Kiev 3 (1954) as compared to the Contax II (1937)

[mravigna]

Today I received a Contax II (1937) and have had a few hours to compare it with my Kiev II (1954) which was purchased from Fedka.

My Kiev II has a quieter shutter and was obviously well CLA'd by Yuri before selling it. Both cameras are practically identical. The Contax has a shinnier metal finish as compared to the Kiev which is more mat. The interior (film compartment) part of the Contax camera seems to be just a tiny bit better finished. My impression is that the Kiev II is of high quality almost as good as the Contax. It would be extremely hard to tell them apart if I interchanged the front plates .

I will be happy to answer any questions about this.

 

[mravigna]

sorry I meant Kiev II vs Contax II (in previous message)

sorry I meant Kiev II vs Contax II (in previous message)

The comparison is between the Kiev II and Contax II

 

[FrankS]

It would be interesting to compare while digging deeper inside the cameras.

 

[zhang xk]

These two cameras should basically be the same with Kiev II's chrome finishing more durable,and Contax II's paint job a bit better.

 

[mravigna]

more observations

more observations

Actually the chrome on the Contax seems to be thicker but maybe not anymore resistant. The black enamal is excellent and the leather of better quality (also seems to be thicker). The Contax seems to be very slightly heavier. As for the internals, I have no way of telling but the camera does feel like everything was better assembled (example: back cover). Overall, I would say that they are very close.

The shutters sound different with the Contax sounding more abrupt and a bit noisier. This could however be simply because every camera sounds differently or maybe because of Fedka's prior CLA's on the camera he sells. I tested both shutters in front of a TV and the shutter speeds on the Contax seem to be just a bit faster. I am not sure which of the two cameras is more accurate.

Also, as I mentioned in a previous e-mail, the Helios 103 fits in the Contax and turns very smoothly but simply will not even enter into the Kiev II and not turn and lock with my Kiev III and lV.

 

[ruben]

Hi Mravigna,

I understand your new Contax was not serviced, therefore what is your evaluation of its work, not compared to any other camera ?

Cheers,
Ruben

 

[mravigna]

seems to work fine but .....

seems to work fine but .....

The camara seems to work fine but I haven't used it with film. Not sure that servicing the camera would make any difference with the sound of the shutter. I have a zorki 3 which was CLA'd by Fedka after the shutter had stopped working. The camera now works very well but the sound of the shutter remains the same after servicing.

 

[Stu W]

Mravigna, both cameras are pretty much the same. The noisier shutter usually comes from overtightening the mainspring to make up for the need of a cla. Even under ideal conditions the mechanisms will never be as smooth as a Leica or a IIa or IIIa. (IMHO) Stu

 

[mravigna]

was apparently CLA'd about a year ago

was apparently CLA'd about a year ago

The seller indicated that when he purchased the camera about a year ago, that he was told that the camera had been CLA'd. It does have that pecular smell of some kind of oil or grease. But who knows for sure? If its an over tensioned spring, then it might break at one point. Hope not

 

[varjag]

Springs in practice never break in cameras. Shutter ribbon is far more likely to give up in Contax or Kiev. Whatever difference is there in smoothness, it is really hard to determine if it conditioned by wear, storage conditions or manufacture. Plus with pre-war Contax and with Kiev samples there was a fair amount of tolerance allowed. Remember, these devices represent pre-war level of fine mechanics technology.