Are Kievs actually cameras?

tunalegs

tunalegs

Pretended Artist
Local time
10:49 AM
Joined
Sep 2, 2011
Messages
2,619
I now own a partially functioning Kiev 4 and a totally jammed up Kiev 4a.

Why didn't anybody warn me about what I was getting into? :confused:

The 4 was from a U.S. seller and it technically works - but you have to fiddle with it and deal with an exceptionally stiff rewind. The 4a came from Russia, and despite being sold as a working camera was jammed solid and totally non-functional.

I really want to like the Kievs, but for the money it would take to get them fixed (and I have doubts about how long they would stay fixed) I know I could get something much, much better.

Maybe this is what I get from the FSU camera gods for daring to stray from Fed. Does anybody reliably, consistently use Kiev rangefinders?
 
I don't use them often, but I have to say that I have two of the much-maligned 4am models (meterless, last version), both from 1983, and they work fine. OK, one has a problem in B, but I so rarely use that setting it's not an issue. Good ones are out there!
 
All mine have always worked, and I must have had three or four, maybe five. But the most recent was maybe 30 years ago, when they were a lot newer!

Cheers,

R.
 
I have four Kievs in all, each purchased at a very low price for Contax spares, and all of them were/are working too well to sacrifice them. Two did not even require cleaning to bring the shutter speeds up to spec.

That said, I have my doubts about commercial Kiev sellers on ebay - one I bought off one of them, a early 3, was in excellent shape and well adjusted. But the other was the worst of the bunch, soaked in WD40 and overtensioned. The other two (both 4a models) were bought off German owners and were decent.
 
Even at Fedka I've had big issues. A CLA'd Fed 2 that got a complete shutter replacement and still shutter capped, even after being sent back twice. Sadly, this is why I sent it there to begin with. Just say no next time. Great lenses out of the old Soviet Union, highly questionable cameras. I say this all the time, but a Bessa R solves the problem very quickly. Lots of great glass available for it at bargain prices. End of frustration. Believe me, I'd much rather be out shooting than sit at home working on old gear.
 
I have a '55 Kiev II. I needed to have shutter ribbons replaced (Oleg) after 2 rolls. I replaced light sealing (I used foam strips from my Canon F-1 light sealing kit) and I use a trick with empty 35mm roll canister for take up spool.

It hasn't missed a beat so far. Frame spacing is as good as in any other camera, no light leaks, no film scratches, all shutter speeds work, even the self timer works. Focusing and film advance is smooth, rangefinder very useable (my M6 is brighter, though). I don't have to worry about cloth shutter and knocking rangefinder out of alignment. And Sonnar type lenses in Contax mount are soooo cheap.

If it had film speed reminder, better slow speed "handholdability" and closer than 0.9m focusing it would be a perfect sub-100 EUR (lenses included, of course) camera, imho.
 
The problem with all FSU cameras is that they were cheap to buy and are now old and unlikely to have ever had a proper service. Few people are willing to stump up the cost on such a low-price camera.

I have my father's '75 Kiev 4 (light meter is dead) and a '78 4a I bought off Ebay. The 4 has never been serviced, the 4a has had the winder gear-train lubricated. They both work perfectly, although neither is exactly heavily used.
 
Last edited:
The quality of a Kiev depends to a great degree on when it was produced. I have a couple old FED 2's from 1949 and 1952, and they are solid, smooth, and fully functional cameras. One thing that always impressed me was that the chrome plating on these early Kievs was of considerably higher quality than that of the prewar Contaxes of which they are a copy.

Build quality gradually went steadily downhill during the long production run of the Kiev. An often-heard story is that toward the end of production, cameras went directly from the factory to the dump, as no attempt had been made to have them work, only the production targets had to be met. I don't believe that story, but it is clear that quality control became extremely lax. It is certainly possible to get a really good late model one, but the probability declined over the years.

The Kiev, like the Contax before it, is an extremely complex camera, with a shutter that will work very well if everything is perfectly in order, and is a source of tremendous frustration if anything at all is not spot on. It depends for its operation on esoteric things like the difference between static and dynamic friction of the shutter tapes in their locating slots. You just can't get even a little bit sloppy in manufacture or maintenance and expect it to work well. Unlike the simple mechanisms of the Zorkis and FEDs, this is not a design that is forgiving to spotty quality control.

Of course, the older it is, the more time it has had for something to go wrong. Personally, I would stick to a Kiev 2 or 3, from a vendor who describes the exact camera you will receive in detail, and is willing to answer any specific questions you have. Ebay feedback is useful, mostly in that vendors will work hard to avoid getting dinged with negative comments. I would tend to avoid vendors with low feedback, or who stock obvious fakes in their listings. It's not practical to send a cheap camera back to Russia or Ukraine, as the postage is high and the wait very long, so do your checking up front. I think I have bought maybe forty items from FSU vendors over the years, and have received a dud exactly once.

Cheers,
Dez
 
I'm on my fourth, the first being bought around 25 years ago.

They've all been the same in working very well at first but then rapidly failing after a few (perhaps c.15-30?) rolls. In each case breakage of the shutter ribbons was the problem.

As such, I'd now be very hesitant to rely on a Kiev for anything other than occasional light use--and probably never for anything important.

Accordingly, No.4 only rarely gets an outing now. Sad: despite (or because of) their ergonomic quirks there's something tactile and appealing about these cameras.

Regards,
D.
 
I think that for practical purposes, if you're going for FSU gear you should look towards the lenses, and not the bodies. I've honestly never had any sort of luck with FSU bodies, but I've shot and worked on some lovely Jupiters.
 
I have 5 Kiev's and they all worked, got them cheap about 10-12 years ago. Now I use the lenses on my Sony and Ricoh GXR people say why are you using old Russian lenses until they see the results. It's always a crap shoot with Russian cameras, but the lenses are a different story. And like it was said before the older the better, I have two FED lenses from 1937 that are fun and are well build not like the stuff after WWII.
wbill
 
My 4a made in 1980 works perfectly. OK, forget about 1/500 and 1/1000 sec time which are terribly wrong but that's the only issue.
 
Hi,

We are talking about second-hand cameras that are about 60, 70 years old, aren't we?

I'm pleased if they work and are undamaged and clean. And a decent technician can soon sort most of them out.

Regards, David
 
Here's the practical scoop: 1. To be an FSU camera owner/user, you also need to become a repair technician (at least minimally). 2. FSU gear varies wildly; get a good example and stick with it (may mean repairs). 3. Early Kievs are generally better than late ones. We all know why.

I have only 1 Kiev 4 and it works great, but that't partly because I gave it a CLA myself. It wasn't that hard to do. Although Kiev/Contax are relatively complex cameras, they're not that bad as long as you're not going for something like complete disassembly.

I prefer the models without the meter because they're so much nicer looking without that big hump on top. I also think they received fewer knocks and whacks over the years. However, I'm going too far with the term "prefer". Ultimately I gave up on using my Kiev and haven't used it in years. Not because it doesn't work perfectly, but because its near impossible to actually hold and use. I simply can't hold one and NOT block the rangefinder window. I also dislike the funky focus wheel and infinity lock. I have a feeling this is why they didn't do well in the end. I did try to make it work though, the rangefinder base length was my motivation for trying as long as I did.
 
rfaspen said:
Here's the practical scoop: 1. To be an FSU camera owner/user, you also need to become a repair technician (at least minimally). 2. FSU gear varies wildly; get a good example and stick with it (may mean repairs). 3. Early Kievs are generally better than late ones. We all know why.

I have only 1 Kiev 4 and it works great, but that't partly because I gave it a CLA myself. It wasn't that hard to do. Although Kiev/Contax are relatively complex cameras, they're not that bad as long as you're not going for something like complete disassembly.

I prefer the models without the meter because they're so much nicer looking without that big hump on top. I also think they received fewer knocks and whacks over the years. However, I'm going too far with the term "prefer". Ultimately I gave up on using my Kiev and haven't used it in years. Not because it doesn't work perfectly, but because its near impossible to actually hold and use. I simply can't hold one and NOT block the rangefinder window. I also dislike the funky focus wheel and infinity lock. I have a feeling this is why they didn't do well in the end. I did try to make it work though, the rangefinder base length was my motivation for trying as long as I did.
Click to expand...
Try a Contax. That way, you can have most of the disadvantages of a Kiev AND pay silly money as well.

Cheers,

R.
 
Get the Bessa R2-C I know it is $750... BUT, you will have a modern camera for Contax/Kiev RF lenses.
And there are a lot great Contax/Kiev glass out there.
The Bessa R2 is fairly solid build.
The Head Bar Tender Has a few left...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom