Kiev 2 vs Kiev 4 build quality

[summar]

I'm sure the early Kievs were better built (like some other cameras), but my Kiev 4A from the '70s -- bought from Fedka including a CLA -- works very well and the lenses are great. So much depends on condition!

 

[Fotohuis]

So far no problems on this Kiev-4AM from 1980. I had a FED-3 50 years October revolution from 1967 completely overhauled with new shutter curtain, take up spool, new RF, modification of the RF cam to adapt the J-12 lens. So I know all crap you can get.

I have also a Zorki-6 from Fedka (directly sent from Ukraine), all 100% working (overhauled) very nice with my J-8 and J-12.

A second Z-6 I bought brand new in the box with I-50 but all with Green fatty grease. So I sent it to my Zorki doctor in Holland. He made all my FSU materials in a perfect way.
Otherwise for him hobby just small money. Officially made you can forget to do these repairs and modifications.

 

[Valkir1987]

I know a person who was the service and repairman of Kiev gear during the 90ies for an importer in the Netherlands. He is retired now, but he can tell great stories of Kiev and the Arsenal works. He did magnificent repair and knows almost everything of Kiev camera's.

Although the parts of the Kiev camera's where made by machines, the assembly was handwork. Even the drilling and tapping of the holes for the screws with a mould.

This way of work in the Arsenal plant led to the Kiev 17 and 19 reflex camera's. Which combine modern design and hand crafted assembly in one camera for that time. They are perhaps not economic, but beautifully made.

My experience in repairing and servicing Kiev camera's tells me the older ones have better tolerances on the gears. Making the camera work smoother with less friction and force. Newer ones can be fine and work well, but are a bit more rough.

 

[Pioneer]

My Kiev 4a from the mid-70s appears to work well and I am very happy with it considering the very low purchase price. Obviously my Contax II cameras are much smoother but they also cost me quite a bit more to purchase.

So far I haven't pushed my Kiev 4a too hard but I suspect it will hold up well even if I do. The other advantage in my mind is that shutter ribbons can still be found for the Kiev's while that Contax II and III shutter ribbons are not so easy to find. Aki Asahi ribbons seem to be the best option but even those are not exact replacements, and I am not positive they will be as durable over time. To me that means the Kiev cameras, though not quite as nicely constructed, still have a solid place as user cameras.

 

[Fotohuis]

To me that means the Kiev cameras, though not quite as nicely constructed, still have a solid place as user cameras.

Yes, I think you're right. In fact nothing wrong with those cameras.

 

[David Hughes]

Yes, and - FWIW - I think most comments about cameras made in the old USSR are based on politics and not engineering. The fact that they are still around and working suggests they were OK.

And a lot of other firms have changed their construction methods over the years, like from brass to steel gears but no one slags them off the way they attack the FSU cameras.

And these days a lot of modern things work well then fail totally because they cannot be repaired economically.

Regards, David

 

[KRaZiGLiTcH]

I own a kiev 4a, it feels nice and solid. the build quality is nice imo ^_^

 

[dee]

If you simply need a properly working Kiev buy a body from www.ok.vintgecameras.com because Oleg is simply a wizard with Kiev / Contax .
Oleg can't understand why the early cameras are so popular as users as most suffered appalling back street butchery just to keep them working .
In the 50s/60s it was cheaper in USSR to update a Kiev 3 with it's top heavy meter with a Kiev 4 top plate/meter/controls which would have made it's way out of the Arsenal factory to a moonlighting engineer both the fix it and 'modernise it ' than than buy a new camera.

Having said that a good Kiev II pre 1955 or so would have been available only to high ranking officials , some even as 'gifts' which may hav head little use ... and a Conatx/Kiev II is just a delight to use.

My favourite Kiev has a genuine Contax III scrap body which would have ended up as spares with an early Kiev 4 top plate meter etc with new cell and with plain meter cover without the strengthening ridges introduced to avoid denting the thin material, but I love selenium meters and the Kiev 4 outline.
I have a camera of 1937 and 1957 'vintage' which is amazing !
I also have a Contax II from a box of parts with Kiev shutter assembly and it may be the best of both worlds as Contax shutters are just too old now !
But I am OTT about Kontax !!

 

[bobby_novatron]

+1 for the Kiev 2, earlier Kiev models in genereal. I have a Kiev 4 from 1981, and a Kiev 2 from 1957. The Kiev 2 is a much more refined machine. The fit and finish on the body is better and the winding mechanism is smoother.

This is a photo of my "later model" Kiev 2, it has the dual script of the Kiev 4, but with the same body finishing as the Kiev 2, including the handy hidden "foot". 🙂

 

[Fotohuis]

In the mean time about 10 35mm films further with the Kiev-4AM. I like this camera and the results are good. It can not completely compete with my Leica M7 but together with the Zorki-6 it is my favorite FSU camera. From family in Ukraine I got another Kiev, Kiev-60 in 6x4,5 but that is another story. Next week we have visitors from Ukraine in Holland so they will bring the camera to Holland.

 

[dee]

Best of both worlds perhaps ?
-Obtain a Kiev 2a or broken Contax II , even without shutter which can be found for £50 or so and send it Oleg to create the perfect camera !!!

 

[Ko.Fe.]

So, as of now I have experience with three different Kievs.
First was Kiev-4AM from eighties. Camera was "meh" and Helios-103 was the same "meh". Light leaks, plastic parts and strange rendering, stiff focusing... Get light leaks fixed by myself and get rid of it.
Second was Keiv-4 from 1966. Good all metal camera, good J-8, no light leaks, shutter ribbon broke at the second roll of film and here is no way I could make stitches accurate enough by myself. Too tiny work for my fingers and eyes... The exposure meter tower made it looks like Russian tank. Light meter was so-so. Get rid of it as well.
As of now I have Kiev-2a from 1955. Different build from 4 and 4AM. Viewfinder is dim, advance is hard.
In easiness of use I put film Leica M at first, FED-2 comes second and Kievs are for the times I don't want to use Leicas or FED-2. Nice FSU collective item with its own ways to operate and good quality J-8 and J-3 lenses. Results are better from what I have seen in comparison to LTM version of J-8 and J-3.

 

[Elmar Lang]

The 1947 Kiev of my avatar, still works fine...