Zorki 1 vs Leica iii

[David Hughes]

Hi,

So a 9 year old thread about some 50, 60 or 70 year old cameras...

FWIW, I've Leicas and FEDs and Zorkis and use the CL and M2 most because the others are interesting and turn out great pictures but you have to take your time with them and work a little harder to get the results.

You can be lucky or unlucky with all of them, unless you buy them new or just a few years old as I did with one of mine, meaning the CL which I can't include in the following remarks.

The rest have all been used and, if needed, sent off to the experts for work. In terms of value for money and ignoring the so called investment angle, they are all pretty much the same to use and keep usable. The Leica II and the FED 1, once both had the treatment from the experts, were like brothers. Slight advantage to the FED in terms of tinted RF, cable release socket and price to buy and get serviced. And the FED lenses are coated but you can't expect that from a 30's Elmar.

The M2 cost a fortune once it needed work done and even more for the lenses but I don't regret it. OTOH, it didn't cost USD 10 with lens and postage extra, like the FED. But I like the FED 2 almost as much; both the M2 and FED 2 have their little quirks. The FEDs cost a pittance and the additional lenses cost me pennies. One exception, bought out of curiosity; the FED clone of the Summar but worth it.

All of them have given a lot of pleasure, the CL is my most used because of the metering being so precise and usable.

FWIW, I have paid out good money for two Leitz lenses and one body that were scrapped as beyond hope, although they looked OK. Plus a IIIc that had to go back to the dealers once I'd put a roll of film in it.

My standard spiel about buying a FED or Zorki is to buy one cheaply but good looking, and put a film through it and then, if need be, send to Oleg. You need to be patient to do that but it pays off. For Leicas, go to a dealer, pay the extra and get a guarantee.

Regards, David

 

[newspaperguy]

Pretty sound advice from Mr. Hughes. Obviously, I agree. I've been using two Zorki I/s (a 'D' & an 'E', both from Oleg) for well over 10 years - no problems.

IMO, with any of the Barnack types, you need a bright line finder. I use CV.

 

[nikonosguy]

Get a leica. Under $300 at Keh. The little bit extra will give you more satisfaction long term. And if you buy the zorki you'll still have the leica lust

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I have purchased two Zorki 1 of the e-bay, both listed as working with mint exterior.
Both I have to rehaul completely and replace curtains. This is one, and may be only, benefit of Z-1 over Barnacks. You could repair them by yourself.
I have IIf which is superior to Z-1 in any aspect. I purchased it on e-bay as well and it is perfectly working camera. Bright VF and RF.
As of now, prices for Z-1 are getting close to $100 and prices for LTM leicas are under $200, where is no real "vs", if you not going to repair camera by yourself.
My IIf is accurate not only with Leitz LTM lenses, but with collapsible Industars as well.

 

[ta152c]

Fair comment, its a question of cost versus what your expectations are. The only 'gripe' with the Zorki-1E is that the baseplate is a wee bit loose, but once a film goes in, it seems ok.

Anyone out there had a similar issue? Regarding the small finder- the Helios finder is my main aid- I just focus and then compose. I'm using a 35mm lens anyway, so you can sort of pre-focus and just snap away.

 

[David Hughes]

I have purchased two Zorki 1 of the e-bay, both listed as working with mint exterior.
Both I have to rehaul completely and replace curtains. This is one, and may be only, benefit of Z-1 over Barnacks. You could repair them by yourself.
I have IIf which is superior to Z-1 in any aspect. I purchased it on e-bay as well and it is perfectly working camera. Bright VF and RF.
As of now, prices for Z-1 are getting close to $100 and prices for LTM leicas are under $200, where is no real "vs", if you not going to repair camera by yourself.
My IIf is accurate not only with Leitz LTM lenses, but with collapsible Industars as well.

Hi,

Fair comment but about the sellers, not the cameras. FED's and Zorkis are no different from Leicas in that the owners can and do wreck them. Worse still, many think they can repair them at home then sell them as re-furbished.

I don't blame Leica for the dreadful IIIc and Summitar I had, although they made them. Same goes for my FEDs and Zorkis.

Read what Zeiss said about their cameras' routine maintainence years and years ago and then read, in forums, what people do to them and you'll understand why old cameras are often ruined.

The other problem is that Leica have been known and have been advertising for years and so have an advantage over FED and Zorki which only became properly known once we started buying them
second-hand and complaining, even though they were second-hand and years old. And read what people say about Leicas in the forums and you might notice that they fail and have problems like others do but we forgive Leica for it...

Regards, David

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Hi,

Fair comment but about the sellers, not the cameras. FED's and Zorkis are no different from Leicas in that the owners can and do wreck them. Worse still, many think they can repair them at home then sell them as re-furbished.

I don't blame Leica for the dreadful IIIc and Summitar I had, although they made them. Same goes for my FEDs and Zorkis.

Read what Zeiss said about their cameras' routine maintainence years and years ago and then read, in forums, what people do to them and you'll understand why old cameras are often ruined.

The other problem is that Leica have been known and have been advertising for years and so have an advantage over FED and Zorki which only became properly known once we started buying them
second-hand and complaining, even though they were second-hand and years old. And read what people say about Leicas in the forums and you might notice that they fail and have problems like others do but we forgive Leica for it...

Regards, David

Sorry, I wrote about cameras, not resellers.
But I was not comparing earlier Leicas which are similar to Z-1.

My IIf and two Z-1 were made within few similar years of production. And only $100 difference in price, if not less, between FSU and Leica. All three cameras were with mint exterior, not a junk. But still different cameras outside and inside. Just listen how different sound is on slow speeds.

Z-1 is primitive, IIf is as well made as my M4-2 is. if not better 🙂

 

[Steve Bellayr]

Not a big fan of Russian cameras: For a few dollars more the Leica IIIf BD or preferably the IIIf Rd. You do not need the self timer. Why get a copy? Just my opinion.

 

[tunalegs]

Not a big fan of Russian cameras: For a few dollars more the Leica IIIf BD or preferably the IIIf Rd. You do not need the self timer. Why get a copy? Just my opinion.

Because some of the copies are better cameras in use. :angel:

 

[David Hughes]

Sorry, I wrote about cameras, not resellers.
But I was not comparing earlier Leicas which are similar to Z-1.

My IIf and two Z-1 were made within few similar years of production. And only $100 difference in price, if not less, between FSU and Leica. All three cameras were with mint exterior, not a junk. But still different cameras outside and inside. Just listen how different sound is on slow speeds.

Z-1 is primitive, IIf is as well made as my M4-2 is. if not better 🙂

Hi,

I was just trying to point the finger at the true villains, imo, the sellers but the factory usually gets blamed 60 years afterwards. I think DIYers should take all or most of the blame.

As for the Z-1 being primitive, well, look how long it's lasted and, if it is, then the Leica model II is as well, but the Zorki and FED 1 have a few points in their favour like the fitting of a cable release and the tinted VF as I said. And a well loved and looked after Leica Model II and the FED or Zorki equivalent have a lot in common when it comes to taking pictures.

Leitz used to sell the ORAKO and OKARO as accessories about the same time as the model II appeared and, knowing the problem, should have realised it was an essential as FED & Zorki did. So a star to the USSR designers for that. Plus the USSR designers gave their customers a clone of the Leica body with a clone of the CZ Sonnar, another point in their favour.

BTW, I'm just trying to take an unbiased view of them all, I've had as many ex USSR cameras and lenses as I have Leitz/Leica ones. But I just look upon them as old cameras. And I can't help thinking that the deliberate isolation of the USSR from modern materials and techniques comes into it somewhere. A level playing field is the correct expression I think; well, politically correct.

Regards, David

 

[David Hughes]

Not a big fan of Russian cameras: For a few dollars more the Leica IIIf BD or preferably the IIIf Rd. You do not need the self timer. Why get a copy? Just my opinion.

Hmmm, well, it isn't when it comes to repairs and so on. Talking in pounds Sterling it's a few hundred more, or even two hundred more. I've bills to prove it.

Regards, David

 

[wolves3012]

Ok, I'll take the bait and throw in an opinion, it's a personal one and includes some geralisations. First off Leica III vs Z-1 is slightly incorrect since the III has slow speeds. Nearer comparison is Leica II vs Z-1.

The raison d'etre of the two cameras is rather different. The Leica was produced as a "professional" model, of high quality in materials and build and in (relatively) low numbers. The Zorki was spawned of a need for mass-produced cameras for the general public to own and to be made using non-imported technology and materials.

Is the Zorki a "rip-off"? Yes and no. The majority of cameras used a horizontal-travel, cloth, focal-plane shutter and Leica and Zorkis do - so do thousands of other RFs and SLRs. The Leica's styling was "ripped-off" by plenty of other makers too and I'd just call it the fashion of the time.

Zorki adopted a cast-aluminium, one-piece crate early on, which I believe Leica did not do until the IIIC. So, technically the Zorki is more advanced, along with the tinted RF for contrast-enhanced RF view.

Move on a few decades. Leicas, being owned by "professional" users, are likely to be well looked after in terms of servicing. Zorkis, being cheap and mass-produced and in the hands of the average russian, are likely to either to be unserviced or "serviced" by unskilled folk.

Couple these factors with a situation where the supply of Zorkis is beginning to diminish and many people try to capitalise on their Leica "heritage", so prices get pushed up.

As for direct comparisons, well you're being a bit unfair to compare a mass-produced budget item with a high-end item. Zorkis don't have finely-cut gears and close-fit parts but they are also fairly robust and more tolerant of home-servicing and neglect. Most of them still work or can easily be restored to full working order and most faults are age-related (like cracking curtains).

At the end of the day, the body is a light-tight box that holds the film and makes a controlled exposure. The attached lens is responsible for most of the picture quality, assuming certain minimum standards are met by the body. As such, the Zorki is as capable as any other. Even well-serviced, good-example Zorkis don't meet their equivalent Leica for smoothness and finish but they aren't far behind in my (very limited) experience.

 

[Filzkoeter]

I've taken apart and CLAd (+ installed new shutter curtains) Zorkis, Feds and my IIIf.
Actually I've found it easier to work on my IIIf then on every FSU rangefinder. Quality-wise they're simply not comparable. The Leica is much smoother and much more reliable, the FSU ones are really crude in comparision. I still have a Zorki1 I considered to be very Leica-like and very smooth in operation... then I've bought my IIIf. The IIIf is simply superior in every way.

Zorkis can be great shooters... but in direct comparison they still feel like toys 😉
And yes, I support the 'blame the DIYers' claim, many items were destroyed by people don't knowing what they were doing. Sure, eastern bloc industries had QC problems, it's in the nature how they worked... it's the same with every other eastern bloc manufactured item. And yes, the early items from the 50s and 60s are often much better built. Back then they had fresh machinery and much better ressources. I'm a fan of eastern bloc cars and motorbikes... the ones from the 50s and 60s are much better built and more reliable and often outlive the later ones.

The lenses on the other hand are really really good when they were correclty assembled and were not tinkered with by unexperianced DIYers. Mechanical wise they also seem crude by comparison... but optically they are top notch. Great Zeiss designs paired with very good glass as the sowjets had the ressources to produce very high quality. Don't forget that for example LZOS nowadays is under contract from Zeiss and their glass quality is considered to be world-class. But they also had great optical engineers, think about people like Roosinov who had revolutionized wide angle designs with his Russar-concept (which then was adapted by Zeiss and others).

 

[Ron (Netherlands)]

Indeed don't compare the early FED and Zorki with a Leica III(a,b,c,d,f) expecially the later Leica IIIc,d,f have ball bearing shutters and more advanced brakes apart from the slow speeds.
So only true comparison is actually the Leica II. From the Zorki's and FED's I had in my hands the one that really compares with the Leica II is the NKDV FED (made from about 1938-1941). After producing more roughly made FED's, I dear say that the Sovjets with the introduction of their NKDV FED were able to present a camera with gears and other parts as finely made as the Leica II - btw prices of these camera's are also not that different anymore - earlier FEDs even fetch higher prices than the original Leica II. Also after correct servicing, the NKDV FED is as smooth as its German counterpart. But of course by the time the Sovjets were able to produce this finely made NKDV FED, it became a little bit of an anachronism since the Germans already had the technically advanced Leica IIIc with ball bearing shutter on the market and the contax was out there too.

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

I might as well throw in a little more in that both Zeiss and FED's factories were non-existent at the end of the 2nd World War. Leitz was fairly intact and could continue and improve, although it suffered from shortages of materials.

And Leica and the new version of Zeiss were in the American Zone and the original Jena Zeiss was in the USSR zone. So advantages and disadvantages for both. FED/Zorki having to start from scratch like CZ in the USA Zone but vastly different conditions.

And the so called Cold War when the Allies turned on each other further complicates matters. Really it's like family history when one brother goes to the USA, one stays at home and sister marries a millionaire... OK a bit fanciful but I hope you get my drift.

As for quality, my Contax II, Kiev's, FED's, Zorkis and Leicas have lasted until now and they are all working OK. The worst in some ways is the 1946 IIIc with its poor quality chrome but it works.

I'll also wonder what FED and Zorki would have turned out if the Cold War hadn't locked them in the 40's.

Regards, David

PS and I still think that a machine that's been neglected for 50 or more years is not a good source of info about quality control. Lack of lubrication causes wear and tear.

 

[dee]

I bought two Leica engraved Leica copies from Russia,
I loved using them, which eventually led to a genuine black Leica II.
The black Leica copies were remade, so, because I liked them, I had Oleg check them out,
He checked and fettled them as required and confirmed them to be complete and properly rebuilt Fed 1c.
I also bought a Kiev 4 and Kiev 4m from Oleg, concerned by the terrible reputation of these later Kievs, but they work exquisitely.
A thought is a cheap Leica IIIc, serviced by Oleg,
You could not do better,
dee

 

[MikeDimit]

I own 2 FED-2,2 FED-3, 2 Zorkij 4,1 Zorkij 4k, 2 Zorkij 5, 2 Zorkij 6. I could say that Fed 2 with a collapsible industar is the smallest combo. Yet my Zorkij 6 with a case is more silence in use than my Olympus 35 trip or Konika Pop. They are all similar at weight ( the FSU cameras). My FED 2 have one more plus - the rangefinder patch is not in the center so I can use 50mm and 35mm lens without external frame.

 

[ta152c]

Good points all. I got a few films back from the processor (ASDA dev and put onto CD)- both the Zorki-1 and the M4-2 turned out great wee images, the only fault was the lens hood on the 35mm Jupiter-12 causing vignetting on the corners. Removed the hood, job done.

In saying that, I'm just about to get a Leica IIIc (converted to a IIIf with red dial).