Kiev-4a...how much better is the Contax?

S

squirrel$$$bandit

Veteran
Local time
5:56 PM
Joined
Mar 8, 2008
Messages
6,244
View My Gallery
I'm quite curious about this, since the USSR Kievs were supposed to have been made with Contax dies. Just how close are these cameras? I assume the Contaxes, CLA'ed, are better than a perfectly working Kiev. But when you can get a mint camera with a great lens on it for a hundred bucks, is it really worth it to look for a Contax?

Anyone who has actually used both, I'd love to hear your impressions.
 
I have Two Contax II, two Contax IIIa, two Kiev III, and one Kiev 4a. Contax IIIa is the best in terms of craftmanship, and smoothness of winding / shutter setting. However, it's not fair to compare Kievs to post war Contax because Kievs were built based on prewar Contax design. Believe me. You won't find difference between prewar Contax and Kiev II/III. They share similar craftmanship, and the feeling of shutter setting/winding. Actually, I like Kiev more for the blue tinted finder. The bluish color contrasts with yellow rangefinder spot and makes focusing much easier.
How about prewar contax and postwar contax? That depends upon one's own taste. IMHO, finder/rangefinders in prewar Contax cameras are much much better than in postwar versions. But, I must admit that chrome finish and winding action are way better in postwar versions.
Hope it helps.
 
mabelsound said:
....... But when you can get a mint camera with a great lens on it for a hundred bucks, is it really worth it to look for a Contax?............
Click to expand...


Dear friend,
In my experience with the Kievs, you are not going to get a mint one for a hundred bucks, although it looks like you can.

Here starts the most basic practical difference between Contaxes and Kievs. Although Contaxes are not less old, and need no less servicing than Kievs, there are many and better places to service a Contax than to service a Kiev. Unless you dismantle your formula and send a Kiev to a good Contax service shop, paying according to Contax reputation fees.

Kindly notice that I didn't say there are no places to service a Kiev, and re-read the above paragraph.

The reason for this gap is economics. A CLAed Contax may be sold for, let's say, $500 or more, while some $200 are taken into account for that CLA. On the other hand a non CLAed Kiev IIa selling for $150, or your Kiev 4a being sold as highly goold for $100, is not expected to be sent to a $200 CLA by its new owner. Hence those cheapy and rusty CLA services for Kievs advertized for below $100, while in fact we are talking about the same internal mechanisms.

But since we are talking about the same internal mechanisms, more or less, the Kiev CLa costing below $100 will give you below half CLA the Contax one will get for $200.

On the other hand, being the Kievs sold cheaper than the Contaxes, they carry the potential advantage to psychologically prompt you learning CLA it yourself - the best formula of all, if possible for you.

Cheers,
Ruben
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well, if I were to buy one, it would be from Fedka, or this forum. I had a bad experience with a "mint" Fed-2 from eBay, and I've had only good experiences with Yuri and the classifieds.

So is a prewar Kiev 2 or 3 the best of the lot, generally?
 
CLA is: cleaning, lubricating and adjusting. This however is not a definition of art and may vary by service provider. Check out Henry Scherer's website at www.zeisscamera.com for Henry's views as a what he offers for Contax servicing. It's a bit like getting your car serviced - you hope that it has been done and that the proper lubricants have been used.

For me, I like my IIa's (currently with Henry) and my IIIa, recently serviced and in fine form. Servicing with Henry requires patience as he has quite a backlog of work.

The advantage of the Kiev is that the lenses are obviously cheaper and whereas the J3 (50/1.5) and the J9 (85/2) can be used with the Contax, the J12 (35/2.8) cannot as the rear element interferes with the shutter. If you intend to shoot wide, go Kiev as the Biogon in 35mm is expensive and in 21mm super expensive.

Enjoy taking photos whichever way you go!
 
mabelsound said:
So is a prewar Kiev 2 or 3 the best of the lot, generally?
Click to expand...
There are no "prewar" Kiev cameras.

You'd better read this first to know more about the Kievs :

http://www3.telus.net/public/rpnchbck/zconrfKiev.htm

Otherwise, I would tell that being asked to pay $500 for a Contax II is a plain rip-off.

A very clean Contax II with snapped shutter ribbons can be bought for less $100 at auction.
Once cleaned, optically/mechanically serviced and fitted with new shutter ribbons it can sell for $200-$250, max.

Any professional camera repair shop who can service a Contax II can service a Kiev the very same way, so I don't get that thing about professional camera repairers not wanting to service the Kiev cameras while they service the Contax.

Eddie Smolov or Steve Serota would service a Kiev with no problem.

Then you can find people who know how to service a postwar Contax IIa or IIIa camera and who don't know how to replace the shutter tapes of the Contax II/III and Kiev cameras, but that's another problem.

hugivza said:
The advantage of the Kiev is that the lenses are obviously cheaper and whereas the J3 (50/1.5) and the J9 (85/2) can be used with the Contax, the J12 (35/2.8) cannot as the rear element interferes with the shutter.
Click to expand...

This will get "mabelsound" confused. The Jupiter-12 35/2.8 lens fits the Contax II and III cameras and doesn't fit the IIa and IIIa cameras.

A quick abstract :

1935-1944 : Contax II and III, produced at Dresden, Germany
1946-1947 : Contax II produced at Saalfeld near Jena, Germany USSR occupied zone, as a training for the Volga project workers
1949-1982 : Kiev II, III, 2a, 3a, 4, 4a, 4M, 4aM produced at Zavod Arsenal, Ukraine
1950-1961: Contax IIa / IIIa produced at Stuttgart, Western-Germany (German Federal Republic).
 
One other thing - you can find user Contax cameras about as cheap as pristine Kievs. Mine isn't the prettiest camera in the world, by any stretch, but for ~$150 for it (including the $75 for CLA) it's much nicer to use than any Kiev I've owned.

I happily sold all of my Bessa & LTM lens kit to finance going back into Kiev/Contax. The only thing I miss is the Canon 35/1.8 I owned but the CZJ glass I pick up for effectively pennies more than makes up for it.

William
 
Mabelsound, I know you are in the States, so you may not be familiar with the items I'll talk about, and this will take some googling. But please humor me, and I think you will find an interesting, usefull comparison.

Ever heard of the Lada (or VAZ) 2101? It is a Fiat 124 made in Russia. It was made with the same dies as the Fiat, and the factory was actually set up by Italian engineers working for Fiat. As the 124 was already a bit old, they even improved on the engine design.

In theory, a Lada 2101 is as good-or better- than a Fiat 124. But in practice, the opposite is true. Hard parts are all the same, but two things aren't: quality control and soft parts (gaskets). So you can take a Lada apart, carefully assamble it yourself, and then you'll probably have the equal of a Fiat. Or then again, you might get lucky, and buy one that was built with very good attention at the plant, and you have a Fiat with lousy gaskets, but at a far lower price.

The very same is true when you compare Kievs and Contaxes. An early, well made Kiev is almost the same except for the soft parts, which plague Kievs (and not Contaxes, in my experience) with light leaks. With later Kievs, it boils down to the care taken in the building of the particular example.

For me, in today's market, I'd get a Contax. The price gap (once you figure servicing) has gotten so small that I think it makes far more sense. Of course, that is if one shops smartly- there are some ridiculous prices around, as pointed out by Ruben
 
Galfredus said:
Can someone tell me what "CLA" is, and how I might go about "CLA"-ing my Kiev?!

Thanks!

Galfredus
Click to expand...

'CLA' (or servicing) is something that I feel is discussed on forums almost to the point of obsession, as though every used camera you get automatically needs one. Perhaps I've been fortunate,- but in over forty years, and many cameras, I've never sent one away for servicing, my two Nikkormats, purchased in the seventies, have seen a lot of amatuer and semi-pro. use, and have never been opened,- they still do the job as well as ever. Yes, if a camera looks, feels and sounds as if it's had a hard life, it will almost certainly need attention, and is best rejected, I look for ones that look as though they have only been out twice a year at Christmas and holidays! I'm certainly puzzled by people having cheap cameras,- fsu's etc. professionally serviced, when the cost of a replacement almost makes them 'disposable'......still, each to their own, but I suspect there are a lot of people making a lot of money out of this alleged need for 'CLA'. I'll now retire to the shelter, to dodge the flak!! 🙂 Dave.
 
Dave Wilkinson said:
'CLA' (or servicing) is something that I feel is discussed on forums almost to the point of obsession, as though every used camera you get automatically needs one. Perhaps I've been fortunate,- but in over forty years, and many cameras, I've never sent one away for servicing, my two Nikkormats, purchased in the seventies, have seen a lot of amatuer and semi-pro. use, and have never been opened,- they still do the job as well as ever. Yes, if a camera looks, feels and sounds as if it's had a hard life, it will almost certainly need attention, and is best rejected, I look for ones that look as though they have only been out twice a year at Christmas and holidays! I'm certainly puzzled by people having cheap cameras,- fsu's etc. professionally serviced, when the cost of a replacement almost makes them 'disposable'......still, each to their own, but I suspect there are a lot of people making a lot of money out of this alleged need for 'CLA'. I'll now retire to the shelter, to dodge the flak!! 🙂 Dave.
Click to expand...

I too have been very lucky with purchases of used cameras and accessories.

Oh, there was one notable exception: My Kiev 4am; light leaks. I am still chasing one persistant one down. That said, The Kiev Survival Site is your friend. The Kiev is pretty easy to work on. Surprisingly so in fact. Working on your own camera does give one a sense of ownership (bonding?) probably not possible with most cameras.

And I have a thing about Zeiss glass (and its clones). YMMV
 
mabelsound said:
micromontenegro--excellent explanation, thank you! And believe it or not...I know what a Lada is. I'll keep an eye out for a Contax iia...
Click to expand...
The Contax IIa is a camera which is totally different from the Kiev. They don't have the least similar part (although I figured out that it's actually fully possible to replace a defective Contax IIa back closing disk - the part that is on the inner side of the camera back - with the one from a Kiev 4/4a).

The Kiev is the clone/derivative of the Contax II and so, the Contax IIa and the Contax II are totally different cameras as well.

Over the Contax II (and so, a good Kiev), the Contax IIa has its own strengths (smaller and lighter, quieter, generally more reliable shutter w/o the pesky prone-to-break ribbons problem) and weaknesses (fading at high-speeds with sometimes blank exposures @1/500 and 1/1250, dumb selftimer design, shorter rangefinder baselength, won't accept the prewar Biogon 35/2.8 and J-12 lenses).

Best value-for-money hit is a good Kiev 2a from the late 1950's. Some can be got for only $50.

Yet the only problem w/ the Kievs is to locate a good one, unless you are keen to change it into a Fiat 124 yourself. 😉
 
No flak from me! My Contax IIIa actually saw 50 years of hard labour (first in my dad's, then in my own hands) before getting serviced... and the fact is, it didn't need it- it was a 50th aniversary gift to her!
 
As for the prices of Contaxes at eBay now, these "Buy it Now" are there (I selected the cheapest for prived sellers and shops, the list goes on at higher prices):

a) US $348.00 - not working, and no lens included:
http://search.ebay.com/zeiss-contax...rvZ1QQsabfmtsZ1QQsacatZ625QQsaslcZ2QQsbrsrtZd


b) US $556.99 - Contax IIIa Camera Carl Zeiss SONNAR 50mm f/2 LENS, OVERALL MECHANICAL CONDITION: 9 , but not commenting on CLA

c) US $649.99Contax IIIa Camera Carl Zeiss SONNAR 50mm f/2 LENS. OVERALL MECHANICAL CONDITION: CAMERA MINTY. LENS SOLID 9
http://cgi.ebay.com/Contax-IIIa-Cam...ryZ15234QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem


d) US $438.60. Contax IIIa, looks very good, but without lens
http://cgi.ebay.com/Zeiss-Ikon-Cont...VQQcmdZViewItemQQ_trksidZp1638Q2em118Q2el1247


Now, it may be very much the case eBay is specially high priced for contaxes - I don't follow other sources.

Cheers,
Ruben
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There is (or maybe was, now), a HS serviced IIIa BD camera with 50f1.5 in Pnet classifieds for $575.
No connection to seller.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

popavvakum
Kiev cameras and Jupiter-8Ms: working distance, lens resolution and focus
Replies
11
Views
1K
rfaspen
rfaspen
dee
Surprise favoured Kievs ...
Replies
2
Views
1K
Ko.Fe.
Ko.Fe.
wern0122
Sonnar 50/1.5 (Contax RF) CLA recommendations in the US?
Replies
3
Views
520
wern0122
wern0122
J
Did Nikon really blow Leitz and Zeiss out of the water in 1950? Not quite, but....
Replies
9
Views
1K
aoresteen
aoresteen
J
  • Article Article
How Lomography Singlehandedly Revived the Moribund 110 Format!A boon to shooters and collectors seeking something different and fun.
Replies
13
Views
1K
Archiver
A
Back
Top Bottom