My Moskva 4 came today

[KN4SMF]

As the title says, my new Moskva 4 came today. I had never heard of it 2 weeks ago when i saw anothe Moskva 5 thread on here. All I did know was that I had a Kodak Medalist II that was unusable and irreparable, and a void in the 6x9 category. So I got rid of the Kodak and bought this. I didn't have money to throw at this problem, and ended up in fine shape. I decided on the Model 4 because the 5 looked like it had a squinty viewfinder way off in the corner, which I reasoned could be a parallax problem. The flip up finder on the 4 is directly above the lens, and not so squinty.. Anyway, I actually lucked out with an American seller up in Massachusetts. The camera is in beautiful shape, all the glass is clear as a bell, the shutter works perfectly and the rangefinder is accurate (at infinity anyway). Ive heard all kinds of stories about Soviet labor and quality, but as far as I can tell, this thing is as good as the Germans. Of course I've never seen a Zeiss Ikonta C, which is the original German model, but I can't imagine how it could be any better than this one, without the fat price tag. I haven't shot any film yet because it just came an hour ago. But if the negs look as good as this camera appears it can do, I ought to be very happy. Sure is a lot lighter than the Medalist was.

 

[tessar]

Good choice. I have a Moskva 5 and the parallax is terrible.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

As the title says, my new Moskva 4 came today. I had never heard of it 2 weeks ago when i saw anothe Moskva 5 thread on here. All I did know was that I had a Kodak Medalist II that was unusable and irreparable, and a void in the 6x9 category. So I got rid of the Kodak and bought this. I didn't have money to throw at this problem, and ended up in fine shape. I decided on the Model 4 because the 5 looked like it had a squinty viewfinder way off in the corner, which I reasoned could be a parallax problem. The flip up finder on the 4 is directly above the lens, and not so squinty.. Anyway, I actually lucked out with an American seller up in Massachusetts. The camera is in beautiful shape, all the glass is clear as a bell, the shutter works perfectly and the rangefinder is accurate (at infinity anyway). Ive heard all kinds of stories about Soviet labor and quality, but as far as I can tell, this thing is as good as the Germans. Of course I've never seen a Zeiss Ikonta C, which is the original German model, but I can't imagine how it could be any better than this one, without the fat price tag. I haven't shot any film yet because it just came an hour ago. But if the negs look as good as this camera appears it can do, I ought to be very happy. Sure is a lot lighter than the Medalist was.

Good!
My experience is with a couple Kievs, and a Zorki S. All needed some tlc, however all were very inexpensive & once the deferred maintenance was done on hundred per cent reliable.
My daily carry has been, for about four years, a Kiev 4 with accurate meter and a '36 Sonnar 50mm.
And a decent Kiev really will give an accurate 1/1250 shutter speed.

 

[KN4SMF]

As an odd coincidence on the day when my Mockba 4 came, there was a special on TV about the Russian copy of the Boeing B-29 bomber, the TU-4, copied all the way down to the engine fires. I wondered if they copied it in such detail that maybe I can expect to find a nice Collins ART-13 Russian copy for cheap.

 

[mshchem]

As an odd coincidence on the day when my Mockba 4 came, there was a special on TV about the Russian copy of the Boeing B-29 bomber, the TU-4, copied all the way down to the engine fires. I wondered if they copied it in such detail that maybe I can expect to find a nice Collins ART-13 Russian copy for cheap.

Art Collins grew up near my boyhood home in Cedar Rapids Iowa. He lived in a little wealthier part of town. When he was a kid he became famous for helping to communicate with a Arctic expedition. He knew more as a teenager than the US Navy. He would communicate with the expedition wireless operator from the Collins home in Cedar Rapids, then telegraph the information to Washington DC.
I wouldn't get into no Russian copy of no B29, of course I wouldn't get into any B29 given the choice

 

[spark]

I wondered if they copied it in such detail that maybe I can expect to find a nice Collins ART-13 Russian copy for cheap.

The planes interned by the Russians in Vladivostok in 1944 may have still used the SCR-274N radios, which were no mystery to them since many went to the Soviet Union under Lend-Lease. But I'd bet their sigint people were very interested in the IFF (Identification Friend or Foe) transponders

Back to the thread- the Moskva 5 had separate viewfinder and rangefinder windows. The parallax problem isn't bad through the rangefinder, it's in the same spot as the -4's, and the Arsenal (Kiev) lenses are pretty good copies of the Zeiss designs. The Zeiss-Ikon Dresden factory was seized by the Russians as a war prize and taken to Kiev. Did you get the 6 x 6 mask with your Moskva-4?

 

[Huss]

Congrats on the purchase of your Mockba 4! I assume I was the enabler from that other thread..
As for the parallax issue on the M-5, it's really quite simple to deal with. If you are pretty close to your subject, you apply some body English. You'll get used to it really quick, it's just about knowing your equipment.
I did that with my infamous White Russian and have had no issues.

Remember, you must set the shutter speed BEFORE you cock the shutter. DO NOT DO IT AFTER!!! You will break the shutter.
(If it is like the M-5)

 

[AgX]

The parallax problem isn't bad through the rangefinder, it's in the same spot as the -4's.

What parallax problem a rangefinder can impose as long it is at same height as the finder?
(Thus other than the parallax problem of the finder proper.)

(And no constellation of different height comes to my mind other than that at field cameras.)

 

[KN4SMF]

It seems all the cable releases I have are not entirely satisfactory for this camera. The ends are all tapered and just barely threading by less than a turn. I can forsee thread stripping happening soon if I continue using them. Apparently this camera would be happier if the cable releases threads were straight rather than tapered. Can someone enlighten me?

 

[John51]

Kodak cable releases have a non tapered thread. Mine works fine in cameras meant for tapered cable releases.

 

[AgX]

There are two standards for cable release tips: a tapered and a straight thread

 

[Dan Daniel]

It seems all the cable releases I have are not entirely satisfactory for this camera. The ends are all tapered and just barely threading by less than a turn. I can forsee thread stripping happening soon if I continue using them. Apparently this camera would be happier if the cable releases threads were straight rather than tapered. Can someone enlighten me?

Without a photo, hard to know what is going on. I've taken off the end portion of threads and had them work on some cameras; a grinder or sander works fine. This leaves less floating section poking down and gets the fatter top section to grab. No assurances, of course. Tracking down the Kodak straight thread releases can be confusing as most people don't even know the difference when selling.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Moskva 4 is the best, Moskva 5 is worse in this series. Have you checked the bellows before taking pictures? This is common point of failure.

 

[Huss]

Moskva 4 is the best, Moskva 5 is worse in this series. Have you checked the bellows before taking pictures? This is common point of failure.

What makes the M-5 the worst? Mine has been great. Zero issues once I figured out I had to be more careful about camera shake.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

What makes the M-5 the worst? Mine has been great. Zero issues once I figured out I had to be more careful about camera shake.

I used tripod with release or 1/250. Here is nothing else I could do. Nor I could use VF at the wrong side or get used to parallax due to this.