Kiev IIa or Kiev IVa is better?

[Tenchi]

Hi, want to seek opinion on Russian camera. I owned Fed 2, so far loving it, but lack of slow speed and high speed...That why wonder Kiev is a nice choice.

Thanks

 

[Donald Qualls]

From my limited experience, the older Kiev models (II and III) are closer to the pre-War Contax than the later ones (IV family etc.). You can see this in the body design -- II and III have the flip-out stand foot by the tripod socket, while the later ones don't (just as the Contax IIa and IIIa did away with this feature).

Further, the oldest Contax copies with the Kiev name were made on actual, original Zeiss machinery and it had less wear on it when production started up than it did by the 1970s.

So it's reasonable to believe there might be some quality differences between the earlier Kiev models than the later ones. How much difference? I don't know. I have two Kiev 4 bodies, one from the early 1970s and the other from the early 1980s. The older unit has good frame spacing but the shutter is very slow; a good CLA would probably fix it (and I might get that done sometime when I can spare the money). The newer has a reasonably accurate shutter (better than a half stop on all speeds), but the frame spacing is all over the place -- and this is something that reportedly can't be reliably fixed. I also have a pre-War Contax III -- with a shutter that's too slow to even test the camera,

 

[Tenchi]

From my limited experience, the older Kiev models (II and III) are closer to the pre-War Contax than the later ones (IV family etc.). You can see this in the body design -- II and III have the flip-out stand foot by the tripod socket, while the later ones don't (just as the Contax IIa and IIIa did away with this feature).

Further, the oldest Contax copies with the Kiev name were made on actual, original Zeiss machinery and it had less wear on it when production started up than it did by the 1970s.

So it's reasonable to believe there might be some quality differences between the earlier Kiev models than the later ones. How much difference? I don't know. I have two Kiev 4 bodies, one from the early 1970s and the other from the early 1980s. The older unit has good frame spacing but the shutter is very slow; a good CLA would probably fix it (and I might get that done sometime when I can spare the money). The newer has a reasonably accurate shutter (better than a half stop on all speeds), but the frame spacing is all over the place -- and this is something that reportedly can't be reliably fixed. I also have a pre-War Contax III -- with a shutter that's too slow to even test the camera,

Thanks for the input...Seem like many issue on the 1970 Kiev IV...I have issue finding one good CLA repairman in my country....models II and III so old sure must have more issue than the 1970 version.

 

[Donald Qualls]

models II and III so old sure must have more issue than the 1970 version.

If the quality of parts and assembly was better (and I'm not certain either way on this, my total experience with Kiev branded Contax clones is my two Kiev IV bodies) you might well find cameras build 15-20 years earlier working better.

FWIW, I keep getting recommendations for Oleg of OK Vintage Camera Repair who works on both Contax and Kiev, as well as Leica, Fed, and many other vintage RF models. Prices seem pretty reasonable. Purists may cringe or run for their torches and pitchforks, since I think it's a given he's using Kiev parts to fix any Contax bodies he works on -- but the earlier Kiev RF bodies were Contax cameras built after moving the factory.

 

[benjiboy]

What I can tell you about the Zeiss Contax, and the Russian Kiev copies Tenchi is that if you wear glasses the viewfinder is so small it's very difficult to see through it.
I have a Zeiss Contax that my father brought back from Germany after WW2 that I can no longer use, I only keep for sentimental reasons because I can't use the viewfinder.

 

[Donald Qualls]

What I can tell you about the Zeiss Contax, and the Russian Kiev copies Tenchi is that if you wear glasses the viewfinder is so small it's very difficult to see through it.

I don't have trouble with my Kiev 4 viewfinder, but the one on my (barely post-War) Super Ikonta B 532/16 is almost impossible with my glasses on (I wore contacts when I got the camera). For some reason, the equally tiny viewfinder/RF on my Welta Weltini doesn't give me trouble either...

 

[benjiboy]

I find Donald that many cameras of that era are unuseable by glasses wearers because of their tiny viewfinders.

 

[abruzzi]

I can’t compare, but I have a IIa from 1957. It works well (it was CLA’d before I bought it). Build feels good, but of course that’s not really an indicator of functional quality. The viewfinders on all these cameras are less than great. No bright lines, just a rectangular window. I find the rangefinder patch pretty visible (except when my fit middle finger is accidentally obscuring the rangefinder window.

I’ve also found the different Jupiter lenses to be pretty nice, but I need to clean and relube the 85 since the old lubricant has dried up and I can no longer focus it with the wheel on the camera.

 

[Paul Howell]

You might want to contact the camera repair shops Malaysia, if allowed by local rules maybe Singapore to find out what cameras they will work on. Maybe an older Canon rangefinder will be easier to have serviced.

 

[ntenny]

I've been looking at Russian cameras as well. Anyone can share their experience ordering from https://fedka.com/catalog/ ?

I have a Kiev IIa and a couple of lenses from Fedka; no complaints. My impression is that he’s pretty careful about providing functional cameras, which isn’t always a given with these models.

-NT

 

[Tenchi]

Thanks for all the nice inputs.

I will try seek out camera repair shop here that willing and capable to fix Kiev before pull the trigger.

 

[Tenchi]

What I can tell you about the Zeiss Contax, and the Russian Kiev copies Tenchi is that if you wear glasses the viewfinder is so small it's very difficult to see through it.
I have a Zeiss Contax that my father brought back from Germany after WW2 that I can no longer use, I only keep for sentimental reasons because I can't use the viewfinder.

So far I'm ok using Retina IIa and Leotax Model F with glasses. Disadvantage is my glasses got scratch by the metal viewfinder

 

[Pioneer]

I actually prefer the older Contax II models, and Kievs of the same design. I do wear glasses but for some reason it is easier to see to focus these models. I also use a turret rangefinder quite a bit on my Contax II. A little bulky but it seems to have a far better view to compose with. Of course I have owned my Contax II for a long time so I am probably more used to it than my newer models.

I use rubber o-rings around the viewfinder windows. Seems to have cured the scratches but then I use glass lenses in my eyeglasses.

There was actually a plastic ring that threaded onto the IIa and IIIa eyepieces. I have one but I would bet someone could make a few bucks on ebay if they could recreate those rings.