Good Russian Cameras?

[M-88]

So I can use soviet lenses (which I hear are well) but which bodies are good to use? I'm interested in trying out Helios and Jupiter lenses, I don't know about which mount, but I prefer a compact design. Can you recommend a good body which I can attach using maybe contax, leica, or m42 mount which are compact?

Kiev, Kiev-2 and Kiev-4 have Contax rangefinder mount and lenses mount on them and focus without any issue. There was one wide angle lens for Contax which doesn't fit Kiev because it's got a long rear element and it just happened so that while copying, Kiev engineers made camera shutter thicker than Contax. But unfortunately I can't recall which lens was it. Original "Kiev" without a light meter box is fairly compact, its "Jupiter-8" lens is collapsible, so also very compact. The lens is a copy of Zeiss Sonnar 50 mm f/2 and yields nice results.

Zorki and Fed cameras have M39 rangefinder mount.Both brands are compact, except for Fed-4 and Fed-5. Good lenses for these include:
Industar 50-2. It's a copy of Zeiss Tessar, 50 mm f/3.5. "50-2" in name suggest that it's a "model 2" of "Industar-50" so not to be confused with 50 mm f/2.
Industar 26M. It's also a copy of Zeiss Tessar, this time 50 mm f/2.8.
Jupiter-11. This is a telephoto lens so not so compact. Zeiss Sonnar 135 mm f/4 copy. Sharp and nice. It even has the coating (yay!)

Now, I can't think of a single compact M42 body. All newer Zenits (B, E, ET, 11, TTL, 12, 122) are big and all older Zenits (3, M and S) are, well, old. This photo taken from the Internet demonstrates it very well:
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/CIAARMqZob0/maxresdefault.jpg
Unfortunately I'm at work right now and I can't give a better size comparison.
As for the lenses, there are M42 version of Industar-50-2 available and it's a good performer, sharp and contrasty, even with poor quality control of Soviets.
Helios-44 is most common Zenit lens.. A copy of Zeiss Biotar, of course. Helios-44-2 has a manual aperture, while 44-M has automatic with Zenit cameras and is considered a better model.
Industar-61Z which is similar to Industar-26 is also available. "61Z" is the one that fits SLR cameras, regular 61 was for rangefinders.
There is also Zenitar-M which is 50 mm f/1.7 but it's less common than Helios.
The only compact lens from the ones I have mentioned is Industar-50-2. All Helioses are made of metal and glass, are heavy and large. Unfortunately, there is no Helios for rangefinder cameras, so if you are looking for a compact body, you might as well go for Pentax Spotmatic. After all, M42 is M42.

Quality control was poor in USSR, so even two lenses from same factory made in same year (first two digits of serial number usually represent a manufacturing year) can perform differently from one another. Here's a good article about factory logos. Krasnogorsk is the one you might wan to aim for, it had best overall quality, although Arsenal is the one responsible for making Kievs.
http://cameras.alfredklomp.com/logos/



Here's a nice guyde

 

[AgX]

Concerning design and quality control of soviet cameras I got the impression here at Apug, that concerning respective discussions, everything concerning the soviet side (finally even ending at the very labourer) is concerned shitty, whereas respective issues at west-german or japanese manufacturers are concerned god-given so to say.

 

[awty]

Concerning design and quality control of soviet cameras I got the impression here at Apug, that concerning respective discussions, everything concerning the soviet side (finally even ending at the very labourer) is concerned shitty, whereas respective issues at west-german or japanese manufacturers are concerned god-given so to say.

There's nothing majorly wrong with design, issue is with quality control. A shame cause otherwise the cameras would be far more desirable.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Throwing away a camera when it does not work anymore because it is cheap is a strange philosophy I never agreed with. A camera is a camera regardless the price because it has its own value.

I'm curious -- what else is someone to do when they have a camera that literally no one in the same country who's capable will touch, and it quits? Not everyone is themselves able to learn to service their own (very complex) camera. I may be able to do my own work on my Kiev 4, but I won't start without having another working body as a backup.

And buying a genuine preWar Contax II or III is out of the question for me. I could buy another medium format system camera, with a lens or two and a film back or two, or another view camera with a lens, for what a Contax in "not film tested, but looks very good" condition costs.

 

[Bikerider]

In my photographic life since 1962 I have only had 3 or 4 Russian cameras and perhaps it was because I didn't hammer the living daylights out of them, I have only ever had a problem with one which I repaired myself. Of them all the Kiev 4 (which was the one with the problem) was a delight to use and the F2/50mm lens was as good as they get.. I recall using it in London with Ilford Pan F and photographing the river bank opposite. This included a statue on a tower which must have been 1/4 mile away and the wrought iron railings around the top were clearly defined and sharp. The others, 2 x Fed 2 and a Zorki 6 were ok but the lenses on the Fed 2's were questionable quality. The Zorki lens was OK ish but not as good as the one on the Kiev. Like others have said it was the quality control or rather the lack of it appear to be the problem.

For interest the problem on the Kiev was with the shutter speed dial on the top of the camera, a tiny screw came undone and I could not change speed. The last shutter speed I had used was 1/60th so I rotated the loose dial until the arrow was opposite that speed and tightened the screw. It was OK after that. I part exchanged it for a Minolta, but that didn't have the character of the Kiev.
I have also heard reports of 39mm screw lenses not working on a number of cameras from the old eastern bloc. (Feds and Zorki's) so before you buy see if there any compatibility problems.

 

[M-88]

I'm curious -- what else is someone to do when they have a camera that literally no one in the same country who's capable will touch, and it quits? Not everyone is themselves able to learn to service their own (very complex) camera. I may be able to do my own work on my Kiev 4, but I won't start without having another working body as a backup.

And buying a genuine preWar Contax II or III is out of the question for me. I could buy another medium format system camera, with a lens or two and a film back or two, or another view camera with a lens, for what a Contax in "not film tested, but looks very good" condition costs.

I agree with you at 100%. Years ago, both my primary and backup bodies of FED-2 failed at a same time and I discovered that buying a replacement cost me less (around 15$) than repairing one of two broken ones (25$). Sure, there is an argument that "a camera has its own value", but some cameras are cheaper than others.
Then there was another case, when someone gifted me with Maxxum 9000 and it developed shutter magnet issue. No repairman wanted to touch it in my country and shipping it abroad was not very economical.

These two lessons are the reason why I now have the cameras, which I can repair on my own.

There is a good reason why I don't keep Soviet cams: even though I can repair them on my own except Kievs: most of them are crude, not very ergonomic and they perform poorly (poor selection of shutter speeds can be a pain in the rear). The reason why they were somewhat popular in Britain or other European countries is that they were cheaper than their German or Japanese peers and therefore were appealing for amateurs.

 

[guangong]

[QUOTE=" That being said, I would suggest a Barnack Leica, as they are not that much more expensive, way better built, hold their value, are easier to get serviced, and are worth the cost of servicing. And there are no fiddly rules about when to change shutter speed.

Actually the shutter speed of a Barnack Leica should only be changed after winding on the film.[/QUOTE]
In fact, shutter speed can only be changed after film advance. Not fiddly at all, but quite straightforward.

 

[M-88]

Actually the shutter speed of a Barnack Leica should only be changed after winding on the film.

In fact, shutter speed can only be changed after film advance. Not fiddly at all, but quite straightforward.[/QUOTE]
By the way, same is true for Kiev-Contax mount cameras, for FED/Zorki (which are copies of Leica) and for early Zenits which were just Zorki with mirror box added.

 

[Dali]

I'm curious -- what else is someone to do when they have a camera that literally no one in the same country who's capable will touch, and it quits? Not everyone is themselves able to learn to service their own (very complex) camera. I may be able to do my own work on my Kiev 4, but I won't start without having another working body as a backup.

And buying a genuine preWar Contax II or III is out of the question for me. I could buy another medium format system camera, with a lens or two and a film back or two, or another view camera with a lens, for what a Contax in "not film tested, but looks very good" condition costs.

Most of FED and Zorki are Leica knockoff. So, someone dealing with Leica LTM can repair FED and Zorki cameras.

Same thing with Kiev and Contax rangefinders.

Regarding USSR medium format cameras, I don't know, I never went into it.

Zenit SLR are not that complex (in fact, they are pretty simple) and they should not be a challenge for any capable repairman.

Sometimes, repairmen don't want to touch USSR cameras (guess why?). Then, you are stuck with a doorstop. This is why I recommend to stay away from these cameras unless you are the plan B (i.e. you know how to repair them).

These represent 90% of the Soviet cameras we are talking about so it should pretty much answer your concern.

 

[M-88]

Most of FED and Zorki are Leica knockoff. So, someone dealing with Leica LTM can repair FED and Zorki cameras.

Same thing with Kiev and Contax rangefinders.

Regarding USSR medium format cameras, I don't know, I never went into it.

But there's a catch: only original Zorki and FED were truthful clones of Leica, while all others were modified. So some parts won't readily fit. As for Kievs, while mostly identical throughout production years, they were also different from Contax due to poor skills of Soviet craftsmen. So in the end, while it can be done, it's not always the best solution.

 

[Donald Qualls]

But there's a catch: only original Zorki and FED were truthful clones of Leica, while all others were modified. So some parts won't readily fit. As for Kievs, while mostly identical throughout production years, they were also different from Contax due to poor skills of Soviet craftsmen. So in the end, while it can be done, it's not always the best solution.

Kiev 2 and 3 were (intended to be) exact copies of the pre-War Contax II and III -- give or take name plate stamping and such. If they differ, it's because some of the machinery got damaged or lost when the factory was moved, or someone couldn't get part X to fit and work correctly, so they modified the manufacture of part X into part X1. The Kiev 4/4M was heavily modified to make it easier to build, and the Kiev 5 isn't even a related camera, as far as I can tell.

 

[StepheKoontz]

I'd love to pick up a barnack leica but they run about $800 on ebay these days.

I'm not sure what you are looking at, a basic IIIc isn't even close to that price point. I see several listed as being CLa'd for under $300. And the soviet models have no low speeds so are more like a model II Leica. Yeah, you are're gonna get a IIIg for those prices but that's not what we are talking about. There are plenty of Canon and Nicca rangefinders under $300 ready to use. Leotax is another really good Leica clone made in Japan. Mostly on a camera this old you are paying for cosmetic condition and possibly rarity of a certain model.

Is getting a manual film camera is the goal and you want a built in meter, why not get a 70's vintage SLR like an Olympus OM1 or OM2?

As far as using Soviet lenses on anything other than a Soviet camera, I wouldn't recommend it. The linkage used is different (a sled vs a roller) and my experience hasn't been great as far as focus accuracy mixing the two. If camera collecting and tinkering with them is your hobby, soviet gear can be fun. I have an original Zenit SLR and am collecting a set of m39 mount glass for it, but get ready to deal with issues like this (and multiple others like overlapping frame etc etc), sometimes out of the blue. Anyone who has ever used soviet gear will relate to this shot.

 

[brainmonster]

I wonder if buying a Zenit TTL or something similar would be reasonable. They are quite cheap. If they are quite simple then I imagine they must be harder to break and easier to construct. The example pictures I've seen online on flickr seem to be pretty good and reasonably sharp, compared to the pictures from a Kiev 4, maybe because it's an SLR so the focus is a little bit more precise. They mostly seem to take m42 mount lenses which are in abundance.

All things considered I think soviet cams are pretty cheap. A Zenit TTL can be had for as cheap as $20 plus shipping (supposedly even serviced). The FEDs, Zorkis, and Kievs I've seen online seem to be around $100 serviced, and the example pictures I've seen don't seem to be very good for some reason, and if they break they perhaps they aren't a good buy.

Kiev, Kiev-2 and Kiev-4 have Contax rangefinder mount and lenses mount on them and focus without any issue. There was one wide angle lens for Contax which doesn't fit Kiev because it's got a long rear element and it just happened so that while copying, Kiev engineers made camera shutter thicker than Contax. But unfortunately I can't recall which lens was it. Original "Kiev" without a light meter box is fairly compact, its "Jupiter-8" lens is collapsible, so also very compact. The lens is a copy of Zeiss Sonnar 50 mm f/2 and yields nice results.

Zorki and Fed cameras have M39 rangefinder mount.Both brands are compact, except for Fed-4 and Fed-5. Good lenses for these include:
Industar 50-2. It's a copy of Zeiss Tessar, 50 mm f/3.5. "50-2" in name suggest that it's a "model 2" of "Industar-50" so not to be confused with 50 mm f/2.
Industar 26M. It's also a copy of Zeiss Tessar, this time 50 mm f/2.8.
Jupiter-11. This is a telephoto lens so not so compact. Zeiss Sonnar 135 mm f/4 copy. Sharp and nice. It even has the coating (yay!)

Now, I can't think of a single compact M42 body. All newer Zenits (B, E, ET, 11, TTL, 12, 122) are big and all older Zenits (3, M and S) are, well, old. This photo taken from the Internet demonstrates it very well:
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/CIAARMqZob0/maxresdefault.jpg
Unfortunately I'm at work right now and I can't give a better size comparison.
As for the lenses, there are M42 version of Industar-50-2 available and it's a good performer, sharp and contrasty, even with poor quality control of Soviets.
Helios-44 is most common Zenit lens.. A copy of Zeiss Biotar, of course. Helios-44-2 has a manual aperture, while 44-M has automatic with Zenit cameras and is considered a better model.
Industar-61Z which is similar to Industar-26 is also available. "61Z" is the one that fits SLR cameras, regular 61 was for rangefinders.
There is also Zenitar-M which is 50 mm f/1.7 but it's less common than Helios.
The only compact lens from the ones I have mentioned is Industar-50-2. All Helioses are made of metal and glass, are heavy and large. Unfortunately, there is no Helios for rangefinder cameras, so if you are looking for a compact body, you might as well go for Pentax Spotmatic. After all, M42 is M42.

Quality control was poor in USSR, so even two lenses from same factory made in same year (first two digits of serial number usually represent a manufacturing year) can perform differently from one another. Here's a good article about factory logos. Krasnogorsk is the one you might wan to aim for, it had best overall quality, although Arsenal is the one responsible for making Kievs.
http://cameras.alfredklomp.com/logos/



Here's a nice guyde

Most of FED and Zorki are Leica knockoff. So, someone dealing with Leica LTM can repair FED and Zorki cameras.

Same thing with Kiev and Contax rangefinders.

Regarding USSR medium format cameras, I don't know, I never went into it.

Zenit SLR are not that complex (in fact, they are pretty simple) and they should not be a challenge for any capable repairman.

Sometimes, repairmen don't want to touch USSR cameras (guess why?). Then, you are stuck with a doorstop. This is why I recommend to stay away from these cameras unless you are the plan B (i.e. you know how to repair them).

These represent 90% of the Soviet cameras we are talking about so it should pretty much answer your concern.

 

[Wallendo]

I enjoy my Soviet lenses. They all take very sharp images when used with my NEX-5n.

The problem I have encountered is focusing on a rangefinder. I have bought all my Soviet gear on eBay. I suspect that the sellers who serviced the lenses prior to sale failed to replace the necessary shims the lenses required. It seems as if digital camera users are the target market for many of these sellers.

I do have an Industar 22 which focuses properly, so it can be done.

 

[M-88]

Kiev 2 and 3 were (intended to be) exact copies of the pre-War Contax II and III -- give or take name plate stamping and such. If they differ, it's because some of the machinery got damaged or lost when the factory was moved, or someone couldn't get part X to fit and work correctly, so they modified the manufacture of part X into part X1. The Kiev 4/4M was heavily modified to make it easier to build, and the Kiev 5 isn't even a related camera, as far as I can tell.

Given that Kiev-Contax were produced between 1947-1985, there were several modifications. Most obvious was omission of 1/1250 shutter speed in 1960s, which even in Contax was more of a gimmick to beat Leica. If we want to be nitpickers, then there is such source:
http://www3.telus.net/public/rpnchbck/zconrfKiev.htm
But like I said, it's mostly nitpicking. I used to own Kiev-4 and it worked well.

I wonder if buying a Zenit TTL or something similar would be reasonable. They are quite cheap. If they are quite simple then I imagine they must be harder to break and easier to construct. The example pictures I've seen online on flickr seem to be pretty good and reasonably sharp, compared to the pictures from a Kiev 4, maybe because it's an SLR so the focus is a little bit more precise. They mostly seem to take m42 mount lenses which are in abundance.

All things considered I think soviet cams are pretty cheap. A Zenit TTL can be had for as cheap as $20 plus shipping (supposedly even serviced). The FEDs, Zorkis, and Kievs I've seen online seem to be around $100 serviced, and the example pictures I've seen don't seem to be very good for some reason, and if they break they perhaps they aren't a good buy.

20$ is dirt-cheap, you might as well get two bodies. Can't get Spotmatic for that much for sure!.. Helios-44 and Industar-50-2 are must have normal lenses and Mir-1 is a 37 mm semi-wide angle which is also Zeiss Flektogon clone and is an okay lens.

 

[Dali]

brainmonster wrote: "All things considered I think soviet cams are pretty cheap. A Zenit TTL can be had for as cheap as $20 plus shipping (supposedly even serviced). The FEDs, Zorkis, and Kievs I've seen online seem to be around $100 serviced,"

Do you really believe to find a serviced camera for $20? If yes, you are quite naive.

And no, because of their overall lack of reliability and the fact that they all are pretty old now, USSR cameras are not cheap in the long run. Instead, buy a decent Jap camera (you need to buy a Nikon F2 or a Canon A-1) froma reliabel seller and you are done. What are we talking about here? Having a bargain or finding a camera to take pictures?

 

[btaylor]

If you are looking for a reliable camera you are going to keep and use for awhile the FSU cameras are not a great choice. I have picked up 2 Pentax Spotmatics with great 50mm Super Takumars for $45-65- the meters worked too. A really nice Nicca with a Nikkor lens for a few hundred- it's build quality is no different than Leica. If you want the adventure of going through the FSU world by all means. But if you want more of a picture taking experience and less fiddling with gear I suggest you look at other options. Foregoing the FSU gear adventure will also be less expensive, I assure you.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Given that Kiev-Contax were produced between 1947-1985, there were several modifications. Most obvious was omission of 1/1250 shutter speed in 1960s, which even in Contax was more of a gimmick to beat Leica. If we want to be nitpickers, then there is such source:
http://www3.telus.net/public/rpnchbck/zconrfKiev.htm
But like I said, it's mostly nitpicking. I used to own Kiev-4 and it worked well.

My 1973 Kiev 4M has the 1250 speed (which I don't think I've used -- next roll will be EI 800, so I might use it on that). I presume you mean the late Kiev 2 and 3 didn't have that speed, but it seems to have returned for at least some of the Kiev 4 examples.

Yes, no doubt, there were little changes made along the line, but the big one was when they switched from the 2 and 3 to the 4A and 4M. The body casting was changed, the foot around the tripod socket deleted, the meter housing reduced in height. From what I've seen, Kiev 4 models came out in the late 1960s and ran until they stopped production in or near 1980.

 

[ColdEye]

I'd love to pick up a barnack leica but they run about $800 on ebay these days. I feel like getting a CLA'd Kiev 4 might be the way to go. Seller assures that the meter works as well. Or a Zenit TTL serviced (although I like the older soviet designs aesthetic better).

Either can be had for under $100, and a Zenit for basically peanuts.

You can get a IIIc for $200 or sometimes under it, then a CLA once you cant take the issues anymore.

 

[Donald Qualls]

Can you buy 35mm and 200mm lenses for that IIIc?

 

[ColdEye]

Sure you can. You can buy a lens + viewfinder.

 

[ColdEye]

Or stick with 50mm colapsible russian lens and f8 on everything, that will take care of focus problems. Or in my case buy a Summitar for $120 because there is haze, that cleaned off right away lol.

 

[Donald Qualls]

And now we're back to assuming that just because someone wants to shoot film, they have the budget of a moon shot. Some of us can't spend $200 for a camera that's likely to need a $125-$150 service almost immediately. For myself, the most I've ever spent on a single camera was close to $400 for my RB67, including 90mm lens, waist level finder, and 6x7 and 6x4.5 film back. I've got less than $200 into my Graphic View and 150mm Componon f/5.6.

For me, and others like me, it's FSU cameras, or fixed-lens, if we want to shoot RF instead of SLR. I've got at least six fixed-lens 35mm RFs. A Kiev was a way into the other side of the playground, so to speak. Otherwise, the paywall would block me out.

 

[brainmonster]

And now we're back to assuming that just because someone wants to shoot film, they have the budget of a moon shot. Some of us can't spend $200 for a camera that's likely to need a $125-$150 service almost immediately. For myself, the most I've ever spent on a single camera was close to $400 for my RB67, including 90mm lens, waist level finder, and 6x7 and 6x4.5 film back. I've got less than $200 into my Graphic View and 150mm Componon f/5.6.

For me, and others like me, it's FSU cameras, or fixed-lens, if we want to shoot RF instead of SLR. I've got at least six fixed-lens 35mm RFs. A Kiev was a way into the other side of the playground, so to speak. Otherwise, the paywall would block me out.

Agreed, although I'm getting pretty close to buying a Praktica, but they are pretty large, but fairly cheap. But no CLA included, so might have to be serviced in the future.

But with FSU bodies and lenses, you can also be sure that they aren't radioactive, as some of the lenses of 1960s-70s were. I know there's a debate but it's nice to know soviets didn't have technology to produce the thoriated glass, I would rather avoid it as a personal choice.

Also I'm not sure if something like a praktica would be compatible with m42 russian lenses.

 

[M-88]

My 1973 Kiev 4M has the 1250 speed (which I don't think I've used -- next roll will be EI 800, so I might use it on that). I presume you mean the late Kiev 2 and 3 didn't have that speed, but it seems to have returned for at least some of the Kiev 4 examples.

Yes, no doubt, there were little changes made along the line, but the big one was when they switched from the 2 and 3 to the 4A and 4M. The body casting was changed, the foot around the tripod socket deleted, the meter housing reduced in height. From what I've seen, Kiev 4 models came out in the late 1960s and ran until they stopped production in or near 1980.

I'm sorry, I must have rememberred it incorrectly. Mine was made in 1957 and it was with 1250 as well but I've been seeing plenty on local flea market with 1/1000 only.