Forgive me for I have strayed..

M

Malcolm_J

Member
Local time
7:18 PM
Joined
Dec 15, 2006
Messages
42
Location
Edinburgh, UK
View My Gallery
I bought an SLR!

It's a Zenit 3M. Does anyone have experience using these cameras?

I expect you are thinking: why? But then again this is Russian RFF - people don't ask questions like that. I bought it for the dumbest reason in the world - it just looks so SOVIET. The monumental body modelled after the University of Moscow, and the ugly, snub-nosed Industar 50. But it has this going for it - it is more like an industrial machine than a consumer item. It is no more than it has to be. I suppose that is what I like about old cameras in general. I take my picture, not the camera's picture.

I'd be glad to hear of any experiences, -ve or +ve. There is not a lot on the net about this camera.
 
Hi Malcolm

I agree with your reasons totally. I remember buying my copy of the 1st ed. of Princelle and being swept away by how everything looked so different and interesting.

I have a 3m and 35, 50 and 135 mm lenses for it, and as you'd expect, the lenses are pretty good. I find it very useable and enjoyable. A lot of the design found its way into the Zenit E and it also has a lot in common with the Zorki 6 rangefinder.
 
Hehehe abandon hope all yee that enter here 😀

I have a Zenit 3 and a 3m plus a TTL kicking about under the desk somewhere , I think I bought them all as non workers , Usually jammed 🙄 My kids use them when their dragged out with dad to shoot film 😀 The trouble is I keep looking at Kiev 6 and Kiev 60,s now 😱 It's only the fact that Christmas is almost upon us that stops me , Well that and the wife and the stroppy letters from the bank 😀



Paul
 
Me too, I bought for parts for my zorki 6, took 3 purchases to get one that I was willing to strip. Very funky users with the manual stop down lenses. Enjoy them.
 
Screwy said:
Hehehe abandon hope all yee that enter here 😀

I have a Zenit 3 and a 3m plus a TTL kicking about under the desk somewhere , I think I bought them all as non workers , Usually jammed 🙄 My kids use them when their dragged out with dad to shoot film 😀 The trouble is I keep looking at Kiev 6 and Kiev 60,s now 😱 It's only the fact that Christmas is almost upon us that stops me , Well that and the wife and the stroppy letters from the bank 😀



Paul
Click to expand...

I went nuts after selling my Rolleiflex SLR and purchased a Kiev 88 from Oleg... no regrets!
 
I had a Zenit C and a 3m with 37Mir;50mm Industar and 135 Jupiter, delightful, wish I hadn't sold them a few years ago, but you can only use so many cameras!!! 37Mir was a stunning lens!!
 
Hi
Beware of the Zenit 3M (and of all Zenits in general). These cameras seem innocent and harmless but they are to be blamed for my FSU gear addiction. I started with a Zenit E just for fun, and I’m a hopeless case now.
Some photos with a Zenit 3M here
http://public.fotki.com/BlueWind/zenit-3m/
Best regards
Joao

RF: Zork(1, 4), Fed(5, 2), Sokol (Automat, 2), Junost, Iskra, Kiev-4,
TLR: Komsomolyets, Lubitel (2, 166B), Flexaret
SLR: Zenit (3M, E, EM, ET, TTL, 12XP, 122K,19, Photosniper), Kiev-10, Olympus OM-2
Other: FED-50, Kiev35A, Smena (7, 8M), Estafeta
 
I notice you have both a Zenit-E and a 122K, is it typical that the older E gets better results, and seems to have a more accurate light meter than the more recent 122K?
 
Beside RF cameras and occasional GAS attacks, I've got another very dangerous illness due to endless amount of funky cameras, lenses and equipment, the mighty Exaktophilia.
 
raftman said:
I notice you have both a Zenit-E and a 122K, is it typical that the older E gets better results, and seems to have a more accurate light meter than the more recent 122K?
Click to expand...
Hello
I own three Zenits E (one with M39 mount, two with M42 mount, each one of them with an aging selenium lightmeter). I always rely on an external lightmeter when I use them. The 12K needs a battery and has a LED system for TTL lightmetering.
The results depend mainly on the lens (I only have a Helios in K mount for the 122K, so it is dificult for me to compare the results). However, I amm quite pleased with the results I get with any of the cameras.
Regards
Joao
 
With the Zenit-E, I have been relying on the selenium meter, and the exposures come out quite decent, with the 122K however, the exposure seems to be wrong most of the time even when the light meter would indicate it's good.
 
raftman said:
With the Zenit-E, I have been relying on the selenium meter, and the exposures come out quite decent, with the 122K however, the exposure seems to be wrong most of the time even when the light meter would indicate it's good.
Click to expand...

