Moskva-2 or Iskra-1?

[godfrog]

Im having a hard time choosing between these two Russian folders.

Ive seen many people recommend the Iskra over the Moskva-5, however, Ive read in many places that the Moskva-2/4 have a better (although somewhat slower) lens than the Moskva-5. Ive also read the Moskva-2 is higher quality than later Moskva-4/5 due to using Zeiss parts (as opposed to later making own parts with Zeiss tooling).

The bigger 6x9 format, the simple/reliable film advance/counter, non-interlocked aperture/shutter settings and the lower price speaks in advantage of the Moskva-2.

The better view/rangefinder speaks in favor of the Iskra-1, as does the faster lens and shutter. Im not sure if there is any quality difference between the lenses at say F8 or F11.

Anyone have any advice that might help me make up my mind?

 

[Krzys]

I've used a Super Ikonta IV and an Iskra. The latter is much much better.

 

[Proteus617]

My main issues with Moskva/Iskra are the squinty viewfinders when mounted in the top deck and the potential for flop in the front standard. As far as lens quality and the potential for Zeiss tooling, 6 decades is a great equalizer. I would look for a Moskva with the flip-up viewfinder (4 or earlier) and try to get it cheap. You might have to go through one or two before you find the right one.

 

[Steve M.]

My experience w/ a Super Ikonta IV is very different that Krzys. My IV is the one camera I would never sell. In terms of build quality and image making it is one of the best cameras ever made. Certainly better than an Iskra, unless you have a really dud Ikonta and a great Iskra. Not even in the same leagues.

My one experience w/ a Moskva 2 was not good. Bellows pinholes, unstable lens standard, and crude build quality. Hey, it's a Russian camera! The lens was pretty good.

You know, for about the same money you can buy a Voigtlander Bessa 6x9 camera. I would definitely go that route if I wanted a quality 6x9 shooter for the least cost. Always go w/ the Germans if you can w/ these type of things. They're just better cameras. You'll have to scale focus it, but no big deal. Folders w/ red windows aren'rt fast cameras to shoot anyway.

 

[remegius]

I own an Iskra, and mine is a great camera. But I must qualify that. These cameras in the condition that I found mine are difficult to come by. They were routinely issued to the Russian press corp, and many of them were heavily used, to the point where the built-in frame counters no longer work. That is why you will often find Iskras with ruby frame windows installed in the rear. God only knows what condition the rangefinder is on some of these cameras. So if you decide on an Iskra...be careful. That said, the camera in good condition has an accurate rangefinder, a very good lens, and has been a terrific photographic companion for me.

Cheers...

Rem

 

[godfrog]

Thanks for the replies! Many good words about the Iskra...

Ive read more into the matter and apparently only the first Moskva-2s had reused German parts (including lenses and Compur shutters). None of the Moskva-2s Ive found for sale are among the earlier cameras, so as for Moskva cameras, Im probably better off with the Moskva-4.

As for other cameras, the Bessa 6x9 Ive seen for sale are either expensive or have a 3 element lens. Same for 6x9 Ikonta cameras.

 

[pschauss]

I have a Mockva 2 and 5 and an Iskra all of which I was able to get working with minimal effort.

I find my Mockva 2 with the flip-up viewfinder much easier to use than my Mockva 5 because it is large. Also, Mockva 2 viewfinder is located directly over the taking lens, eliminating some paralex problems. With a 6x9 negative I have gotten some spectacular results with this camera. Be aware, however, that both Mockvas use front cell focusing which does sacrifice some sharpness. The Mockvas are a bit awkward to hold, especially in portrait mode. This does lead to some camera shake problems. I usually hold the camera upside down when I use it in portrait mode. Film flatness can also be a problem with the 6x9 negative. When I advance the film, I always leave room so that I can advance it another 1/4 inch or after I open the front and just before I snap the picture.

If you can find an Iskra with a film counter which works and if you can manage to cure the light leaks in the takeup and feed spool areas, an Iskra will also produce really sharp pictures. I believe that the entire lens on the Iskra moves when focusing. (Others correct me here if I am wrong).

I find the Iskra a bit easier to use, especially when I am traveling, because frame spacing is automatic and it has a clip on the top to hold my VC Meter. Mine gives me a small amount of frame overlap when I use modern films like Tri-X. I get proper spacing with Foma films.

Note that both the Mockva and the Iskra have coated lenses. Pictures taken with a prewar Super Ikonta will have less contrast because its lens is not coated.

 

[P C Headland]

The Iskra is the better camera, assuming you are equally comfortable with the formats. It is a later design, somewhat more complex (particularly the film wind mechanism), and feels better made.

The Iskra viewfinder is most certainly not squinty, in fact it has probably the best viewfinder of any of the older folders. Better than the Super Ikonta III, better than the Mamiya Six, better than the Certo Six.

The one thing you do need to test for is the film wind mechanism. If it is working, it should, bar totally ham-fisted operation, continue to work. The lens is great, and is unit focused. The Certo Six lens is slightly better, and faster (compared to both my Iskra I and II). Oh, and the shutter makes a lovely "schnick" sound 😉

If I could only keep one camera, it would be the Iskra.

 

[wupdigoj]

I have owned a moskva 5 and had lots of problem with it, mainly the strong realease action of the shutter blurred every picture except using B. Later I have tried several 6x9 folders, but couldn't get a decent one, film flatness I suppose. The iskra is another story. I have had an iskra I and an Iskra 2. The one I have now is made from parts of the two. In one of them the shutter had all sort of problems, but the second one have worked very well with a standard CLA. In my opinion the two shutters were made from different materials and very different quality standars. The good one comes from the iskra 2

The lens is very good, the shutter very soft and the viewfinder/rangefinder excelent. The frame counter of mine have worked steadily for seven years, and then it just stuck. It is nearly impossible to repair, so now I have a nice red window in the back.
I heartly recommend the iskra over the moskva, but to find a good one could be problematic, if you are not inclined to repair cameras.

Javier

 

[godfrog]

Thanks for further replies, especially to pschauss posting from experience with both cameras.

Ive decided to buy a Moskva-2. The bigger format is simply too tempting for me, downsides seem possible to work around, and the camera is in my opinion just beautiful. The Iskra seems excellent and if I like MF folder shooting (Im buying my first now) I might end up buying a Iskra sometime in the future, it seems very capable. The frame advance does bother me though, it appears you get to choose between "already broken" and "inaccurate and going to break".

The one I purchased is below, there were cheaper ones but this had the most attractive details (condition, CLA, good pictures, good seller, mask/case included, returns accepted):
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=300338864557