FED 1d T.S.V.V.S F93- "No Name", fake or not?

[xayraa33]

Hello Xayraa33,
Thanks for the tip. I will post my question on their site too.
Regards,
Ad

Odd, on how my reply to you on Oct 15th just now got mysteriously edited for some strange reason.

Anyways, the people I mentioned on the site I mentioned originally will give you the answers you are looking for regarding that camera.

 

[farlymac]

After another look on Soviet Cams, what I see different on the body with the lens is the shutter button collars are different, the screws on the front of the top cover do not match the alignment of the examples, and the arrow on the rewind knob is in a different position (half way between the post and the edge, as opposed to three quarters of the way on the examples). This I suspect could be a fake. The one without the lens looks to be the real thing.

Would like to see the inside bottom, as that would show if it is at least a FED body or not.

PF

 

[Mosasaurus2]

Hello Farlymac,
Here are some pictures of the interior (On the bottom also the small button, I mentioned above, that looks like a "flash contact"....):


:

 

[DaveP]

Probably the real thing, there are no bayonets on the lens mount so not likely was the mount hacked from a Kiev. The originals in the Sov cam link dont have the bayonets either.

 

[Mosasaurus2]

Hello Dave,
It's a Contax/Kiev mount. I'm sure about that.
Please follow the link I mentioned above: http://www.sovietcams.com/index.php?1556498228

 

[radi(c)al_cam]

Holy!

I've never seen anything like this before, Ad.

They may have been built after WWII from spare parts that were smuggled out of Contax factories and sold off on the black market to get some cash. But I'd say the bodies are TSVVS to start with.

Is the rangefinder view on the camera with lens correct? That would be really special!

I think you have the stuff here that collectors go wild over!

Can't imagine it would work. Apparently, this chimera of a camera has the rangefinder following cam that works only with LTM lenses, it's absolutely useless for a Contax/Kiev lens.

 

[Mosasaurus2]

Odd, on how my reply to you on Oct 15th just now got mysteriously edited for some strange reason.

Anyways, the people I mentioned on the site I mentioned originally will give you the answers you are looking for regarding that camera.

Hello,

Yes, strange ...
Could you please repeat the names and the links? Would be very nice.
Thanks!

 

[radi(c)al_cam]

My question to you is: Can anyone tell me how I can see whether these cameras are original "No Name" FEDs or counterfeited?
Also I'll have to detect if the cameras are well functioning.

Well, see above, Johann Niels' question:
Does the rangefinder coupling work, or not?

(IMHO, the cam follower that I can see is an warning signal, that the chimera you've bought aren't ТСВВС/TSVVS, but a bogus. But you didn't pay a lot, hence it's no reason for sadness.)

 

[Mosasaurus2]

Hello radical _cam,
|As I mentioned, I'm no "connaisseur" of Leica(copy)-camera's. But it sounds very likely what you said about the rangefinderproblem.
I'll have a look tomorrow....
The qualification "General's FED" has perhaps to be changed into "corporal's FED ...

 

[xayraa33]

Hello,

Yes, strange ...
Could you please repeat the names and the links? Would be very nice.
Thanks!

Hi, the moderator informed me he deleted my Oct 15th info by mistake and asked me to re-post the info from memory and I did and he did place it back on my original Oct. 15th reply to your query.

So just follow the hyperlinks in that reconstituted Oct 15th post of mine above.

 

[Mosasaurus2]

Here a picture of the "Contax"-Tessar, 2,8:

 

[Mosasaurus2]

Hello Johan, Radicalcam,
Raw test: Rangefinder works.
Too bad: I saw just now that the locking lever (of the lens) on the chrome version has disappeared! (As you can see on one of the pictures above.)

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

Well, regardless of what people are saying I'd be happy to own one or both of them and I don't think I'm the only one who would be very happy with just one of them. A third of 50 euros is about 16 or 17 but for bogus ones I'll offer 10 ;-)

The TSVVS wasn't a production run of millions and were probably made in small batches as needed and, obviously, modified as time went by. Some generals may have had one but I see them as a working camera...

And, usually, presentation cameras have a lot of engraving about the splendid hero, fancy boxes of accessories, etc, etc. The lack of engraving on the top plate ties up with others in collections and suggests an early model or pre-production one.

Regards, David

 

[radi(c)al_cam]

Hello Johan, Radicalcam,
Raw test: Rangefinder works.
Too bad: I saw just now that the locking lever (of the lens) on the chrome version has disappeared! (As you can see on one of the pictures above.)

It works with the lens that came with the camera? A nice surprise, very good!

And thank you for posting a picture of the Tessar.

Could you send a close-up picture of the bayonet's distance-transmission system?

 

[Mosasaurus2]

Hello Radicalcam,
The 2 distance-transmission systems:

 

[sevo]

It works with the lens that came with the camera? A nice surprise, very good!

Well, there is that small standard focal length difference between LTM and Contax systems, which will mean some amount of drift close-up. But the only thing needed would be to make the RF tab track the internal mount barrel edge - which has the same movement as any 50mm lens.

 

[Greyscale]

If you are on Facebook, there is a fellow named Vladislaw Kern who is the administrator of the "Vintage Camera Collectors" group that would happily help you with finding the provenance of your camera, he has incredible knowledge regarding Soviet cameras.

 

[Mosasaurus2]

Hello Greyscale,
No, I'm not on Facebook ...
But in the meantime I've contacted him on USSRPhoto.com.
Thanks.

 

[Chubberino]

Awesome stuff here and great find!

 

[Mosasaurus2]

The so called "flash contact(?)":