If it happens with fresh batteries, there may be some kind of bad contact or short-circuit in the lightmeter wires - unfortunately I'm not able to give any specific advice on repairing electric malfunctions.
Enjoy your Zenits !
Joao
 
Quite simply , the Zenit 3 , based on the Leica ... is the first Leicaflex , and more true to it's origins !
I love that the Russians saw the growing dominance of the SLR..and did something simple with what they had !
So it's not much bigger than most rangefinders , but a lot easier for close ups !
 
Joao said:
If it happens with fresh batteries, there may be some kind of bad contact or short-circuit in the lightmeter wires - unfortunately I'm not able to give any specific advice on repairing electric malfunctions.
Enjoy your Zenits !
Joao
Click to expand...

Well, the batteries are indeed fresh, is it likely to improve with time?
 
My Zenith arrived today from Kiev in the Ukraine. It came in the original maker's box. It does not seem to have been used very much in its 42 year existence; the controls are quite tight, the body is largely unmarked and the leather case is stiff to use.

I am surprised by how compact it is. It is narrower than my FED2, and only a little taller. It is far less of a handful than my Kiev 4a. Unlike my other Soviet cameras, the lense on this one does not rattle! In fact, I am impressed by the build quality, at any rate that which I can see without pulling the thing apart.

The viewfinder is a little grainy due either to "they're all that way mate" ie: its era, else deterioration of the mirror. It's not really a problem, except possibly in poor light. It's got a nice snappy action when you hit the button - a definite double action, first the mirror flips up and then you press more and the shutter goes "snap!".

Another niggle is that the f-stop dots don't match up with the f-stop range on the focusing ring. Is there a way of adjusting the aperture ring? Again, not really a problem, just a niggle.

Now I just have to sling a roll through it and see what comes back.

Should I do any kind of lubrication on it at this stage, before I start using it? I don't think the guy who sold it will have done any extensive overhaul before passing it on. I mean, even in the Ukraine it must be hard work making a living selling old cameras at £23 a pop..... What lubs would I use?

Advice gratefully received!
 
It takes some getting used to- the stop down aperture ring. I've had an E for years with that helios 44 lens it came with and I still have to stare at the rings and fiddle with them to remember the how and why to set them- it always seem odd to me. Malcom, your dots may be in alignment after all, the numbers on the ring and I think the whole ring with dots turns also, this is some arrangement to make up for the lens not being 'auto'. One is supposed to view with the diaphram fully open, and by pre-setting the other ring the lens can be stopped down manually quickly to the preset without looking just before pressing the shutter release.

The later EM model has auto diaphram! The EM auto diaphram is crude but clever at the same time, it's just a big lever rig driven by the first several mm of the shutter button's travel, thus you can see in the finder the results of the diaphram shutting down just before the exposure- or just partially depress the release as a DOF preview.
 
Malcolm_J said:
I notice it has a shorter focal length and presumably wider field of view than the Industar 50. Does this cause any distortion? Or do you get a picture that takes "a bigger bite" of reality?
Click to expand...
Sorry not to reply sooner Malcolm, but in reply the 37 Mir is a "wide angle" lens, with a larger field of view than the 50 Industar. 37mm seems an odd number but I think they were just being honest, many so called 35mm lenses of that period were nearer 37mm focal length than 35mm. It was a lovely lens for landscape and street photography. mine had the "Gold Medal at Bruxells" marking on it, as it won a medal for quality at the 1958 World Fair.
Distortion was low and it was very sharp.
Found this. Mine was the silver on ein the heading.
http://www.zenit.istra.ru/archive/lenses/mir-1.html
 
Last edited:
John Robertson said:
Sorry not to reply sooner Malcolm, but in reply the 37 Mir is a "wide angle" lens, with a larger field of view than the 50 Industar. 37mm seems an odd number but I think they were just being honest, many so called 35mm lenses of that period were nearer 37mm focal length than 35mm. It was a lovely lens for landscape and street photography. mine had the "Gold Medal at Bruxells" marking on it, as it won a medal for quality at the 1958 World Fair.
Distortion was low and it was very sharp.
Found this. Mine was the silver on ein the heading.
http://www.zenit.istra.ru/archive/lenses/mir-1.html
Click to expand...

Can you still use the standard case with the 37Mir fitted? A camera without a case is pretty much not my interest. This is why I wouldn't get the Helios lense, even though it is a far better lense than the standard Industar 50.
 
Having more issues with the 122K. Is this the result of a leak? It doesn't seem like any leak the camera has could be this bad, and also, it's not consistent, because some frames seem to turn out quite alright.

The first to are with the "leak" and the last seems to have turned out ok.

leak.jpg


leak2.jpg


1-17-2007-09s.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom