Are Kievs actually cameras?

[Elmar Lang]

From 1985 until the mid-'90s we've been able to see everything arriving from the dissolving Warsaw Pact, mostly sold for very, very cheap prices.

The 1947 Kiev of my avatar costed a few bucks from a Red Army officer met at Bologna's "Konversija" show, back in 1991. Now, I think it would be liked by a few collectors.

I remember how many orders and decorations arrived -for instance- in Italy where I live: I have the personal knowledge of an Order of the Red Banner (RSFSR type, made in Transcaucasia), bought for a very cheap price in 1995, then sold again in 2008 for 130.000,- Euro (plus buyer's premium) and so on for similar pieces...

Best wishes,

E.L.

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

I quote "Also when visiting Prague, "The capital of pickpockets"... I made a test: When visiting the restrom in a beer pub, I left the "kiev" on the table. When coming back, the camera was still there. Nobody thought it worth even stealing... ".

There's another explanation, people are honest in Prague; even when faced with temptation.

Regards, David

 

[rfaspen]

Praha: the capitol of pickpockets. Pretty descriptive. I confirm the characterization.

The Kiev remained on the table because the patronage were old enough to recognize a Kiev. As the younger generation prevails, the Kiev will look like something interesting... I notice the same phenomenon in Bulgaria. In young hangout in Sofia, the Kiev would disappear in seconds. In country villages, it is safe wherever I leave it.

 

[Sid836]

That would be mostly because just few care for cameras of that era. People that know not much about such cameras and are not into collecting syndromes like many of us just consider them as junk. Try it with a dslr, or your iphone (everywhere in the world, not just Prague) and let me know if you get back and find it still there (actually you won't have to leave, just turn your stare elsewhere for a while).

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

One thing you must hand to them in Kiev is that they managed to produce a copy of the Contax. Others tried copying the Leica and gave up, and the Leica was a lot simpler than the Contax.

Regards, David

 

[Valkir1987]

Well.. its not that hard to get a Kiev working again for simple shots, or replacing the straps.

Its hard to get it working accurately, on all speeds within acceptable tolerances. Using the proper lubricants for each axe, some parts don't need lubrication at all.

Just like the Contax II and III. I alway's think that I know how to win on a repair. But it always takes moving the shutter in and out many times before it works.

But when it works, there is a very nice set of affordable optics within its range. Which give promising results.

 

[ronnies]

Hi,

One thing you must hand to them in Kiev is that they managed to produce a copy of the Contax. Others tried copying the Leica and gave up, and the Leica was a lot simpler than the Contax.

Regards, David

They did it by stealing the factory of course. Not really a copy, more of a relocation of production. 🙂

Ronnie

 

[DominikDUK]

Actually they did not steal it it was part of war reparation. The countries of the Allied forces also received a lot of know how as war reparations not only the soviets. The US Space program would not exist without those neither would the russian.
If treated proberly Kievs are good cameras just like Contax's.

 

[ronnies]

Actually they did not steal it it was part of war reparation. The countries of the Allied forces also received a lot of know how as war reparations not only the soviets. The US Space program would not exist without those neither would the russian.
If treated proberly Kievs are good cameras just like Contax's.

I did add a smiley face ! 🙂

Ronnie

 

[DominikDUK]

Sorry missed it

 

[David Hughes]

I did add a smiley face ! 🙂

Ronnie

Trouble is this the internet and now thousands of people will believe you. And in 20 years time someone will get a PHD for repeating it with frills on...

Regards, David

 

[CCCPcamera]

I used a Kiev 4 regularly, and I really liked it. AND THEN IT DIED. Jammed permanently.

 

[Dralowid]

My Kiev was too reliable so I got myself a Contax I.

That cured me.

Michael

 

[Sid836]

I still use my Kiev III. Even its (not spot on) lightmeter works. Not sure if all speeds are dead accurate, but they are more than enough for me (they all work, slow, fast, B).
Now I have left it aside as I am attracted by small rangefinders (o.k. now I have a little Minox EL with me, but that is just an exception).

That Kiev has never failed so far, and has never been through CLA of any kind. It will fail eventually, but it seems not any soon.

What exactly should one expect from a camera of that age? People should be aware that the most reliable ones had been the ones that at least had Contax parts in them. Latter when the production of Kiev cameras had shifted to units with lower grade parts and with lower design tolerances, people had problems with them. But even then they had been more reliable than the rest 60% of all brands.

An example? Get a late (lesser quality) Kiev 4 (for less than 20$) and something fancy, say a Yashica Mat-124G (for more than 120$). Which one do you expect to last longer?
(I know they are completely different, but get this as an example of what is considered a camera and what lasts longer)

But what do you know? Everything eventually dies. Even the stars.

 

[jhalmu]

I bought Arax cm-mlu (Kiev 88-cm) camera via web last year (from Ukraine). Well, only because I have couple of P6 lenses from my Pentacon Six. Arax is one of those firms which "rebuild" those Kievs. It works 🙂

 

[Elmar Lang]

I agree with Nikos' statements.

Only, I think that even relatively late-made Kievs can be good cameras although not so well finished.

What failed with time, was the quality control: in the same time, worked excellent technicians, side-to-side with people not caring at all if a camera would have been working or not: both stamped with their "OTK" mark the cameras' Pasport.

As previously said, my favourite Kiev is a 1968-made 4A, with all his papers. It never failed; it always worked in all exposure times. I can also say that the piece itself had an excellent outer and inner finish (the latter, said my repairman, who simply opened it and did some cleaning and lubricating).

The Kiev wasn't produced with the dismantled Zeiss Ikon Contax lines: the original/repaired ones, went practically lost due to inaccurate transport/storing from Dresden to Kiev. Actually, the German/Russian camera (at the beginning, it was the "Volga" project), was produced from newly-made lines, set up by the Zeiss/Saalfeld personnel, who trained the first soviet technicians and workers. Then, to avoid a further loss of machinery, the lines were sent to Kiev with many "volunteer" Zeissianern, that stayed in Ukraine until the early '50s and later.

The Soviet workers were good, prepared people, whose skills were even improved by the co-working with Germans. The main problem, immediately noted by the Germans in Kiev, was the requested "socialist" production levels, asking too many pieces to be produced, while a complex camera like the Contax, needed a slower production speed. As we can imagine, the requests of the Soviet authorities prevailed (even with some punishments to German and Soviet technicians not agreeing with political, rather than technical rules): the result, was a very fine camera, sometimes defective for the rush of fulfilling the production quotas.

What a strange world: Nikon re-produced his S3 and SP, selling all of them at VERY expensive prices (and they're still highly appreciated as collectibles and usable cameras). Who knows, perhaps the Arsenal could have achieved a success, if they decided to produce a "new" Kiev, whose production would have been accurately controlled and perfectly finished. But we already know, that with the word "if" we can't make history.

Best wishes,

E.L.