xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
Fred, the Sears Nicca Barnack copy camera (Tower brand) was not an inexpensive camera to buy new in the mid to late 1950s.
At 189 dollars with the f2 Nikkor 5cm lens it was slightly cheaper to buy than a new Leica IIIf camera with the Elmar 50mm lens.
The 1950s equivalent of 189 dollars is about 1600 dollars today.
At 189 dollars with the f2 Nikkor 5cm lens it was slightly cheaper to buy than a new Leica IIIf camera with the Elmar 50mm lens.
The 1950s equivalent of 189 dollars is about 1600 dollars today.
btgc
Veteran
So what. Rostec hit by sanctions may have freed some resources so they are looking for opportunity. Why not rebadge some luxury brand camera, sold cheaper it would outperform original. As photo gear doesn't fall into sanctioned prod and tech list it would work (of course, high performance optics is strategic tech so no esoteric lenses there). And this is another chance to regain some status, question if that chance can be really used by corp like Rostec. So if that thing ever see light it should be either rebadge or another 65nm chip.
To be clear I'm not saying Russia isn't able to make camera. They probably are, but for me is hard to understand if right now and why now not 15 years before. Now they have some other quite different things on ASAP list.
Krosya
Konicaze
In my experience Russia (USSR) was very capable of making a fairly good camera. Simple - sure, but working just fine for most. Sure - quality control was not the best, so there was some junk. But after all - a huge population of USSR was using those and often for a long time and with good results. I think Zorki and Kiev cameras were valued better as higher quality ones. Zenits were more common. I have used all these brands (not all models though) and I can tell you - optically they were often very good. Mechanically - that was more of a lottery.
Do I think that Russia today can make something to compete with Leica - probably not. But what they can do is make some lenses to fit Leica and other popular mounts and it may actually work out. After all they did try to make a go with Kiev MF in a new clothes - Hartblei (I think that was a name) and some people were pretty happy with them, yet mechanical problems still existed. So, I think manual focus glass would be the only possibility IMO for them to get some attention from a photo community.
Do I think that Russia today can make something to compete with Leica - probably not. But what they can do is make some lenses to fit Leica and other popular mounts and it may actually work out. After all they did try to make a go with Kiev MF in a new clothes - Hartblei (I think that was a name) and some people were pretty happy with them, yet mechanical problems still existed. So, I think manual focus glass would be the only possibility IMO for them to get some attention from a photo community.
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
A lot of people could make something to compete with Leica but I haven't noticed them yet.
As for the old USSR wheren't they deliberately isolated and so had to bash on ploughing their own furrow, as we say. And, yes, command systems fail but just look where we are with the wonders of capitalism. Or aren't banks part of the capitalist system?
Regards, David
A lot of people could make something to compete with Leica but I haven't noticed them yet.
As for the old USSR wheren't they deliberately isolated and so had to bash on ploughing their own furrow, as we say. And, yes, command systems fail but just look where we are with the wonders of capitalism. Or aren't banks part of the capitalist system?
Regards, David
DominikDUK
Well-known
Interesting list especially the price difference between the Exakta and the Contax. Before the war the Contax was way more expensive than the Leica.
So the eastern cameras weren't the least expensive bodies, something Zenit can build on
So the eastern cameras weren't the least expensive bodies, something Zenit can build on
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
You are looking at a Tower 5, which was pretty costly because it was lever wind. But you will notice Sears will be glad to give the buyer credit, so the monthly cost is still quite low.
The difference in price between the Nicca and the Leica may seem low, but in reality it was a almost two weeks salary to my engineer dad (with an advanced degree) who only earned about 6k a year in 1960, before taxes.
I have all the Sears (USA) catalogs, but most likely too lazy to dig them all out.
OK decided to dig out the 1958 catalog with the $189 Tower in it, a Nicca 5L with Nikkor f2.
Leica 3g with a 50 f2 collapsible was $342.
M3 was $456 with F2, $495 with DR -- a big mental jump money-wise, unless you were a bachelor.
Nikon SP was $415 with a f 1.4 Nikkor. (the 58 catalog shows an SP in the photo, calls it an S2)
Canon L1 with f2 was $440.
Exacta IIa with 50 1.9 was $374.
Contax IIa with f2 was $298.
Contiflex with f 2.8 was $199.
The best bargain was the Tower (Pentax) 26 with f2.4 lens at $165.
Or if you wanted 4x4, the Rolleiflex with 60 3.5 was $149.
A brick from Argus, was only $66.50, and you got a case and flash.
Remember in 1958 there was no discounting, but dealers in NYC like Olden offered "trade-ins."
Actually I was looking at a Tower 48 aka Nicca 3-F second version with lever wind. Its predecessor, the Tower 3-S was similarly priced with the f2 Nikkor lens.
A lot of people confuse the Tower 48/Nicca 3-F lever wind with the costlier Nicca 5L/ Tower 45/46 (the number depended on the f 2 or f1.4 lens). The Nicca 5L/ Tower 45/46 had a hinged open back just like a Leica M camera and top shutter speed of 1/1000 instead of 1/500.
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
The Tower 48 and the Tower 35 appear from the outside to be the same camera, both have lever wind, no hinged back alla Leica M and top shutter speed of 1/500 of a sec .
http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/iannorris/leica_copies/leica_copies_t/tower48.htm
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Sears-Tower...r-H-C-Tokyo-/331773082949?hash=item4d3f377d45
http://www.ebay.com/itm/TOWER-35-50...SHIP-GLOBAL-/111900086085?hash=item1a0dc3cf45
I have a Tower 35 knob wind camera plus the Tower 45 and 46 and my favourite is the rare Nicca type 5 which I never did find its Tower equivalent, but it might exist as it exists re-badged as "Snyder" for an Australian photo store chain.
The Tower 45 came with the F2 Nikkor lens and the Tower 46 came with the black ring f1.4 Nikkor lens and this was factory correct and not a mish-mash.
I stupidly turned down buying a Yashica YF new in the box for a 100 dollars in 1987.
http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/iannorris/leica_copies/leica_copies_t/tower48.htm
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Sears-Tower...r-H-C-Tokyo-/331773082949?hash=item4d3f377d45
http://www.ebay.com/itm/TOWER-35-50...SHIP-GLOBAL-/111900086085?hash=item1a0dc3cf45
I have a Tower 35 knob wind camera plus the Tower 45 and 46 and my favourite is the rare Nicca type 5 which I never did find its Tower equivalent, but it might exist as it exists re-badged as "Snyder" for an Australian photo store chain.
The Tower 45 came with the F2 Nikkor lens and the Tower 46 came with the black ring f1.4 Nikkor lens and this was factory correct and not a mish-mash.
I stupidly turned down buying a Yashica YF new in the box for a 100 dollars in 1987.
kbg32
neo-romanticist
Dear kbg,
All of those terms in that quote require far more definition to have meaning.
For example, if they made only 3 million that would represent a 75% reduction. If the quality doubled or tripled what would that mean in actual terms? Finally, ridiculously hefty price tag for whom, the average Russian, the average American, the average Chilean?
I won't buy one either way, but what you quoted doesn't mean anything without parameters.
Regards,
Tim Murphy
Tim,
Did you read the link? I have nothing to do with Zenit. It is being compared to a luxury camera item as Leica.
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
I suspect that Sears wanted to differentiate the lever wind feature from the same model ( a re-badged Nicca 3-F) that earlier had knob wind and later had lever wind but with the same name or designation as the knob wind original.
To us almost 60 years later, it just creates confusion.
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
Back to the topic, did the firm making the new Zenit camera say they were to compete with Leica at the luxury end of the market? Or was that added?
Certainly they will compete with Leica because Leica are the only other serious firm making a film camera. But that doesn't mean they are aiming at Leica. As I see it they are trying to reassure people that the camera will be a better one than their reputation deserves.
But - a big "but" btw - their reputation is based on their price, which is silly as it ought to be based on looking at prints taken with the cameras. And the fact that many Zenits from the early days have survived and are still in use suggests they may be a decent camera. Especially since I have noticed that few people seem to think they are worth repairing or checking and so on by a technician...
Lastly, way back when they (Zenit) were designed all cameras were big and clunky. Small and neat started years later with the sensational OM-1 and started all the other Japanese firms realising that they made big, heavy cameras. The result was that they started making smaller ones but Zenit didn't. So the word for Zenit is straight forward and slightly old fashioned, imo.
Regards, David
Back to the topic, did the firm making the new Zenit camera say they were to compete with Leica at the luxury end of the market? Or was that added?
Certainly they will compete with Leica because Leica are the only other serious firm making a film camera. But that doesn't mean they are aiming at Leica. As I see it they are trying to reassure people that the camera will be a better one than their reputation deserves.
But - a big "but" btw - their reputation is based on their price, which is silly as it ought to be based on looking at prints taken with the cameras. And the fact that many Zenits from the early days have survived and are still in use suggests they may be a decent camera. Especially since I have noticed that few people seem to think they are worth repairing or checking and so on by a technician...
Lastly, way back when they (Zenit) were designed all cameras were big and clunky. Small and neat started years later with the sensational OM-1 and started all the other Japanese firms realising that they made big, heavy cameras. The result was that they started making smaller ones but Zenit didn't. So the word for Zenit is straight forward and slightly old fashioned, imo.
Regards, David
DominikDUK
Well-known
In the original press release they said something like "a luxury good like a Leica". So Leica was more used as an example than as competition.
I admit I only read the google translation of the Press release so I could be mistaken.
I admit I only read the google translation of the Press release so I could be mistaken.
santino
FSU gear head
As far as I know early Zenits (the Zenit, the 3m, Kristall) were actually small. The original Zenit bottom loader was smaller than all it's successors - so they walked in the opposite direction compared to Japanese firms...
Tim Murphy
Well-known
Dear Keith,
I did read the link. No price is mentioned anywhere? Without a price calling it ridiculously priced doesn't make sense to me. If it is $ 3000.00 then yes the price is ridiculous, but if it is $ 500.00 and the quality is there perhaps it's not so ridiculous? That's all I was trying to say. I'm sorry if that was misunderstood.
Regards,
Tim Murphy
valdas
Veteran
I can't believe my eyes there is a discussion about this on RFF. I spent a bit of time reading some comments on Russian forums and they don't believe this will ever happen (new Zenit). A typical comment from one of Russian forums:
"We are here in Russia so tired of such statements like "we fly to the moon", then we construct the "E-mobil" (hybrid car project that never happened), then Zenit revival ... do not make laugh my Rotennberg and Chubais (Не смешите моих Ротеннбергов и Чубайсов - untranslatable joke reffering to the realities of bureaucracy and corruption in Russian business)"
As to the original Zenit... Well, I grew up in Soviet Union and Zenit was my first SLR. It was bad bad bad bad... All photojournalists and wedding photographers were shooting Canons or at least Eastern German Prakticas (the lowest acceptable threshold of quality). Unreliable, inaccurate, viewfinder so dark you can forget the accurate focusing... Cheap? Yes. And that's why the famous saying "not rich enough to buy cheap things" was so right about Russian cameras.
On Sunday I was on the local flea market in Vilnius (Lithuania). One guy was selling quite nice Zorki 4k with J8. How much, I asked. - 100EUR. I said - are you kidding me? He felt a bit embarassed and said - "well, that's for foreigners".
"We are here in Russia so tired of such statements like "we fly to the moon", then we construct the "E-mobil" (hybrid car project that never happened), then Zenit revival ... do not make laugh my Rotennberg and Chubais (Не смешите моих Ротеннбергов и Чубайсов - untranslatable joke reffering to the realities of bureaucracy and corruption in Russian business)"
As to the original Zenit... Well, I grew up in Soviet Union and Zenit was my first SLR. It was bad bad bad bad... All photojournalists and wedding photographers were shooting Canons or at least Eastern German Prakticas (the lowest acceptable threshold of quality). Unreliable, inaccurate, viewfinder so dark you can forget the accurate focusing... Cheap? Yes. And that's why the famous saying "not rich enough to buy cheap things" was so right about Russian cameras.
On Sunday I was on the local flea market in Vilnius (Lithuania). One guy was selling quite nice Zorki 4k with J8. How much, I asked. - 100EUR. I said - are you kidding me? He felt a bit embarassed and said - "well, that's for foreigners".
santino
FSU gear head
pvdhaar
Peter
The question is of course whether the Zenits that were exported adhered to the same quality standards as those for domestic use. Another aspect is that some importers inspected and serviced/adjusted them before resale onto the general public..
Of course, one camera doesn't make for much of statistics, but the Zenit-E I bought (new, ca 1977) in the Netherlands took well over 20 years of abuse, focused and exposed correctly, and didn't give a single hiccup..
What is decidedly true, is that the finder is darker than the other SLRs from the same era, which mostly had bright-screens. However, for accurate focus, bright-screens need a focus aid like the wedge or micro-prisms in the center.. The darker ground glasses allow critical focus without those aids, at the expense of, well, being dimmer.
nukecoke
⚛Yashica
Hahah, in Sweden sellers do sell overpriced film photo gears too, but the difference is they don't feel embarrassed but make you feel embarrassed when you imply "why so expensive?".
grouchos_tash
Well-known
Yeah, the same here. I was at a car boot sale (an good ol' British thing) where there was a guy selling some FSU rangefinders and junk cameras. I noticed a Fed3 that was filthy, but it was £40. The guy was really offended when I tried to haggle and told me to 'get one of eBay' if I didn't want it, which was a pretty good idea
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
The original link in the first post was to Petapixel and Micheal Zhang's article (the one with the picture of a Leica) with a reference that takes you to Photo Rumors (sic) and that was a Google translation. It was about plans by Rostec to revive the Zenit name and so on. So pretty nebulous in my experience. I shall wait until it happens. Did anyone else track back to it?
As for Zenits and Zorkis and FEDs, there seems to be a lot of them around and still working. The oldest I have is nearly 80 years old.
Looking at my original, bottom loading Zenit and my Zenit B, the height varies by a millimetre and so does the width. The cameras have also been weighed without lenses and the Zenit B is 144grammes heavier but it does have flash sybch and a self timer. The earlier one is more compact but the centre of the eyepiece is only 2mm lower.
I've a Pentax Spotmatic as well, slightly higher and wider than the Zenit B but 28g lighter. But what does any of this prove?
Regards, David
The original link in the first post was to Petapixel and Micheal Zhang's article (the one with the picture of a Leica) with a reference that takes you to Photo Rumors (sic) and that was a Google translation. It was about plans by Rostec to revive the Zenit name and so on. So pretty nebulous in my experience. I shall wait until it happens. Did anyone else track back to it?
As for Zenits and Zorkis and FEDs, there seems to be a lot of them around and still working. The oldest I have is nearly 80 years old.
Looking at my original, bottom loading Zenit and my Zenit B, the height varies by a millimetre and so does the width. The cameras have also been weighed without lenses and the Zenit B is 144grammes heavier but it does have flash sybch and a self timer. The earlier one is more compact but the centre of the eyepiece is only 2mm lower.
I've a Pentax Spotmatic as well, slightly higher and wider than the Zenit B but 28g lighter. But what does any of this prove?
Regards, David
valdas
Veteran
Which Spotmatic? I have Spotmatic F - after my childhood with Smena and Zenit Spotmatic feels like the latest Mercedes after driving Lada. But sure - you can get from point A to B in Lada as well...