My Case

First thing I do after purchasing a Soviet rangefinder is to separate the top case from the lower one, and then attach a connector press fastener for both. After all the fashion is to go with a the lower case only, if at all. A friend uses his Leica 4 without any case at all, he likes the "metal feeling", I prefer to silence the camera as much as possible and the elephant thickness of the Soviet cases is quite good for the mission.
This was the case till I discovered there is a manual for the Kiev II, and it is, of course, the manual for the Contax II, our donor Butkus has for us (one day I would really make him a Paypal contribution - my debt for his manuals is quite a big one). The Contax II manual has been very interesting and instructive for me.

Among the most interesting things there, it is the strength given to the must of having the camera closed within its case as much time as possible during the shooting too. Their point is dust. The Kiev, for instance, is not a dust insulated camera at all. Dust easily enters through the frame counter, the small wheel for fine focusing, the front viewing window, and perhaps I am forgetting something else. Hence perhaps a contribution to the stiffness of dirt and grease we find when we buy either a Kiev or a Contax that has not went any kind of CLA. Hence perhaps a factor in the malfunction or even breaking of some parts. Hence perhaps one of the factors for which we point the finger to the poor Soviet quality control, while the previous users may have not been knowledgeable about this need, and on the other hand once in a life we find a Kiev that without any CLA is in very good shape and smoothness, i.e. an old Kiev that has not been used and kept in a drawer, like Noel pointed to in his good years, those in which he was dissecting Kievs. :munch:

Fine, but for some reason I do not understand why, cases were designed for using the standard lens without a hood even up to day. I do not understand the logics in the assumption that hoods were and are not necessary. In any case I want a hood on my lenses, both for shadowing and to avoid touching the glass, and it is odd to assemble the hood every time I take the camera out of the upper case. Therefore I need a plastic case of the kind sold for small digital cameras, i.e a sort of pouch. These pouches are sold at any photography shop, but where I live these accessories are sold at guillotine prices. Today I have found a different industry selling even better plastic pouches for a sized camera: bicycle fixing shops. There are cheapo priced, can be set at the belly belt, or the included belt, and include a nylon for rain.

There is still a Kiev (model 4A?) on my wish list, so I'll keep this in mind.
Thanks,
Bert from Holland

Yes, it drives me banana, this smelly like soldier boot case with my FSU in it and in addition to it the hood and filter?
Wait, here is also lightmeter and spare roll of film. Double the case!

In my case I have several sources to obtain camera and accessories protective storage.

Not all camera stores are douchebags in terms of pricing, but big box stores with camera departments in them.
If it is photography dedicated store - you'll find even big ones for $10. If no stores around, big retail stores have all kind of suitable cases known as lunch bag.
And in terms of Paypal you could get next to unlimited amount of cheap pouches and cases for very low price and free shipping. On e-bay.
http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_sacat=0&_nkw=camera+pouch&_sop=12

RubenBitt said:

for which we point the finger to the poor Soviet quality control, while the previous users may have not been knowledgeable about this need, and on the other hand once in a life we find a Kiev that without any CLA is in very good shape and smoothness, i.e. an old Kiev that has not been used and kept in a drawer, like Noel pointed to in his good years, those in which he was dissecting Kievs. :munch:

Click to expand...

HiRuben

Noel still gets given zip lock bags of parts... various cameras not just Kievs.

I keep my 'in use' Kievs in a gadget bag rather than ERC with uV filters and hoods fitted.

Most problems I get are lubricants turning from grease into epoxy resin. The bags of parts normally have a broken bit.

The next most frequent problem is corrosion from moisture ingress.

The next frequent wear in the 'wind on' gears and the chassis controlling the gear positions.

Noel

RubenBitt said:

View attachment 93731First thing I do after purchasing a Soviet rangefinder is to separate the top case from the lower one, and then attach a connector press fastener for both. After all the fashion is to go with a the lower case only, if at all. A friend uses his Leica 4 without any case at all, he likes the "metal feeling", I prefer to silence the camera as much as possible and the elephant thickness of the Soviet cases is quite good for the mission.
This was the case till I discovered there is a manual for the Kiev II, and it is, of course, the manual for the Contax II, our donor Butkus has for us (one day I would really make him a Paypal contribution - my debt for his manuals is quite a big one). The Contax II manual has been very interesting and instructive for me.

Among the most interesting things there, it is the strength given to the must of having the camera closed within its case as much time as possible during the shooting too. Their point is dust. The Kiev, for instance, is not a dust insulated camera at all. Dust easily enters through the frame counter, the small wheel for fine focusing, the front viewing window, and perhaps I am forgetting something else. Hence perhaps a contribution to the stiffness of dirt and grease we find when we buy either a Kiev or a Contax that has not went any kind of CLA. Hence perhaps a factor in the malfunction or even breaking of some parts. Hence perhaps one of the factors for which we point the finger to the poor Soviet quality control, while the previous users may have not been knowledgeable about this need, and on the other hand once in a life we find a Kiev that without any CLA is in very good shape and smoothness, i.e. an old Kiev that has not been used and kept in a drawer, like Noel pointed to in his good years, those in which he was dissecting Kievs. :munch:

Fine, but for some reason I do not understand why, cases were designed for using the standard lens without a hood even up to day. I do not understand the logics in the assumption that hoods were and are not necessary. In any case I want a hood on my lenses, both for shadowing and to avoid touching the glass, and it is odd to assemble the hood every time I take the camera out of the upper case. Therefore I need a plastic case of the kind sold for small digital cameras, i.e a sort of pouch. These pouches are sold at any photography shop, but where I live these accessories are sold at guillotine prices. Today I have found a different industry selling even better plastic pouches for a sized camera: bicycle fixing shops. There are cheapo priced, can be set at the belly belt, or the included belt, and include a nylon for rain.

Click to expand...

Dust is quite a problem with most older cameras, hence the advice to keep it in the case as much as possible.
I got a Kiev 4a in very nice running condition. The camera has seen enough use to remove the chrome from the winding knob but is still in great shape inside. The case is still functional, but fairly beat up. The camera has virtually no marks on it - just wear from use.
One thing I did was seal with felt as much as possible the frame counter, focus wheel, advance and rewind knobs.

When the camera isn't in my hand, I keep it either in a shoulder bag the holds the meter, a lens, some film etc. or a small leather belt pack.

Ko.Fe. said:

Yes, it drives me banana, this smelly like soldier boot case with my FSU in it and in addition to it the hood and filter?
Wait, here is also lightmeter and spare roll of film. Double the case!

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_sacat=0&_nkw=camera+pouch&_sop=12

Click to expand...

There are no limits what one can do following a beauty. Take me for example, I do not have even to actually use the camera. With a good, redressed by me (from dress) Kiev II, I have only to wind and fire without film, several times, and I get my adrenaline dose.

What do you do with the case bottom when your'e changing films quickly ? because you already have the loose camera back to juggle with and the loose take up spool, I have the original Zeiss ERC for my Contax 11, but never use it for that reason.

RubenBitt said:

View attachment 93731First thing I do after purchasing a Soviet rangefinder is to separate the top case from the lower one, and then attach a connector press fastener for both. After all the fashion is to go with a the lower case only, if at all. A friend uses his Leica 4 without any case at all, he likes the "metal feeling", I prefer to silence the camera as much as possible and the elephant thickness of the Soviet cases is quite good for the mission.
This was the case till I discovered there is a manual for the Kiev II, and it is, of course, the manual for the Contax II, our donor Butkus has for us (one day I would really make him a Paypal contribution - my debt for his manuals is quite a big one). The Contax II manual has been very interesting and instructive for me.

Among the most interesting things there, it is the strength given to the must of having the camera closed within its case as much time as possible during the shooting too. Their point is dust. The Kiev, for instance, is not a dust insulated camera at all. Dust easily enters through the frame counter, the small wheel for fine focusing, the front viewing window, and perhaps I am forgetting something else. Hence perhaps a contribution to the stiffness of dirt and grease we find when we buy either a Kiev or a Contax that has not went any kind of CLA. Hence perhaps a factor in the malfunction or even breaking of some parts. Hence perhaps one of the factors for which we point the finger to the poor Soviet quality control, while the previous users may have not been knowledgeable about this need, and on the other hand once in a life we find a Kiev that without any CLA is in very good shape and smoothness, i.e. an old Kiev that has not been used and kept in a drawer, like Noel pointed to in his good years, those in which he was dissecting Kievs. :munch:

Fine, but for some reason I do not understand why, cases were designed for using the standard lens without a hood even up to day. I do not understand the logics in the assumption that hoods were and are not necessary. In any case I want a hood on my lenses, both for shadowing and to avoid touching the glass, and it is odd to assemble the hood every time I take the camera out of the upper case. Therefore I need a plastic case of the kind sold for small digital cameras, i.e a sort of pouch. These pouches are sold at any photography shop, but where I live these accessories are sold at guillotine prices. Today I have found a different industry selling even better plastic pouches for a sized camera: bicycle fixing shops. There are cheapo priced, can be set at the belly belt, or the included belt, and include a nylon for rain.

Click to expand...

The hoods came in leather cases that slid onto the straps that usually also held a filter.

P.S The other photographer in the picture with Robert Capa is George Roger a very famous British war photographer. http://life.time.com/history/at-the-gates-of-hell-the-liberation-of-bergen-belsen-april-1945/#1

benjiboy said:

What do you do with the case bottom when your'e changing films quickly ? because you already have the loose camera back to juggle with and the loose take up spool, I have the original Zeiss ERC for my Contax 11, but never use it for that reason.

Click to expand...

After reading the Contax II manual I am using an original case with the two parts together. Before that I said to myself better to take care of the camera when changing film than taking care of the lower case, or worse the whole case. In that way I damaged several cases additionally, by cutting space for rings on the ears and the strap attaching directly to the camera, not to the case. By logic I was supposed to take care of the camera, not the case.

However in the Contax II manual I found something of help. The manual says that out of the rule, when you use the camera without its case, you should attach a separated strap directly to the camera ears, (without any ring, meaning the ears are supposed to have enough space for a metal connector) and I built a strap for this end. Therefore one option for changing film and keep the camera safe is to attach a smaller auxiliary hand strap.

Yet since the manual is so precise on these issues, they show the action without any additional accessory. But if you look to detail at the pictures they show the camera upside down but in a diagonal way, and indeed if you turn the camera upside down to change film in a diagonal angle, the feeling is more of safety.

I do not know exactly what happens with a Contax II, but Kievs II usually have their sliding back channels quite rough, with some paint mostly, and rough any way. So I have used a small nail file to absolutely remove the paint and make the channels smooth, so they will not interfere with a smooth removal of the back.

What the manual gives you the lead about, is that the Contax was the most pricy camera and the user was supposed to have it in such shape, not with a special nail file but out of the camera being new. And this is crucial for understanding that many of the problems we see today are the result of the camera deterioration, and in the Kievs of the disastrous frankenstations of the cameras to put one camera on sale out of 3 cameras to trash. (Well, Sherer is claiming that Contaxes from Europe are Kievs within Contax plates, due to an extended gang of fakers).

In any case I can assure that if you manage to clean the borders of the back viewing window, i.e. as if the camera was purchased new from the factory, the vision through the viewfinder dramatically changes, and you see better the framing borders.

Now I speculate that one was supposed to wind also when holding the camera in a diagonal angle. It is easier, faster, and at the same time you clearly view the speed scale. But it is my speculation only.

Anyway the manual states you have to get skillful in the use of the Contax, in the manipulation of the camera, a question that I have been wondering about for some decade. Most of it is there in the manual.

RubenBitt said:

.............

Anyway the manual states you have to get skillful in the use of the Contax, in the manipulation of the camera, a question that I have been wondering about for some decade. Most of it is there in the manual.

Click to expand...

Meaning, I guess, that after you spend so much money at the time in the highest developed camera, you are not going to change it next year, therefore some features like the fast turning of the small distance wheel (see manual) were left to the user to become skillful about. By the way I remember that some decades ago the say was the same, use a single camera. And as a darkroom folk I would add, use a single film at the same rated ASA. Less is more, etc, but I am not among the beach boys showing off they use a single lens, that's my border. Since I am sixty I guess with luck I have some two decades ahead to start everything anew. Contaxes as Kievs will be working another 20 years at least. The more time passes by the more the Kontax ages with beauty.

This has some importance because nowadays, when the Contax is not anymore The camera, but one in our closet among several other cameras, we buy a Contax or a Kiev and we protest to ourselves what is this for, how it is possible that.. why it is so hard to make it work faster, etc, and by the end I say to myself 'fine this is a take your time camera, but how Capat took it to war ?' So I think that if one is to use a Contax or an old Kiev, one should do it 'a la Contax', as your single camera to become skillful in its manipulation, and without that damn nylon pouch. All these are new for me, all these is to assimilate, all these is what I was looking for when I said earlier I was wondering about, all these is part of what I am talking with Noel among others from time to time last fifteen years, and all these flow directly and undirectly from the Contax II manual. And there it is said that the small foot is not just to park the camera, but also for 'image stabilization' when you have the opportunity, and that with time and experience you will be able to reach the 5 seconds shot. Kudos again for Butkus, someday I will make my Paypal contribution, I swear.