No love for Zorki 6

shadowfox

shadowfox

Darkroom printing lives
Local time
12:54 AM
Joined
Oct 24, 2006
Messages
8,770
I often wondered why is it in a lot of threads asking "which FSU camera should I buy" rarely I see people recommending Zorki 6.

The top two FSU cameras recommended are Zorki 4 and Fed 2.

To me, Zorki 6 is better than those two (especially for beginners) because it has a very good RF patch, no removable film spool, hinged back, and a lever.

Care to enlighten me on this?
 
I have a FED 2a and a Zorki 6 and like them both but I prefer the Z-6 for the loading and ease of use and the VF. I like the Zorki with an I-61 L/D or the Jupiter 8.
 
I guess one reason is that Zorki-4 and FED-2 cameras tend to be cheaper because there were more of them made.
 
You see more Zorki 4 and FED-2 than Zorki 6 listed for sale.

I have two of the Zorki-6, and I've recommended them to some people at one time.
 
+1 for the Zorki 5. I prefer bottom loaders because they are thinner and less susceptible to light leaks. The downside, of course, is that you have to trim the film leader and the takeup spool is not permanently attached.
 
Another for the Zorki 5. The 6 is fine, but the 5 is slimmer and the 5a is just beautiful, slim and every bit as cranky as my other FSUs.
 
pschauss said:
+1 for the Zorki 5. I prefer bottom loaders because they are thinner and less susceptible to light leaks. The downside, of course, is that you have to trim the film leader and the takeup spool is not permanently attached.
Click to expand...

I don't understand.

What makes hinged back bodies thicker than bottom loader ones?
The hinges are on the side, not on the back.
 
shadowfox said:
I don't understand.

What makes hinged back bodies thicker than bottom loader ones?
The hinges are on the side, not on the back.
Click to expand...

You are right to ask, I've just measured the base plate and found them to be pretty much the same width at 30mm. It is clear that the back protrudes, but perhaps this is within a couple of mm. So, maybe it's just a perception?

(For those wondering about this, the Zorkis 5 & 6 are both significantly slimmer than those with removable backs.)
 
fidget said:
You are right to ask, I've just measured the base plate and found them to be pretty much the same width at 30mm. It is clear that the back protrudes, but perhaps this is within a couple of mm. So, maybe it's just a perception?

(For those wondering about this, the Zorkis 5 & 6 are both significantly slimmer than those with removable backs.)
Click to expand...

The Zorki -5 and -6 have the same dimenstions. However, the Zorki-6 does appear heftier because of the extra chrome and trims. The Zorki-5 has a simple, continuous oblong body without chrome sliding locks, hinges, delayed release levers. The pebbled vulcanite also appears to make the camera body more petite than if it's dressed in the industrial nylon that Zorki-6 came in.

Aside from the need to keep a lens on the mount for firing, and the bottom loading issue, Zorki-5 tend to have temperamental (and more damage prone) advance/winding mechanisms. Many Z-5 are found with heavy or rough turning winding levers.

For some reason, the Zorki-5 resembles the Leica M3 more than the Z-6.

Zorki-5
image8161.jpg



Zorki-6
image7411.jpg


image7431.jpg
 
I really like the Zorki 6, very easy to use and very stable - just like the FED 2. I think there is a psychological factor present here; the Zorki 6 does not have the special retro look and feel, it just looks like an old camera. Now there is a great difference between "old" and "retro" :D

The FED 2, with its mushroom winding knob, its protruding rewind knob (aka removing-from-eye-for-each-wind and getting-sore-fingers-when- rewinding) and its dark viewfinder (at least when compared to Zorki 6), still FED 2 usually is the one that I grab when I go out for a quick shoot in the neighborhood.

Hmm...I don't like what I have just written, but I am afraid there is some truth in it. I will go and exercise my Zorki 6 this weekend - PROMISE! :eek:
 
I remember asking my Armenian camera-collector-turned-camera-salesman in Tashkent whether he had a Zorki-6. He said that among Soviet photographers it had a reputation for being somewhat capricious because of the more complex film wind mechanism.

I don't think it's all that capricious, it's a rather simple mechanism after all. Maybe this reputation is just a reflection of the general mentality that things should be as simple as possible so as to be reliable. The embodiment of that in Soviet cameras is the FED-2, and not surprisingly my friend there considered the FED-2 the pinnacle of Soviet camera making.
 
konicaman said:
The FED 2, with its mushroom winding knob, its protruding rewind knob (aka removing-from-eye-for-each-wind and getting-sore-fingers-when- rewinding)
Click to expand...

Actually when you have a FED-2 with the mushroom wind knob and a mechanism that is in good shape, the wind mechanism will be so smooth that you don't have to take it off the eye. I have one (bought here, had been serviced by Fedka) where I can wind the film by sliding my index finger along the knob.
 
rxmd said:
I remember asking my Armenian camera-collector-turned-camera-salesman in Tashkent whether he had a Zorki-6. He said that among Soviet photographers it had a reputation for being somewhat capricious because of the more complex film wind mechanism.

I don't think it's all that capricious, it's a rather simple mechanism after all. Maybe this reputation is just a reflection of the general mentality that things should be as simple as possible so as to be reliable. The embodiment of that in Soviet cameras is the FED-2, and not surprisingly my friend there considered the FED-2 the pinnacle of Soviet camera making.
Click to expand...

The mechanism is simple indeed, but the way the gears mesh (they are laid in steps) is another thing. Get them to mesh right and you have a fine moving winding lever. A slight toggle to one of the grid layers, and the mechanism becomes gritty.

This was the state my Z-5 came in. I had to take it apart, loosen the screws holding the grids and plates on the winding mechanism to slightly displace and replace them until they meshed smoothly. Such was its condition, until a few months ago when the Z-5 was knocked rather strongly. No damage like dents, but it did make the winding tough.

I suppose that would be similar to what happened to those old non shock-proof watches which stopped when dropped.

There is also the issue of materials used. I've seen the insides of some dozen Zorki-6. Aside from a better layout which prevents the focus and winding parts from getting tangled, the gears used in the winding mechanism appear to be better made. I've seen a couple of Zorki-5 whose winding gears were stripped or broken- the parts appeared to of softer grade brass.

I also agree with what your friend said, I do see the FED-2 as the pinnacle of Soviet LTM cameras- both in function and aesthetics. Everything else that followed is quite 'fugly'. :D
 
Last edited:
I have two Zorki-5s with the red logo. Winding on seems to work OK when they are not loaded. When loaded, the film pulls the take-up spindle sideways and the winding mechanism jams. I also have one of the other Z-5 types and that is quite smooth.

The Fed-2 is the only example of truly successful design in the whole Soviet camera output as far as I can see. Even the Zorki-6 is let down by a poor catch on the hinged back. It is easy to accidentally pull this open when removing the camera from a pocket or bag.
 
I've suggested the Zorki 6 on several occasions. I like the bright, accurate RF and the easy-load back. No spool to lose. As others have pointed out, if the gears are correctly set up the winder works very nicely. Mine's let down by a rather industrial-strength return spring (I have only one, so I don't know if that's the norm). The Zorki 5 I have is much lighter - that also needed the gears cleaning, lubing and adjusting though.

As for the FED 2, I like that too but for ultimate simplicity it's beaten by the FED/Zorki 1.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom