Kiev 4 vs FED-2

[RFH]

Kiev 4 is a nice camera. Very accurate focusing, cool design, and surprisingly good lenses. I have the Jupiter 12, Jupiter 8 and Helios 103, all of which perform excellently. I think the Helios was $10 brand new. At 1.8 it's my fastest RF lens. My benchmark for image quality is Leica M glass, so it can be quite disconcerting to not see much of a difference between the Leica and the FSU images. Yes the Kiev has its quirks, but all in all it's a bargain at the current prices.
If something breaks, the Fed may be a lot easier to DIY repair. I once took apart a Kiev in order to fix a broken shutter ribbon. What a job!
I'd say get 'em both. They're so cheap anyway.

 

[David Hughes]

Well, if you want to expand the collection - as you said - then get the Kiev but why ask us? I know: sharing the blame does help ;-) But just for taking photo's the FED 2 has a lot going for it, like the lenses. And using the Kiev in a hurry you can think it's already focussed by blanking the RF's window.

Regards, David

 

[Brian Legge]

If you already have a LTM camera and haven't used a Contax, I'd suggest going for the Kiev. It has a rather different feel to it.

I'd also suggest looking at a 4a unless you like the look of the meter (or want the meter and can verify that it is working correctly).

 

[newspaperguy]

FWIW - my users are a 59 and a 56 (sorry, that one's a II, not a 4.)

 

[wolves3012]

Thanks Rick - how old is old? I'm looking at one with '72 serial number

Also, two further quick questions:

- How's repair work on the K4? I've thoroughly enjoyed giving the FED-2 full strip downs and doing repair work on it, but I've noticed distinctly less info online about the Kiev.
- just to clarify (i'm feeling abit dense today - not enough coffee eh?), the in-camera focus mechanism can be locked and over-ridden on any lens? I'm sure I remember seeing a J-12 without distance markings on it, or I may have just been a bit inatentive and not seen them...

Repairing a Kiev is by no means impossible but it's a much more complex camera than something like a FED 2. The Kiev survival site gives much useful info:
http://www3.telus.net/public/rpnchbck/index.html

No, you can't lock the in-camera focus system. The Kiev has 2 bayonets, an inner and an outer. The 50mm lenses fix to the inner bayonet and activate the infinity-lock. All non-50mm lenses fix to the outer bayonet and bybass the infinity-lock (they couple differently, it makes more sense when you see the two lens types for real). The J-12 *does* have focus/DOF markings - unless someone deliberately erased them.

If you want a J-9, the Kiev version is cheaper and it's a simpler design that is less likely to be found mis-focussing due to botched repair jobs (compared to the LTM version, that is). If you get a Kiev, the Helios is a must-have lens, it's not possible to fault it for value.

As regards what age, most people think the older the better and that quality was poorer from around the early-mid 70s. Personally, I have a '75 K-4 and a '78 K-4A and I don't think they're badly made. The late 4M/4AM are a lottery but they can turn out good as well as bad!

 

[ChrisCummins]

Thanks once again for all the tips and hlep - there is such a vast knowledge base on this forum!

Peter, what is the 'shutter fade' problem you talk about on the FEDs?

Thanks Steve for the flickr link - really informative images. I was looking into a Zorki-4k initially purely because it has a wind lever, but I have to say that I find it to be a hilariously ugly looking camera - something about it just cracks me up, it reminds me of 1980's mobile-phone design! Good condition camera collection by the way - I'm a big fan of the black J8 with vented hood look.

Out of curiosity, is there a reason why FSU lenses seem to max out at a relatively *slow* speed of ~ f/2? 1.4 and fast lenses aren't uncommon for SLRs and I would have thought the Russians would have hopped straight on the bandwagon of ever faster lens knock offs?

I have to say that I'm getting very used to the idea of being a Kiev-4 owner now, and am preparing myself for the nuisances and bancrupcy it will surely bring upon me! 🙂 And yes David, blame sharing is exactly what I'm doing - I have to make sure not to take everyone's words to heart too much though, I remember being almost dissapointed when I first set eyes upon my FED-2. After reading all the knee-wobbling praise it gets on this forum, I was expecting a camera the size of my finger and with more sex appeal than carmen electra...

Best regards
Chris

 

[sevo]

Out of curiosity, is there a reason why FSU lenses seem to max out at a relatively *slow* speed of ~ f/2? 1.4 and fast lenses aren't uncommon for SLRs and I would have thought the Russians would have hopped straight on the bandwagon of ever faster lens knock offs?

At the time their originals were conceived, the f/1.5 Sonnar was the fastest normal. The USSR did not really attempt to copy any more recent and faster lens - they were in a position to define the market, and they obviously saw no need to supply the amateurs with anything beyond what was there. They only made few abortive attempts to cater for professionals - as a society with no competitive advertising they had a very limited count of professionals, and importing German and Japanese gear for them was cheaper than developing their own.

That they had the J-3, a f/1.5 lens, was merely due to it being included in the 1939 state of the art designs they brought home as spoils of WWII - otherwise they probably would never have gone past f/3.5 Tessar clones.

Besides, the USSR was not really cloning that much in a legally vulnerable manner, at any rate outside the secret military/strategical field - even though they were not member of all copyright and patent treaties, they generally obeyed their rules, as they were dependent on imported technology and did not want to provoke export restrictions against them. It was not until most (by that time) former socialist countries turned market liberals in the mid nineties that they (or rather, their fledgling upstart companies out for fast money by any means) began to engage in design piracy.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Fast lenses... Let me think...

Have I ever mentioned the Jupiter-3 on this forum...

1955 5cm f1.5 J-3, wide-open on the Contax II, focus is on the one blade running across the front.

And at F4:

Another at f4:

"Jupiter-Glow"

The Helios-103 is a great, inexpensive Planar forumula lens. 6 elements in 4 groups. And it took several hours and a Dremel to make it into Leica Mount. It took 1 minute to collimate it for the Nikon S3.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Menopta is the export version of the helios-103:

Wide-open on the Nikon S3;

at F4:

 

[hipsterdufus]

Geez, thanks a lot, guys. Because of this thread, I just bought a Kiev 4 with a Jupiter 8... This forum is trying to kill my pocketbook. 😀

 

[oftheherd]

Geez, thanks a lot, guys. Because of this thread, I just bought a Kiev 4 with a Jupiter 8... This forum is trying to kill my pocketbook. 😀

The Kiev is not a bad camera to use at all. You do have to get used to holding it a little differently so as not to cover the rangefinder window. After that, it is OK. It does have a quiet shutter as well, even on high speeds. On slow speeds, it has been well described by Keith.

 

[ChrisCummins]

Well I've spent the last couple of days researching heavily. Thanks to everyone for their inputs! I was amazed at how little the price gap is between the Kiev4 and Contax equivalents, I always assumed it was much larger, closer to the massive gap between Leica/FEDs.

So I came up with the ultimate solution to my problem - buy a Contax! I came into a bit of money today so treated myself to a Contax III with a blistering f/1.5 sonnar lens, it should be winging it's way over from state-side as we speak. Many thanks to eveyone for their inputs, I can now venture outside of 'FSU' section of this forum without feeling to envious! 🙂

Chris

 

[shadowfox]

I came into a bit of money today so treated myself to a Contax III with a blistering f/1.5 sonnar lens, it should be winging it's way over from state-side as we speak. Many thanks to eveyone for their inputs, I can now venture outside of 'FSU' section of this forum without feeling to envious! 🙂

Chris

Good for you!

I once had a Contax IIIa with that Sonnar lens, it was so cool.
The fit and finish is incredible.

 

[ChrisCummins]

Good for you!

I once had a Contax IIIa with that Sonnar lens, it was so cool.
The fit and finish is incredible.

Great looking camera there. I believe the IIIa was a post-war model, with some minor differences? (apparently the finish is better, and the lens mount doesn't work with every type of lens).

 

[sevo]

Great looking camera there. I believe the IIIa was a post-war model, with some minor differences? (apparently the finish is better, and the lens mount doesn't work with every type of lens).

With many major differences, yes - the IIa/IIIa was a complete redesign, smaller (almost Barnack size, even though it seems bigger) with the rangefider losing a third of its formerly wide base, a very different drive train and less space between shutter and mount (so that the pre war 35mm Biogon does not fit any more).

Sevo

 

[ChrisCummins]

Ah right, thanks for the explanation. I didn't realise there were such stark differences. Does a Kiev mount J-12 fit the Contax III?

 

[sevo]

Ah right, thanks for the explanation. I didn't realise there were such stark differences. Does a Kiev mount J-12 fit the Contax III?

The Kiev J-12 is effectively the same as the Contax II/III Jena 3.5cm f/2.8 - neither will fit a IIa/IIIa.

 

[ChrisCummins]

Ok cheers. Since I've bought a standard III, I should be alright then