Is Kiev the most complex rangefinder camera ever made?

[SCOTFORTHLAD]

After taking note of your not quite original protest about Soviet quality control, had I be a RFF member of either Ukrainian or Russian nationality, I would feel myself offended to the depth of my bones, by this sentence, which is not much compatible with being RFF a multinational website.

Not that I am looking for a fight, but I couldn't keep silent either.

Ruben

I tend to agree with Ruben on this,last week I posted a scanned article,dated 2000, from a UK Photo mag.about 3 FSU Rangefinders.I had kept the item on file as a source of reference about these cameras.
After posting I re-read the article,and was very embarassed to read the dismissive and sarcastic attitude which it displayed,and regretted posting it at all.

Frankly it was a sad reflection.

Brian.

 

[FrankS]

At least a little cultural/national sensitivity is in order on our international RFF site.

 

[zhang xk]

Oh but John - isn't this just Wonderful? Doesn't your heart beat faster at its sheer, sublime ingenuity and insane beauty? Isn't perfectly functioning complexity the ultimate triumph of simplicity? -
http://japwatches.wordpress.com/2007/06/23/vacheron-constantin-tour-de-l’ile/

Incidentally, Zhang. RFF member Lynn is devoted to her Great Wall and has excellent results. I was recently present when a Hassleblad owner innocently asked "What is that, a Chinese Brownie?". For a moment I thought there would be bloodshed....

Cheers, Ian

Many thanks Ian for the link. That is an amazing time piece of 19th century's technology. I think a Kiev II is a similar product with probably more parts. If a Kiev II or III was built today by a Swiss company, it might cost $10,000 IMO.

Once I said that no camera could servive a drop from the 3rd floor, but a Great Wall could for its simple construction. :bang: The DF-2 needs some good optics to produce 1st grade images. There are many versions of Great Wall DF.The ones with DF-2 on its face is the poorest in build quality. What version do you have?

Cheers,

Zhang

 

[zhang xk]

Here are some more photos of the Ektra:https://www.westlicht-auction.com/index.php?id=76816&acat=76816&_ssl=off
Scroll down a bit--it was lot 456.
I think it is an amazing machine but not one I'd care to have as my main RF!
Rob

Hi Rob,

There seemed to be a bidding war, and the item ended with a much higher price. There are people out there who shared the same fascination for complex, unique mechanical gears. This made me cherish my Kiev even more before their price sky-rocketed to $500.

Cheers,

Zhang

 

[payasam]

Without dismissing other varieties of booze, I shall say that vodka is good.

 

[zhang xk]

I tend to agree with Ruben on this,last week I posted a scanned article,dated 2000, from a UK Photo mag.about 3 FSU Rangefinders.I had kept the item on file as a source of reference about these cameras.
After posting I re-read the article,and was very embarassed to read the dismissive and sarcastic attitude which it displayed,and regretted posting it at all.

Frankly it was a sad reflection.

Brian.

Hi Brian,

Some later Soviet cameras may have some quality issues, but I disagree with the blanket opinion that everything made in the USSR was bad. Besides, the comparison is usually unfair with a 50-70 years old $30 camera vs a latest $3,000 one. And some 50 years old camera Soviet or not with a proper servicing could perform just as well.

Cheers,

Zhang

 

[Sonnar Brian]

I suspect that Soviet quality control had more to do with making quotas than making everything work "precisely". I've tested about 40 J-3's and J-8's; four of five needed the shims changed. The focus on most was "close", but some where way off. One required a 3mm shim to be added, several required more than 1mm.

The Helios-103 and Menopta 53/1.8 were better on collimation, but the machining of the mount was all over the place. Some required filing to fit a Kiev, others required filing to fit a Contax, some went right onto a Nikon. Again, lack of standardization.

In the United States, we always joked that you wanted a car built on a Wednesday. Farthest away from the past weekend's hangover, and far enough from Friday where they were not thinking about the upcoming weekend bash. Anybody else have a sense of humor?

 

[nzeeman]

i have many fsu and quality control was never a problem.bad QC on east is something what west companies used to kick them from market. eastern countries were always bad in one thing and thats marketin. for example Skoda was winning rallies in 60s and 70s and it that still didnt meant anything to western customers - they still bought their "quality" vehicles. russian went to space, had great airplane tech - they were decades ahead of time in science - and west still make bad propaganda about ussr. people in west thought that on east people still live in stone age.
only reason for bad east cameras now is that sellers buy them from flea markets and people on flea markets collect them from garbage. throw leica in garbage can for some time and kick it around flea market - and it will also be unadjusted and broken. is that a proof of bad QC in leica???

 

[Harry Lime]

I hate to say it, but since the Kiev is a copy of a Zeiss-Ikon camera, I'm not surprised.

Zeiss makes great optics, but had a tendency to make their cameras overly complex.

 

[Xmas]

The FSU cloned the (Contax) Kiev to print, using Ge tools.
Then the added synch for flash.
A winder knob and a summicron style rip off lens.
They reduced the build standard, fewer engravings, leather to leatherette, poorer chrome, etc.
They did not try and compete with Canon or Nikon, it was just like they were still making T34 to stop the Ge hordes (of Panzers), - at Krusk they just held on.
They are still effective cameras and if they get stolen there are more on e-bay - cheap.
Noel

 

[zhang xk]

I hate to say it, but since the Kiev is a copy of a Zeiss-Ikon camera, I'm not surprised.

Zeiss makes great optics, but had a tendency to make their cameras overly complex.

Practical or not, it is just the complexity that fascinates me. A toubillon is an overly complex to a common chronometer wrist watch. The metal blade curtain of Contax at least has a merit, one can not find a pin hole on it.

 

[zhang xk]

The FSU cloned the (Contax) Kiev to print, using Ge tools.
Then the added synch for flash.
A winder knob and a summicron style rip off lens.
They reduced the build standard, fewer engravings, leather to leatherette, poorer chrome, etc.
They did not try and compete with Canon or Nikon, it was just like they were still making T34 to stop the Ge hordes (of Panzers), - at Krusk they just held on.
They are still effective cameras and if they get stolen there are more on e-bay - cheap.
Noel

There was a cost-down process over the years. Quality drops as production number increase. According to what I saw, early Kievs have a better chrome plating than the originals. Everything else is a Contax made in USSR until about 1953?

Cheers,

Zhang

 

[oldrangefinderguy]

Normally I'd say that given two machines which both do the same job equally well, the more simple of the two would be the more senisible. That said, I can't help but perfer my Kievs over my Fed 1g. Maybe it's just that the Kiev is a better copy of the Contax than the Fed is of the Leica. Given two copies of the origionals and the scales might tip the other way. Either way, you have to admire the engineering that went into the Contax/Kiev.

I've gained new respect fpr the Kiev through rebuilding a '65 4a. This included stripping it down to the chassis and soaking the shutter crate in solvent for a week as well as replacing the rangefinder prism with one from a parts camera. I did the work bit-by-bit over a few months time. Finally I reassembled it and tested the shutter speeds. All looked great and the shutter was much quieter than the one in my '58 4a. Then, suddenly the shutter dial refused to turn past 1/4 second. I could take a picture as long as it was on bulb, 1/2, or 1/4 second! Discouraged, I set the camera aside for several months and didn't have the heart to delve into it again. In fact, I was soured on camera repair period over that stretch of time.

Then, the other day I opened it up again. It turned out that a tiny little spring I probably never noticed had come loose. All those thousand or so parts had become virtually useless because of this one little spring. A chain is only as good as its weakest link and I suppose a complex machine has more links in its chain. Still, it only took an hour to get it all back together. Now the thing puts my other Kiev to shame. It's so smooth and quiet I can't imagine that an original Contax could really be much better. Overly complex it may be, but I have to hand it to both the original designers, engineers, and technicians at Zeiss and to their counterparts in the Ukraine. It has to be one of the great designs of all time. I think I read somewhere that an example of the original Contax II resides in the Museum of Modern Art. If this isn't true, it should be.

 

[zhang xk]

i have many fsu and quality control was never a problem.bad QC on east is something what west companies used to kick them from market. eastern countries were always bad in one thing and thats marketin. for example Skoda was winning rallies in 60s and 70s and it that still didnt meant anything to western customers - they still bought their "quality" vehicles. russian went to space, had great airplane tech - they were decades ahead of time in science - and west still make bad propaganda about ussr. people in west thought that on east people still live in stone age.
only reason for bad east cameras now is that sellers buy them from flea markets and people on flea markets collect them from garbage. throw leica in garbage can for some time and kick it around flea market - and it will also be unadjusted and broken. is that a proof of bad QC in leica???

Hi,

I saw many Leica II,III in worse shape than my Zorkis. I think many has a stamped sheet metal body case and inner parts, while most Zorki has a die-cast case and shutter crate. Many early Zorki are VERY smooth after a CLA.
When someone wants to make a big profit, what else do you expect them to say about other similar products?

 

[zhang xk]

........ Overly complex it may be, but I have to hand it to both the original designers, engineers, and technicians at Zeiss and to their counterparts in the Ukraine. It has to be one of the great designs of all time. I think I read somewhere that an example of the original Contax II resides in the Museum of Modern Art. If this isn't true, it should be.

Very well said! That is exactly what I thought of the Contax design.

Kind Regards

Zhang

 

[ZeissFan]

A small technicality: Carl Zeiss made the lenses but not cameras. Zeiss Ikon made cameras but not lenses. It's a small point, but the two shouldn't be considered as the same entity in terms of photographic product manufacturing.

As far as complexity, the Contaflex TLR uses the pre-war Contax shutter and adds several components that make repair even more difficult.

As well, the prewar 35mm Nettax is a bear to disassemble, because you must remove a good number of the parts to remove the top deck. The Super Nettel, on which the Nettax is designed, is only slightly less complex.

The postwar folding Contessa is an elegant camera although overengineered.

However, it's important to note that the Zeiss Ikons and many of the older German (and some American, European and early Japanese) cameras will outlive us and most of the plastic SLRs that will have long ago broken down because of poor choice of parts, faulty electronics and prolific use of plastic.

I've long felt that there are three factors in camera manufacturing (and other items too): Design, choice of materials and workmanship. Any weakness in one of these areas will eventually lead to (mechanical) failure of the product. Commercial failure is another matter.

 

[Jocko]

i have many fsu and quality control was never a problem.bad QC on east is something what west companies used to kick them from market. eastern countries were always bad in one thing and thats marketin. for example Skoda was winning rallies in 60s and 70s and it that still didnt meant anything to western customers - they still bought their "quality" vehicles. russian went to space, had great airplane tech - they were decades ahead of time in science - and west still make bad propaganda about ussr. people in west thought that on east people still live in stone age.

Nzeeman, how do you know?

Lets take your example. From the Mid-60s Skodas were amongst the most popular cars in Britain. In the 1980s they seemed to be everywhere because as one famous headline had it they "handle like a Porsche 911, cost only £4,200 and are more fun than a GTI". The motoring press were invariably respectful. In the early 1970s Moskvitch outsold Japanese manufacturers in the UK. Ladas, which replaced them, sold 30,000 cars a year. Even Wartburg and Yugo did pretty well. Today - of course - Skoda are up there with the best.

In the 1980s Zenit and Praktica outsold all other SLR brands and in the 70s Soviet-made TVs, radios, binoculars, telescopes and more were popular and widely liked. My family ran a grocers - amongst our most cherished lines were Czech chocolates, Roumanian jam and the frankly superb Bulgarian preserves. The problem - which was exactly that faced by British manufacturers - was a faliure to invest and to develop goods. Others ultimately made them better and cheaper.

I realise that you will never miss a chance to voice your particular obsessions, but it is always best to know what you are talking about first.

Cheers, Ian

 

[Jocko]

Many thanks Ian for the link. That is an amazing time piece of 19th century's technology. I think a Kiev II is a similar product with probably more parts. If a Kiev II or III was built today by a Swiss company, it might cost $10,000 IMO.

Once I said that no camera could servive a drop from the 3rd floor, but a Great Wall could for its simple construction. :bang: The DF-2 needs some good optics to produce 1st grade images. There are many versions of Great Wall DF.The ones with DF-2 on its face is the poorest in build quality. What version do you have?

Cheers,

Zhang

Alas Zhang, I do not have a Great Wall - the camera in question belongs to Lynn, who has just taken some brilliant pictures, which I hope she will soon post!

It's a remarkable camera!

Cheers, Ian

 

[zhang xk]

Thanks Zeiss Fan for the correction. So engineers who designed those compound microscopes were not involved in Contax design? Or Zeiss Ikon designed the microscope frames and Carl Zeiss designed the objectives?

It is interesting to know more about Zeiss(Ikon or Carl Zeiss).

Cheers,

Zhang

 

[zhang xk]

Alas Zhang, I do not have a Great Wall - the camera in question belongs to Lynn, who has just taken some brilliant pictures, which I hope she will soon post!

It's a remarkable camera!

Cheers, Ian

Ah, I misunderstood. I will try to find images of other versions, DF-3,4,5. I only have two versions of the DF, a DF, and DF-2. Lynn sounds like a Chinese name Lin. Is she a Chinese?

Cheers,

Zhang