How much would you pay for an AE Kiev ?

[ruben]

....On the other hand, the best contrasty viewfinders with stronger yellow patches, among the Cheapo category, belongs in my opinion to the Kievs. By far and large. If they just were autoexposure...

Cheers,
Ruben

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=358239#post358239

Where is the fun in having an AE Kiev?????

OK, just kidding.....
Cheers
Ernesto

No kidding: For an imaginary AE Kiev (the most accurate RF together with Contax + a very silent shutter already there) I would pay $500 and buy without hesitation a couple of them.

Cheers,
Ruben

 

[ErnestoJL]

I guess a Contax updated to the actual technology level would be a bit higher than USD 500, just because the quality level was at least the same as a contemporary Leica, and that level should be kept till today.
A rather conservative calculation would give a price of about USD 3500 as minimum. A Kiev would be less expensive just because it was allways cheaper than it´s sibling, and yes may be around USD 500 to 800.

I´m a Contax / Kiev fan and I really enjoy shooting with them the way they are. No doubt AE will expand their possibilities (added to an advance lever), and make them fast shooting cameras, something they never were.
But... the question remains (for me) would it be the same?

Is the ZI the "natural Contax evolution"? That´s something to think about , I guess.

Cheers

Ernesto

 

[ruben]

I would like to expand the issue a bit. Perhaps you have noticed that my $500 are quite close to the price of a Bessa. Yet, I feel reluctant to pay such a price for a camera that is outside the silent category, notwithstanding with the other great features the Bessas offer.

When I look at the Kievs, with all their advantages but without AE, I start for the first time to feel furious against the Soviets for not having done it, instead of keeping sleeping.

 

[JohnM]

Are we talking about simply adding AE to the Kiev 4a-types? I don't know if I would call the shutter on mine quiet. Might be quieter than a Bessa, but they're both in the same ballpark.

I'm not really interested in AE, but if they issued a new Kiev with a meter and AE, I would think they would have to price it well below the Bessa to interest me. The quality control issues of that camera would scare the holy hell out of me given the slap-dash nature of the Kievs I have. (Part of the charm!)

 

[rbiemer]

AE? Dunno about that but I would really like it if some camera hacker could cram the VC meter into the meter housing on a nice 3 or 4 and keep the operation the same as how the meter works now(uncoupled is fine for me). That would get my attention and possibly my money.
Rob

 

[Jocko]

My thought exactly Rob. AE would not be half so attractive as the simple prospect of reliable metering. In fact, a few days ago I summoned up the courage to open up the meter and see what could be done - maybe something along the lines of replacing the selenium with a little solar cell... I felt very brave and pioneering.

But I couldn't undo the fourth screw! 🙁

Cheers, Ian

 

[rbiemer]

I don't own the VC meter but from what I can see, I think it would fit inside the "shell" that the Kiev selenium meter is in--the workings with out the outer shell of the VC meter I mean. Then one would need to connect the dials around the rewind knob correctly (and probably make newly engraved dials with modern film speeds and Kiev shutter speeds). I'm not "techy" enough to do this but it sure seems like it would work.
That would make me happy, indeed! Now, who should I ask about this? G'Man? SK Grimes maybe?
Reuben, sorry to "swipe" your thread!
Rob

 

[darkkavenger]

Ruben, the problem is that the russians were content when they had built something solid and reliable, for it could be produced for years... since everyone was a proletarian there was no real research to develop high end consumer products, the research being essentially diverted for military appliances. Look at the Ladas, the tractors, and even those battletanks... the designs are crude but efficient, made to stand a large margin of errors during the production process.

by the way most arab armies in middle east still use vintage soviet battletanks... speaking about reliability, one of the last german "königstiger" (Tiger-II, SdKfz 182) was in service in the Syrian army against Israël in the six-days war, if I'm right (or maybe on Yom Kippur, I forgot my source).

To return on photography, the soviets did bring some improvements to the Kiev design, but they remained purely experimental, much to our despair. The Kiev-TTL had a dual coupled CdS ttl sensor, visible in the viewfinder. I have the photos of this little jewel (lucky he who owns it) but they are unfortunately stored in an outlook mail backup file, which I can't open with thunderbird.

Max

 

[ruben]

Are we talking about simply adding AE to the Kiev 4a-types? I don't know if I would call the shutter on mine quiet. Might be quieter than a Bessa, but they're both in the same ballpark.

I'm not really interested in AE, but if they issued a new Kiev with a meter and AE, I would think they would have to price it well below the Bessa to interest me. The quality control issues of that camera would scare the holy hell out of me given the slap-dash nature of the Kievs I have. (Part of the charm!)

Dear John we are viewing things in perfect opposition and that's ok by me.

I haven't ever hold a Bessa and the reason holding me back from ordering one, is Stephen's bold and honest assestment that it sounds 'like a quiet slr such as the OM1'.

I do own an OM1 and upon my subjective judgement there is a qualitative step separating it from a Kiev in terms of sound and vibration.

