rubies.