First Kiev 4am Photos!

santino

santino

FSU gear head
Local time
2:27 PM
Joined
Mar 5, 2006
Messages
2,082
View My Gallery
first shots from my new Kiev 4am with Helios 103.

film was Fomapan 400 in R09.
and guess what, no light leaks at all 🙂

it isn't a really high quality camera (compared to older models) but it's pretty handy with the bigger speed dial and hot shoe. I'm really happy 😀
 

Attachments

  • drzewo.jpg
    drzewo.jpg
    196.1 KB · Views: 0
  • szyny.jpg
    szyny.jpg
    200.6 KB · Views: 0
  • pal.jpg
    pal.jpg
    148.5 KB · Views: 0
The Helios has better microcontrast than a J8(m) and rivials a post WWII Sonnar. My 103 has no internal black paint but I did a sun in photo test and it held up as well as more expensive lenses, so I'm not going to take the risk of stripping it. You need microfilm and a tripod to see how good it is.

The finish on a 4am is terrible but they work, you need a sound stage muffle, to disguise you are a 4am user, if you are ashamed.

The photos will be better.

Noel
 
yeah thanks 😀

as far as I know the Helios is a Biotar design and as far as I know the Biotar is a more modern design than the Sonnar. It has def. better microcontrast (the pre-war sonnar is just too soft for normal pictures - when it comes to me).
 
The Helios, is reputed to be a rip off of the Mandler (leitz) summicron from '79, both are double gauss, e.g. planar. Tjhe Mandler is a computerised high refractive rationalised design.

Noel
 
santino

Yes the genealogy, is double Gauss, Cooke speed panchro,
Biotar
Planar
add mans dream

It was difficult to make the deep curves...

Mandler 'removed' several tolerances, for 'cron from '79, russians ripped off
New Zeiss Planar for Z is pretty similar, real nice design

Noel
 
The watershed to avoid is the '72 change, if you get before 72 you get real leather and it is nice leather.
Post 72 leatherette.
Post 80 you get rough chrome, rewind handle looks horrible, Helious lens, fixed take up spool, nicer case, bigger nose, nicer smell, your dog still want to will sleep outside.
Most if us are fondlers so pre '72
If you go back to pre '56 it is almost like a Contax
pre '50 people say it is a Contax except the name plate
Contax are more available than one might anticipate, i.e. cheaper
You could buy new helios until rescently, still may be available.

So the lens is better post '80 but the camera needs to be kept in its case cause it is homely. It will be cheap.

Any Kiev will need TLC, neglected ones will snap ribbons, or stall/jam on slow speeds, a relube and ribbon change and they will go for 30 years of shooting,

Capa and Lancelot Vining used Contax, not a lot of difference between the Kiev and Contax.

Noel

P.S. I shoot with a 63 and 68 I like the leather...
 
Last edited:
Malcolm_J said:
What is so bad about a 4AM compared to say a 4A? They look almost exactly the same except for the speed dial and the rewinder. There are a couple on eBay that look pretty nice.

See here:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/KIEV-4AM-Russian-Soviet-35mm-RF-Camera-Helios-53mm-lens_W0QQitemZ150086842379QQihZ005QQcategoryZ15234QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem?hash=item150086842379

A wee bit pricey but tempting due to the lens.

What are the main weaknesses of the 4AM?
Click to expand...

I will risk my skin by saying that with the latest Kievs there are most of the chances you'll get a soft winding cocking knob, if we skip over the heads of reputable sellers, who may deliver soft winding with any model.

Secondly, the black finnish is specially suitable to camouflage the cheaper chromium and have a beatifull looking camera by itself. Add a lizard covering from Aki Asahi, and you will be ready to walk showing off a beautiful piece.

Latest Kievs don't have features of the older ones but the contrary is true as well.

As for the conflict between the high quality finnish of the earlier models and the convenience for shooting of the newer ones, I have solved it by having two or three old models for admiration and two newer models for shooting.

But most important of all is not which model but in what condition the model you have is. And for that the most important is not the age of the camera but the seller. If you buy highly expensive models from Fedka, the chances that you miss are close to zero, with some respect to anyone out there with a less than perfect sample.
If you buy any Kiev from any seller at ebay, it doesn't automatically mean that you are going to be screwed, but you must be counscious you are throwing a coin into the air.
Cheers,
Ruben
 
Oops, am I getting ruben and santino mixed up?
Santino, I'm happy for you! As for ruben, he has been
my 'guiding light' in Kiev & OM cameras and other stuff.
Further... ruben is a technical wizard and exceptional innovator.

I wanted a Kiev as an artifact, and I bought the K4a because
of its 'classic look.' A 1960 model, it was $79- at Fedka's and
well worth it; the winding is soft, and there's no overlap of
neg frames.

A separate purchase, the J8M 53/2 [$19-] is superb at wide apertures.

Santino, we'll be looking for your pix, and kudos to ruben.
Ciao, mike
 
Helios/Biotar/Planar designs are all double-Gauss type and too similar to draw serious distinction. I think the Helios-Biotar association goes back to copying of SLR 58mm Biotar that became known as Helios-44. I'm not sure that Helios-103 shares much design traits with that lens, aside from both being double-Gauss type.

Saying that Helios is more modern design than Sonnar isn't entirely correct, as Planar formula dates back to 1896. While in my limited experience H-103 is better low light performer than J-8 samples I tried, I have J-3 which is just as good and a half stop faster at that.

Regarding the internal painting of H-103: that was my suspicion too, but it is actually there, although is not applied everywhere. Most of element edges are finished in good matte black, but some of them have cut-in grooves where paint is lacking. Once I blackened them, the strong circular reflexes visible in the lens before were gone.
 
Noel, I have some shots in the bright days where H-103 was doing fine, and some washed out with veiling flare in the middle. It's a fine lens and I have I think at least a hundred of rolls done with it, but hood is advisable 🙂
 
OK folks, I shot my second roll with the 4am.
Shots are fine but it was a 36 exp. roll and frame spacing is critical in the middle of the film. other than that all went ok.
any hints?

PS I will scan some pics of that roll. 🙂
 
Ruben taught me to wind a Kiev as follows:

- half a turn to advance the film...
- another half turn to advance the film some more, and cock the shutter.

What's important is NOT to advance the film/cock the shutter in 4-5 little turns.
Why? Kievs characteristically have irregular spacing between neg frames. I found that, if I advanced the film from frame to frame as above, all is well. OK, it is not the even spacing of a Leica or good SLR body... but the method works for many a Kiev.

Enjoy, mike
 
thanks, I'll try that. I was advancing it in one turn but who knows. as to frame spacing I don't care as far as there is no overlapping (I've got a M6 so I know what good frame spacing is 😀
 
Santino
Even a Contax II will have frame spacing problems, the fix is simple but dont do it unless you have >1mm overlap or torn sprocket holes.

You are cleaning a slipping clutch like on stick shift auto.

You need a screw driver to fit the three screws holding the take up spool in place. Remiove three screws over a deep tray, steal a coffee tray from houshold. Stick the screws to sticky tape.

There is a screw in centre of take up fork, need a screw driver to fit this accurately. Remove this screw with the camera upside down, counter hold the fork (shaft) with pliers, protect the shaft with rubber gloves. You need to make a record of the sequence of the washers there will be one or more under the screw and one or more the other side of the fork, and a spring.

Clean each part in Zippo fluid or alcohol with cotton cloth, reassemble in same (reverse) order, use the rubber gloves as glooves for Zippo.

To test the camera is ok you need a scrap film and a (soft graphite) pencil, load the film normally, remove the lens and shoot each frame on B, marking the film through the shutter gate. Remove the film and look at the separation.

Right don't do this unless you have torn perfs or >1mm overlap, it could make things worse. If this does not work it is add a shim or compress the spring...

Varjag

My FSU collasibles and old Elmar are like that, and some other more expensive, washed out colours and iris images but my J8 and 103 are ok. I do use a deep hood on all my shots. One of my j12 does seem to have a hot spot problem, but it may have had a filter on it.

I wont strip a lens without cause and my 103 apart from being homely and looking like it needs more paint is ok, I'll have to try it again.

Are you sure your 103 is clean (inside) have you projected a torch light (flashlight/lamp whatever) through it, in darkened room?

My standard test is low sun in picture, varies with cloud etc., but hood does not help.

Noel
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom