Zorki 4K vs Leica M

[Huss]

I was hoping to sell some if not all my FSU cameras on this thread.
I guess I was not effusive enough in my praise.

 

[George Mann]

I was hoping to sell some if not all my FSU cameras on this thread.
I guess I was not effusive enough in my praise.

Well, when you are ready to sell your Fed 2, look me up.

 

[summicron1]

I would personally buy a Fed 2 over a Barnack. Are you sure that your Zorki wasn't in need of a CLA?

it needed last rites.

Seriously, it was horribly made. Must have been made on a Friday before a May Day celebration when the workers at the factory got a really big head start on their drinking. A service MIGHT have made it work better, but even at its best that thing would have been a step up from a Holga but with less charm.

 

[removed account4]

In my FSU rangefinder days Oleg at Fedka put me in touch with his repair guy (who has since passed on). Perhaps he has someone else in his stable here in the US. It might be worth contacting him.

yeah. .. I looked up people who were known and talked about and praised on the Kiev site, and word of mouth but they either passed on or were un-reachable. the kievaholics site has info on -self-help but I am not sure of my self with an open camera to even attempt simple stuff and the last thing I would want to do is ship someone in the Ukraine or Lithuania something a box of separate parts LOL. (have almost brought a camera in parts to someone to fix before I had an a-ha moment).. I have an arax 60 bought from someone here ( HUGE THANKS!!! ) and it is wonderful .. and i know if I ever have to get it tuned up I will have to ship it to George in the Ukraine... that said its a shame there are so few people who will work on these FSU marvels of ingenuity here in the states. my uncle taught at a university in hayastan in the 90s and brought my cousin back a zorki with a full compliment of lenses, looked beautiful and my uncle was so stoked he got my cousin a Leica type camera.. unfortunately the internet was young and my cousin wasn't able to find anyone to put a new shutter cloth in or fix the seals or cla the shutter so he was way-happy but wicked-frustrated. seems like it is creeping up on the 90s again from the looks of it... when I asked my 2 local repair guys who can pretty much fix anything, real masters of their craft .. neither would touch a camera from FSU... I hate the idea of something that can't be fixed and has to be tossed

 

[btaylor]

yeah. .. I looked up people who were known and talked about and praised on the Kiev site, and word of mouth but they either passed on or were un-reachable. the kievaholics site has info on -self-help but I am not sure of my self with an open camera to even attempt simple stuff and the last thing I would want to do is ship someone in the Ukraine or Lithuania something a box of separate parts LOL. (have almost brought a camera in parts to someone to fix before I had an a-ha moment).. I have an arax 60 bought from someone here ( HUGE THANKS!!! ) and it is wonderful .. and i know if I ever have to get it tuned up I will have to ship it to George in the Ukraine... that said its a shame there are so few people who will work on these FSU marvels of ingenuity here in the states. my uncle taught at a university in hayastan in the 90s and brought my cousin back a zorki with a full compliment of lenses, looked beautiful and my uncle was so stoked he got my cousin a Leica type camera.. unfortunately the internet was young and my cousin wasn't able to find anyone to put a new shutter cloth in or fix the seals or cla the shutter so he was way-happy but wicked-frustrated. seems like it is creeping up on the 90s again from the looks of it... when I asked my 2 local repair guys who can pretty much fix anything, real masters of their craft .. neither would touch a camera from FSU... I hate the idea of something that can't be fixed and has to be tossed

Yes, the FSU cams are absolutely capable of producing wonderful photographs- it’s having them work when you need them to that can be the issue. I had a run with FSU cinema equipment a decade ago- there were specialists in various parts of the world (not unlike Arax) who would retrofit the cameras to operate mostly reliably and accurately. The lenses were excellent for the most part (the anamorphic ones are still highly sought after) but even then is was very difficult to find someone who was willing to service them. Great optics but not great mechanicals, it would take them too much time setting them up and adjusting them. The one guy that would work on them would take forever- because they were always on the back burner.

 

[Lee Rust]

I have a FED 1... roughly comparable with a Leica II. Only 5 shutter speeds, so there's not that much to go wrong. I didn't try the FED 2, Zorki, etc because they were awkward looking and didn't seem like they would be as comfortable to hold as the Barnack copy FED 1.

 

[Huss]

I have a FED 1... ..Only 5 shutter speeds, so there's not that much to go wrong....

I just counted 5 things that can go wrong.

 

[Lee Rust]

I just counted 5 things that can go wrong.

I must have gotten lucky with this particular FED. Most of what I've read here about FSU cameras is sorrow and regret.

 

[Toasty]

No, it's not anywhere as good as any Leica M body... It is what it is. Now would an M be worth the extra money? That's completely up to you. You can have a lot of fun driving a Chevy Corvair or a Porsche 911. Both would be rear engined and air cooled but one is a much better vehicle in quality and engineering.

If you want something more modern save up for a Bessa with an LTM mount, you can find those sometimes for under $500 USD.

 

[Huss]

I must have gotten lucky with this particular FED. Most of what I've read here about FSU cameras is sorrow and regret.

Actually I haven't had any issues with my Fed2. The Zorki 4 needs its shutter exercised before use if it has sat a while. Otherwise the slow speeds become variable. The Kiev 4AM is ok.
But to be honest, these cameras do not get a lot of use, so I have no idea how they would hold up if used actively.

 

[grain elevator]

No, it's not anywhere as good as any Leica M body... It is what it is. Now would an M be worth the extra money? That's completely up to you. You can have a lot of fun driving a Chevy Corvair or a Porsche 911. Both would be rear engined and air cooled but one is a much better vehicle in quality and engineering.

If you want something more modern save up for a Bessa with an LTM mount, you can find those sometimes for under $500 USD.

I think the difference is more like Porsche and Beetle... I prefer the 2CV though. That's the Canon RFs. Also prefer them over the Bessa R, which I sold a few years ago for some 150€! It fells plastic-y and I didn't like how the visibility of the RF patch depends very much on the precise position of the eye. The Canons with steel foil shutter are virtually immortal.

 

[Huss]

The Canons with steel foil shutter are virtually immortal.

The Canon P that I owned had a smooth, wrinkle free metal shutter. But most of them have wrinkles/creases. How does that happen? There can't be THAT many people sticking their fingers into the shutter, can they?

 

[George Mann]

The Canon P that I owned had a smooth, wrinkle free metal shutter. But most of them have wrinkles/creases. How does that happen? There can't be THAT many people sticking their fingers into the shutter, can they?

If they let go of the film leader while loading it, the leading edge can be forcefully snapped into it.

 

[grain elevator]

The Canon P that I owned had a smooth, wrinkle free metal shutter. But most of them have wrinkles/creases. How does that happen? There can't be THAT many people sticking their fingers into the shutter, can they?

My two are also wrinkle free, and I didn't seek them out for that. Still a small sample, but maybe the idea that nearly all of them are wrinkled is one of those myths that one author copies from another, or the wrinkles are overreported. Anyway the wrinkles are supposedly inconsequential.

 

[Huss]

My two are also wrinkle free, and I didn't seek them out for that. Still a small sample, but maybe the idea that nearly all of them are wrinkled is one of those myths that one author copies from another, or the wrinkles are overreported. Anyway the wrinkles are supposedly inconsequential.

When I bought my wrinkle free one, it took a long time finding it. All the ones I saw before it had wrinkles, so I don't think it is over-reported.
But apparently it does not affect anything. As said by all those sellers!

 

[davela]

Are they comparable at all? I can't afford to add a Leica to my collection, but I can a Zorki.

I am mainly interested in comparing their viewfinders, and ergonomics in general .

If you can't afford a Leica, why worry about it? The price of Leica's reflects to a large extent their superior build quality and overall desirability, and is not due to some fluke of inspired by materialistic prestige obsessed owners like a few seem to think. Some Zorki's will certainly do a credible job of taking pictures, though usually after servicing which can cost much more than their purchase price. The Zorki 4K is one of the more usable models. If I had to chose between a Zorki and any Leica, I'd take a Leica though every time hands down - any model from the very first forward till today.

 

[Steve York]

Zorki's slow you down because all that money in your pocket you saved from not getting Leica.

I've used Fed, Zorki and Kiev's and my favorite of the old Russian rangefinders were the Kiev. Much higher quality then the Feds and Zorki I used. The ones from the 50's are really well made. As nice as the prewar Zeiss Ikon Contax.

 

[davela]

If you need a new hobby that will take all your free time chasing down light leaks, reassembling lenses that literally fall apart in your hands (even when new), spending endless hours watching videos and reading blogs on how to make them work, then absolutely one should buy a Zorki, a Fed, or a Kiev. If you prefer a camera that has a damn good chance of being completely unusable, even if new, I can also recommend a Shanghai or just about any other Chinese camera I've seen.

If you're interested in classic cameras that actually work with minimal hassles, I recommend you open your pocket book and buy a recently serviced Leica, a Contax, or one of the many fine Japanese copies of these! These cameras all say more about world economic systems as much as they do anything about photo engineering.

(I've owned and used them all too)

 

[gorbas]

https://kosmofoto.com/2021/02/the-m...jG22JqcOOU8qqT0-wupcp1Viq6v5MCLUnAOPMXg5kr2jw
Just saw it now.

 

[Huss]

Which cameras would you recommend?
“I have an exact answer to this question. This is Zorki 1 or FED-2. Both of these cameras have a simple design, are made with a good technological level and they are mass produced. They are always easy to find on sale, and most likely they will work even if they have not received service for their entire life. And if you find such a camera after it has been serviced, consider yourself lucky. A well-maintained Zorki 1 or FED-2 with repaired curtains is able to work for a long time and reliably.”

I knew there was a reason I liked my Fed2 the most!
I wouldn't ship a camera from the US to Oleg to get serviced. Way too expensive. Cheaper to just buy one from him.

 

[rulnacco]

The idea, espoused by anyone, that a Soviet camera is "just as good as a Leica" mechanically, optically and functionally is ludicrous rubbish. I've handled FEDs--horrible, horrible, no desire at all to shoot one of those things. I still own a Zorki 4K, stuffed in a box somewhere. It looked nice when I bought it--which I was quite eager to do--and had a viewfinder that on first use seemed quite nice, but lasted half a roll before basically catastrophically disassembling itself internally. The Jupiter 8 that came with it was actually handy--and I managed to make some good images with it--when I acquired an M3 and mounted it on that camera with an LTM to M adapter. But even the lens was pretty hideous in comparison to a Leica: all aluminium (thin and cheap feeling, not like, say, an old 35 Summaron), no aperture click stops, tiny aperture ring, aperture settings not evenly spaced as on a Leica.

*If* you have a Commie Cam that works, and *if* you don't accidentally move the aperture ring while focusing or otherwise, and *if* you have a reasonably well-assembled lens. and *if* the shutter speeds are ballpark accurate and you are shooting negative film, and *if* the focusing of your lens and rangefinder are properly calibrated, and *if* the shutter curtain isn't sticking/capping/bouncing--well, hey, thank your lucky stars! You'll get a usable image. Maybe.

An old Leica may need a CLA to function as designed. But that's the point: the design, the engineering, the manufacture, they're all top notch. If your camera has been maintained properly, or serviced fairly recently, it will just *work*. Exactly as you *expect* it to work. They're not perfect, no camera is--but they are not potential sadistic instruments of masochism like every Soviet rangefinder I've handled.

If you can't afford a Leica--and they're not magical, they're just very good cameras...which still rely on the *user* to make the magic--then get a *decent* rangefinder. A Voigtlander, a Minolta CLE, a Canon fixed-lens rangefinder, a Nicca/Tower, a Leica Barnack, a Contax G1 (not strictly like the above, but *great* lenses and with *much* of the rangefinder experience), or even an Olympus RD or something. And there are probably plenty of others I'm not familiar with that would be way, way better options than an Eastern Bloc rangefinder.

 

[AgX]

The idea, espoused by anyone, that a Soviet camera is "just as good as a Leica" mechanically, optically and functionally is ludicrous rubbish. I've handled FEDs--horrible, horrible, no desire at all to shoot one of those things. I still own a Zorki 4K, stuffed in a box somewhere. It looked nice when I bought it--which I was quite eager to do--and had a viewfinder that on first use seemed quite nice, but lasted half a roll before basically catastrophically disassembling itself internally. The Jupiter 8 that came with it was actually handy--and I managed to make some good images with it--when I acquired an M3 and mounted it on that camera with an LTM to M adapter. But even the lens was pretty hideous in comparison to a Leica: all aluminium (thin and cheap feeling, not like, say, an old 35 Summaron), no aperture click stops, tiny aperture ring, aperture settings not evenly spaced as on a Leica.

*If* you have a Commie Cam that works, and *if* you don't accidentally move the aperture ring while focusing or otherwise, and *if* you have a reasonably well-assembled lens. and *if* the shutter speeds are ballpark accurate and you are shooting negative film, and *if* the focusing of your lens and rangefinder are properly calibrated, and *if* the shutter curtain isn't sticking/capping/bouncing--well, hey, thank your lucky stars! You'll get a usable image. Maybe.

An old Leica may need a CLA to function as designed. But that's the point: the design, the engineering, the manufacture, they're all top notch. If your camera has been maintained properly, or serviced fairly recently, it will just *work*. Exactly as you *expect* it to work. They're not perfect, no camera is--but they are not potential sadistic instruments of masochism like every Soviet rangefinder I've handled.

If you can't afford a Leica--and they're not magical, they're just very good cameras...which still rely on the *user* to make the magic--then get a *decent* rangefinder. A Voigtlander, a Minolta CLE, a Canon fixed-lens rangefinder, a Nicca/Tower, a Leica Barnack, a Contax G1 (not strictly like the above, but *great* lenses and with *much* of the rangefinder experience), or even an Olympus RD or something. And there are probably plenty of others I'm not familiar with that would be way, way better options than an Eastern Bloc rangefinder.

A camera is useless as long as one cannot see a sharp finder-image or cannot hold it firm at ones head to use the slower exposure times.

Anyone wearing glasses knows what I am talking about.

The FED-4 has an adjustable eyepice.
No other still camera from the pre-autofocus period comes to my mind that got such feature.

 

[removedacct2]

Are they comparable at all? I can't afford to add a Leica to my collection, but I can a Zorki.

I am mainly interested in comparing their viewfinders, and ergonomics in general .

the title of this thread made me jump : I have seen often comparisons of Zorki-3/4 with Canon VT or IID2, Leica III, but never with the M3/M2. They are different technological levels and KMZ never tried to make a sophisticated multi-framelines parallax corrected viewfinder I think. Besides, the M serie were also manufactured as a luxury item on the outside. The Leica since then are both designed for heavy duty profesionnal use and as a nice luxury toy for the wealthy, hence the market speculation.

the only soviet RF with multi-framelines 35mm, 50mm, 85mm, 135mm, parallax corrected very bright VF is the Leningrad, manufactured in relatively small amount by GOMZ/LOMO. but spring motor driven, so the issue is to find one that has been maintained correctly. It has full speeds 1s to 1/1000 and is m39, removable back.

the Arsenal's Kiev-5 too somewhat, the full frame being for 35mm and the inner lines for 50mm, but lenses are limited.

I haven't made up my mind between the Fed and the Zorki. From what I read, either can be reliable.

It's down to a battle between features and ergonomics.

the Zorki-6 is the best user-friendly and idiots-proof: a nice winding lever, a built-in take-up spool, a hinged back, a shutter dial that can be set before winding, diopter adjustment, self-timer, strap lugs. hotshoe.
The inconvenient can be the limitation to the basic five speeds 1/30, 1/60, 1/125, 1/250, 1/500.

the one I prefer is still the early 1950's Zorki-1, ie. a Leica II copy. I have a 1953 D-type which is so smooth. It's in fact quite ergonomical because the small size, pocketable, can wind on the knob with thumb and forefinger without moving the hand away.
I found also the old speeds 1/20 1/30 1/40 1/60 1/100 1/200 1/500 very convenient, when my meter tells 1/15 i can in fact shoot with the 1/20, but with a Fed-2 or Zorki-6 1/30 wouldn't do it.
I have run countless rolls through it and it just keeps going on and on.

on the Zorki-4k I am not sure the lever adds much more ergonomics

the Fed-2 and Zorki-6 being basic shutter mechanism, there's less risk it had been badly cleaned/adjusted in its former life and will have random behaviour.

 

[rulnacco]

I'll add my voice, as *I* tried to get into the 35mm rangefinder experience--I had loads of experience with SLRs & TLRs and a good bit of use of large format before doing so--with a Zorki 4K. I found one in nice cosmetic condition. But it felt really kind of nasty compared to any camera I'd owned before. And it managed to internally disintegrate halfway through my first roll, even though I'd read up on the does and don'ts with that particular camera before attempting to put it to work.

Luckily, I managed to find a tatty old M3 for a reasonable price at what became my favourite camera dealer in South London. I traded a Fuji GW690 II in on the M3 and a collapsible 90mm lens. (I liked the Fuji, and it was a rangefinder. But it was huge, and sounded like dropping a manhole cover when fired, and I wanted something more discreet and pocketable as my daily carry camera.)

There *was* no comparison between the two. The Leica was better, way better, in every possible way a camera can be than the 4K (well, except for price--but I still think the value to price ratio was way better than the Zorki). I *did* find the Jupiter-8 lens that came with the Zorki useful and decently capable on the Leica until I could afford a proper Leica 50mm lens; I still keep the Jupiter for potential use one day.

If you can't afford an M, there *are* decent Barnack Leicas out there at reasonable prices. Even if they haven't been CLAed, there's a pretty good chance, if they're in working order when you get them, they'll continue to work for a long time to come. And you *can* use Soviet glass on them, to save a bit of cash--although why you'd do that when there are plenty of great options out there at good prices for third-party glass that can be used on screw mount cameras, I really don't know. Unless you've only got 20 bucks to spend on a 50/F2, then I guess the Jupiters and Industars become an attractive option.

 

[removedacct2]

a Zorki 4K. I found one in nice cosmetic condition. But it felt really kind of nasty compared to any camera I'd owned before. And it managed to internally disintegrate halfway through my first roll, even though I'd read up on the does and don'ts with that particular camera before attempting to put it to work.

I am not surprised. This is not uncommon. You can buy an old soviet rangefinder that is sold as checked and working and the first shot you take, one of the ribbon holding the curtains gives up. This happens also with old Zenit SLR. (i have had the case)

• the glue used back then by KMZ was not supposed to hold half a century , and for the last Zorki produced, ie. the 4K, they are more recent but because they were manufactured in the 70's, they may be prone to sloppier assembly, included gluing of the curtains...

• contrary to old Leicas, soviet cameras have often never been serviced/maintained and for the ones that have, if it was DIY it may have been uncorrect. Any Leica-ist on dedicated forums will tell a service must be done every some years like five or so, and there's a market logic: owners did pay a huge amount for a new camera, and try to resell with less possible loss, and for this a servicing with receipt, which the other around seller will want in order to pay that price.

I am used to soviet cameras since long, and the last 15 years Russia and Central Asia are my main week-ends and holidays destinations. Typically I buy cameras and lenses at few 2nd hand shops or by meeting someone selling on the ads site Avito. I mean: i check and handle the camera, yet there's no way to know the history of it, so it's about luck, but if you dry fire few shots at every speed, have a look at the curtain, you may have a good one. On Ebay, one or two sellers do actually sell carefully checked cameras, but then at twice the price.
An alternative is to have curtains replacement as well as careful general check at a certified technician in Russia or Ukraine. This is not done because it costs more than the price of buying it, but then it cost less than a "CLA" of Leica III.


the point on forums like this, is that some people go on repeating some meme without having been actual users, and others have experienced one or two bad instance of the same camera and make a general judgement.

that said, a Zorki-4 which would be brand new and fresh can˝t compare with a M3/M2, it's impossible. In construction it's a lesser level of care and in features only the Leningrad compares, excepted for film advance which is spring based. The RF/VF windows is comparable to the M Leica: multi-frame, clear, parallax corrected, but uses a different focusing scheme: