How far would you go ... Kiev kompanion ?

[dee]

Luckily , I am officially '' dee realised '' and '' dee - also dee stablilsed , dee mented , dee constructed , dee sturbed ... etc .

i love using my Oleg Kiev 4 and 4m , but they are a bit roughy finished , and the early Kievs need CLA.

So , i am considering indulging in my ultimate Kiev 2 , and Kiev 4 created from my 1955 and 1963.

Kiev 2
New nickel plating to body parts
New engraving '' Kiev script '' 1947 -
or ''no name '' - at no extra cost for engraving
Full CLA - including dismantling of camera for replating , and the messing around of parts sent off etc .

1963 Kiev 4 .
Existing Face plate to be stripped , engraved 1947 script t be donated to Kiev 2.
KNeB face plate from the Kiev 2
New meter cells from Oleg [ min 3x $12 for free shipping ]
Full CLA

i would prefer a Kiev 3 body and Kiev 4 meter , but no one can tell me if it can be done .

i may consider a nickel Kiev 4 too - I love that soft feel - at £80 each , it's affordable - and if I stick with '' no name '' the existing script removal is included .

This will provide a KNeB Kiev 4 , chrome or nickel , with working meter .
i947 or no name , Kiev 2 , chrome or nickel .

This will maximise several suspect Kievs , and hopefully I can reduce my Kiev intake konsiderably , and have years of kontented klassik kamera dee light !

But .. would you go this far ... to create the perfect Kompanion ?

dee

 

[ruben]

Dee stress

 

[Livesteamer]

If you can afford it, Do it. If you are a professional then you use what you need and it's just a tool. An amateur should use what they enjoy and your past posts suggest Kievs are right for you. I have two Kievs and can see the attraction but then I have too many old cameras. Good Luck. Joe.

 

[Valkir1987]

I would'nt do this if both camera's where in good working condition. There will alway's be differences, even with a perfect combination. And because the body's are of the same design, but not of the same production range will give difficulty fitting the parts, even the top covers and the light meters.
I keep my camera's as original as possible, although I sometimes made a camera from 2 entirely broken ones.

There's no perfect car in this way as well, although I confess I have an old volvo 440 and I do want to have some parts exchanged when I buy another one, but thats a different stoy 😀

 

[dee]

i have a quotation of £50 post for Nickel plating and grinding down the name plate of my less than perfect '56 Kiev 2 , and have found a hand engraver who will sort the 1947 logo @ £30.

All + taxes of 17.5% and posting bits to and fro - CLA and stripping will be another £120 or so .

the camera cost about £40 , so , in all , my as new , leather recovered Kiev 2 will be about £250 .

i don't save much if I keep the chrome 'cos the face plate will cost £ 20 for chrome - and it's not likely to match the original .

However , i do not want a replica of the 1947 - just an obvious individual recreation.

i was considering a Kiev 4 ... with the face plate from the Kiev 2 ...
but I am not sure about the cost of CLA , when my Oleg Kiev 4 is so quiet and smooth .

dee

 

[Ed S.]

I have an ~1980 K4A (working meter), recently CLAed by Fedka, and a 1952 K3 (functional meter) with (its original?) 1953 J-8 (and now a 1952 J-3), and the obligatory J-9, J-11 & J-12, plus a Helios-103 and Menopta.

From a purely utilitarian standpoint, the K3 does feel slightly smoother than the K4, but only slightly, and I have to concentrate to really notice, and a bit more than slightly better made, but only a little bit.

The lenses seem to not care which camera body they’re on; the photos do not change.

From a collectability standpoint, there’s reason to believe that a working Kiev will still be working in 50 years (not so sure about DLSRs). These might be kult items, but the older ones are quality items, and sought after even now. Collectors pay more for items that are original: original parts, original serial numbers, etc.

As mentioned previously, is turning a working Kiev in original condition into something not OEM a good choice?

Given the amount of money you’re considering spending (sounds close to Contax cost), wouldn’t a teardown, rework of some of the rough parts, and thorough rebuild be a better investment?

True, the result would not look like a real 1947 Kiev, but I’ve found that, while searching for lenses at camera swap meets, my "Kiev" is viewed quite differently once the dealer ("yeah, we’ve all had Kievs") sees that it’s a 1952 K3.

I suspect that your 1956 and 1963, when thoroughly reworked, will be viewed the same way.

 

[dee]

it is quite krazzee to dee-file an innocent Kiev ...
I agree entirely with the koncept of a full Fedka revitalisation of an unmlested camera .
But , I have wanted a personalised classic camera for ever and a day , so a tired Kiev 2 or 2a [ rather than a Leica IIIc ? seems the best kompromise .

As you see from my avatar , I konsider a late Kiev to be fair game for re-invention -even one bought CLA from Oleg !

i shall undoubtedly have my fair 1951 kiev 2 CLA , but a worthless , expensive , but stylish kompanion would be my ideal - and a Kiev is the most logical camera to affect this.

By no means do I konsider this to be '' dee'sirable '' , either will I justify it , but black Kievs are now becoming very popular , so why not a nickel camera ... maybe if i sacrificed a Kiev 4 from the 70s , that would be more acceptable - even though the K 4 was sorted by cupog and does not leak like the Kiev 2 !

i shall think about my next move... can i mutilate another innocent ... ?


dee

 

[dee]

p.s - i will NOT try to kombine a Kiev 3 and 4 - or destroy any camera to kreate my ideal .
However , i do see a tired Kiev 2 as an acceptable choice for konsiderate intervention .

dee