Would you buy a Kiev-4am with a Helios-103 Lens?

No. It was the first Soviet camera I ever got. That was around 1990. This Kiev was made in 1983. It was so badly made. It never wound film right, made overlaps or else wide spaces between frames. Its ribbons broke after a few uses. It almost destroyed my perception of Soviet cameras. Luckily, earlier Zorki, FED and even Kiev which I later got changed all that.:D

If the camera would have been better made, it would have been great. It had a hot shoe, a fixed takeup spool, and a winding crank instead of a knob. The Helios 103 is an excellent lens by all means. The quality of the Kiev camera declined in the 1970s. Some owners of Kiev 4aM might say otherwise- they may be lucky to get good ones which were properly made.

You might be better off with a Kiev made in the 1960s. My best Kiev were pre 1970s.

Jay
 
Sure a 4am with helios 103 was my first rangefinder. It was made in 1979 and I must have gotten lucky because I've had no problems with it except rarely after taking a shot the camera won't wind on unless I press the shutter button again. The helios is a great lens. Haven't been shooting it much since I got a contax II and IIa and Nikon S with assorted glass.
 
ZorkiKat said:
No. It was the first Soviet camera I ever got. That was around 1990. This Kiev was made in 1983. It was so badly made. It never wound film right, made overlaps or else wide spaces between frames. Its ribbons broke after a few uses.
Click to expand...
I have a Kiev 4a from '78 with a Jupiter-8. Works great. Actually it's the cam in my Avatar.

I'm currently looking for a Helios-108 as it is said to be the sharpest 50mm FSU in Contax mount.

My Zorki also works great BTW, though the rigid Industar-50 is definitly the ugliest 50mm ever; and mine needs some new greace.
 
Last edited:
My 4AM with the Helios was the camera that got me started on rangefinders. I bought mine from Yuri at Fedka. If you're interested in getting one, I'd recommend going through him.

My daughter used the 4AM this past summer in a photography course. Got an"A" and compliments on the quality of her photographs.
 
Where did you hear of a Helios-108? I just checked my copy of Princelle (2nd edition, 2004) and there is no mention of it. Only the Helios-103 and Helios-94, both 1.8/50 or 53. I agree that the rigid Industar-50 has to be the ugliest 50mm lens ever. Sort of reminds one of a pig's nose. I have two - one for M39 RF, and one for M39 Zenit SLR. I'm not sure which one is uglier. Probably the RF one because it looks like the SLR one with an extension tube permanently mounted on the back.
 
I have owned two 4AM's that I bought after I using my Contax IIa and IIIa.

Using the Kievs was kind of like dating Cinderella's step-sisters after taking Cinderella and Snow White to the Ball. I have a tainted view of the Kiev 4AM as they just are not in the same league as a Contax. I have never used any of the older Kiev's, I hear they are better than the later models.

Wayne
 
My 4am is a decent camera, but definitely rough around the edges. So much so, I'm getting a '59 4a to try out.

If you can get the kit at a good price, it's worth it to try out, IMHO. If the camera is a POS, keep the lens and get another body.
 
I also have a Kiev 4AM and I like it a lot. Made in 1984, I bought it from a fellow RFFer who said it had been CLA'd by Oleg. It works perfectly! No frame spacing, very smooth winding and shutter and nicely finished over all. Got a J8, J12, and of course a Heilos 103 with it. One of my favorite cameras!

Charles
 
Bill
If you want to shoot with it, this is the best Kiev 4/lens combo. The 4am has the improved shutter rewind wheel, and the Helios is sharper and contrastier than the J-8, with a improved coating, too, and still a nice bokeh.
Didier
 
I also have a Kiev 4aM and love it

I also have a Kiev 4aM and love it

I haven't had any problems with it at all and the Helios 103 is a gorgeous lens but I think the LTM I-61 L/D slightly tops it. I also like the J-8 a lot on the Kiev. It's become my second favorite take out camera and lens combo( the Kiev with Helios) . I got mine from Fedka also. I'm sure if I could find a pristine Contax lla I would be very happy with it , too.:)
 
I have two Kievs. A 1962 4A and a 1984 4AM. Both work well and I've had no problem with either of them. The 1962 is a bit better in finish but they are both very nice cameras, particularly when you consider how little they cost. I have shot with both Jupiter 8 and Helios 103 lenses and did a feeble lens test which did reveal that the Helios was a tad sharper then the Jupiter. Oh, and one of my two shots (the cadillac dashboard - see my gallery here in rff) in the second Rangefinder book was taken with the 1962 Kiev and Helios 103 lens. The other lenses in my kit include the Jupiter 12, Jupiter 9 and Jupiter 11. All nice lens and great for the money. Amazing that you can put together a complete kit for the price of a single Leica lens (or less, depending upon which Leica lens you're talking about). If you've found a Kiev & Helios in good condition then go for it!

-Randy
 
The "would you buy" question didn't exactly apply to me. I bought a Kiev 4a (no m) from Yuri at Fedka in NYC. In the process of fillng the order, he e-mailed me and said the lens on the camera (a J-8) had "slight cleaning marks" on it, so he was including a Helios 103. In due time, the camera arrived, with BOTH lenses.

I've read that the Helios was brought out as a replacement (improved??) of the J-8. Given that the J-8 itself has a pretty decent reputation, if the Helios really was an improvement, who's complaining? Whatever may be said of the cameras, Soviet lenses seem to have a pretty good history.
 
Bill58

Most fondlers like the pre'72 cameras, for the finish, one can fondle, they even have Zeiss bumps to show they are real clones. I like the black leather...

The J8 lens is nicer than a J8M, but the optics of the Helios are better, cheaper to manufacture and better off axis performance, supposedly a late Leitz summicron rip off, but it may not have as good a black paint job as a J8, more flare all need a good lens hood.

The early cameras have a premium but a '71 is still cheap.

Noel
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom