ZORKI 3 / 3m = why ?

dee

dee

Well-known
Local time
8:10 PM
Joined
Dec 9, 2006
Messages
1,921
Location
M25 south UK
View My Gallery
I have been advised , time and again to add a Zorki 3 / 3m to my collection - as the best Russian ranngefinder .
But why ? - when a Zorki 4 - or even a 3s , does the same job at a fraction of the rarity prices of the admittedly prettier , but , to me , seriously lopsided [ ! ] 3m .
... and , as I am fortunate to have two Leica IIIc's , i don't '' NEED '' the extra facilities .
Now I have several Zorki / Fed ones - in Leica guise , and perversely prefer them to my real black Leica II's in some respects , so I am far from rational ... but I just can't fathom what all the Z 3 fuss is about - give me a good Fed 2 anyday !
dee
 
dee said:
.
But why ? - when a Zorki 4 - or even a 3s , does the same job at a fraction of the rarity prices of the admittedly prettier ,dee
Click to expand...



The Zorki-3C(3S) looks exactly like the Zorki-4, the change being in the style of shutter speeds used: the 3C used the 'international' 1/25, 1/50, 1/100... progression, whilst the 4 used the 'modern' 1/30, 1/60, 1/125... scale.

Why the top plate got inflated is really a mystery. Some room had to be made for the step-timed flash synch switch, but this by itself doesn't take up much space. In fact, there's nothing much under the top plate. Perhaps it was easier to stamp these squared-off plates than one which has plenty of curves like the top plate of the Leica IIIf?

Jay
 
Why the top plate got inflated is really a mystery. Some room had to be made for the step-timed flash synch switch, but this by itself doesn't take up much space. In fact, there's nothing much under the top plate. Perhaps it was easier to stamp these squared-off plates than one which has plenty of curves like the top plate of the Leica IIIf?
Click to expand...

Reminds me of FED-4 and FED-5 - the tops are just so HUGE they could easily place there a compartment for a spare film canister 😀 But IMO with more space it is just simplier to assemble it together at the factory...
Leica IIIf had adjustable flash sync and is only marginally larger... the difference is: Krasnogorsk vs. Wetzlar 😀
 
Hmmmm still not conviced ... The Z 3s looks like a Leica IIIc gone wrong to me , though it's a shame that they had to make the Z4 so much more basic . i would also assume that it was cheaper to make .
It's a similar story with the Zorki 1 / Zorki S - the later cameras adds flash sync [ does anyone know how to use it ! ? ] , but in all other respects it adds nothing to the original - except continuos improvements , and a later year , and the Z S is cheap !
 
I'm with you on this one Dee, I don't see the fuss either. The 3 lacks a synchroniser and is less useful IMO. As far as looks goes, the 3 has the edge, looking like a blown-up 1...but not to the extent I'd pay large sums for a less competent camera. I need a 3 to complete my "set" but I'll bide my time for one at a price I think is reasonable. Part of the price for a 3 is bound to be rarity and the older-is-better-built idea...

As regards stamping the tops, I can't see the 4 being easier. Once you've made the dies there's no real difference whatever the shape. As for the synchroniser, they could have made it smaller and still be adjustable - they managed it on the C and 2C after all.
 
dee said:
the later cameras adds flash sync [ does anyone know how to use it ! ? ]
Click to expand...
Yes, it's quite easy - set it to "0" for electronic flash and to whatever the manufacturer recommends for flash bulbs!

The settings refer to the number of milliseconds that the flash is fired prior to the first curtain being fully open. It's often referred to as a flash-delay but it's a flash-advance really. Electronic flash is virtually instantaneous but flash bulbs take a short time to reach peak output, hence the advance.
 
I am a fan of the Z3M(don't own a Z3) and , frankly, my like of this camera isn't entirely rational. On some aesthetic level, it appeals to me more than most of the other FSU cameras available. I don't shoot flash very often and the lack of synch contact is a non issue for me. And I like that the camera is asymmetrical--there is just enough metal to do the job and little more. And the big viewfinder is--for me--the easiest to use of the FSU cameras I have owned.
I certainly don't think that the Zorki 3M is better than the other choices but it pleases me more to use it.
I also find the FED2 visually appealing but I couldn't use the VF well--a perfectly fine camera but it didn't suit me.
The earlier Zorkis(with separate RF/VF windows) are very pretty but don't thrill me the way the Z3M does. The later Zorkis lack some(or several--depending on which one) of the things I want in a camera. The Z3M seems to be a sweet spot in combining the elegance and utility of the Zorki range.
Rob
 
I have a Z3, that is in parts right now. I have a Z3M headed to me from the motherland. I have to say that the big VF of The Z3/3M is much easier to use. I have a couple of FED 3s and they have really crappy VFs Also, the rangefinder dot is not a dot, but a square. So it is a bit easier to see as well. I don't really need a flash sync, so 3C is not needed. I had a couple of Z4Ks, but they are now and forever a pile of parts. If the 3M had an advance lever, it would be the perfect FSU rangefinder as far as I am concerned. I may try to upgrade my Z3M that is coming depending on its condition. Heck, I have plenty of Z4K parts to work with...
 
Well, the Zorki 3 is the FSU I grab when I need more than the Zorki 1. I also have a 4, but it does not look as nice, have strap lugs, or an easy-to-set slow speed dial. That little folding "foot" found on the older Z3s is also great for impromptu long exposures.
 
The Zorki.3 has been labeled as "troublesome" with their slow speed dial, though mine has worked w/o a hitch. These they made for 6 years. They finally got the slow speed right with the 3M, but only made them 2 years. hmmm... 😕

I'm guessing the attraction is mainly looks 'n comfort. Both the 3 and 3M feel similar to a Zorki.1 in your right hand, due to the "cutaway" top. Pretty nice in itself, plus you get to look through the larger VF. I rather like 'em both (though I'm ticked at my 3M still for a glitch which led me to "ground it" until I get over my frustration. 😡 )

Sidenote: I won't add to the Poll Forum, but out of curiosity, has anyone here ever had a failure of their Zorki.3 slow speed mechanism?
 
Last edited:
wolves3012 said:
As regards stamping the tops, I can't see the 4 being easier. Once you've made the dies there's no real difference whatever the shape. As for the synchroniser, they could have made it smaller and still be adjustable - they managed it on the C and 2C after all.
Click to expand...

The timed synch mechanism in the C and 2C is about the same in size as the one found in the 3C and 4. Note too that the C and 2C have significantly larger topplates compared to the original Zorki.

Larger top plates make assembly easier and tolerances easier. For instance, the larger room ensures that the electrical contacts are far from the metal parts. In a tighter space, the assembly has to be ensured that the metal surfaces don't touch and therefore need more careful insulation and wiring.

The separate speed dial of the Zorki-3 could have proven to be fussier to make so they shifted to the single dial found in (and used in all later Zorki and FED with slow speeds) the Zorki-3C and Zorki-4. Aside from installing two dials, the Leica style retarding escapement required a second mechanism found at the bottom of the shutter crate. The linkages are the weakest point in the system

The single- dial design is an elegant solution devised by Soviet designers. The blank area between 1/25 and 1/50 (or 1/30 and 1/60) on the dial became the host to the slow speed mechanism which bore directly on the speed disk. Though not too convenient to use, it did prove to be easier in terms of assembly, and yes, reliability.

Jay
 
I have Zorki-3M and several Zorki-4's. I can tell you that there is no difference between the viewfinders of the 3M and 4 series except that the 3M seems to be better built (fewer rattling noises).

Overall the 3M rattles less and fits together better than any of the 4 models.

I think that the real reason for the unnecessarily larger top on the 4 is marketing aesthetics. The production time period for the 4 coincides very closely to the introduction of the Leica M series. I think the extended length of the top made it look more like the Western camera and gave the Soviet's something to mitigate their Leica-envy.

The 3M is a very well built camera, perhaps the best of all of the Zorki's, but not as nice as a Kiev-2 or Kiev-3.

-Paul
 
I just lurve to stir it all a bit ! - Really , I don't anticipate '' rational '' when it comes to the Red Menace , but love to hear who likes what !
dee
 
dee said:
I just lurve to stir it all a bit ! - Really , I don't anticipate '' rational '' when it comes to the Red Menace , but love to hear who likes what !
dee
Click to expand...

there is no rational in these things - for example i dream about zorki 5 first version - but i will be happy with second version or even zorki 6.
 
I said that I would never be tempted , but I have bid on a rather expensive , near mint Zorki 4 , with brown snake skin covering !
It even has the ugly-bug I 50 , but in lovely condition - maybe if I win it , I will put the I 50 on my Leica ,'' because I can ! ''
So this wll solve the Zorki 3 conundrum !

dee-lusional ~?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

dee
USSR cameras - why ?
Replies
19
Views
2K
oftheherd
oftheherd
dee
Curious - why Fed , if you have a Barnack Leica ?
Replies
17
Views
2K
dee
dee
wolves3012
  • Sticky
Selecting an FSU camera: Beginner's Guide
5 6 7
Replies
128
Views
115K
briansilcox
briansilcox
Back
Top Bottom