Why does this keep happening

[pakeha]

Buying and using an FSU camera is supposed to be such a gamble according to many of the haters round here.
So i`ve just developed the first roll from my just arrived via Ukrainian seller Moskva 4. No problems.
Now I have a full range of 4 series FSU cameras, all arrived in full working condition. 100% satisfaction...think i`ll stop now. Is it possible the duds are posted to a `certain market'?
regards
CW

[reagan]

Consider yourself blessed. I've had 2 or 3 that worked well out-of-the-box then developed small issues, light leaks or whatever, after not that much use.

Anyway, go forth and enjoy.

[Martytoof]

Even the Zorki I bought from fedka developed issues (thankfully, quite literally within hours of opening the package) so I consider it to be a function of luck when working with 50-60 year old cameras. The FED-2 I bought has a terrible viewfinder vertical alignment problem and a leaky shutter curtain, but a kind RFFer gave me a project FED-2 to work on that I'm lovingly restoring

[wolves3012]

Buying one probably is a lottery, in most cases. They were cheap cameras when new and QC wasn't the highest priority. Add anything up to 70 or so years of neglect and it's no real shock many have problems.

Using them isn't a lottery - provided they're properly serviced. Beyond the wear-and-tear failures any mechanical device might suffer, I think their simplicity and low-tech construction makes them very, very reliable.

[Roger Hicks]

I've had maybe ten or a dozen, and most worked. Some didn't. Also, there's how you define 'work': I had a 50/2 where you could see one of the lens elements moving when you tilted the lens. Quality control was wobbly when they were new, and decades of neglect have rarely helped. Often, too, the worst have been junked or stripped for spares by now.

A friend of mine was Photographer to the Supreme Soviet in the late 80s. He wanted a Horizont. So he ordered a dozen and kept the one that worked best. Not perfectly: just best

Cheers,

R.

[I Love Film]

Standard practice in the FSU was when a photographer bought a camera (or a car, or almost any State produced item), you assumed it was not made properly and you took it to a skilled local who would tune and adjust it for you.

During the late 1990's and early 2000's, the cream of the FSU cameras was sold cheap on eBay. It was a feeding frenzy for starved collectors who saw a cornucopia of formerly unobtainable stuff pop up daily.

Now that the low lying fruit is mostly gone, they are scraping the bottom of the barrel to come up with stuff to sell. Junk cameras, cameras made from parts, etc, are all for sale at high prices.

[Valkir1987]

Every FSU camera needs service soon or late. And that depends on several facts. Some have been serviced before by unqualified repairmen. (the great 'do it yourself' including the lada and trabant)
Some have never been serviced and have been kept in their cases for years with little use.
Some have been used a lot, but still work fine and need little service.
I serviced and repaired many camera's, and by experience I can tell wether they have been serviced before or not. Factory quality controll is not a very big problem on these cameras as many people suggest. It's how they have been treated afterwards mostly.

[Roger Hicks]

Originally Posted by Valkir1987

Every FSU camera needs service soon or late. And that depends on several facts. Some have been serviced before by unqualified repairmen. (the great 'do it yourself' including the lada and trabant)
Some have never been serviced and have been kept in their cases for years with little use.
Some have been used a lot, but still work fine and need little service.
I serviced and repaired many camera's, and by experience I can tell wether they have been serviced before or not. Factory quality controll is not a very big problem on these cameras as many people suggest. It's how they have been treated afterwards mostly.

Then why were they so variable when they were new?

Cheers,

R.

[FrankS]

Originally Posted by Roger Hicks

Then why were they so variable when they were new?

Cheers,

R.

Roger, how do you know they were?

[Roger Hicks]

Originally Posted by FrankS

Roger, how do you know they were?

Dear Frank,

Soviet-built cameras were widely available in western Europe, and this was the general consensus in the 60s, 70s and 80s. For a less charitable view of the reliability of Soviet cameras, talk to anyone who lived in the USSR in the same period.

Cheers,

R.

[Roger Hicks]

Originally Posted by C.Hudson

Dear Roger,

Could you please verify the quantity ordered by your friend, for each time you tell this anecdote the number varies considerably.

Cheers,

C.

So does my memory, because the number was unbelievable, and it was over 20 years ago.

I don't think I've given any numbers other than half a dozen and a dozen, unless I (mis)remembered that they came in tens. Perhaps you'd be kind enough to give examples of other numbers.

FWIW (clearly not a lot) Frances remembers "either 4 or 40".

Regardless of the number, no-one in the FSU had much faith in the cameras in question.

Cheers,

R.

[Frontman]

I have bought half a dozen FSU cameras on eBay, and every one of them has required repair. Three required new shutter curtains, one had a badly deteriorated lens, and a couple simply needed to be cleaned and lubed to un-jam them

[Roger Hicks]

Originally Posted by C.Hudson

. . . So, somewhere between 4 and 40. . . .
Thanks.

I admire your diligence in seeking out all those references, but I can't see that the exact number matters very much. Four and forty were Frances's numbers, not mine. She said, "It was a ridiculous number, and I can't even remember it to an order of magnitude." My numbers were 6, 10 and 12; a rather smaller spread than 4 to 40.

I know it was an entire case of cameras, but I don't remember how many there were to a case. Bear in mind that I never saw the case: I merely borrowed the one that worked reasonably well, and even then, he warned me that there was some risk of striping on the images. As, indeed, I found when I used it.

Cheers,

R.

[pakeha]

I just fnd the entire reaction to FSU cameras and ukranian sellers one big...
I posted this after the reaction of a freind who was actually shocked that I would risk purchasing anything via e-bay through an `Eastern European' seller.
His explanation was that there are probably many fake deals there and I was likely to get burnt.
Well, I replied that so far in life the only people who have ripped me off have been my fellow citizens..the tie wearing,insider trading corporate type,the local tradesmen that after 25 years in business still cannot give an acurate quote, my acountant that charges in the seven minute period and i pay for his pee break
In short - cheap and cheerfull camers are the small stuff and not worth the angst that some display..take care of the big stuff.

[Aapo]

Every camera, whether it is FSU or not, I'm about to buy is potential risk not because top plate says Fed, Zorki, Kiev, Leningrad etc. They are old and they are beaten to death during those decades. Sure I have preconceptions between labels but bottom line is that everyone is a risk. And while FSU cameras are still decently priced (maybe not always) it's part of the thrill to see whether product gives me hours of DIY repair or not.

Some might not want to experience that pleasure of course...

[Valkir1987]

Then why were they so variable when they were new?

The camera's where made by diffirent factories, and sometimes made for the domestic market, and others for export.
Last service and controll was outsourced to the import agents abroad for the export models.
But when you look at the parts and the assembly, the finish and adjustment is quite stable. Not as refined as other brands, but up to expectations and specs.
Of course, quality varies. But not within one batch or series. Mostly when they altered the design.
Even when the Russians adopted the Toyota Production system on their camera's , they would still need service today!

[Dralowid]

I have a box of unused FSU lens hoods still in their original packing...for Roger's peace of mind they are packed in tens, maybe cameras came in tens too. One doubts that there is much of a link between imperial measurements, bourgeois dozens and the USSR, not to mention the bakers dozen...removes tongue from cheek.

Regarding FSU cameras, they had a bad reputation in the UK when new, even the distributors (Technical and Optical Equipment in Holborn???) knew it and were happy to take them back for repair at the drop of a hat. Some have said that they did a 'pre sales service' but this legend is not substantiated. They were, however, cheap as chips.

The best advice seems to be 'the older the better'...a pre war Fed is a well made thing.

Michael

[Roger Hicks]

Originally Posted by Dralowid

I have a box of unused FSU lens hoods still in their original packing...for Roger's peace of mind they are packed in tens, maybe cameras came in tens too. One doubts that there is much of a link between imperial measurements, bourgeois dozens and the USSR, not to mention the bakers dozen...removes tongue from cheek.

Regarding FSU cameras, they had a bad reputation in the UK when new, even the distributors (Technical and Optical Equipment in Holborn???) knew it and were happy to take them back for repair at the drop of a hat. Some have said that they did a 'pre sales service' but this legend is not substantiated. They were, however, cheap as chips.

The best advice seems to be 'the older the better'...a pre war Fed is a well made thing.

Michael

Dear Michael,

Ah, thank you... But given the genius of the command economy, it's entirely possible that the cameras were packed in 9s (3x3) ot even 11s (4x3 with one space missing). It's more for C. Hudson's peace of mind than mine: the fact that even the Supreme Soviet couldn't get reliable cameras, and had to order a whole box, matters more than how many there were in a box.

Like you, I remember when Soviet cameras were available new, and the reputation they had at the time. I can only suspect that those who think the reputation was undeserved are either too young to remember, or Americans who could not easily gain access to Soviet cameras at the time.

As I've said before, I suspect that a lot of the worst cameras have been scrapped, and probably a fair number of the good ones have been repaired, so even after allowing that they're now 40-50 years older than in TOE days, on average they may not be as bad as they were new.

What really puzzles me is the highly emotional language used by some devotees of FSU. Anyone who suggests that they are not, perhaps, the equal of a Leica is branded a 'hater'. Well, yes, there are some things I hate, but quite honestly, I can't summon that depth of emotion for old cameras.

Cheers,

R.

[Dralowid]

Roger,

It may even be possible that they were sold by the square yard but let's not go there.

I was going to start the well worn hypothesis about cameras being an easy means to acquire Western currency but then thought of Zeiss and Leitz in the inter war period.

Being moderate, Russian cameras can be fun to use....I'll stop right now!

Michael

[camperbc]

I have purchased two FSU cameras online in the past six months or so; a Zorki-4 and FED 2, and they arrived in truly mint condition, both cosmetically and mechanically. There is not a single flaw to be found on either one of these cameras; they are perfect.

I recently ran some film though them, with outstanding results. Some of you will recall my posting sample shots, taken with these two cameras.

So contrary to popular belief, there are indeed some pristine FSU cameras still kicking around!

Glen

[fanshaw]

Originally Posted by Dralowid

Regarding FSU cameras, they had a bad reputation in the UK when new, even the distributors (Technical and Optical Equipment in Holborn???) knew it and were happy to take them back for repair at the drop of a hat. Some have said that they did a 'pre sales service' but this legend is not substantiated. They were, however, cheap as chips.


Michael

Yes, T&OE honoured the guarantee supplied with every camera. Is this different in the case of non-Soviet manufacturers? The cameras had a 'bad' reputation for their design, weight and limited specifications and the lack of status they conferred on their owners rather than for poor reliability.
T&OE stated that every camera was checked at their UK workshop before sale. Certainly they were re-packaged and given new quality control documents and re-written instruction manuals, so I see no reason to doubt this.

[Aapo]

Originally Posted by Roger Hicks

What really puzzles me is the highly emotional language used by some devotees of FSU. Anyone who suggests that they are not, perhaps, the equal of a Leica is branded a 'hater'. Well, yes, there are some things I hate, but quite honestly, I can't summon that depth of emotion for old cameras.

Cheers,

R.

More like a common problem among photography community. I don't really follow RFF Leica threads here but elsewhere I have witnessed bitter Leica discussions lately due to their Monochrome release. And sure we have these everlasting film vs digital "discussions" filled with emotions and reason nowhere to find.

[Dralowid]

This year I bought a Skoda...I would never have done that in the '70s....

[rxmd]

Originally Posted by Roger Hicks

What really puzzles me is the highly emotional language used by some devotees of FSU. Anyone who suggests that they are not, perhaps, the equal of a Leica is branded a 'hater'. Well, yes, there are some things I hate, but quite honestly, I can't summon that depth of emotion for old cameras.

I don't think the FSU section holds any kind of monopoly on that.
When people are emotionally invested in something, they use emotional language, here and elsewhere.

Just look at APUG where people use highly emotional language about everything. Or look at what is currently happening in several places with the M8 warranty debate.

[reagan]

What really puzzles me is the highly emotional language used by some devotees of FSU. Anyone who suggests that they are not, perhaps, the equal of a Leica is branded a 'hater'.

Emotions were bound to emerge once the delusional Leica crowd was faced with the reality that their cheesy precious Barnacks were indeed nothing more than expensive copies of those wonderful little FSUs.