kuzano
Veteran
Interesting, because when I get my takeup spool to operate correctly, it seems to me that my spacing is a bit better. I find this confusing because the spacing should be a function of the sprockets that pull/drive the film, and not of the proper friction or takeup of the takeup spool. Hmmm. My camera was supposed to have been CLA'd shortly before I purchased it, and it's been functioning very nicely, except for this one issue of film piling up on the takeup occasionally. That's a reminder for me to tighten up the screw in the takeup mechanism.
R
ruben
Guest
Yes indeed ! But first let me put on the table I never held a Nikon S2 on my hands and yet I think your comparizon test is a very original idea.
Now my theory. There is no doubt the Kiev you squeezed from Fedka is a very good one. Nevertheless Fedka is a seller, not a refurbisher. It is quite possible that your camera was refurbished before being sold to Fedka, precisely in order to be sold to Fedka, since his craft is to recognize good stuff and resell it.
By this I am going to say that your Kiev, for all the merits it deserves, still doesn't take full advantage of the Kievs full potential. A home CLAed Kiev doesn't "kick" at any point, and in my Kievs as far as the speed raises, the sub-noise/camera shake is accordingly lower. But I admit I have allowed myself some translation freedom when dealing with the shutter compound.
The great advantage of the home CLAed Kiev is that you can input the mamouth amounts of work/time, this predator needs to grow.
Lastly, for all the good things I can say about myself, I must admit that softness and shutter silence have always been my highest priority. I am not so much shure my Kievs will stand a frame spacing comparizon with other Kievs, or a high accuracy test of harmony between the distance scale and the film plane sharpness at the 0.9m neighbourhood.
So all in all, when Henry Sherer asks you several hundred bucks for bringing a Contax to perfection, I think you are getting a bargain price.
Cheers,
Ruben
Last edited by a moderator:
mooge
Well-known
okay- about that shutter kick...
the Kiev shutter is more like a garage door than a cloth curtain- it's made of linked brass strips. brass is heavy. high speeds are required for fast shutter speeds. so we have our heavy garage doors moving at fast speeds then quickly coming to a halt. you can defintately feel the shutter going off, the momentum of the shutter is that great- but the downwards motion is mostly absorbed by your hands, and most of it occurs after the exposure has been made, as the curtains hit the bottom of the shutter.
but slow speeds you say? that's a different story- from speeds 1/50 to B an escapement of some sort is used. this slows down the speed of the garage doors- less speed, less momentum: less shake.
conversely, the Leica shutter. for B it's quick open, quick close. however, the leica's cloth shutter has little momentum, thus a minimal about of shake is created.
the kiev/contax? for B, the shutter is slow open, slow close, so very little shake is generated. my guess is that a Kiev is an excellent choice for demanding long exposures (no proactical knowledge here- the tripod socket on mine is too big).
if you don't believe me- put your Kiev on your palm, wind, set to 1/125 and use the selftimer to fire. it's there- not grand, but it's there.
(and all of this is nullified by my speciemin's xtralousy release...)
cheers,
D
the Kiev shutter is more like a garage door than a cloth curtain- it's made of linked brass strips. brass is heavy. high speeds are required for fast shutter speeds. so we have our heavy garage doors moving at fast speeds then quickly coming to a halt. you can defintately feel the shutter going off, the momentum of the shutter is that great- but the downwards motion is mostly absorbed by your hands, and most of it occurs after the exposure has been made, as the curtains hit the bottom of the shutter.
but slow speeds you say? that's a different story- from speeds 1/50 to B an escapement of some sort is used. this slows down the speed of the garage doors- less speed, less momentum: less shake.
conversely, the Leica shutter. for B it's quick open, quick close. however, the leica's cloth shutter has little momentum, thus a minimal about of shake is created.
the kiev/contax? for B, the shutter is slow open, slow close, so very little shake is generated. my guess is that a Kiev is an excellent choice for demanding long exposures (no proactical knowledge here- the tripod socket on mine is too big).
if you don't believe me- put your Kiev on your palm, wind, set to 1/125 and use the selftimer to fire. it's there- not grand, but it's there.
(and all of this is nullified by my speciemin's xtralousy release...)
cheers,
D
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Yes at the slower speeds it's entirely different ... anything below 1/50 is accompanied by a sound not unlike a small mammal being strangled!
R
ruben
Guest
Hmm, following what I learned from the Kiev curtains, I think I could measurably lower the noise and vibration of your garage door.
The brass strips of the Kiev shutter are not heavy metal blocks but very light strips, whose shutting movement is gradual. You can further silence them by some sort of oil application between the links, followed by a good cleaning of the area.
Overall the great question is wether the shutter mechanism is very clean, greased, AND DISTENSIONED TO THE MINIMUM NECESSARY FORCE. Ussually it is quite strange to find a Kiev with an already distensioned shutter.
Cheers,
Ruben
Last edited by a moderator:
hks3sgte
Established
Yes at the slower speeds it's entirely different ... anything below 1/50 is accompanied by a sound not unlike a small mammal being strangled!
great way of describing it!
acheyj
Well-known
Yes at the slower speeds it's entirely different ... anything below 1/50 is accompanied by a sound not unlike a small mammal being strangled!
Or a sigh of intense satisfaction and pleasure.
ron
Last edited:
rolleistef
Well-known
Dear Ruben, maybe you could make a sticky about the ways and means tune a kiev shutter? That would be invaluable!
That would be invaluable!
blw
Well-known
Yes, I second rolleistef's motion!
mooge
Well-known
perhaps there is some confusion, my Kiev's shutter is not excessively loud or shaky.
haha, I had to crank up my shutter a few good turns, I can't fathom how it worked (or did it?) with that spring power. (but come to think of it, it must be overtensioned now. arrgh.) in any case, I blame crude Soviet quality control (har har)
R
ruben
Guest
Hi dragunov,
Let me say that while it is formally true that the tension of the shutter is controlled by a spring and the spring by a screw, whose number of turns gives us the measure of desired tension - it is a bit more than that.
The whole mechanism should be cleaned beforehand, (and we are talking about a cleaning submitted to loupe inspection), and then greased and oiled. It is only then, that you can effectively distension the mechanism.
Not so big deal, to disassemble, clean and lube - but it takes A LOT of time and patience, rather than high technical knowledge. You are talking now with a person of quite low technical knowledge - but with a lot of patience and a very small budget to fiddle with other camera systems.
It would be fantastic had the Kievs a built in good autoexposure device. Yet as it is, as they are, the Kievs hide great potential - the smoothness and low noise among them. The contrasty viewfinder and great yellow patch, etc.
Cheers,
Ruben
mooge
Well-known
well, I pulled (more than) a few parts and rinsed with lighter fluid like 3 times, so I can say that it's pretty clean. but then, I couldn't figure out how to pull some of the parts, the top curtain for example (not that it would be a good idea, but I tried).
what are you to look for under the loupe...?
I'm not to big on autoexposure, but a better meter ( like a CdS one in the pop up hood... hey, sounds like a DIY job) would have been nice- though my selenium cell still works, it's range is about the same as my sunny 16 estimation range.
and yeah, camera repair is not for the impatient.
what are you to look for under the loupe...?
I'm not to big on autoexposure, but a better meter ( like a CdS one in the pop up hood... hey, sounds like a DIY job) would have been nice- though my selenium cell still works, it's range is about the same as my sunny 16 estimation range.
and yeah, camera repair is not for the impatient.
40oz
...
I use my Kiev 4's meter as a sanity check. It agrees with my handheld meter, but as you say the range is limited. I think the take-away is that your sunny-16 experience is adequate, not that the meter is limiting.
There aren't many cameras with built-in metering that have a much broader range. Even my handheld meter bottoms out before my film does. I'm left with "Dim-1.5" much of the time a meter would actually be handy, and experience does the job.
Realistically, something like a Luna-Six or perhaps a Quantum Calc-u-Light would be better, but not much else. If you lived in Minnesota or Wisconsin you could duct tape one of those to the top of your Kiev, but anywhere else in the world, people would think that was strange lol
There aren't many cameras with built-in metering that have a much broader range. Even my handheld meter bottoms out before my film does. I'm left with "Dim-1.5" much of the time a meter would actually be handy, and experience does the job.
Realistically, something like a Luna-Six or perhaps a Quantum Calc-u-Light would be better, but not much else. If you lived in Minnesota or Wisconsin you could duct tape one of those to the top of your Kiev, but anywhere else in the world, people would think that was strange lol
David Murphy
Veteran
You have a sweet camera for sure, but be sure to give credit where credit is due. The early Kiev's are direct copies of the Contax II.
Be sure to add Jupiter 12 to your kit for this camera. It's the best lens bargain going in the rangefinder world.
P.S. Can you tell us where you bought the camera, and how much you paid?
Be sure to add Jupiter 12 to your kit for this camera. It's the best lens bargain going in the rangefinder world.
P.S. Can you tell us where you bought the camera, and how much you paid?
Last edited:
hks3sgte
Established
Thanks.
The Jupiter 12 is next plus a decent finder.
I bought the camera on eBay for $51.
mooge
Well-known
try as I might, I couldn't do it, was not sure what to remove. got a few screws out and fiddled with it, but then I realized it's probably not worth the effort...
I assume you could put it back together if you took lots of pictures, made notes and scored the gears.
the Kiev survival site is GREAT, but there is nothing on adjusting the shutter. that's absolutely essential...
ok, maybe the meter is useful near the tail end of the range, my sunny 16 is not that great (work in progress)
I got my Kiev 4 (1964) for $20 off Keh.com... naturally, shipping was like $24... and took a month.
L
lkgroup
Guest
One of my favorite cameras is a 1952 Kiev 2. I use a 53 1.8 Helios as my main lens and find it to be outstanding.
The camera is smooth, very quiet and the pictures other rangefinders in quality, if not in workmanship. I got a Grip Tac leather (From Camera Leather) and recovered the camera and it really looks shape.
I don't have an extra 35mm J-12, which should be your no 1 lens to get after a normal lens, but I do have a couple other lenses available in the Contax/Keiv Mount if you are interested.
85mm F/2 J-9 1959 Silver (A little stiff) good shape $75
135mm F/4 J-11 1959 Silver $40.
Let me know if you are interested at all in these lenses.
You got a great camera with the Kiev 2.
Leo
The camera is smooth, very quiet and the pictures other rangefinders in quality, if not in workmanship. I got a Grip Tac leather (From Camera Leather) and recovered the camera and it really looks shape.
I don't have an extra 35mm J-12, which should be your no 1 lens to get after a normal lens, but I do have a couple other lenses available in the Contax/Keiv Mount if you are interested.
85mm F/2 J-9 1959 Silver (A little stiff) good shape $75
135mm F/4 J-11 1959 Silver $40.
Let me know if you are interested at all in these lenses.
You got a great camera with the Kiev 2.
Leo
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
Seconded.
At some point I cease to understand this irrational desire for quietness. My "shooter" Kiev is a 1949 Kiev II that had its shutter repaired in Kiev last year by a factory technician. The shutter is adjusted to spec, a 1/1250 is a 1/1250. At 1/25 the shutter gives a nice unobtrusive whir that is all but unnoticeable as soon as there are living, breathing people around you, and at 1/125 and 1/250 it's a faint click. If people detension their shutter in order to have it even quieter than this, maybe they should use their cameras outside their insulated Hi-Fi-optimized living room. If it was good enough for Capa, it's good enough for me, and if you want it quieter the only thing left that will give you that quietness is a digital compact
Philipp
R
ruben
Guest
I think the abovequoted statement is worth a good thinking.
Even better, for our good luck, we can test and get conclusive results. For some of us using negative film, instead of slides, some relative byas is not the most relevant since there are many factors, already byasing and absolute correct exposure. Nevertheless, none of us want that any of the speed settings (excluding the highest 1250) will go ridiculously or unusefull unacurate.
So in order to test a home (or Oleg) distensioned sutter, we know that 1 stop is 1 stop, therefore our test can start with setting our camera at a permanent shutter speed and create a series of exposures in which we alter the combinations of speed and aperture, leaving the same basic EV. Our results should be seen in the film as a constant density.
True, if we want to be more severe in our testing, a simple observation of the processed film will not be enough. We should print at a constant time paper exposure.
Furthermore, we can even perfection our test by choosing our most trustable non-Kiev camera, perform on the same film the EV test, and compare its results with those of our Kiev, either at the level of processed film ovservation, or at the printing stage.
It would be of the highest interest to me to perform this test the first opportunity when time is available.
Ooops !, I almost forgot, if anyone is going to perform this test, don't forget to test your Kiev before the distensioning stage, i.e. with the shutter tensioned as it comes beforehand. This may be of great interest too.
And do not forget, that the distensioning stage, as always said, must be on the basis of a perfectly clean and lubed shutter mechanism.
Personally I am not going to perform the test tomorrow morning, but I keep it in mind. So far my Kiev exposures have been "OK", in the spectrum of my EV variations, but I openly reckognize a propper test is due.
Cheers,
Ruben
R
ruben
Guest
I think we should re-view our basic aims.
In this discussion about whether to distension the Kiev shutter or not, there are two basic entangled issues, that could be separated only for the sake of clarity. One is the very utility of a silent shutter. The second is common sense. The tragedy is that both depend on the eye of the beholder.
There is no doubt Philipp, that everything is relative to the measure of severity with wihich it is judged. Scientifically talking, it seems to me there is no absolute silent shutter in the same sense that there is not absolute 1/500 speed, or in the same sense that if we were going to measure a 10cm block - the measure of accuracy will depend on the capacity of the measuring device.
I do not think appropiate in a long post as this to repeat old and well established truths about the intrinsic value of a silent shutter. This discussion is not with me but with Leica and Zeiss designers, as well as with many other manufacturers, even Maitani, and the myriad of photographers who have paid their best money to have a silent shutter. My only assertion here is that the Kievs have the potential to rank at the top to the list of besides the best non between the lens high class cameras.
We have a special thread, appearing from time to time, called something like "Why rangefinder?". Each of us has her/his own reason. I am very much aware other people like rangefinders for their capacity to meter distance with wide lenses, their smaller size, the non-blocked view of the subject when firing the shutter, etc, etc.
But for me it is first and foremost the best tool for MY street photography, requiring many times a silent shutter and most of the times a quick manual distance metering - which is better served by the superimposition of the double image. Silent shutter and quick manual distance metering. Other photographers are equally entitled to evaluate their likes of rangefinders in different formulations.
It is worth to note that I do not claim the Kiev system is the best for street photography, far from that. For street photography of the quicky type, an autoexposure camera is required. So by now I am trying the Konicas Auto, whose shutter is noiser than those in my Kievs.
But the Konica Auto S(2 and 3) are not system cameras. Therefore my Kievs remain my System Rangefinder - not my exclusive street camera. Some of us do not need a system, others do.
So despite the AE shortcoming, and a few minor ones, the Kievs still hold their own by being system cameras and supersilent shutter.
Be kind in considering that my approach is just a small grain of sand in Malibu beaches. But don't kid yourself with the prejudice that your approach is all the rest.
By common sense it is obvious that there is no point in achieving the highest possible silent Kiev shutter if the resulting speed byassing is going to ruin picture after picture, most of the pictures, half of the pictures or even a third, etc.
In practice, my results have been more than satisfactory in the technical terms of exposure. I never had a badly exposed frame when metered with any of my digital Sekonics.
In my opinion my kitchinette methods to check speed accuracy are much less accurate than any of the other sugested methods at the previous Highway 61 post.
Furthermore I am convinced that if tested with a good shutter tester (by the way - shutter testers are for sale at quite low prices) my Kievs may show some discrepancies not catched by my eye. But no speed is repeating the previous or the next one - and all are quite good for negative film, i,e, around a third stop tolerance, excluding the 1250.
In other words my tolerances are, let's say, generous, or plainly rough.
Certainly macro-photography, and other genres would require higher camera standards.
But now, let's invert the situation. Let's say that in order to silence the Kiev shutter to the delicious level I have, I will be forced, by rigurous shutter tester examination, to accept a level of plus/minus one third of stop unaccuracy, variating in a somewhat consistent direction: Would I buy the silence in exchange of the one third stop unaccuracy ?
I think I have already answered MY choice.
Respectfully,
Ruben
In this discussion about whether to distension the Kiev shutter or not, there are two basic entangled issues, that could be separated only for the sake of clarity. One is the very utility of a silent shutter. The second is common sense. The tragedy is that both depend on the eye of the beholder.
There is no doubt Philipp, that everything is relative to the measure of severity with wihich it is judged. Scientifically talking, it seems to me there is no absolute silent shutter in the same sense that there is not absolute 1/500 speed, or in the same sense that if we were going to measure a 10cm block - the measure of accuracy will depend on the capacity of the measuring device.
I do not think appropiate in a long post as this to repeat old and well established truths about the intrinsic value of a silent shutter. This discussion is not with me but with Leica and Zeiss designers, as well as with many other manufacturers, even Maitani, and the myriad of photographers who have paid their best money to have a silent shutter. My only assertion here is that the Kievs have the potential to rank at the top to the list of besides the best non between the lens high class cameras.
We have a special thread, appearing from time to time, called something like "Why rangefinder?". Each of us has her/his own reason. I am very much aware other people like rangefinders for their capacity to meter distance with wide lenses, their smaller size, the non-blocked view of the subject when firing the shutter, etc, etc.
But for me it is first and foremost the best tool for MY street photography, requiring many times a silent shutter and most of the times a quick manual distance metering - which is better served by the superimposition of the double image. Silent shutter and quick manual distance metering. Other photographers are equally entitled to evaluate their likes of rangefinders in different formulations.
It is worth to note that I do not claim the Kiev system is the best for street photography, far from that. For street photography of the quicky type, an autoexposure camera is required. So by now I am trying the Konicas Auto, whose shutter is noiser than those in my Kievs.
But the Konica Auto S(2 and 3) are not system cameras. Therefore my Kievs remain my System Rangefinder - not my exclusive street camera. Some of us do not need a system, others do.
So despite the AE shortcoming, and a few minor ones, the Kievs still hold their own by being system cameras and supersilent shutter.
Be kind in considering that my approach is just a small grain of sand in Malibu beaches. But don't kid yourself with the prejudice that your approach is all the rest.
By common sense it is obvious that there is no point in achieving the highest possible silent Kiev shutter if the resulting speed byassing is going to ruin picture after picture, most of the pictures, half of the pictures or even a third, etc.
In practice, my results have been more than satisfactory in the technical terms of exposure. I never had a badly exposed frame when metered with any of my digital Sekonics.
In my opinion my kitchinette methods to check speed accuracy are much less accurate than any of the other sugested methods at the previous Highway 61 post.
Furthermore I am convinced that if tested with a good shutter tester (by the way - shutter testers are for sale at quite low prices) my Kievs may show some discrepancies not catched by my eye. But no speed is repeating the previous or the next one - and all are quite good for negative film, i,e, around a third stop tolerance, excluding the 1250.
In other words my tolerances are, let's say, generous, or plainly rough.
Certainly macro-photography, and other genres would require higher camera standards.
But now, let's invert the situation. Let's say that in order to silence the Kiev shutter to the delicious level I have, I will be forced, by rigurous shutter tester examination, to accept a level of plus/minus one third of stop unaccuracy, variating in a somewhat consistent direction: Would I buy the silence in exchange of the one third stop unaccuracy ?
I think I have already answered MY choice.
Respectfully,
Ruben
Last edited by a moderator: