dee
Well-known
Given the number of FSU cameras to yield spares , they may outlast more prestigious classic cameras !!!
FSU as survivors ?
- Thread starter dee
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 10
- Views 2K
dee
Well-known
Do you have a specific favourite FSU or are they disposable ?
Mine is a customised 1956 Kiev III+1957 Kiev IV meter which retains the less compromised body with the cleverly engineered reduction in meter size .
I like using the selenium meter - with new cell and quite content to make adjustments as required and like the shape which may be reminiscent of ban SLR with ' pentaprism '.
It also fits a Kiev III square case !
I also like it's wicked twin - 1937 Contax III with 1957 Kiev IV meter etc , but that's not strictly an FSU !
dee
Mine is a customised 1956 Kiev III+1957 Kiev IV meter which retains the less compromised body with the cleverly engineered reduction in meter size .
I like using the selenium meter - with new cell and quite content to make adjustments as required and like the shape which may be reminiscent of ban SLR with ' pentaprism '.
It also fits a Kiev III square case !
I also like it's wicked twin - 1937 Contax III with 1957 Kiev IV meter etc , but that's not strictly an FSU !
dee
popavvakum
Established
Given the mad amount of time to bring it back to life, my freshly repaired/re-tensioned/cleaned Kiev with replaced light seals, new light baffles out of modern plastic is certainly not disposable.
The meter ( I fitted a new cell bought from Russia!, the old one was dead ) only goes down to "gloomy day indoors", so it is rather useless. I prefer a meterless top.
The meter ( I fitted a new cell bought from Russia!, the old one was dead ) only goes down to "gloomy day indoors", so it is rather useless. I prefer a meterless top.
summar
Well-known
+1 popavvakum. I have a Kiev 4a on which I had the light seals replaced and a CLA done. I bought the camera because I wanted to compare the Contax design to that of the Barnack Leicas with which I'm familiar. A whole different but pleasant experience, and the FSU lenses have their own character, nothing like the Leitz lenses. I'm certainly not going to dispose of this camera!
Wulfthari
Well-known
IMO no good camera should be disposable, no matter how little you paid for.
dee
Well-known
There seems to be a general dismissive attitude to Soviet cameras kk,whereas I have nothing but admiration for those not trained as engineers who were able to do do much within the limitations of Leica , Kiev etc.
I love my early Zenits - the 1st Leicaflex !?
dee
I love my early Zenits - the 1st Leicaflex !?
dee
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Brownie has one of the highest survival chances, because it is very simple.
I'm using my family FED-2 as the only film camera for next two weeks.
And I used it couple of weeks before. But my regular main film camera is M4-2, due to the lenses and effectiveness of use.
But the pleasure of looking at, holding and handling of FED-2 is the same as with Leica.
Also, I could CLA it by myself. Kiev and Leica - I can't. This might be one of the major factors to be in use as long as film is available. Not the origin, nor how many were made.
I'm using my family FED-2 as the only film camera for next two weeks.
And I used it couple of weeks before. But my regular main film camera is M4-2, due to the lenses and effectiveness of use.
But the pleasure of looking at, holding and handling of FED-2 is the same as with Leica.
Also, I could CLA it by myself. Kiev and Leica - I can't. This might be one of the major factors to be in use as long as film is available. Not the origin, nor how many were made.
ForestCap
Well-known
I'm having a blast with a newly purchased Canon 7. It arrived with messed up frame lines, due to the miss-placed frame lines mask. I opened the top plate and fixed it, but I'm not sure if I can do more advanced fix on this Canon 7, it's like a maze inside the camera.
And FED-2, yes, I feel my feet on the ground when tinkering with it. And I will never sell or give away my FED-2.
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hmmm, it's beginning to look as though the FED 2 with the Industar or Jupiter standard lens is a classic, due to its design and - dare I say it - build quality.
Regards, David
Regards, David
Elmar Lang
Well-known
Hello,
I see that many users of cameras from the former USSR, like or prefer the FED-2.
Its quality is in the simple mechanic, the large rangefinder's base (from the Contax/Kiev one). The design is also pleasant, I admit.
In other words, the say "what there isn't, it won't break" is right for the FED-2; plus, the lenses of the Jupiter series, that are all fine to very fine.
Personally, I prefer the Kiev, for its very fine shutter and the precision. I have my first Kiev (a 4A made in 1968) since 1975 and this used to me to the Contax-Kiev system.
A Kiev RF camera, in my opinion, is well worth to be repaired and maintained, even if the price could be higher than the price paid for the camera itself. Once back in its pristine condition, a Kiev can be a camera of professional level, lasting for many years of reliable service.
E.L.
I see that many users of cameras from the former USSR, like or prefer the FED-2.
Its quality is in the simple mechanic, the large rangefinder's base (from the Contax/Kiev one). The design is also pleasant, I admit.
In other words, the say "what there isn't, it won't break" is right for the FED-2; plus, the lenses of the Jupiter series, that are all fine to very fine.
Personally, I prefer the Kiev, for its very fine shutter and the precision. I have my first Kiev (a 4A made in 1968) since 1975 and this used to me to the Contax-Kiev system.
A Kiev RF camera, in my opinion, is well worth to be repaired and maintained, even if the price could be higher than the price paid for the camera itself. Once back in its pristine condition, a Kiev can be a camera of professional level, lasting for many years of reliable service.
E.L.
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
FWIW, I don't think the old ex-USSR cameras need spares any more than any other camera. Just blinds, imo. Same goes for Leicas too.
Of course, they need servicing from time to time but mostly that's a matter of stripping them down and cleaning them and reassembling with new lubricants etc.
OTOH, damaged ones need spares but that the same for every make and model of camera and not unique to the ones from the old USSR.
It would also be interesting to look at the number of cameras made for say FED, Leica and Zorki over the same period. We might all get a surprise.
Of course Leica were lucky in that they weren't destroyed by the USSR forces during the war, whereas FED's factory was destroyed by the Third Reich in 1941 or 42. Then Leica were lucky enough to end up in the American Zone and weren't starved of materials and so on during the so-called cold war...
Regards, David
FWIW, I don't think the old ex-USSR cameras need spares any more than any other camera. Just blinds, imo. Same goes for Leicas too.
Of course, they need servicing from time to time but mostly that's a matter of stripping them down and cleaning them and reassembling with new lubricants etc.
OTOH, damaged ones need spares but that the same for every make and model of camera and not unique to the ones from the old USSR.
It would also be interesting to look at the number of cameras made for say FED, Leica and Zorki over the same period. We might all get a surprise.
Of course Leica were lucky in that they weren't destroyed by the USSR forces during the war, whereas FED's factory was destroyed by the Third Reich in 1941 or 42. Then Leica were lucky enough to end up in the American Zone and weren't starved of materials and so on during the so-called cold war...
Regards, David
Similar threads
