Kiev 4 [Archive] - Rangefinderforum.com

darkkavenger

01-22-2006, 13:23

Salut Steph! ;)

well I'll speak english as it is the norm amongst us.. welcome here! I'm crazy about Kiev cameras, in fact I keep fondling mine here... I recommend you to get an early Kiev -- before 1970. My preference goes to the Kiev-2 and Kiev-2A (with flash sync), though you might want to have a Kiev-3A (with non-coupled lightmeter). I personally prefer the models without a meter, as most meters are no longer working or accurate.

Cheers!
Bonne soirée!
Max

fidget

01-22-2006, 13:35

I use a 79 model which operates well and feels very smooth, maybe I was lucky. I also have a second kiev of 73 vintage which was faulty when received. (50% success on thE bay?)

w3rk5

01-22-2006, 14:00

I got to play with a Kiev 4 today. I love they way they feel. Very solid and a nice weight behind it. I've read somewhere the best year to get is anything upto early 1960. When I get one......I mean if I get one, I'll get one without the light meter. :) Like Max said, "Most meters are no longer working or accurate".

Socke

01-22-2006, 14:13

And they are much more sexy without the light meter :-)

wlewisiii

01-22-2006, 14:15

My experiance isn't typical I'm sure, but my best Kiev 4a is from 1977 and still shooting wonderfully. My worst was a Kiev II from 1952. It was eventually used as a parts body. So be aware that a good camera could be made at anytime during the Kiev's production as well as a bad one. Buy from a reputable dealer - it will cost more but you'll have better options if it is a lemon.

That said, I do love my Kiev 4a :D and I hope you'll get a good one too.

William

darkkavenger

01-22-2006, 14:30

This said, I must say my immense luck is to live in a city where I can find lot of FSU rangefinders and where I can buy them for reasonable prices AND ***test them*** ... I wish I was rich! so many cameras to buy! :D

rolleistef

01-23-2006, 14:02

hellomates,
thanks a lot for your replies... I'll eventually buy a IIIa (saw a cuple of them for 35 tikets on ebay), but I personnaly prefer the light-meter versions, for I think it just looks like... a Louis XV cupboard or secretary... so cute! I saw one yesterday, and it's amazingy small! Anyway if I get he big prize at the lottery, I'll but a Contax instead (and a leica Mp as well; let's stop dreaming :D )
See you soon,
Stéphane

akptc

01-23-2006, 16:02

Hi Stéphane, before taking the plunge on the IIIa, consider this beauty: http://www.dvdtechnik.com/ebay/contaxc/black/12.jpg - how could anyone resist it? :) I have one (had to do some minor fixes) and just love it.

ErnestoJL

01-23-2006, 16:37

Hello Stephane!
I´ve got my first Kiev 4 in 1982. It was made in 1966 and had no flaws. Recently I´ve got a Contax II (made in 1937), and found no noticeable differences between them. The Kiev came with the J 8, a very good clone of the Sonnar 2/50mm which in fact is as good as a pre war Sonnar.
You won´t be disappointed with a Kiev, but remember that you´re in the first steps of a long run to full GAS!

Good luck and welcome to the forum!
Ernesto

rolleistef

01-24-2006, 13:09

What do you mean by GAS, ernesto?
For AKPTC : black Kievs are usually of quite low reliability, and I don't like them with this colour.. but that's kind anyway!
Stéphane

akptc

01-24-2006, 13:31

For AKPTC : black Kievs are usually of quite low reliability, and I don't like them with this colour.. but that's kind anyway!
Stéphane You may be right on that, it took some tinkering to get mine all tight and ready to go. But, isn't having a camera 50% about the looks anyway ;)

darkkavenger

01-24-2006, 14:02

What do you mean by GAS, ernesto?
For AKPTC : black Kievs are usually of quite low reliability, and I don't like them with this colour.. but that's kind anyway!
Stéphane

GAS = Gear Acquisition Syndrome [Syndrome d'Achat de Matos] :D

ErnestoJL

01-24-2006, 15:38

Massimiliano: thank you for answering Stephane. Better that You did as you speak french better than I would ever do!! Grazie tante!!!

Stephane:
After buying the first FSU RF camera, some kind of infection takes place over most of the buyers, and then they want to buy almost all.... Well, that´s what usually happens. It doesn´t mean you´d be infected right now, but ... wait and see....

RJ-
There are just two possible situations:
1)I´m very lucky because my Kiev sounds (really, does it?) very quiet, or
2)Conversely, I´m not lucky at all as my Contax sounds louder than it should be, almost like a Kiev...

Well, probably I´m quite lucky as my Kiev is really quiet and the Contax sounds the same.
What I´m sure is that both cameras are really quiet in comparison with many leaf shuttered cameras, however not as quiet as a Leica in good shape.

Sorry to hijack this thread!!!
Again, Good luck Stephane and enjoy being here.

Ernesto

rolleistef

01-25-2006, 07:14

hello,
wow so much advantages for a single camera! :p
I'd also like to have the cons, because camera (more generally a soviet one) are never perfect (except 2 of them : the Leica M4 to 7 and P, and the Rolleiflex 3.5/2.8F ;) )
And I'll mind the GAS.... anyway, me being a poor broken student... And foe the moment I don't even have enough money for a Kiev (Kneb)!
But I admit I once dreamed abut having all the versions, from the II to the 4M, and 4A mk2 as well...
Massimiliano, did you live in France once? (I'd bet not a lot of people would know "matos" instead of "materiel") :dance:
Cheers,
Stéphane

Krawczyk

01-25-2006, 10:05

My Kiev is a 4M - 1984 and work very good, including the meter.

Jocko

01-25-2006, 10:30

My Kiev is a 4M - 1984 and work very good, including the meter.

Same here - although it did need a tune-up from Oleg. And like Ernesto's, mine is also wonderfully quiet.

Stephane, these are beautiful cameras. I too bought my first Kiev when I was a "poor broken student" - do it and have fun! You won't regret it and you'll treasure the pictures - college is just one long photo opportunity! :D

dll927

01-25-2006, 11:01

The matter of a meter or not is pretty much personal preference. I tend to think the 4a, no meter, is better looking, too. In any case those meters are the selenium type and probably not reliable any more as 'yardsticks' (French, meter!!) for exposure. Particularly not with slide filem.

rolleistef

01-25-2006, 11:34

that's right, one may not be rely too much on built-in-selenium meter... It's just a feature that makes them look prettier and was useable at the glorious era of b&w (long life to Emofin!). The 16-Rule works pretty well too!
More of all, as I 'm rather looking for a IIIa than a 4, the meter has 90% of chance of not working! If it does, it'd be nice though... I'd love playing with it! :D :D :D
Photographers are big kids... who never enjoyed winding his/her Rolleiflex at the last frame, singing a music-box tune :D :D (it's what makes a Rollei perfect!)
Stéphane

rolleistef

01-29-2006, 11:01

hi again,
a last question :
I'm hesiting between a 4 and a IIIa. Which one you think is better? What are exactly the advantages of the 4 over the IIIa, except a (so useful :p ) more accurate selenium meter?
Thanx to all
Stéphane

FrankS

01-29-2006, 11:05

Kiev III's are rarer (I think) than 4's, made earlier and closer to the Contax connection, so better build quality is likely. I prefer non-metered Kievs!

darkkavenger

01-29-2006, 11:09

I prefer non-metered Kievs as well. :)

ricpr

01-29-2006, 11:18

I second the opinion on the Kiev 4 from the 80's. Maybe it was luck, but mine has a working meter and takes great pictures. A cheap *bay buy for $70.

FrankS

01-29-2006, 11:24

I have 2 Kiev cameras, a 1959 4a and a 1980's 4am, and a Contax IIa (post-war, no meter). The earlier Kiev 4a feels more like the Contax than it does to the later Kiev 4am.

rolleistef

01-29-2006, 11:37

Wow,
thsese were hyperspace-speed answers! IIIa then?.. OK. f I find a 1959 4 (same year as my Rollei!) it may be all right as well.
Stéphane

FrankS

01-29-2006, 11:40

Earlier/older Kiev's (1940's, 50's, 60's) are generaly better made than later (1970's, 80's) ones

darkkavenger

01-29-2006, 11:54

I second FrankS words... I currently own a Kiev-2A (meterless, flash sync) from 1956 and it feels very solid and is a very reliable companion. I've had besides this one, a Kiev-2 from 1955 (the closest to a pre-war contax-II) and despite the lens (a 1955 J-8) showing some wear, the camera operated very well all the same. In comparison, I had a 1970 Kiev-4 (metered, lens: J8M with click-stops) that although feeling like a nice camera, didn't give the same impressions of robustness. But maybe that's just subjective!

ErnestoJL

01-29-2006, 20:15

My choice would be : any prewar Contax be it either a II or III; any Kiev made before 1970, earlier the best (increased Contax resemblance). My Kiev is from 1966, and works as a charm.
Regarding the question Metered or non metered, I think It´s a question of personal preferences.
I usually prefer metered cameras, but I´m carrying allways a handheld meter (a LunaPro CdS).
If you find either a Kiev 4 or a Contax III with the meter working (even out of calibration), buy it. The cell can be replaced, recalibrated and it´ll be allways of some help.
Non metered cameras force you to think and calculate the exposure, and the most important, to not rely only on the meter reading alone, but to make a reasonable judgement according to what do you want to obtain.

Ernesto

Stanton

01-29-2006, 20:20

I have an '81 with a meter which still works, and the camera is fine, and an 83 without the meter. Both have been fine, no tinkering, no adjustments, no servicing. While the majority may be correct that the earlier models are more reliable, I must say that my newer models have been consistently good. Dave

rolleistef

01-30-2006, 09:07

what concrete difference between a 4 and a 4m (except the flash thing?)

varjag

01-30-2006, 09:22

4M/AM has fixed takeup spool, rewind crank and the left lock on the back serves as rewind switch.

FrankS

01-30-2006, 09:35

Also, the 4M/AM is newer and has poorer build quality compared to an early 4 or 3 or 2.

ruben

01-30-2006, 13:21

Well, if we are talking about Kievs to shoot, I have to disagree with all chaps on two points:

a) The main issue is not production year but how good your Kiev performs, and how good are the lenses you have for it. Obviously between a perfectly working 1956 Kiev and a perfectly working 1984 Kiev - I choose the first one for esthetical reasons, sacrifying the more practical later model. BUT older models, besides being truly lovable, are more prong to becoming disaligned, with lose screws, etc, just for having being more used, and having older materials, as the synch cable of the IIa. And even this is just bla-bla, when you are going to buy any kind of Kiev as you can not foresee what are you going to get.

b) One of my 4 Kievs has a working meter. But what the hell is it practical to use, being marked for Russian rocts and with a very limited range, instead of using your Kiev with a modern handheld meter ?

Sorry this time,
Ruben

FrankS

01-30-2006, 14:27

Ruben, of course the main issue is how well your camera performs once you have it, but if you are in the process of buying one, the year of manufacture is an excellent indicator of build quality. I'm sticking to that point.

ErnestoJL

01-30-2006, 15:45

IMO a working meter even if it´s selenium, is a help, perhaps not perfect, but a good help anyway, especially if you don´t have any other meter.
If it´s calibrated in GOST (roct), it´s not that bad as long as you have the conversion table.

Ernesto

ruben

01-31-2006, 01:32

build quality. I'm sticking to that point.
In historical terms I agree, but for practical purposes, who is the seller is in my opinion a better stick.
For a beginer asking what type of Kiev should he/she buy, I would advise: first of all start with choosing the seller.
My No.1 seller is Trofimov from the Ucranian "Soviet Camera Store", offering both CLA and warranty. This doesn't mean I would not buy from anybody else. Thus for example Trofimov seldom have Kievs from the sixties. Then I pick anything else (DVD Technik for example) but I do it counciously I am running a certain risk. If I choose anyone from eBay I know I am running a big risk - and even then I may buy if the lower price is a counter-weight. But for sure I would not pay $150 or over to an untested seller for a glorious Kiev 1947.
Rgds
Ruben

FrankS

01-31-2006, 08:27

claidemore

01-31-2006, 09:06

I have two Kiev 4's, a 1958 and a 1969. The 58 was rough looking, had seen some hard use and been touched up with black laquer, had Zeiss bumps, and a couple missing screws (inside the works, where there are sets of three) and the self timer did not work. I've since torn the 58 apart and it's in the process of being refurbished. ( I bought it because I had read that the older ones were better made)

The 69 is really nice, one tiny Zeiss bump and functions perfectly (except the self timer which quit after two weeks). It feels much better than the 58, everything is tight and the impression you get when you pick it up is that of a good solid camera. It feels right and works right.

Both have working meters, and though I use 'sunny 16' most of the time, it's nice to have the meter to double check. I have shot rolls using only the meter for exposure, and they came out great. Not a liability in my opinion, though not a necessity either.

We gotta remember that these cameras are 40 years old. Logic dictates that a newer camera will have a better chance of working properly and testimonials support this.

Other user opinions indicate that the late 50's early 60's cameras may be better than the later ones, BUT...they will probably need to be worked over by a technician.

Two ways to go.

Glen

rolleistef

01-31-2006, 09:36

Then you think that it may be dangereous to buy a 56-60s Kiev?
That's an interesting point.
What I have heard (and what a lot of people have heard before) is that
1°Kiev from the late 60-70s are not reliable enough to take the risk of buying it on ebay, cf the famous expression "russian roulette" (I saw 70s Kiev whose film-rail was absolutely appaling)
2°50s-early 60s cameras are more reliable than later model, because mdae closer to Contax models (and IIIa made with Contax parts)
3°80s cameras well made but ugly, even if more convenient to use (knob, speed dial...)
The best choice would then be a late 70 4a?
It's true that buying a 55 year-old camera may be a bit hazardous (well depends of the camera, it's the date of birth of my perfectly-working Rollei=)

Frank, you say that you feel a real quality difference between the 59 and 70 models, what difference? I reckon the 59 ones have a more solid-grip.
dlridings you talk about a creemy/smooth grip, what do you mean?

(i'm not very used to reading english/photographic metaphoras :( )
Thanks a lot
Stéphane

optikhit

01-31-2006, 18:29

zhang

02-01-2006, 07:43

Hi Daniel,

As said, I have 2 Kievs, one built in 1959, the other in 1980 or so. To me, there is a real and significant difference in feel, fit and finish, and perceived build quality between the 2. I have not looked inside them so I can only infer from what the outside looks like. Do you not notice this with the many Kievs that you have?

I guess few people have more Kievs than I do. I agree that the best bet are those 1960's Kievs. earlier ones with Zeiss parts in excellent condition are equally good, but demand a much higher price and are much older. If I have a choice, I would avoid later Kievs with a plastic tip on the self-timer lever. It does not mean later kievs are bad cameras. They could be equally good performers.

FrankS

02-01-2006, 07:48

"I guess few people have more Kievs than I do."

I bow humbly before the master Zhang!

darkkavenger

02-01-2006, 07:52

*bows humbly as well* ;)

zhang

02-01-2006, 07:53

"I guess few people have more Kievs than I do."

I bow humbly before the master Zhang!

Thanks. But I feel humble before those magnificent Kievs. :D

FrankS

02-01-2006, 07:53

We're a humble group! :)

claidemore

02-01-2006, 07:54

I reckon that someone who owns 25 Kievs might know a thing or two! :)

Just a question for Stephane.... if there were 25 perfectly working Kievs of different ages and models lined up in front of you, and you could pick any one you wanted, which one would you pick?

Glen

FrankS

02-01-2006, 07:59

darkkavenger

02-01-2006, 07:59

I've been considering to block eBay at work, but no... it was too hard to resist!
I'd love having one of those Zeiss-Kievs with 3K (ZK) lenses on it... what about a yummy 50/1.5 ZK !

zhang

02-01-2006, 08:10

Let's ask that question of Master Zhang. He actually has about that number of Kievs in front of him.

In fact I have more than 25! A mint 1965 Kiev 4 got me hooked to Kiev gears and now I still believe it is the best buy among others.($25 only) :)

IMHO, and according to what I heard, I believe 1960's Kievs are the best among Contax-Kiev lines. Yes, including the Contax II and postwar IIas.

zhang

02-01-2006, 08:15

varjag

02-01-2006, 08:49

The mid-60s Kiev-4 I had an opportunity to handle was indeed extremely smooth camera. I thought my 1976 4A was fairly good, but that specimen had no shutter noise to speak of, and film advance was unkievly smooth and easy.

LOOP

02-01-2006, 09:56

I have a Kiev-4 from 1960 and it is so quiet and even smoother than my contax IIa.

rolleistef

02-01-2006, 11:53

if i had the choice between 25 mint Kievs? It's the question I AM asking! But knowing all the stuff i learnt during the last 3 weeks or so, I'd choose
A IIIa, even if I have to repair the ribbons
A 1959 4
or a very late 4.
Why four and not 4a? Well, it's more for aestethic reasons than anything else : everytime I see a 4A or IIA, I can't help thinking : the roof is too flat, isn't the rangefinder missing?
Yeah, it's just as if something was missing....
I now ask all of you the question : if you could chose between 25 Kievs, all mint, but of different ages, which one would you take?
(please avoid "i'd take the 25!" even if it would only cost 1000$ =), and anyway if you can afford 25 kievs, purchase a Leica M3!)

ruben

02-01-2006, 12:51

In fact I have more than 25! A mint 1965 Kiev 4 got me hooked to Kiev gears and now I still believe it is the best buy among others.($25 only) :)

IMHO, and according to what I heard, I believe 1960's Kievs are the best among Contax-Kiev lines. Yes, including the Contax II and postwar IIas.

Nothing else to add.

HOW ARE YOU COMRADE ZHANG ? A pleasure to taste your special flavour again!

Cheers,
Ruben

ruben

02-01-2006, 14:01

As I said previously on this thread, latest Kievs, 4A, are aesthetically ugly, including their cases, with syplifiyed mechanics and cheaper materials, very unfriendly to fingers and glass wearers.
BUT at the same time they own some features which conter-balance their convenience (unconvenience):
a) Materials are newer and guarantee more shooting 'kilometrage' before repair.
In my case, the viewfinder is slightly brighter, but I cannot speculate about what may happen if my older Kievs and the 4A were all to pass through a professional viewfinder cleaning.
b) There is a re-winding crank, making the camera more adapted to street photography. Also, along the same path the fixed taking spool is a real help.
c) There is a hot shoe.
d) The eye contact viewfinder window is circular and therefore bigger and therefore relatively eye-reliefer.

Now, some improvements I did to my 4A:
a) I painted the rough chromium black, and this changed the whole aesthetical equation. It looks like the camera found its re-design purpose, and of course apparently smaller sized. It strongly tempts me to paint black my older models too.

b) Additionally I exchanged the utterly ugly selftimer crank and put instead a fully shining chrome one, and this further improved the look.

c) I covered the rough winding wheel teeth with a double strip, cutted from my byke punctured tyre. Now, the softness of the winding action leaves behind my older Kievs.

d) A further improvement could be to exchange the cheapy leatherete for another better looking and better textured from Cameraleather, but personally I do not need it as I made my own soft-real-leather case, relieving me from both body leatherete and case.

e) Painting black and cutting the case strap, attaching it direclty to the body luggers, will never harm but make safer film exchange. By the way, the Kievs real leather strap, after disassembling the doble strap system, is my favourite strap.
Do away with the ugly case top, and wrap body and lens with a stylish and hard fabric, and you will not loose body protection nor manipulation speed.

And, among us, it is this Kiev 4A the one trusted to habitate my daily back pack, Universal Turret Finder attached. The older luxuriorer models habitate my closet, waiting for selective use only.

Cheers,
Ruben

darkkavenger

02-01-2006, 14:19

Ruben... you say all of this and let us poor guys without showing a photo of your Kiev4A ? ;)

ruben

02-01-2006, 14:44

Well, the only digital camera (exception) at home is my 14 years old daughter's, who is sleeping now. (Now in Jerusalem is midnight) And I have more features in that Kiev I didn't write about them, therefore a single pic will not do it. But you can help me to speed proceedings by explaining me how to post images to this ultrasophysticated forum.
Cheers,
Ruben

darkkavenger

02-01-2006, 14:58

It's pretty easy, Ruben (btw it's late here too, and I left my kiev-2A & lenses at work)... to post photos, you click on "Go Advanced" instead of "Post Quick Reply" and then you click on "manage attachments" a window will show up to send your photos :)

zhang

02-01-2006, 19:05

My first Kiev is a 4AM made in 1984. It looks quite new however the lens has a small nick on the front glass plate. The right shoulder is a little bit higher and therefore the speed/winding wheel is a little bit tilted. Eventhough I haven't used any Kiev before I can feel the metal shell is thin (not solid as I expect).

Hi,

Another Kiev user from China? I am glad to meet you here.
A 4AM should have a Helios-103 lens and that is a real sharp lens. A well made Kiev 2 or 4 can be extremely durable so you don't need an old Leica that probably has pin-holes on its cloth curtains. :D Another candidate for a user is the Kiev 5 with a very bright view finder and a crank for quick winding. All kievs have a thin metal top plate that covers a solid die-cast shell, but earlier Kievs have a better finish and fit for those parts.

Cheers,

Zhang

zhang

02-01-2006, 19:10

Nothing else to add.

HOW ARE YOU COMRADE ZHANG ? A pleasure to taste your special flavour again!

Cheers,
Ruben

Hi Comrade Ruben,

I am very glad to hear from you again. Your DIY black Kiev sounds very impressive. I do hope you could post some images to feast our eyes!

Cheers,

Zhang

claidemore

02-02-2006, 01:43

Which Kiev would I choose if there were 25 of them lined up? (BTW I'm glad you know which model you want Stephane, now all you gotta do is find one! :) )

Kiev 4AM. I know it isn't as pretty as a Kiev 4, ( to most eyes), but my eyes can see the shutter speed numbers easier. I like the smaller, meterless profile and being newer it's a wee bit easier to find one in good cosmetic shape. I'd be tempted to paint it black though, the all black ones look pretty nice to me.
But...my next FSU rangefinder will probably be a Fed 3a or Zorki 4k. (oops! did I say that out loud?)

darkkavenger

02-02-2006, 01:50

Seems that the concept of having a politburo for the Russian RF forum is good! What do you think, comrades ? :D

zhang

02-02-2006, 03:34

Seems that the concept of having a politburo for the Russian RF forum is good! What do you think, comrades ? :D

Well, I guess even if you say you want a capitalist crap Leeca, KGB will not arrest you at this time. After all a Kiev was not a real red Soviet camera to begin with. :p

zhang

02-02-2006, 03:55

I have a Kiev-4 from 1960 and it is so quiet and even smoother than my contax IIa.

Here is my prize Kiev also my 1st, a 1965 Kiev 4 in mint condition. It even comes with the brass film cassttee and take-up spool. I could not believe that I only paid $25 for such an expensive camera. And the b/w images it produced is just amazing. No, I don't need another " better rangefinder camera". :)

varjag

02-02-2006, 04:36

Zhang, you sure can make an eye-candy.

darkkavenger

02-02-2006, 05:10

Well, I guess even if you say you want a capitalist crap Leeca, KGB will not arrest you at this time. After all a Kiev was not a real red Soviet camera to begin with. :p

I agree that I often tend to mistake my Kiev-2A for a Contax ;)
I'm just a wannabe!

FrankS

02-02-2006, 05:36

The double shelled film cannister is for bulk loading film into. It is the film supply side rather than the film take-up side.

I just got 3 of these for my Leica IIIa and am figuring out how to use them too. :)

varjag

02-02-2006, 05:38

The double cassette opens when the latch on the back is locked and closes when unlocked, hence it can never scratch a film and when used as takeup spool allows user to shoot part of film and cut off the rest.

The latch controls the opening with buttons on the bottom of cassette. There is also a small tab on a ridge of cassette that should match with indentation in camera body for proper insertion.

zhang

02-02-2006, 06:41

"Here is my prize Kiev also my 1st, a 1965 Kiev 4 in mint condition. It even comes with the brass film cassttee and take-up spool."

Is this a metal chamber, inside another chamber? I have one of these and didn't know what to do with it. I put it in the take-up spool and dented the film plate trying to close the back.

What do you do with the brass film cassette? I know now what I did wasn't right. ..

What's the photographs from the Kiev & lens combination like, Zhang?

Well I never actually used it, but I think it is just a film cassette that can be re-used.

I lost the prints made by this Kiev 4. At about the same time I used a Canon A-1 with a zoom lens. To simply put it, you just want to keep the images made by the Kiev with the J-8M lens.

ErnestoJL

02-02-2006, 06:52

Recently I tested a 1956 Kiev 4a (or maybe it was a 3?), and the shutter noise was as quiet as mine, also a Contax II with almost same noise level (not measured, just tested by ear). A few days later I found another 4 (from 1963) and when testing it, it sounded good and quiet.
The only difference I found was that some cameras have noisier (but very slightly) clockwork than others, and when shoot at 1/125 or higher speed the difference between them was nil (IMO).
I guess it all depends on how the cameras were cared and maintained, but when it comes to reducing manufacturing costs, simplifying a mechanism, or just replacing materials, the differences should become more noticeable being noise perhaps the easier to detect.

Ernesto

rolleistef

02-05-2006, 09:56

hi again,
what are your favourite russian or ukrainian sellers?
It will be awful for the postage, because of French slugish custom service...=(
Stéphane

Socke

02-05-2006, 10:05

I have a '64 Zorki4 with J-8, a J-12 in Kiev mount and a Leningrad 7 meter from UA-Project. Shipping was 15 Euro for the Zorki kit and 10 for the meter and the J-12 in one package. I had no problems with customs here in germany.

Rick Beckrich

02-05-2006, 10:56

Mlle. Stef...

Please take a look here:

http://www.okvintagecamera.com/index.html

That's Oleg in the Ukraine (if he hasn't frozen to death... joke).

He is an excellent repairman and an honest seller. I have both a
Kiev 4am and a Zorki 3M that he CLA'd before selling to me and
they are both functioning perfectly.

Grandpa Rick

darkkavenger

02-05-2006, 11:23

Stéphane, I don't think that customs would be sluggish, especially if you buy from ex-URSS countries. My dad lives near Nice (yep, i'm french!) and it took him 12 days to receive his jupiter-12 lens. Or you can try to spot a Kiev in France, it will cost you a bit more maybe, but even then you might have a chance to check the camera, and a little colissimo or chronopost parcel will make you have the camera very fast ;)

//max

rolleistef

02-05-2006, 12:36

cool, there's a compatriot on this site, then! =)
(did we meet before on photim??)
well, there's a huge price difference between shop prices and ebay prices, and I can't afford it...
Darkavanger, it's a comforting news, that post is that fast... m.gandy had once told me (when I thought about buying a Bessa) that it had once taken a parcel 6 weeks before crossing our sunny border... but I've read that it' was a different system for 40-less€/$ merchandises...
Stéphane

darkkavenger

02-05-2006, 12:43

Of course Steph, it depends of the value of the thing. If you're getting a Kiev from ebay or from someone here, chances are that the people will mark the pack as being a gift, however if it's marked with a value, it'll lag behind. I received a pack from my girlfriend this autumn (she's in california) and it took almost four weeks before I had it. She wrote that there were gifts for a value of 20$, so since there was written a value outside, the czech customs charged me about 4 euros of taxes. bah!

I've never been on photim alas ;)
cheers
max

rolleistef

03-01-2006, 14:05

at last! I got it! It's a IIIa. His name is Mr. 568997. It works perfectly and had the chance to meet a really nice seller, so no ebay, no post, just a meeting at a photo store, in front of the chemistry shelves :) I thank him a lot.
The camera is wondeful, very quiet, the lens is a J8 from 56 (nice millesima). being able to shoot 36 frames on the same roll is nice! With my rolleiflex, I'm limited to 12 (technicallytalking) shots, it's a bit short....
Thanks for your helpp, guys! It was really useful!

Stanton

03-01-2006, 22:10

I've got two Kiev 4's, one with meter, one without, from years 1980 and 1983. Both are fine, no tune up or work over required. I can't argue from experience whether the earlier ones are better, but I have had no trouble with either of mine. Dave

rolleistef

03-03-2006, 13:41

Hi,
first day shootin' at school with my old glory,
using mainly the depth-of-field, and thanks to the quiet shutter, I took photos of people standing two meters ahead!
The light meter, though not useable indoor, is acurate, and once you got the tip, you can use it instead of a hand-held light meter (well, not for slides of course =)
good-night, have a nice day! (10:30pm in paris)

Arthur Soares

03-15-2006, 00:33

been a while since i haven't post anything here,
my last post was about me getting or not a Kiev 4.

Well, guess what it turned out,
lol.
got a wonderfully working Kiev 4 (meter) from 1960s, all shutter-speeds are ok and the meter too!

Great camera :)

ruben

03-22-2006, 04:42

Regarding the question Metered or non metered, I think It´s a question of personal preferences.
I usually prefer metered cameras, but I´m carrying allways a handheld meter (a LunaPro CdS).
If you find either a Kiev 4 or a Contax III with the meter working (even out of calibration), buy it. The cell can be replaced, recalibrated and it´ll be allways of some help.
Non metered cameras force you to think and calculate the exposure, and the most important, to not rely only on the meter reading alone, but to make a reasonable judgement according to what do you want to obtain.

Ernesto

After testing the meter of my flawless 69 Kiev, at ISO 100 indoors and outdoors, against my digital Sekonic L308, and finding both in total agreement, I formally retreat from my former statements at this thread, against the user value of metered Kievs, with special apologies to Ernesto and Claidemore.

By the way, again, this Kiev was bought against all my theories of responsible\expensive buying, just careless, because of the exhuberant external beauty of the camera, as pictured at ebay.

"Facts are stubborn things"

Cheers,

Ruben

ErnestoJL

03-22-2006, 16:06

ruben

03-23-2006, 07:19

Ruben:
No need for apologies!!!!
It´s a question of preferences, and if you prefer to go with a handheld meter, that´s OK. I´m currently doing almost the same, because many of my cameras don´t have a working meter, and of course, even working well, the meters are of the average type and have no intelligence to help me.
To be honest, what I would like to have is a fixed lens RF with a spot meter like the Oly 35SP, but unfortunately those are unusual to find locally in good shape.
Then I do my spot meterings by hand.

Kind regards

Ernesto

I do own an Oly 35SP, and can tell you, that besides a hell of a lens, the spot meter feature there is no big deal. Not because it is not accurate but because it is too big spot area metering (the rather big yellow patch). In practice it gives you some compensation, usually 1 stop plus or minus from the general reading (which is also accurate and good), but I would not say it is rather a big deal in practice than it is in the concept. (Kudos for Maitani !). The OM4's and 3s' are a totally different story, a spoting delikatesen, or better said a Multi spot delicatessen. (More Kudos for Maitani ! ! !)

I also own a Sekonic L408 spot meter, which being smaller than minoltas is still too big for a daily companion.

As for the metered Kievs, after finding the acuracy of mine - I can manage with it instead of a handheld meter for day light, and this is a good step forwards for me.
Unfortunately, the Kievs meter cannot meter at ISO 800/1600. Here I am left with a problem that my small other Sekonic is to compensate for.

As I am getting older I am becomming more and more sensitive to camera noise and conspicuosy, as to not being seen unless I deliberatedly want it.

Cheers,
Ruben