Is it really all our fault?

[David Hughes]

I know I'm going to get shot down for this but...

I read things in the forum that worry me; people suggest FED's etc are easy to repair and adjust for example and I think that they probably are but only if you know what you are doing and have the right tools. No mention, for a simple example, of oil-stoning the screwdrivers so they fit.

Another example, there's no mention of what lubricants to use except "I used... " or "modern" etc. This worries me. I'd expect a specification or else a make and model to be given for each lubricant. Use the wrong one and you can make matters worse: I see lots of examples of this.

Then people mention "paper shims" and I think paper or card is/was used as a light trap under the lens mount. Shims, in my little world, are metal. If I was making a shim at home I'd find a few drinks' cans, open them out and cut the shim from the sheet metal after carefully measuring its thickness several times in several places. But I keep reading about paper, which shrinks over time as the moisture content drops.

Then I had an idea and did a search here and on the LTM forums. The word "unscrew" got 147 results here and 47 result under the LTM banner.

So I can't help thinking that people who don't know what they are doing charge into repairs - especially on our ex-USSR cameras - and them sell the result on ebay when it doesn't work. Then FED get the blame: ever noticed that very few people ever mention that it's difficult to judge QC 50 or 60 years after the event?

For the record I have as much trouble with early Leicas* as I do with FED's but the latter are cheaper to repair but you can't ring Oleg and discuss them. (A great pity: I was taught Russian 52 years ago but have forgotten it all.)

OK the rant's over but it does worry me.

Regards, David

* Rust, dry bearings, blinds that should be pensioned off, general neglect etc and the worst lens I have ever used...

 

[Roger Hicks]

I know I'm going to get shot down for this but...

I read things in the forum that worry me; people suggest FED's etc are easy to repair and adjust for example and I think that they probably are but only if you know what you are doing and have the right tools. No mention, for a simple example, of oil-stoning the screwdrivers so they fit.

Another example, there's no mention of what lubricants to use except "I used... " or "modern" etc. This worries me. I'd expect a specification or else a make and model to be given for each lubricant. Use the wrong one and you can make matters worse: I see lots of examples of this.

Then people mention "paper shims" and I think paper or card is/was used as a light trap under the lens mount. Shims, in my little world, are metal. If I was making a shim at home I'd find a few drinks' cans, open them out and cut the shim from the sheet metal after carefully measuring its thickness several times in several places. But I keep reading about paper, which shrinks over time as the moisture content drops.

Then I had an idea and did a search here and on the LTM forums. The word "unscrew" got 147 results here and 47 result under the LTM banner.

So I can't help thinking that people who don't know what they are doing charge into repairs - especially on our ex-USSR cameras - and them sell the result on ebay when it doesn't work. Then FED get the blame: ever noticed that very few people ever mention that it's difficult to judge QC 50 or 60 years after the event?

For the record I have as much trouble with early Leicas* as I do with FED's but the latter are cheaper to repair but you can't ring Oleg and discuss them. (A great pity: I was taught Russian 52 years ago but have forgotten it all.)

OK the rant's over but it does worry me.

Regards, David

* Rust, dry bearings, blinds that should be pensioned off, general neglect etc and the worst lens I have ever used...

Dear David,

I have long suspected this.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Leigh Youdale]

Dear David,

I have long suspected this.

Cheers,

R.

I'm shattered! I thought all the people here were as knowledgeable as they are opinionated. Seems it's not true!

 

[Pickett Wilson]

I think it's more that these are old cameras that people buy cheap and are unwilling to spend the money to get CLA'ed. I doubt a lot of people attempt repairs themselves. They just expect a 60 year old camera that hasn't been used in 40 years to work perfectly with no attention. When they don't, then they sell them.

 

[ZorkiKat]

David, the mix of low cost camera + high cost of repair + apparently low-tech assembly + low regret factor in case a FED dies during the process can account for this.

The first FED I repaired (replaced curtains, shimmed to Leica standard, lubed and cleaned) 10 years ago still work today.

As far a lubes go, it appears that Soviet mechanisms aren't as finicky. For instance, their helicoids like thick automobile axle grease. Use something thinner, and its movement becomes less accurate, as in J-9s.

The oils which go in the mechanism seem to be just two types: fine for the small, quick moving parts; and slightly more viscous for the bigger, slower moving parts. The plain machine oil I used for the latter appear to work. All the cameras I used this with still operate smoothly, without getting rough, gritty, dry, or tough in operation.

Following Thomosy's recommendations of course, in greasing. As well as Maizenberg (of Russian Camera Design and Repair fame), who in his book mentioned only two types of oils- Swiss watch oil and Fine machine oil, plus one grease, which may as well be describing axle grease.

As for shims, the original FEDs really had paper in them. Those found were usually glue-soaked or lacquer coated. Perhaps this made them more 'stable'. Perhaps this could explain why some cameras now have their foci far from the original calibrations they had years ago.

The paper isn't really used for keeping light out. Its used to space the parts. The only camera where I've seen paper used for light proofing is the Kiev RF cameras- to cover the long RF prism.

Maizenberg also recommended paper for shimming both lenses and camera mounts. He suggested using types ranging from the laminated thick types used for wrapping photo paper to really thin rice paper for finer adjustments.

As far as the use of paper is concerned, they seem to work. The FED I shimmed a decade ago is still in specs. Here in the tropics, the climate can change so much that even wooden paneling on walls can contract or expand. Imagine what that can do to frail flimsy paper- but so far the adjusted cameras I have are still focusing right. I've used everything from writing paper to the paper backing of roll film. So far so good. Perhaps being pressed tightly between the mount and the camera body makes the paper stable.

Paper is also mentioned in the factory manuals for shimming. The one for the Kiev 88 for instance instructs the use of paper to shim the lens mount, as well as the front panels of the film magazines.

 

[David Hughes]

I'm shattered! I thought all the people here were as knowledgeable as they are opinionated. Seems it's not true!

I do agree and look at the link you'll get between "child labour" and "FED" & "Zorki" if you do a search. Seems lucky 14year olds in the West get apprenticeships and unlucky 15year olds in the USSR were merely exploited whilst being expected to pick up a trade in the factory.

Well, this was at the back of my mind when I was typing the first post. My reaction to Fricke's* article was that the factory was the victim of a lot of anti-Soviet feeling, probably misplaced in this instance. And a lot of people in the west would be happy to get board and lodgings from 15 up to the age of 20 whilst serving a proper apprenticeship.

Politicians have a lot to answer for, in my opinion.

Regards, David

* History of Photography, April 1979

 

[David Hughes]

KorkiKat, I do agree with what you say and am saying that now just in case this comes over as critical or rude. It's always difficult to write something as it will be read, and I am writing in English English, which not everyone reads these days, so subtleties and politeness get missed or lost.

My opinion of Soviet oils is that they are crude but, perhaps, they had little say in it. At the time of most of the 1's USSR had moved from a peasant economy towards a "modern industrial Western" style one when they were devastated by the 2nd WW (millions dead and factories destroyed) and then the Cold War. Anyway, as you say they work and work well. Like you I have a high opinion of the cameras once properly looked after.

And, of course, Leica were an old established firm in peace time with expanding sales to finance research etc. Although that's more to do with FED et al versus Leica.

But my version of choosing an oil involves wading through pages of specifications and 'phoning the firms etc (although I am not talking about cameras). Because it has to be just right. Again, luckily - as you say and I agree - the FSU ones work and work very well. But I still worry about the average owner attacking the camera with the bread knife and then using any old light oil on it (and, usually, the more the better, it seems).

I have had to repair things dealt with this way... I still laugh/shudder 40 years on about some of the things they did.

What you say about paper is interesting, especially about the paper for shims but I'm afraid I'm sticking to (or stuck with) my version about paper or card being for light sealing.

Anyway, many thanks for an interesting reply.

Regards, David

 

[ruben]

Using very old cameras, that you yourself has cleaned, reapaired, adjusted and lubricated is, no doubt highly time consuming a craft.

If you have never entered this gate, another question will stand and it is if you have both the required patience, and the instinctive skill for the job.

There are several folks at RFF who to different degrees are knowledgeable of the matter, and others that are even knowledgeable of the lens optics - so for them is very natural to speak about "an easy fix" (FOR THEM !), but you should not get confused, unless you get upon youself learning the craft, in whose case, at the beging will be hard.

There is another required skill and it is to grasp the written expalanation in the net. Here, good, well illustrated basic explanations are the exception.

At the end, fixing old cameras is not for everyone, but everyone can try and feel how it feels.

Lastly I would like to say that shooting with very old cameras that work as a delight in the smooth displacement of its gears, its low sound and also with accuracy - all this is is a very expensive luxury, not a cheap bridge to avoid paying for the cost of new cameras. Because you have to consider not just the cheapy cost of the camera, but also the time of appricentship, the failures you have had in the way, the instruments, the cleaning and lubricting materials (usually the most expensive in the market) and most than anything else the hours and hours it takes to convert onesef into an expert.


Cheers,
Ruben

 

[ZorkiKat]

Oils and Paper shims

Oils and Paper shims

David, I too am familiar with that 'laugh/shudder' experience as I get it everytime someone sends over a badly mangled camera. One which had been through that butterknife-and-oil routine. But more like butterknife AND butter since the goo which oozed had its consistency. At one time a Kiev 4a arrived with its parts in several containers. Good thing that all the parts were there, so it was possible to revive it.

In my Fotokor (9x12 Recomar copy), I also found paper shims under the lens. The paper used appeared to have been recycled from the pages of an accounting ledger. The paper was ruled and full of cursive script in ink, but die-cut to form the shim.

You would not believe what the Soviets used, and recycled, for the parts of some of their cameras. In a half-frame Chajka, what looked to be 'glass' that covered the frame-counter window turned out to be recycled sound recording film. The film wasn't even cleanly cut, but instead just roughly slit in the middle. One side still had perforations, and next to it was the optical soundtrack. The clear part of the soundtrack film served as the counter's window glass.

Here is a scan from the Maizenberg book which may interest you. It's about paper shims:

Paper's s advantages are in the ease of cutting and shaping them, as well as the ease of getting them in different thicknesses, as what rice paper can give. But stability does remain a big question.

 

[Steve M.]

Hard to compare a Leica w/ a FSU camera. I've had trouble w/ Leicas as well. These are very old cameras after all. But a properly working Leica is a wonderful camera. A properly working Fed just isn't the same! Good luck finding a properly working one anyway. As for people knowing what they're doing, I have sent cameras (repeatedly) to Oleg in the Ukraine, and now to FEDKA, who is the preeminent Fed guy in the USA.. In both instances I have not received properly working cameras even after CLA's and do overs. I'm done with them. They are badly made cameras and I have no confidence in the people who repair them. Why should I? My real life experience, not what I've read, has been 100% unsatisfactory. I don't want a camera that I have to constantly worry about or always adjust.

Most repair people won't work on them. What does that tell you? In fact, before I sent mine to FEDKA I tried other repair people. The one who was willing to do it said that he wouldn't guarantee the work, and he also said that while he likes the cameres, especially the Fed 2's, he's seen some that look as if they were carved w/ a chisel.

The lenses somehow are very good, but I won't allow one of the cameras into my house.

 

[ZorkiKat]

Hard to compare a Leica w/ a FSU camera. I've had trouble w/ Leicas as well. These are very old cameras after all. But a properly working Leica is a wonderful camera. A properly working Fed just isn't the same! Good luck finding a properly working one anyway. As for people knowing what they're doing, I have sent cameras (repeatedly) to Oleg in the Ukraine, and now to FEDKA, who is the preeminent Fed guy in the USA.. In both instances I have not received properly working cameras even after CLA's and do overs. I'm done with them. They are badly made cameras and I have no confidence in the people who repair them. Why should I? My real life experience, not what I've read, has been 100% unsatisfactory. I don't want a camera that I have to constantly worry about or always adjust.

Most repair people won't work on them. What does that tell you? In fact, before I sent mine to FEDKA I tried other repair people. The one who was willing to do it said that he wouldn't guarantee the work, and he also said that while he likes the cameres, especially the Fed 2's, he's seen some that look as if they were carved w/ a chisel.

The lenses somehow are very good, but I won't allow one of the cameras into my house.

Let's not turn this thread into another FED=junk one.😉

Most repair people also don't want to work on Contax. Does it put Contax in the same vein as the FSU 'junk'?

It's just that you haven't seen a good FED yet. As I type this I have a Leica III and a FED-1 next to the keyboard. And on the scanner next to the computer are some negatives shot with the FED-1. Both cameras are of the same age. Both are working, virtually the same in all respects except for the slow speed part. There is nothing in this FED which makes it less than the Leica III.

Note that this is just one of the Barnack type FEDs I have which work. There are also as many Barnack Zorki which are as wonderful as any equivalent Leica.

As far as the person who said that they look to have been 'carved by a chisel', I suppose that was an exaggeration, stemming from what could be a biased perspective. I can tell you that the FED-2 is no more different than, and even easier to work with as, a Canon from the 1950s. Does he see those old Canons to have been made with a hammer and butter knife too?😉

And the reason why many repairists refuse to work on FED-2 is usually because they just don't know how to. Mechanics who can readily work on Japanese or German cameras won't necessarily have the skills needed to work on a Soviet camera which evolved on their own within the confines of the then closed USSR.

Just what exactly were the 'unfixables' in your FED 2? I know that they are very fixable, unlike the later FED-5.

A nasty experience with just two FSU cameras is not enough to pass a blanket judgment on all that is FED, Zorki, or Kiev.

 

[David Hughes]

David, I too am familiar with that 'laugh/shudder' experience as I get it everytime someone sends over a badly mangled camera.

Hi again,

Thanks for the cutting, very interesting.

As for the laugh/shudder experience; I used to work on East & West German, Chinese and Soviet stuff. And you get to know the equipment and can easily tell if it's been tampered with by the naughty customer.

East German engineers were old fashioned enough to line up the screw slots for example and all the oils used smelt different. But the naughty customers would never admit touching the things even though I could see (and sometime smell) that they had.

It puts me in an awkward position with cameras as I've the tools to do a lot of jobs (dozens and dozens of screwdrivers f'instance and some weird tools) and could probably cope but I know what can happen when things go wrong and you've not the experience. Like finding a left-hand thread when not expecting it (thinking of a Canon then).

Regards, David

 

[David Hughes]

Hard to compare a Leica w/ a FSU camera.

- - Snip! Snip! - - -

The lenses somehow are very good, but I won't allow one of the cameras into my house.

Hi,

I think you must have been very unlucky with them. I've had both FED's and Leicas that looked identical, sounded dreadful when wound on and worse when the shutter was fired (you couldn't squeeze them).

Both had a lot done to them and both came back a thing of beauty and a joy forever... So you've my sympathy, especially as you're missing the beauty of the FED 2's and a J-8 or I-61.

As for tech's not doing repairs; trying getting a Leica R series done or a little all-electronic APS or 35mm compact zoom or P&S. But it doesn't mean they are rubbish.

Regards, David

 

[newspaperguy]

Hey, it's a hobby, OK?

If you love to 'tinker' with mechanical things, you can learn to enjoy older FSU
cameras. If you have limited mechanical skills, you should never even consider it.

I'm with ZokiKat - I've had five Barnack Leicas and an 'M'. I'm currently shooting a Zorki 1d and a Kiev IIa that I would stack against any L that I had owned.

You are buying cheap and investing 'sweat equity'. Sorry, that's just the way I see it.

 

[gb hill]

I have a FED 2 that I fixed/cla'd 3 years ago. When I fixed it I only had my basic tools & small jewelers screwdrivers. Never even seen the inside of a camera before, but after I saw the sticky on how to do it myself I decided to give it a go. The camera has worked perfect since! Saved myself a ton of money in sending it off for repair & the satisfaction of knowing I brought it back to life makes it even more the special for me. As for my Zorki 2c I will put it up against any barnack any day. This is an outstanding camera but I do admit I use a Leitz Elmer 50/3:5 on it! The Industar 50/3:5 rigid that came on the Zorki I like using on my Bessa R.

 

[Roger Hicks]

How many people actually visited the Soviet Union when it existed? I did.

How many have any reason to know much about the Soviet Union? My (British) great-grandmother joined the Party in 1917 and was indeed arrested for sedition during the Great War. She was cremated in the 1960s with the Red Flag over her coffin: the local Party Secretary read the eulogy. Her father was a very rich man; she was a rebel.

Premise I: "They pretend to pay us, and we pretend to work." An old Soviet Union joke. Most communist industry was dire, with poor QC. Cameras were no exception. When Zorkiis, Kievs, Zenits etc. were available new in the UK from the 50s to the 80s and even 90s, no-one pretended QC was great. Including the importers.

Premise II: A cheap camera, 40-60 years on, probably never serviced, cannot be expected to work well. On the other hand, the worst stuff has often been junked, so what survives is probably the better stuff.

Premise III: Some of us bought Soviet cameras in the 60s and 70s because they were cheap. We were not always impressed: we accepted that it was the luck of the draw (QC).

Premise IV: Many apologists for Soviet cameras are quite young, without direct experience of new Soviet gear or the Soviet Union.

Sure, if it was (a) assembled right in the first place and (b) maintained well, or (c) rebuilt to spec, Soviet gear can be very good. It's just that this is far from invariably the case.

Cheers,

R.

 

[underbyte]

I visited the USSR in 1985. That was a wild experience. 2 points about FSU;

1) My Zorki 4K is the least used camera in my arsenal because it isn't a joy to shoot. The Jupiter 8 makes fine pictures but I prefer it on any other body.

2) If you happen upon a time machine that takes you back to the USSR in 1985, seriously, don't eat the chicken. It's no wonder that I'm a vegetarian now 😀

 

[pakeha]

I visited the USSR in 1985. That was a wild experience. 2 points about FSU;

1) My Zorki 4K is the least used camera in my arsenal because it isn't a joy to shoot. The Jupiter 8 makes fine pictures but I prefer it on any other body.

2) If you happen upon a time machine that takes you back to the USSR in 1985, seriously, don't eat the chicken. It's no wonder that I'm a vegetarian now 😀

which branch of vegetarianism are you in?😀

You are correct,the food was far worse than the cameras 🙂
regards
CW

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Last week I was sent a Type 1 Rigid Summicron to work on. Three of the groups were put in backwards, and one was forced into place to the point that it chipped. Last year I was sent a wartime Zeiss Sonnar in LTM to work on that had been sent to a pro shop for repair. The rear group was not tightened into the optical fixture and was bouncing around ~0.5mm

Bad camera repair is not limited to hobbyists and FSU equipment. You get out of it what you put into it. Practice, time, and care go in and reliability comes out.

 

[batterytypehah!]

^ Rick, Greg and Brian -- thank you for some much needed common sense.

Eagerly awaiting my first FSU camera, a Zorki 4 from the classifieds here. $25 shipped, with rigid Industar 50, and I'm almost disappointed that the seller re-lubed that lens already. Where's the fun in that? 😉