What to watch out for in a Nikon S series?

__Brian · Jun 8, 2022

These adapters are not copies of the Amedeo adapters, but as far as I know- these are original designs.

Leica - Inexpensive Adapter, Nikon RF to Leica Thread Mount. ~$70.

Just arrived in the mail, under $70 with shipping. This compares with adapters costing 3x as much. The Amedeo adapters are works of art, his M-Mount adapter for internal mount Contax RF lenses has an indexed cam to correct the slight difference between the Zeiss 52.4mm focal length and the...

cameraderie.org

Some things I learned: the inner portions of the helical are not painted black. This was a problem with a Zeiss 8.5cm F4 Triotar. Solution was to use a Black marker on the shiny parts, reflections gone. Aligning the outer helical with those on the lens required a little work. With using a Zeiss lens on the inner helical, you might need to adjust the lens slightly. The Pitch of the Helical in the adapter translates the rotation of the Zeiss lens to the 51.6mm standard for the RF of the camera. Amedeo uses an indexed cam for this. This adapter has a straight cam. A Nikon RF 5cm internal mount lens will focus perfectly on it, and a Contax External mount lens focuses perfectly on it.

Donald Qualls · Jun 8, 2022

Hmmm. So it's kind of the reverse of a Nikon S situation -- longer lenses (which use the external bayonet) work fine, but wides need some adjustment. And the adapter needs "calibrated" to work with the outside bayonet.

Maybe I'll just buy an Argus C-3 and starting hunting for those lenses -- at least they'll all fit and work...

flavio81 · Jun 8, 2022

Donald Qualls said:
and there seem to be few if any repairers in the USA who'll work on Soviet cameras (and I'm reluctant to send a camera to Ukraine for service at this time, much as I'd like to support Oleg).

I'll ask on the camera repair group i'm very active in.

btaylor · Jun 8, 2022

Beware the less expensive adapter is only for 50mm lenses. The other one that is rangefinder coupled and accepts the outer bayonet is $300-400. So, IMHO, really not worth it. Sell the FSU glass and pick up M39 lenses (Nikon, Canon, and many others) to use on that sweet Canon 7 you’re going to purchase. Just a thought!

flavio81 · Jun 8, 2022

__Brian said:
The focus on the Zeiss and Russian lenses will be off on a Nikon Rangefinder. Unless.Unless, you change the shims under the helical of the Nikon and then calibrate the Rangefinder for the Zeiss lenses.
It works,

Great idea and the theory behind it is completely sound.

btaylor · Jun 8, 2022

An Argus! Maybe it’s just me, but it is one of the uglier cameras of the period. But then again I loved the Studebaker Hawk, so maybe I am way off!

Donald Qualls · Jun 8, 2022

btaylor said:
An Argus! Maybe it’s just me, but it is one of the uglier cameras of the period. But then again I loved the Studebaker Hawk, so maybe I am way off!

I guess it depends on whether you like bricks, building blocks, and machinists' 1-2-3 blocks. My main thought is that if a lens fits it, it'll work, and everything about them is inexpensive (or at least used to be).

btaylor said:
that sweet Canon 7 you’re going to purchase. Just a thought!

You mean the one I was thinking about purchasing? I really prefer the Contax design, but...

__Brian · Jun 8, 2022

btaylor said:
Beware the less expensive adapter is only for 50mm lenses. The other one that is rangefinder coupled and accepts the outer bayonet is $300-400. So, IMHO, really not worth it. Sell the FSU glass and pick up M39 lenses (Nikon, Canon, and many others) to use on that sweet Canon 7 you’re going to purchase. Just a thought!

The less expensive adapter that I linked to is currently on my Contax/Kiev mount KMZ Jupiter-9 and Zeiss 8.5cm F4. It was under $70 with shipping. It is fully rangefinder coupled and holds focus across full range.

On my Leica M8.

At $70, hard to beat- but be prepared to adjust the phase of the external flanges with the lens. Done once, will be fine for other lenses as well. When assembled, they probably don't use a lens to test.

__Brian · Jun 8, 2022

Donald Qualls said:
Hmmm. So it's kind of the reverse of a Nikon S situation -- longer lenses (which use the external bayonet) work fine, but wides need some adjustment. And the adapter needs "calibrated" to work with the outside bayonet.

Maybe I'll just buy an Argus C-3 and starting hunting for those lenses -- at least they'll all fit and work...

I have the 100/4.5 for the C-3.

Better to look for a C-44. Or a Kodak Signet 80.

You could wait for someone to put up a recently CLA's Kiev or Contax.

On the cheap adapter: it is only the 5cm internal mount lenses that have an issue. The Wide-angle lenses use the external mount and are fine. BUT- a J-12 will often hit the light baffles of the Canon 7 and Canon P.

Donald Qualls · Jun 9, 2022

Shaking my head.

This can't be simple, can it...

Signet 80, no thanks. That'll be much harder to find lenses for than a C-3 or C-44. At least Argus sold a lot of C series cameras, so there are significant numbers of their lenses in circulation. Kodak sold, what, fifty of the Signet 80? And it's a unique mount...

wjlapier · Jun 9, 2022

Donald Qualls said:
That hadn't even occurred to me. Then I could grab a Fed or Zorki and future lenses could be L39... Though I recall one or the other of those having some focus compatibility issues, too. And they'll be cloth shutter curtains (the metal curtains, impervious to sunlight burns, are one of the cool things about the Contax design). No, not interested in actual Leica, though a Canon might be attractive. Are any of the LTM cameras equipped with metal shutters?

I think it’s the other way around. You could use Contax mount lenses on a ltm mount camera not ltm lenses on a Contax mount camera—flange to film issue.

My Nikon S came filthy not working with holes in the shutter curtain. Nobody wanted to work on it and DAG was backlogged then, but eventually I found someone to install the curtains ( the main reason no one wanted to work on it ). The camera is working again but now sits on another work bench awaiting a black paint job.

My S2 I recently purchased went to DAG for a CLA. Curtains were fine. Now, that camera is super smooth.

__Brian · Jun 9, 2022

Changing lenses on the C-44 was insane. I ended up selling the Telephoto for it long ago. The C-3- also changing lenses is not easy.

The Kodak Signet 80- someone must have "discovered it", lenses used to pop up on Ebay. They are "Ektanars", not Ektars- not as good.
I have a full set of lenses for the Retina IIIS. The styling of the Signet 80 reminds me of a 1957 Chevy. It has a good viewfinder. Used to got for $20 or so.

Using LTM and other lenses on a Contax/Kiev requires taking the Barrel out of the LTM mount and putting it into a Contax mount. I've adapted the 50/3.5 from the C-3 to a Nikon S-Mount, also an I-61, and a few others.

Donald Qualls · Jun 9, 2022

wjlapier said:
You could use Contax mount lenses on a ltm mount camera not ltm lenses on a Contax mount camera—flange to film issue.

That was what I said -- the Contax/Kiev mount lenses I have with the adapter on an LTM body. Except the Soviet LTM bodies have issues, too.

Donald Qualls · Jun 9, 2022

__Brian said:
Using LTM and other lenses on a Contax/Kiev requires taking the Barrel out of the LTM mount and putting it into a Contax mount.

Yeah, I was just talking about switching to LTM bodies, but the only one of those that will focus "right" and that I can maybe afford is a Leica II -- are they any better than the Contax II (pre-War) in terms of parts and service?

reddesert · Jun 9, 2022

I summarized the focus compatibility issues upthread in post #14. The simple answer, for LTM, is the Canon 7 or similar. That's probably less expensive than any screwmount Leica in usable condition, and focuses the same.

IMO, the Fed/Zorki rfs are less mechanically complex than the Kiev/Contax, meaning if you get one that works, good chance it will keep working, and the shutter is not incredibly complicated. But there's still going to be a focus issue with lenses converted through the Contax-to-L39 adapter (at least for lenses longer than 50mm, or 50mm wide open). I have not tried the fairly inexpensive Contax-to-L39 adapter, but Brian's experience makes it sound at least interesting.

Also, IMO, the Canons have nicer viewfinders than either screwmount Leicas or most FEDs. Your millimeterage may vary.

Donald Qualls · Jun 10, 2022

Well, I got a response back from Advance Camera -- apparently, they will at least look at my Contax II body at only cost of shipping, and don't charge an estimate fee, with a range of cost from $60 to a little over $200 depending what it needs. IMO, that would be the ideal solution, and I'm going to try to get it shipped off to them soon. It's likely if they can put it back in 100% condition, it'll outlast me.

Also, given relative costs, I decided to take a chance on one more Kiev; I bought a 4AM (no meter, 1957 dated), "tested" with film, from a seller in Kyiv. Includes a Jupiter-8M 53 mm f/2, about $92 shipped after a discount of some sort applied by eBay (Ukraine support?).

ic-racer · Jun 10, 2022

Lenses come off my c44 just as easy as any other camera. The “front” leaf shutter is nice if one likes daytime fill flash.
I have had mine since new, though the external meter stopped working some time in the late 1970s. Too bad as it was my favorite selenium meter due to its tiny size.
I almost never use this camera because I don’t like the 50mm focal length on any camera. I tried getting the wide angle in the 1980s but could not find one in Shutterbug.

__Brian · Jun 10, 2022

I had the 50 and the 100 on the C-44,

https://www.cameramanuals.org/argus/argus_c-44_lenses.pdf

In case anyone gets a set this manual has instructions for mounting the lenses.

The Leica IIIa is probably the cheapest of the Leica screw mount bodies. The Leica II is not as common, often found in Black paint.
Easier to service and find parts.

I would send the Contax II in for repair at Advance camera, let us know how it turns out. Even at $200- a good price.

Donald Qualls · Jun 10, 2022

__Brian said:
I would send the Contax II in for repair at Advance camera, let us know how it turns out. Even at $200- a good price.

I pretty strongly agree, though as it's a pre-War model I also half expect to hear "Oh, sorry, we can't fix this, it needs a part that hasn't been made in eighty years." FWIW, it does operate on all speeds (haven't tested the self timer), but the 1/2 an 1 speeds hang and 1/50 and lower are obviously slow.

flavio81 · Jun 10, 2022

Donald Qualls said:
Also, given relative costs, I decided to take a chance on one more Kiev; I bought a 4AM (no meter, 1957 dated), "tested" with film, from a seller in Kyiv. Includes a Jupiter-8M 53 mm f/2, about $92 shipped after a discount of some sort applied by eBay (Ukraine support?).

Nice, tell us how you find it. And i'm curious of how quick was that shipping from Ukraine to the US.

__Brian · Jun 10, 2022

I've used Parts from a Kiev to repair a Contax II and a Contax III. Many are interchangeable.

I picked up a collection of lenses, including a 1932 5cm F1.5 Sonnar, a KMZ Jupiter-9, and KMZ Jupiter-12- along with a 1960s Kiev 4. Someone took good care of it and gave it a nice CLA: very smooth.

Donald Qualls · Jun 12, 2022

flavio81 said:
Nice, tell us how you find it. And i'm curious of how quick was that shipping from Ukraine to the US.

Estimated shipping was running 2 to 6 weeks (so June 23 to July 26); last item I ordered from Ukraine (my second Kiev 4 body) ran right on three weeks via Ukraine's postal system. Not sure how much disruption there is, given Kyiv is in the actual war zone, but I guess I'll know by the end of July. Seller was quite prompt with shipping confirmation, at least.

__Brian said:
I've used Parts from a Kiev to repair a Contax II and a Contax III. Many are interchangeable.

I picked up a collection of lenses, including a 1932 5cm F1.5 Sonnar, a KMZ Jupiter-9, and KMZ Jupiter-12- along with a 1960s Kiev 4. Someone took good care of it and gave it a nice CLA: very smooth.

My two Kiev 4 bodies so far are 1973 (good shutter) and 1971 (good advance). I've heard the older ones were better built, but one never knows how much truth there is in reports like that about Soviet manufacturing. The only other Soviet item I own that I've used a good bit is my Mosin Nagant rifle, apparently made in 1942 when function was strongly prioritized over appearance. Both bodies so far have come with Jupiter-8 50 mm f/2; I've purchased two Jupiter-12 (one was quite inexpensive due to scratches on the rear element, which turned out to be visibly disruptive to image quality; the other is perfect) and a Jupiter-9 since then. Hard to justify spending the money for an actual Zeiss lens until I've got a body that works well.

Using Kiev parts to fix Contax is one of the major things at least one Contax repairer rants about. Not much chance he'll get my business anyway; not only are his prices NASA-level, it seems unlikely he'll live long enough to get through his existing backlog as of last year. As far as I'm concerned, compatible parts are compatible parts. I also have no objection to adding a flash synch to a shutter that originally lacked one, if it doesn't affect the function (my Weltini had that done at the cost of the cable release socket, which I'd rather not, but that's the only significant complaint I have about that camera; my Contax II body has an added PC socket as well, which might indicate it's had a Kiev shutter installed in the past; if the times were accurate, I wouldn't care).

__Brian · Jun 14, 2022

I've been sent Two lenses that had been "repaired" by the famous Contax specialist. He glued the optical barrel into the focus mount and the shim was way off. Screwed Up. The second- the owner wanted a Nikkor 3.5cm F2.5 shimmed for use on a Contax IIIa. The trick is to reduce the shim slightly. Not a standard repair, but something that can be done.

GRHazelton · Jun 21, 2022

btaylor said:
An Argus! Maybe it’s just me, but it is one of the uglier cameras of the period. But then again I loved the Studebaker Hawk, so maybe I am way off!

I also liked the Studebaker Hawk. I consider the '53 and '54 Studebaker two door coupes perhaps the lovliest cars made in the US in the mid-twentieth century. I tend to agree with you about the Argus C-3. But it is generally cheap.

ags2mikon · Aug 21, 2022

I have Nikon s2 bodies and Kiev bodies, Nikkor lenses and West German Zeiss and USSR lenses. My Kiev 3 1954 was a superb picture taker and a very fine smooth machine until one of the shutter ribbons broke. My son has one from 1957 and it is really great also. The one from 1973 is good but the later ones, 1980's were very crude. The Helios 103 does not focus track on the Kiev's but works on the Nikon's. Some of the Kiev's almost worked with the Nikkor's. The Ziess lenses and the USSR lenses all work at infinity on the Nikons and the wide's work up close on the Nikon's. The Zeiss normal and telephotos do not. I have 2 8.5 CM Nikkor P telephoto's one marked with a "C" meaning Contax mount and another not marked meaning Nikon S mount. There are a lot of good lenses in these mounts but not many cameras. I must admit I am a sucker for sonnar lenses. I absolutely love the way they render an image. They really don't benefit a lot from super duper multi coating much like a tessar and depending how the corrections were calculated they can be either optimized for infinity or up close.

What to watch out for in a Nikon S series?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency