Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
As I promised in the thread dedicated for pictures taken with our FSU cameras.
Why FSU cameras are often "the copies".
First FED and Zorki are well known example. And if you ever look inside of the later RF cameras from FED and KMZ they were very similar to first ones in terms of shutter construction.
Next is Kiev RF cameras. Made with Contax equipment and up to 4AM looking similar to original Contax RFs inside and outside.
Lets hold to Arsenal for a while -
Salut-C, Kiev-88 looks like Hasselblad 1600f.
Kiev 35A is copy of Minox 35.
Kiev 16 mm cameras were originated from Minolta 16.
Moskva MF RFs are similar to Zeiss Ikonta.
Porst CM auto is Lomo LCA.
I don't think this list is complete.
I'm not trying to be "logical", negative or smart ars here. It just the part of my own background. My wife's uncle used to work as young student at LOMO. And one local winemaker I know was working at KMZ.
I'm also not into snobbery against of FSU cameras and lenses here.
My most recent camera is Smena-8M, enjoyable camera with rich character in the lens.
Why FSU cameras are often "the copies".
First FED and Zorki are well known example. And if you ever look inside of the later RF cameras from FED and KMZ they were very similar to first ones in terms of shutter construction.
Next is Kiev RF cameras. Made with Contax equipment and up to 4AM looking similar to original Contax RFs inside and outside.
Lets hold to Arsenal for a while -
Salut-C, Kiev-88 looks like Hasselblad 1600f.
Kiev 35A is copy of Minox 35.
Kiev 16 mm cameras were originated from Minolta 16.
Moskva MF RFs are similar to Zeiss Ikonta.
Porst CM auto is Lomo LCA.
I don't think this list is complete.
I'm not trying to be "logical", negative or smart ars here. It just the part of my own background. My wife's uncle used to work as young student at LOMO. And one local winemaker I know was working at KMZ.
I'm also not into snobbery against of FSU cameras and lenses here.
My most recent camera is Smena-8M, enjoyable camera with rich character in the lens.
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
Some FSU cameras have been counterfeit versions of the Leica II(D), complete with the Leica script. Others have copied the Leica II(D) in appearance, although they are marked with the true manufacturer's name such as FED. Some look nothing like the Leica, but have counterfeit Leitz/Leica engraving. The word "copy" is simply more charitable than "fake."
David Hughes
David Hughes
But have we seen it said about all the other non-FSU copies as often?
Regards, David
Regards, David
jschrader
Well-known
I do not know exactly, but I would assume the Canons and Nikons that were also "faked" or "copied" Leicas and Contaxes in the 1960 were also called fakes or copies.
But they developed further and overtook Leica, in certain ways (not in the RF field). Thus, their image improved.
Now, we see a Nikon RF as an amazing forerunner of the F. Not as a poor copy of the Leica.
AndersG
Well-known
Well, only the first model of FED and Zorki:s are really close to being copies. The rest of the LTM bunch have developed in their own way - maybe less in the shutter mechanism while more in the view finder.
The fakes are as far as I know all second hand jobs - the FED or Zorki just being a convenient starting point.
The fakes are as far as I know all second hand jobs - the FED or Zorki just being a convenient starting point.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Who are "we"?
I never hesitate to call earlier Canon and Nikons as knockoffs.
I never hesitate to call earlier Canon and Nikons as knockoffs.
Bille
Well-known
As part of the World War II "reparations", the Soviet army took most of the existing Zeiss factories and tooling back to the Soviet Union as the Kiev camera works.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Zeiss_AG#Corporate_history
Kiev also produced several 35 mm film rangefinder cameras which were clones of the pre-war Contax II and Contax III cameras, and a range of 35mm SLR cameras.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiev_(brand)#Kiev_35_mm_cameras
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
Why put the word in quotation marks? It rather suggests that the Third Reich didn't invade the USSR and destroy a lot of it including the camera and optical works that caused this...
I thought the basic facts of the 2nd World War were fairly well known.
Regards, David
apostasiometritis
Established
Spider67
Well-known
Regarding the fact that the first Kiev RFs were made with German machinery by technicians trained by the German techs I am inclined to call the Kiev rather a Version than a copy.
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
Going back to the original post.
Canon and Nikon have been advertised as Canon and Nikon for many years and were known from the 40's to the occupying US forces; who also brought their cameras home and helped establish a market in the USA.
FED were made in the old USSR and sold in the old USSR and so were not known beyond apart from rumours in the 30's and a magazine article in 1941 (from memory). I first saw a FED etc advert in the UK in the 80's so there's no link with the earlier Leica copies to my mind here.
But - here we go - look on ebay and every FED and Zorki right up to the Zorki 10 is advertised as a Russian Leica copy. Or worse as a Leica but we all know, or should know, how to spot a fake.
Taking the other point made, like Nikon and Canon the USSR made FED's and Zorkis were based on the Leica II but soon started to move away from it and be developed by the FSU technicians. I'd say that the pre-war ones were a copy and the post war ones were based on the Leica, like a lot of other makes.
I hope it's easy to see the improvements and changes as I can't be bothered to type a list but I'll add that in some ways I prefer my FED I and Zorki I to the Leica II.
Regards, David
PS And - of course - FED and Zorki's reputations have been ruined by idiots who think repairing cameras and lenses can be done at home in the kitchen with the bread knife as the only tool.
Going back to the original post.
Canon and Nikon have been advertised as Canon and Nikon for many years and were known from the 40's to the occupying US forces; who also brought their cameras home and helped establish a market in the USA.
FED were made in the old USSR and sold in the old USSR and so were not known beyond apart from rumours in the 30's and a magazine article in 1941 (from memory). I first saw a FED etc advert in the UK in the 80's so there's no link with the earlier Leica copies to my mind here.
But - here we go - look on ebay and every FED and Zorki right up to the Zorki 10 is advertised as a Russian Leica copy. Or worse as a Leica but we all know, or should know, how to spot a fake.
Taking the other point made, like Nikon and Canon the USSR made FED's and Zorkis were based on the Leica II but soon started to move away from it and be developed by the FSU technicians. I'd say that the pre-war ones were a copy and the post war ones were based on the Leica, like a lot of other makes.
I hope it's easy to see the improvements and changes as I can't be bothered to type a list but I'll add that in some ways I prefer my FED I and Zorki I to the Leica II.
Regards, David
PS And - of course - FED and Zorki's reputations have been ruined by idiots who think repairing cameras and lenses can be done at home in the kitchen with the bread knife as the only tool.
Dralowid
Michael
No one has mentioned that the USSR did not sign up to the international patents agreement (or whatever it was called). Don't know about Japan.
But David makes a point, it was hard to find anything Russian (in the UK at least) in the '50s (apart from dolls).
In 1961 there was huge and impressive Soviet exhibition in London as part of an export drive and then TOE opened a shop:
http://cameras.alfredklomp.com/toe/
...and then my brother in law bought a Moskvitch Estate which I remember had a heads up display on the windscreen for the speedometer...
But David makes a point, it was hard to find anything Russian (in the UK at least) in the '50s (apart from dolls).
In 1961 there was huge and impressive Soviet exhibition in London as part of an export drive and then TOE opened a shop:
http://cameras.alfredklomp.com/toe/
...and then my brother in law bought a Moskvitch Estate which I remember had a heads up display on the windscreen for the speedometer...
Dralowid
Michael
tunalegs
Pretended Artist
It's simple. They're called copies to boost their value. The association with Leica no matter how distant inspires people to spend money it seems. I don't sense it as derogatory in the least, rather it's exploitative of the Leica brand recognition.
I have seen some people call American cameras like the Perfex and Clarus "leica copies" and this claim is frankly ridiculous as neither camera even vaguely resembles any leica apart from having a rangefinder and a focal plane shutter - both of which function in a different basic manner than those in Leicas.
I have seen some people call American cameras like the Perfex and Clarus "leica copies" and this claim is frankly ridiculous as neither camera even vaguely resembles any leica apart from having a rangefinder and a focal plane shutter - both of which function in a different basic manner than those in Leicas.
apostasiometritis
Established
That's probably where it all comes. Like all these listings "NOT LEICA, M9, M8" etc. Quite annoying actually.
nukecoke
⚛Yashica
In certain ways FED and Zorki also developed further. And they produce them in larger amount, so more people can reach the cameras and use them. Is using the copies and fakes "thieving"? Should I feel guilty about it?
tunalegs
Pretended Artist
I don't think anybody has ever suggested using them is. Just selling zorkis with fake leica engravings is.
valdas
Veteran
To me your question is also an answer. Many of them were copies indeed - you gave quite many examples. And those of us who grew up in FSU (like myself) know very well that "a copy" of something created on the other side of the iron curtain always had a higher value. So I think it started there - the wish to create a perception of a higher value (as somebody has already mentioned).
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
I think that the Nikons and Canon copies were advertised as Nikons and Ccanons but FED etc never were and so didn't exist in our minds/perceptions as a brand with any reputation for a long time.
So we see Canon and Nikon RF's as themselves but not FEDs etc. Showing the power of advertising.
On another point, I would have said that the FED and Zorki I's improved the RF by the use of a slight tint to each glass to give better contrast. A pity that wasn't copied elsewhere for a long time.
Regards, David
I think that the Nikons and Canon copies were advertised as Nikons and Ccanons but FED etc never were and so didn't exist in our minds/perceptions as a brand with any reputation for a long time.
So we see Canon and Nikon RF's as themselves but not FEDs etc. Showing the power of advertising.
On another point, I would have said that the FED and Zorki I's improved the RF by the use of a slight tint to each glass to give better contrast. A pity that wasn't copied elsewhere for a long time.
Regards, David
Fotohuis
Well-known
In Holland there was import of Praktica and OrWo materials from the DDR (East Germany), however the FSU range finders were not available in a large amount. I am very happy to have a Leica M7 with Leica M glass however I have a lot of pleasure with my FED, Zorki and Kiev RFs. But you do not have to forget that these camera's, for me 1958 and up till 1980 are already pretty old and need a CLA.
Looking at some individual Jupiter and Industar lenses you can have some excellent optics hardly worse then my M lenses for a fraction of the price. So far the Zorki-6 is my favorite FSU RF camera. The J-8 and J-12 my favorite lenses. Now searching for a J-9.
Looking at some individual Jupiter and Industar lenses you can have some excellent optics hardly worse then my M lenses for a fraction of the price. So far the Zorki-6 is my favorite FSU RF camera. The J-8 and J-12 my favorite lenses. Now searching for a J-9.