Zorki VS Leica

[Steve M.]

I like FSU cameras, but they've been horribly unreliable for me. One Fed I was sent back to Oleg to be "fixed" so many times I finally told him to just keep it. Nothing from Fedka ever worked right either. The lenses are great though, assuming you get one that hasn't been put back together wrong.

Unless you get very lucky, you soon discover that it's much cheaper and a lot more fun to just buy a Leica in the first place.

[Nutterz88]

Originally Posted by p.giannakis

I have a Fed-3b and a Leica IIc. Although the Leica is by far my favourite camera of the two, the Fed was bought in 1967 by my friend's father and hasn't been ever serviced. Last Xmas I took the Fed on my winter vacations and I cannot say that I missed my Leica.

Well I gave in and got a leica
I got an iic too. Do you cope well with the max shutter speed being 500?
Also, I believe zorki/fed screw lenses are compatible with the older leicas, is this true?

[p.giannakis]

Originally Posted by Nutterz88

Well I gave in and got a leica
I got an iic too. Do you cope well with the max shutter speed being 500?
Also, I believe zorki/fed screw lenses are compatible with the older leicas, is this true?

The 1/500 doesn't really bother me. With 400ASA film in daylight it is 1/500 and f/16 which is good enough. I don't use films faster than 400ASA anyway.
There is a difference with FSU and Leica lenses in the way they register distance but the difference is so little that the depth of field at i.e f3.5 will make up for it. I don't know what happens at f/2.8 or f/2 with the Jupiter 8. I would expect some errors in focusing...
More experienced members could correct me on that.

[newspaperguy]

While I voted for the KIEV - I have a II and an early 4a - I've done more
shooting with a pair of Zorki 1s - a D and an E over the last 10 years.

Admittedly, I'm much more likely now to using the CL or one of the Bessas.

[StillKicking]

I have owned both FSU and Leica rangefinders. When it come to build quality the Leica wins hands down every time. I have owned both the Leica Iiic and Iiif and they are things of beauty.

However, the Zorki's I have owned which include Zorki-I, Zork-4 and Zorki-3 have all been capable and reliable (once CLA'ed). For the record my Leica's needed a good CLA too and that cost on average 3 times what I paid to have the Zorki's done. I also liked my Kiev 4a although it never felt as solid as the Zorki's.

When it comes to lenses the Jupiter-8 remains one of my favourite lenses. No it is NOT as good as the Summicron but it is no slouch. The Jupiter-3 is again a pretty good lens but built quality lets them down a bit.

What do I have now.. well I have kept my Leica M outfit with Leica glass. However I still carry both the Jupiter-8 and Jupiter-3 in my bag.

[jammcat]

Russian cameras gave me nothing but problems.
They're certainly quite finicky, and if you wear glasses you may as well forget using them.
I also really just hate needing to cut the leica film leader. It's an extra step. Of course, my problem is more of a problem with early leica screwmountsin general than one particular to FSU cameras..

Zorkis are quite solid though. I'll bet you could defend yourself with one if the situation required it.

The lenses, particularly the Jupiters, can be great. I don't care for the lack of aperture clicks, but that's about my only problem with them. A J8 in LTM (or converted to m-mount!) with aperture clicks would be a fantastic lens to own.

[John Robertson]

My late model Fed2 is about 50 years old, I've owned it since new, and bought it on a school trip to the Soviet Union. It has been serviced once in 1972 at theLeica Factory in Wetzlahr. I was staying with a technician and his family and whilst attending the Leica School, he had it serviced for me. He was quite complementary about its construction and lens quality. Its more Land Rover build as opposed to Rolls Royce, and on the same scale my Foca Standard is probably a John Deere However both the Foca and Fed have given me faultless service

Under top plate of Foca standard
Gears are about 3 mm thick!!

[beyond]

You 'heard'......

[John Robertson]

Originally Posted by beyond

You 'heard'......

.....?.....

[rinzlerb]

I think you’re missing the point with this question. I’ve never had a film Leica (perhaps someday…) but I love the plain, sturdy, utilitarian quality of the Zorki; the fact that it cost $29 with a Jupiter 8, that I’ve had to take my vise grips to it a couple times to loosen it up, that I climbed up a cliff with it last week, dropped it hard on some rocks when I reached the top, and it still took some beautiful pictures (and if I had broken it I could go get another one without heartbreak or great expense). It shows the great spirit of the Russian people, at once undervalued, capable, brilliant, sometimes grumpy, and always sublime. I think I would admire the Leica, but I would not feel as close to it. (So much we read into these machines!)

[bobby_novatron]

Just thought I'd stick up for the FSU cameras ...

I have bought (from fleaBay) several of them, including Fed-2, Fed-5, Zorki-4, and Kiev 4a models, among others.

If it seems like camera gluttony, one must remember that you can buy several FSU cameras for the price of one Leica lens hood.

I've taken great pictures with a Fed-5, and horrible pictures with a Leica M6. It's never the tool. It's always the brain behind the camera.

That being said, I wouldn't use a FSU camera for critical work -- the build quality and ergonomics just aren't the same as a Western camera. I have a 1966 Kiev 4a that is well-built and reliable, and a 1981 Kiev 4a that feels like a rough, cheaply-made insult to its Contax heritage. The quality definitely went downhill in the later years of production.

I think these FSU cameras are fun and quirky to use. But the Soviets never really nailed the concept of 'quality control'.

[Marc-A.]

Kiev II (before 1956) and a late Helios 3 ... IMHO, it can compare with a Leica set : the body's as reliable as any Leica III, it's very light and makes absolutely no noise. Optically, the Helios 3 is just excellent (early ones have the "Leica glow" if it means something, late ones are razor sharp and contrasty).

[abbasvin]

zorki is miles better than leica

[xayraa33]

Originally Posted by Marc-A.

Kiev II (before 1956) and a late Helios 3 ... IMHO, it can compare with a Leica set : the body's as reliable as any Leica III, it's very light and makes absolutely no noise. Optically, the Helios 3 is just excellent (early ones have the "Leica glow" if it means something, late ones are razor sharp and contrasty).

What is a Helios 3 ?

Do you mean the Helios 103 ?