Besides, the Kievs have, besides our mutually disputed silent categorization, other outstanding advantages in my opinion. Extremely contrasty and easy to focus viewfinder. Super accurate focusing capability, including 135 and beyond lens capability. Competitive optics. Fine-focusing wheel for the standard lens. Reliable mechanics and strong build-up. Unsurpassed aesthetical design.

My experience in purchasing Kievs, ranging from standard to very high prices, and allways from the most reputed dealers, didn't fail me ever. The saga about Soviet quality control is known to me only from others at the net. On the other hand I mayself cuold easily write deeper horror stories about Japanese manufacturing and USA sellers, if to put in writing my experiences with 7 Yashicas. Not that I deny the claims about quality disharmony, but I tend to think that the stories mix also bad sellers and oldish equipment within the claims about manufacturing.

The Bessas have many different advantages. But subjectively, from my angle, those of the Kiev attract me most. Out of the AE which I really miss in the Kievs, as it would make them fast to operate system cameras for street photography.

Well, not everything is street photography.

Cheers,
Ruben

 

[guinness]

Rather just get the Bessa; you get the modern advancements, plus you don't have to worry about shutter ribbons.* Only thing I would really miss about the Kiev would be the weight of it, and the Jupiter 12, but CV makes better wide angles anyhow. The larger viewfinder and brightlines of the Bessa would be great as well, even though it has a short rangefinder base.

* I am currently attempting to bring an Exa II back to life, without much luck, at least until I can find a decent repair manual. Got it off the 'bay, with a stuck film advance/mirror that I knew about, but I figured that I would at least have a project to work on. Got the mirror free, but then the shutter ribbons came loose (the old glue gave way). Stopped for the time being, as it will end up being a waste of effort until I can get a repair guide.

 

[brachal]

Wouldn't be interested in an AE Kiev. I like their manualness. I'd pay $500+ for a new one, functioning perfectly, with a TTL meter, though ...

 

[ErnestoJL]

I left this thread unattended since my taschenrechner (nick for my PC clone) gave up on last tuesday.

Well.... I´ve got to admit that my love for Contax/Kiev cameras started many years ago, just when I was 15 y.o.
At that time I decided that such a camera will be kind of "ultimate camera" as it wasn´t battery dependant. Even the meter was not a must, just something else but anyway nonessential.
Having any AE within a Kiev or Contax would mean to add a lot of electronics in it, meaning that the original specs (a battery-less camera) are´t met anymore (for me at least). Instead of AE I would like to have a Contax/Kiev body with advance lever and perhaps TTL metering...

What I do like most of any Contax / Kiev camera is it´s solidness, weight and feeling of a thing made to last, and that´s what I´m looking for, may it be called some "ageless camera" or whatever.

After some years tinkering with cameras of different make, I would be able to say that some cameras should be modified a lot to add any kind of inprovements like TTL metering or (worse) some kind of AE. Then, the original specs wouldn´t be maintained anymore, thus being something else than the camera I wanted at some time.

For me, a Contax is a Contax, and it is what it must be, and a Kiev is the same, then any AE Contax or Kiev wouldn´t be anymore a Contax or a Kiev...

That´s why I´m looking for another Contax/Kiev body without anything else.
Perhaps any AE camera would relieve me partially the need of being watching for (and choosing) the decissive moment... and that´s not what I´m trying to get.

Ernesto

 

[ed1k]

Ernesto,

I like my Kiev exactly for the points you listed. Even meter works well on mine... well I know I have to correct plus 1 step 🙂 I like it how it is and don't need ttl nor advance lever. Too bad it's almost impossible to produce this fine machinery for reasonable price these days. So, there is no new replacement.

Talking about some hypothetical RF camera with reliability of Contax and AE option, I just recall my Nikon FM3a. I really like hybrid shutter. In fact, I use more often AE but I know I have all range of manual speeds when battery's dead. Shutter doesn't sound as good as good Kiev, but this would be a good combination, I think. Anyway, real cameras are business for none these days... it's too expensive to build a real thing...

Cheers,
Eduard

 

[ErnestoJL]

Eduard:
To make an updated Contax II or III today will cost more or less the same it takes to make a Leica M6, so the never ending "battle" (Contax vs. Leica)would still be fired...
When I say updated it means no plastic parts, but a heavy and solid camera as they used to be, with the same reliability they have. This also applies for any Kiev, which IMHO is (may it be) as good and reliable as an old C II.
The big difference is that FSU labour costs were so low that they were able to put a decent Contax clone for a fraction of the original price with same optical quality and lower finishing quality.
Building a Kiev today with the same quality and materials as a 50 y.o. camera would cost a lot of money and I´m in doubt if it would be commercially possible.

Cheers

Ernesto

 

[HankOsaurus]

Fascinating discussion, Folks.

I cannot imagine my 1969 K4a having an auto anything about it. If it did, I think I would just get rid of it.

To me, it is a quirky machine in handling, and especially so when compared to an M3. But I really do like the K4a, just the same. The Jupiter 8M does a very fine job. I put some new ribbons in mine two years back when one let go while I was winding it way too vigorously. Working great now with new Arsenal ribbon material I got from Oleg in Moscow. That shutter was never quiet to me, at least not when compared to a rubberized curtain shutter like on an M3.

The only things that I do not like about my Kiev 4A are these:

1. The need for the special "Contax Hold" that keeps fingers from covering the rangefinder window.

2. Film spacing. Too generous. I get about 22 or 23 shots per 24 roll, never 24. I am thankful that they do not overlap.

3. That wee little peephole excuse for a viewfinder.

Ruben, I see that you wear glasses, and I am surprised that you, and seemingly nobody in the RFF, finds this tiny little K4A viewfinder to be an issue. I wonder how Contax/Kiev users here are mitigating the fractional viewing provided to glasses wearers.

Happy day.

Henry
Leica M3, Kiev 4A, Nikons F, F2, L35AF

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

When I look at the Kievs, with all their advantages but without AE, I start for the first time to feel furious against the Soviets for not having done it, instead of keeping sleeping.

I am very sure the Soviets would have thought of AE in a rangefinder a very bourgeoise idea. If they put more stock on meeting production quotas than meeting QC, I think it's not hard to see why they didn't also consider adding other idealistic features such as parallax correction.

I think my Kiev 3a is fine the way it is: quiet, reliable, clunky, and extremely cheap. I got what I paid for. Well, a little more: it is whisper quiet.

 

[ed1k]

Ruben, I see that you wear glasses, and I am surprised that you, and seemingly nobody in the RFF, finds this tiny little K4A viewfinder to be an issue. I wonder how Contax/Kiev users here are mitigating the fractional viewing provided to glasses wearers.

I do not normally wear the glasses, though people find it odd with my prescription -4 and -6 spheric lenses plus two -2 cylinders differently rotated to compensate my astigmatism. I wear glasses to focus my SLRs and such, but I do not have any problem to focus my Kiev4 without glasses. Don't know how it works but I can do it... and can't with some FEDs I tried. Some Leicas seems to be very good also in this regard, but very expensive for me.

I'd say I'd pay $500 for a brand new Kiev 4 like it was 30 years ago if I need replacement for my old body. Or $1k if it's new and quality of Contax II. Of course this price should include free of charge repair at least how it was in USSR. Kiev 4 was not cheap in USSR, one had to pay a slightly below average monthly salary for a body with J8M. More precicely my mother's monthly salary as of engineer was 150 roubles plus some bonuces, and Kiev 4 with J8M was 121 rub. QC? It was not any worse than any big american corporation. Their all management levels had to report good otherwise they'd got a problem right away... Sure it was a PITA to get warranty service because instead of using camera you have to give it to repairman for a week or two , but after 2 repairs when camera was broken 3rd time during warranty period they replaced it. It was common with Kievs - they worked fine or they had a bunch of problems so 3 repairs for 2 years would be almost guaranteed to replace it... and start it all over again 🙂

Soviets had some AE cameras, not Kievs though. Friend of mine had a Viliya-Auto that worked fine.

Eduard.

 

[HankOsaurus]

but I do not have any problem to focus my Kiev4 without glasses. Don't know how it works but I can do it...

Hello Eduard.

Thanks for your reply. I also can focus without glasses. No problem, and I am just as baffled as to why it is so as you seem to be. I just cannot see the full frame with glasses. I suppose I will have to get some sort of aux finder for that.

Thanks for sharing the pricing of a new Kiev a generation ago, expressing it in terms of wages in the FSU. Your observations have confirmed what I had concluded by trying to piece that information together from several sources, namely that a new Kiev once cost about what an average engineer might make in about a month, not counting state provided subsidies such as for housing, etc. That's real money, a month's wage.

So, I would not be a bit surprised to see a modern equivalent costing way over a thousand dollars, if there ever were to be one.

However, and since I am not much of a fan of automation, I probably would not be interested in an AE Kiev RF at any price. I like it for its no nonsense, straightforward, battle tank tough nature. I would not want those qualities compromised. IMO, the current price performance is very good indeed.

 

[Xmas]

Ruben
You coule try a G1, G2 or a m style 'Contax'?
Noel

 

[ruben]

Hi folks,
Somehow some of you undertand AE as "no manual exposure", that was not my intention.

In practical terms, after reading the thread so far, my wish is to be seen as quite unpossible to have taken place. Therefore, anger against the Soviets is taken back. Those to be pointed the finger at, may be the Germans who stopped developing their flagship rangefinder, thus preventing the Soviets a sine qua non source of inspiration...

Finally I tend to agree with Ernesto, in that a sort of updated version of the Contaxes are the new Zeiss Ikon. Now let's mortgage home and pay for a couple of bodies.

Cheers,
Ruben