Kiev ? Which model ?

[Xmas]

dee
The meters do look as 'attractive' as warts, but they make the camera more useful, although they are not sensitive, and need careful use.
One option is to wait until a UK forum member is selling a Kiev which he has been using, you only have to spring the UK postage and most forum members are open about what they sell.
Brouse the classifieds.
Peter Loy a london dealer has some Kievs, google 'peter Loy' - good luck.
Noel

 

[tedwhite]

I would opt for the Kiev 4AM - no ugly meter - and a very handsome camera. Mine was made in 1980, so we're talking hi-tech.

 

[dee]

Blast from the past , could not resist !
These old posts following my Kiev fever culminating in those Contax/Kievs from ex-Arsensal techs .
The Olegs are still going strong , albeit in new clothes - 4=tan and 4m=purple .
Trying to clear some of the 17 !
dee

 

[Elmar Lang]

Hello, the Kiev rangefinder camera can be addictive...

My favourite one is a 1968-made 4A, bought back in 1975. It works very fine also today.

With time, I became something like a collector of Kiev and its ancestor, the Contax-II/III.

Besides collecting, the Kiev can be a real pleasure, as the everyday's film camera.

 

[Zorkiiglaza]

I have used them all except the Kiev 5 and all of the lenses.
I prefer the lines of the meter less Kiev 2's and the Kiev 4's.
Having the take-up spool is also a benefit .
I enjoyed using them and found them to be smooth to use and the shutters quiet.
I found the Jupiter 9 to be very sharp.

 

[john341]

Easy choice..I bought one of the last Kievs before they shut the factory down. I asked a dealer for a body only, and when it arrived, I sent it back to Oleg for a service..the speeds were rubbish, but the speed selector, so different from earlier Kievs, is brilliant. Years later, I am still using it with a Yupiter 8-M lens and I still love it. A brilliant model let down by crappy workmanship. But thanks to Oleg, it lives on

 

[David Murphy]

I had one of the older metered models many years ago. It worked OK, but one can pretty much forget about using the meters. Learn the Sunny-16 rule or get an exposure meter (or both). Therefore I'd buy the Kiev in best condition that you can find, meter or not.

The lenses made for Kiev have pretty good optics, and for the most part adequate mechanics. No Kiev I've ever seen is even remotely as well made as a post-war Contax however (Contax's costs a lot more though). The vintage Kiev I had was somewhat closer to a pre-war Contax model in handling and use (after which they were fashioned).

The newer Kievs have a poor reputation. I did handle a late production Kiev once, and I was not impressed at all. Personally I would avoid late models.

 

[David Hughes]

FWIW, I think the early ones without the metering are the ones to chase after and they have that sensible little foot to stop them falling over. It's something all cameras should have, imo.


Regards, David

 

[Philip Whiteman]

... and place an early Kiev II alongside a prewar Contax II and you'll see its 95% as well made as the German camera. In fact, the chrome looks better...

 

[Forest_rain]

That's really interesting, that there are some kiev fans here. I've heard nothing but bad things about FSU rangefinders until now. Reliability issues, frame spacing, difficulty loading, etc. It made me avoid them and buy an Canon LTM camera. But I'm curious to try the contax mount lenses which seem to be cheaper and in abundance, and pre-war contax RF can be expensive.


Just a question, can the bottom loading leicas and canons use tape like the kiev for bottom loading models to the film spool, or should one always trim the leader? It certainly would be more convenient to use tape instead as I've seen recommended on some threads.

 

[David Hughes]

From what I have seen and experienced, the bottom loading Leicas have take up spools that gradually fail, as the rivets holding the clip loosen, and do not hold the film. So that I guess is the reason why people tape the film on to the spool centre. An alternative is to get hold of a FED or Zorki one, which are a better design, but not all versions fit the Leica and it's difficult - if not impossible - to sort them out online but only by testing them with the camera.

Trimming the film is for loading, not fitting to the spool.

I can't speak for the Canon, I've not used one.


Regards, David



PS (Edit) You really ought to look at all the people having trouble with their Leicas; there's enough of them on these forums to convince you that all cameras have problems and a lot of the problems are caused by the previous owners. And there's worse, a lot of people who know nothing about them try to repair them; by "them" I mean almost every make of camera...

 

[Beemermark]

Who is Oleg and does he have a website?

 

[David Murphy]

That's really interesting, that there are some kiev fans here. I've heard nothing but bad things about FSU rangefinders until now. Reliability issues, frame spacing, difficulty loading, etc. It made me avoid them and buy an Canon LTM camera. But I'm curious to try the contax mount lenses which seem to be cheaper and in abundance, and pre-war contax RF can be expensive.


Just a question, can the bottom loading leicas and canons use tape like the kiev for bottom loading models to the film spool, or should one always trim the leader? It certainly would be more convenient to use tape instead as I've seen recommended on some threads.

Kiev's load pretty much like modern cameras. I never had to trim a film leader to use any Kiev or Contax I owned. The main difference between loading a Kiev and a modern SLR (for instance) is that the back is completely removable, but this is not hard to get used to and has some advantages. One needs to manual reset the film counter too - easy. The Nikon F is the same except the film counter resets itself.

Kiev's are easier to load than early Canon rangefinders (which are essentially Leica III copies).

 

[KoNickon]

Who is Oleg and does he have a website?

Oleg Khalyavin, in Russia. His site is OKVintageCameras.com. I have a Contax III I bought from someone here on the forum that he had worked on (probably replaced the shutter with a Kiev one). Works fine. He has an excellent reputation; very good prices too.

 

[KoNickon]

Sorry, wrong name: http://okvintagecamera.com/

 

[paul in AZ]

Who is Oleg and does he have a website?

I have a kiev 4a coming from Oleg. Its somewhere in the Russian mail.

Rather than the crapshoot of the big site I tried to go to established dealers. The one in Manilla of all places isn't shipping. Fedka [in NY] didn't answer emails. I suspect both are Covid shutdown victims.

Oleg responded to emails promptly and the only delay was the few days it took him to service the camera. Apparently he services or checks out everything he sells.

Cost was very reasonable considering it has been serviced.
Shipping is a bit pricey, [$33] via Russian post but then he is some 10 time zones east of Arizona. He has no FEDEX service way out there in eastern Russia.

Now the wait for it to get here.


Edit: Just remembered the name of the store in the Philippines. soviet camera.

 

[markjwyatt]

Be careful. Kiev's are gateway cameras. My 4a was a gateway to my Contax iia!

 

[Beemermark]

Sorry, wrong name: http://okvintagecamera.com/

Thanks KoNickon. I had two Kievs at one time and both worked flawlessly. Sold them both but still have two or three lenses. No luck in selling the lenses and I sort of miss the cameras -🙂

 

[valdas]

I have Kiev 4 from 1969, I paid 20€ for the camera and lens (Helios 103) combo - it works flawlessly - no light leaks, accrate frame spacing, correct speeds, but... ergonomically Kiev for me is a disaster. Maybe it’s just me. I constantly have my fingers obstructing RF window due to the position of the focusing ring, then “catching” the infinity lock unintentionally...

 

[Philip Whiteman]

One of the great frustrations in my life has been trying to get the 1980s Kiev my son gave me to work properly. It has utterly defeated me, despite repeated strip-downs and fettling. Every attempt to plug the light leaks and stop frames overlapping has failed, and the wind-on feels like a pepper grinder, however artfully I lean and lubricate the gear wheels. By contrast the '50s Kiev II it inspired me to buy worked perfectly, straight out the original box - and I managed on my first attempt to get my beater of a Contax II, bought with one broken shutter ribbon and frozen focussing mount 'as seen', to function like new.

Valdosta above is a lucky fellow - all he needs to do is perfect the Contax/Kiev 'grip'! In my experience, finding a light-tight, non-frame-overlapping '70s or '80s Kiev is something of a lottery. It's a case of a beautiful design being made on ever more worn-out machinery by people who cared less and less about quality with each passing year (and, frankly, who could blame them). Early Kievs were prestigious products made with pride. Late ones less so, but what an opportunity they offered for inpernicous young shutterbugs to get into rangefinder photography!