What do I need for macro with Kiev?

It is possible, but not very practical. You need to get a special closeup kit (the Contaprox) or auxillary lenses (Contameter) that I believe were only made by Zeiss and never, to my knowledge, by the Soviets. There is more information about them here: http://www.trenholm.org/hmmerk/SHBG11.pdf

Basically for real macro or greater than 135mm telephoto it's time to breakout a Contarex :D SLR...

William
 
Richard, I would dare say that Kiev, like most RF cameras, is not particularly suited for macro work.
Unlike the SLR cameras, where in the viewfinder you see what the lens "sees", the Kiev's rangefinder is separate from the lens, and gives you only an approximation of what the lens sees.
So, in order to take macro shots, you would need a relatively complex rig, consisting of close-up lens for the camera lens, but also a rig which would go over the RF/VF "windows". Leica has such contraptions, mostly produced for the M3 camera, in order to use 35mm lens on the M3 - not particularly for taking macro shots.
"Dual Range" Summicron also comes to mind - it was advertised as intended for close-up shots (not exactly "macro", either).
In short, don't bother with macro shots with Kiev. I'm sure that, if you're stubborn and technically minded enough, you could make some kind of DIY solution, but its not cost-effective.
If you really want macro shots, get the cheapest SLR you can find with a macro lens, and you're good to go.
RF cameras are for other types of photos, so neither macro shots nor long telephotos are particularly easy to use, even on those cameras which enable you such things - and Kiev is not such a camera.

Some attachments were produced a long time ago for the original Contax cameras, but I doubt you can easily find such attachments, and even if you do, they'd be *very* expensive.... Not sure those would fit Kiev, either... Perhaps they would, but you would have to make sure before purchase...

Denis
 
Heh, William was faster than me, and provided a better answer, too.. :)
 
What William and Denis said. Like it or not, SLRs are more versatile than rangefinders. SLRs are the most efficient, accurate, and preferred solution for copy work and macro photography. Most of the gadgets that allow rangefinders to do macro work are Rube Goldberg contraptions with indirect viewing systems (with the exception of add on reflex housings such as the Leica Visoflex system). These often produce inaccurate results with framing and focus, and calculating the proper exposure can by tricky (especially if extension tubes are used). Nothing beats SLR's direct viewing through the taking lens, and with TTL metering exposure is a snap. SLRs are also much better for microphotography and long telephoto work. But I still love my rangefinders for the things they can do, and do with style.
 
Oldprof said:
Like it or not, SLRs are more versatile than rangefinders.
Click to expand...

Sacrilege, sir (grin)!

Let us not forget that rangefinders are exceptionally versatile as well - just in different areas. Smaller, for one thing. Tend to be quieter. And you can use heavy filtration that would prevent you from seeing/focusing correctly on an SLR - great for infrared photography, for example. For those of us with 'experienced' (read: old and tired) eyeballs, focusing is easier in general, and for available-light style photography, often the only game in town.

I find rangefinders faster to use - I can keep both eyes open and see subjects about to walk in or out of a frame, can't do that with an SLR.

When I'm depending on DOF to keep my subject in focus, the fact that my viewfinder is never out of focus means I don't have to worry about the rangefinder patch, I can just compose and shoot. With an SLR, if the lens is out of focus, DOF won't help you compose, since you're looking through the lens wide-open and don't see what it will see stopped-down. So try to compose without focusing - everything's all blurry! True that auto-everything has done away with some of those issues...

Anyway, the answers given about macro were all dead-on. SLRs do macro better, and that's the truth. But I beg to differ that SLRs are "more versatile." It's just a question of the job at hand.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
bmattock said:
... But I beg to differ that SLRs are "more versatile." It's just a question of the job at hand.
Click to expand...

Yes Bill, and in some ways a 1960 Volkswagen Beetle is superior to a 2004 Honda Accord. You gotta work pretty hard to convince people of this, but it can be done. :D
 
Originally posted by marlinspike In that case macro work will be done with my dSLR.
Click to expand...

A wise decision, Sir. ;)

The link you posted did have one bit of mis-information. The reference to "Contax" being stamped on the back of the faceplate is completely incorrect. By the very early 1950's all German parts for the Contax/Kiev had been consumed. When your camera was made in 1972, it was 100% USSR. That's not a bad thing as a Kiev can be a real joy to use. I like mine!

Walker
 
Thanks walker, I had read that bit either on the first link that comes up in google if you do a search for Kiev 4 or a link I got within that page. I shall delete it post haste.

In response to Bill, two things you counted against SLRs is easily overcome. For one is the two eyes open thing. It takes a bit of practice to get used to it, but I can do it easily (a skill best learned shooting sports). Another is the DoF thing. SLRs nowadays have a depth of field preview button where the lens will stop down before you take the picture. I do like my Kiev for it's size and noise level, plus film has it's plusses (and minuses) too. I can't wait to get my pictures developed tomorrow so I can see how this is (this is my first successful roll through this camera. The first roll I misloaded and while I took some what I think are amazing pictures, none of them got recorded onto anything, this roll I just fired off to test the camera, and got lucky and say a 64.5 mustang, an early chevelle, and a hot rodded old vw beetle).
Richard
 
Oldprof said:
Yes Bill, and in some ways a 1960 Volkswagen Beetle is superior to a 2004 Honda Accord. You gotta work pretty hard to convince people of this, but it can be done. :D
Click to expand...

Accords don't float. Quod erat demonstrandum.

That wasn't so hard, now, was it?

:D

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
marlinspike said:
In response to Bill, two things you counted against SLRs is easily overcome. For one is the two eyes open thing. It takes a bit of practice to get used to it, but I can do it easily (a skill best learned shooting sports).
Click to expand...

Doesn't work so well with lenses of telephoto (or extra-wide) focal length, I've found.

Another is the DoF thing. SLRs nowadays have a depth of field preview button where the lens will stop down before you take the picture.
Click to expand...

I was unaware that DOF Preview had been re-introduced on modern auto-everything SLRs. My old Canons and Pentaxes have it, plus MLU, but those features had pretty much been dropped when I lost interest in the march of technology vis-a-vis SLRs. Glad to see at least some of the old tools are back.

However, I would still take issue. DOF Preview is great - but doesn't solve the problem I spoke of. When you DOF at say, f5.6 or f8.0, your screen tends to get awfully dark. So you have the DOF you will actually experience, but now the frame may be too dark to compose!

To me, the rangefinder has definite superiority in both these areas. Easier to keep both eyes open with any focal-length lens, and easier to recompose as your subjects move about and you're using the lens' DOF to keep focus instead of the rangefinder.

I do like my Kiev for it's size and noise level, plus film has it's plusses (and minuses) too. I can't wait to get my pictures developed tomorrow so I can see how this is (this is my first successful roll through this camera. The first roll I misloaded and while I took some what I think are amazing pictures, none of them got recorded onto anything, this roll I just fired off to test the camera, and got lucky and say a 64.5 mustang, an early chevelle, and a hot rodded old vw beetle).
Richard
Click to expand...

Richard, congratulations and welcome to the RFF fold. I'm sure you're going to enjoy using your Kiev - if you ever get the desire to experience a REALLY quiet shutter, try a fixed-lens rangefinder with a leaf shutter instead of a focal plane shutter. Wow, those can be whisper-quiet!

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
You really don't think two eyes open on an SLR can be done with telephoto (I agree with wide angle)? I do it with 300mm usually. MLU is back to, with avengance. In fact, to differentiate the dRebel from the 10D, canon deactivated MLU on the dRebel, and people hacked the firmware to bring it back (and some other stuff). Oh, and with a good camera (like a 1 series canon) and a good focusing screen, you could do DoF preview down to f/14 or 16. Either way, at some point when I have to money I'm going to get me a Leica M3, though I'll probably break down before I have enough and just get a canon 7s.
Richard
 
though I'll probably break down before I have enough and just get a canon 7s.

not lookin' to make friends here, eh?

;)joe
 
Ha, I'm in the Russian rangefinder forum, aren't I. Forgot about that bit. Rest assured that between the lenses and flash I need for my dSLR and the developing costs of film, it will be a good while before I have enough to leave.
 
marlinspike said:
You really don't think two eyes open on an SLR can be done with telephoto (I agree with wide angle)? I do it with 300mm usually.
Click to expand...

No, I find it too distracting. I'm glad you can do it, but I can't.

MLU is back to, with avengance. In fact, to differentiate the dRebel from the 10D, canon deactivated MLU on the dRebel, and people hacked the firmware to bring it back (and some other stuff).
Click to expand...

Glad to hear it! I am looking forward to getting my hands on a Digital Rebel some time in the future, so I can use my M42-mount primes on it.

Oh, and with a good camera (like a 1 series canon) and a good focusing screen, you could do DoF preview down to f/14 or 16.
Click to expand...

Well, again, you maybe. Me, no way. I can barely see to focus through an f16 stopped-down lens outdoors in the bright sunlight. Add a polarizer or a Wrattan 25 filter to that, and I'm looking into a black box. Indoors is worse. With my rangefinder, it's no worries, mate! Guess that's what happens when you get old.

Either way, at some point when I have to money I'm going to get me a Leica M3, though I'll probably break down before I have enough and just get a canon 7s.
Richard
Click to expand...

Well, I certainly hope you enjoy whatever you end up with - and of course, I mean no disrespect of your choices. I love my SLRs - and they really are superior for many things, macro included. But I refuse to accept that rangefinders are 'less versatile' than SLRs - they just do different jobs. Some overlap, some don't. In the end, we use the tools we are most comfortable with, or the tools we have at hand, and we make the best of it.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
marlinspike said:
Ha, I'm in the Russian rangefinder forum, aren't I. Forgot about that bit. Rest assured that between the lenses and flash I need for my dSLR and the developing costs of film, it will be a good while before I have enough to leave.
Click to expand...

Not to worry, we're a friendly bunch around here. Ever buddy likes ever thang, and that's the beauty of it.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks
 
bmattock said:
Accords don't float. Quod erat demonstrandum.
Click to expand...

Neither do 1960 VDubs if there's any kind of chop on the water and the rocker panels are rusted out. Don't ask me how I know this :)
 
Granted I'm going OT in my own thread, but you know what's kind of sick? I haven't even developed a roll of film from this camera and I'm thinking about replacing the lens with a sonnar 50 f/1.5. How does the Helios-103 compare to that btw?
Richard
 
I've done some macro stuff with the Proximeters, the (uncoated) Voigtlander prism/magnifiers.

Worked fine.

I'll keep my eyes open for a Kiev Macro system- there were a couple made, and they are rare. I'm looking for a Stereo attachment for my Kiev 4 now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom