Kiev 6c - to medium format or not to medium format?

[DanieliusB]

If you had to choose - kiev 6c or no medium format at all, what would it be? Would the pros of medium format outweigh the soviet engineering?

 

[Bronson Dugnutt]

For simplicity sake I'd opt for a TLR basic design. Lubitel, Ciro Flex, and various 6x* folders give the ability to expose medium format without the fuss of SLR mechanics.

 

[Paul Howell]

Unless you need interchangeable lens, as noted by Bronson a TLR is lighter, less to go wrong,. If you plan on a complete kit, lens, viewfinders, screens, do you want 6X6, square, 6X7 rectangle ,or larger 6X9 or smaller 6X 4.5? Not sure what prices are like in Lithuania, here in the states, a good midlevel TLR or Rangefinder like the Mamiya Press can be had at a reasonable price. Other consideration waist level or eye level finder.

 

[Kino]

If it were the only option, sure!

It's a camera you have to try to see if you can tolerate the size, weight and mechanical strangeness of the form factor. It's kind of like having a toaster oven around your neck that takes photos. If you want to be discreet, forget it; the mirror-slap will blow back your hair and frighten little children into hysterics.

I have both the Kiev 6c and 88, so I am familiar with the quirks of FSU engineering and don't mind it so much since I can share lenses back and forth between the camera bodies with the right adapters. The lenses are good and relatively cheap, but everything is not what you would call professional grade and you have to be willing to live with some degree of unreliability.

If you are looking solid, uninterrupted and consistent service, try a TLR as others have suggested.

I am kind of fond of my 6c; it can produce good images with care and is a real conversation starter...

 

[Sirius Glass]

Welcome to APUG Photrio!!​

 

[M-88]

Kiev 6c? I'd definitely vote for no medium format.

P.S. Go large instead.

 

[M-88]

Working ones exist. Or do I have the only two in the world doing so?
Also maybe the OP is left handed.

Working ones exist, they are PLENTY in my country.

I'm right handed, I use Kine Exakta with no effort.

Edit: Moskva-2 too.

 

[Kino]

Funny, the OP stated 6C or nothing...

I would think something would be better than nothing at all.

 

[Pioneer]

If that was my only choice I would use it. I have a Pentacon Six TL that works pretty well but it is certainly not a point and shoot affair. I believe it is a kissing cousin to the 6C. Just make sure the film is loaded correctly and snug or you will have overlapping frames. Using that camera is a very deliberate affair but that Carl Zeiss Biometer 80mm lens produces very nice negatives when you do your part.

 

[guangong]

Many years ago Pentagon works gave me a camera. It didn’t work properly from day one. One would think that they would have made a special effort.
The question is: why would OP want medium format? If he has a good argument favoring MF, then many choices available...folders, TLRs, rf cameras, SLRs. Size is a consideration, as well as how camera fits in the hand. Another factor to consider, especially for SLRs, is repair ability. From what I gather reading Photrio threads, some cameras, especially those loaded with electronics, can suffer sudden death with no resurrection.
If I were to buy a MF SLR today, the cheapest in the long run eould be a Hasselblad C or CM from a reputable dealer.

 

[Kino]

Many years ago Pentagon works gave me a camera. It didn’t work properly from day one. One would think that they would have made a special effort.
The question is: why would OP want medium format? If he has a good argument favoring MF, then many choices available...folders, TLRs, rf cameras, SLRs. Size is a consideration, as well as how camera fits in the hand. Another factor to consider, especially for SLRs, is repair ability. From what I gather reading Photrio threads, some cameras, especially those loaded with electronics, can suffer sudden death with no resurrection.
If I were to buy a MF SLR today, the cheapest in the long run eould be a Hasselblad C or CM from a reputable dealer.

Well, maybe that's all the OP can afford OR is available or both.

 

[1kgcoffee]

I love my Kiev 6c (s) but they are unreliable. Shoots 120 and 220. The glass is what I love most.
If you buy a refurbished Arax they can be quite reliable.

 

[guangong]

Well, maybe that's all the OP can afford OR is available or both.

Yes, available funds stymies a lot of great ideas. If it were me, I would first try a folder to determine and advantages, if any, compared to 35mm for his particular photographic interests.

 

[Besk]

I voted no.
Except if you are primarily going to use the Kiev for mostly portraits I would stick to a good 35mm SLR.
It is amazing what can be done with 35mm using good technique including using a tripod.

Instead I would try to go to 4x5 skipping medium format.

 

[Prest_400]

Welcome! Voted yes because it's better than nothing and better hope that Kiev is one of the good ones.

I voted no.
Except if you are primarily going to use the Kiev for mostly portraits I would stick to a good 35mm SLR.
It is amazing what can be done with 35mm using good technique including using a tripod.

Instead I would try to go to 4x5 skipping medium format.

This point sould be emphasised. I have a Fuji 6x9 and then no modern Medium format down until 35mm. A decent 35mm SLR with a 50mm 1.8 double Gauss shooting T-grain ISO 100 film can equal medium format with a cubic ISO 400 film.

But medium format has longer focal lengths as well as a larger negative with its respective impact in the photos. I would choose as well a TLR like a Flexaret or such option.

 

[Marcelo Paniagua]

It is a great camera if you don't mind some frame overlap now and again . Also, with some people spooling 220 and it being available from some film makers, having the 220 option is a good.

Great camera and lens selection is a pretty good. There is even a economic (not cheap) fish eye that is great (got one for my Kiev 88).

Normally use it with a WLF finder. I find it more comfortable (and light) that way.

 

[Steven Lee]

I have more than 50 TLRs, I hate them all.

Eugen, there must be a story behind this, no?

 

[Steven Lee]

Funny, the OP stated 6C or nothing...
I would think something would be better than nothing at all.

Well... the OP has 35mm cameras. And I would say that a combination of a fine 35mm film like Delta 100 and a high-performance fast lens like Zeiss Miluvs/Otus f/1.4 would give you an image generally comparable to ISO 400 film in an average medium format camera. I am referring to usable resolution, smoothness/grain, and DOF. It won't match a MF image exactly, but it will be pretty close for most use cases.

 

[Xylo]

It's funny because I always find that old Soviet cameras have a weird charm to them. Yes, they are unreliable when compared to their Japanese counterparts. Yes they are weird. Yes they are clunky and often heavy.
But when you use them you tend to feel good.
And their lenses are rarely a disaster.

 

[Roger Cole]

Buy your soviet gear only in person where you can test it. I found no single Kiev 60, 60c, 88 or Pentacon Six bought online to work perfectly.

Most posters recommend a TLR. I do not.
A TLR handles completly different. I have more than 50 TLRs, I hate them all. My problem is, they are too tall and wobble when I hold them in the palm of my hand. (To focus and make the exposure.) Interestingly the best in this regard is my cheapest TLR, the humble Seagull. It has enough weight so it stays more stable.
So if you never used a TLR, try it before buying.

Btw, the answer to not being able to afford a Kiev 60c is not abandoning MF completly but to buy an Agfa Clack.

My opinion about Kiev 60, 6c and Pentacon Six is that they were a bargain in the 90s and maybe 2000s. But since then price of reliable MF cameras (Bronica, Yashica, Mamiya) fell to the same level, so it does not make any sense to risk buying the communist made gear.

TLRs are a love 'em or hate 'em kind of thing. I love mine. Of all my cameras I think it's the one I get the most enjoyment out of using. It doesn't produce the best photos (that would be my RZ 67 Pro II until I get back to 4x5) nor the most versatile (35mm) nor the most versatile (Mamiya 645 Pro system) but in terms of just enjoying using it, the little Yaschicamat 124 is my favorite.

But some people can't used to the mirror reversed waist level image. This is the first I've heard of problems holding it but I guess that's one too. (I don't have any problem steadying my YM124 but of course YMMV.)

I voted yes, assuming it's one that works properly. I understand the folks just saying use 35mm because it can produce excellent results, but once you use MF pretty extensively including optical printing (if you do that, I tend to assume B&W shooters do but I know many don't) 35mm starts to just feel tiny and fiddly. It's EASIER to get superb print quality from MF. But then the OP didn't specifically say B&W either - another assumption on my part that may not be valid.

 

[Xylo]

assuming it's one that works properly.

I once opened one and can say that it's mechanically simple under the hood. But hard to understand unless you really know what to look for (that's how mine ended-up wrecked).
If you know what to touch, there's no problem (I didn't).

The only things that should be fiddled on it are the curtain position stops (two screws under the camera frame), the clockspring (single screw attached to a ratchet gear on the left side under the timing mechanism) and the frame position adjust (on the right side). Apart from that, if the curtains are good, there's no issue.

 

[LeoniD]

If you had to choose - kiev 6c or no medium format at all, what would it be? Would the pros of medium format outweigh the soviet engineering?

More like the viscosity of soviet 40yo lubricant. Practically all "quirks" that people attribute to engineering are actually caused by old lubricant. Change it and you have a perfectly working camera(but make sure the technitian knows what he's doing, otherwise your camera will spend most of its life in repair shop) . Even if you find a working camera that wasn't CLAd, continuing to use it as-is is almost a crime, you could as well pour some sand in.
I have a Kiev 60 that was serviced 4 years ago, and it works like new to this day, despite having all the "Kiev quirks" before the CLA

 

[Xylo]

You should make a tutorial. I for sure would be interested in it.

That's the hard part as I broke a screw trying to fix it and it can't be reassembled without it...
The screw holds the clockspring, so the timing mechanism is totally gutted. Lets just say I wasn't proud of myself when this happened.
There is a guide in French (http://www.suaudeau.eu/memo/rep/Kiev_6c.html) but it contains multiple errors that will actually damage the camera and don't fix anything. So it's better avoided. (that's the guide I followed...)
But it does show how easy it really is to take this camera apart.

The thing I loved the most is that it uses a frame that holds everything together that gets dropped in the housing. So fixing stuff is quite easier than on a 35mm SLR where everything is cramped and small.
Also, since it doesn't have auto mirror return, you can't have an out of focus image because the mirror bumper is worn and the mechanics are much simpler.

The build quality is equivalent to a soviet tank, as in rough but functional.

 

[Marcelo Paniagua]

No exactly for Kiev 6c but for Kiev 60.

Kiev 60 Kalibration

May come handy.