Why does this keep happening

[David Hughes]

Hi,

I've been buying Leicas, FED's, Contaxes and Kievs from the 70's onwards: here are some figures:

German ones: 18 bought; 7 needed repairs and 1 or 2 written off. (I'd be more exact if I could remember precisely. And some were very young when the repairs were needed but not as young as the Digilux 2 with the funny CCD: not that I've counted the digital ones.) Aged from 1926 to mid 90's.

FSU's: 19 bought; 4 repaired. Aged from 1950 to '85.

Looking at my files I see I got a fair price for one when traded in in 1972...

As for QC, how can we judge that all these years later? Saying TOE checked them all doesn't mean a thing as 99.9% could have passed.

And Leica check all their cameras; does that mean their QC is the same?

Also, look at the age of some posters and you wonder how they could possibly have commented on QC which happened before they were born.

Regards, David

[wolves3012]

Originally Posted by David Hughes

Also, look at the age of some posters and you wonder how they could possibly have commented on QC which happened before they were born.

Regards, David

I'll comment, since I'm old enough to remember the reputation they had when new (in the UK, at least). The reputation was that they were old-hat, yesterday's technology and lacking modern features but cheap. Pretty much accurate there! I don't recall them having a particularly bad reputation for quality. The owner of an FSU was simply considered inferior because he was a cheapskate or of lower class.

[wolves3012]

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.

Roger,

I think few FSU devotees would claim that they are the equal of a Leica. Even the earlier and best-made examples are not as finely engineered or finished. However, some come much closer than the price differential should justify.

There is more than enough Leica snobbery against any other brand, never mind FSUs. Leica owners seem to be exceptionally poor at realising that other folk either can't afford or don't wish to justify the stratospheric price. They are also particularly defensive of their choice, as are most people who have bought into an expensive brand. As an anecdote of mine, I remember quite clearly the annoyance of the driver of a Porsche Carrera (spelling?) who told me a track through a snow-filled car park was impassable. He was treated to the sight of a humble 2CV negotiating said "impasse" with ease; the route his Porsche had slid all over and got nowhere.

Nevertheless, there does seem to be a surfeit of posts of the "all FSUs are rubbish" variety. Considering that we users of this sub-section clearly do like FSUs and try to help and support oneanother, it's not particularly welcome - unsurprisingly.

We all know that QC wasn't the hottest, we all know that they are based on outdated technology and so on. We don't need to be told any of this. We enjoy them because they (can) produce good results at a bargain-basement price. We enjoy them for the technical challenge. We enjoy them because we can tinker, safe in the knowledge that mistakes won't cost the earth or destroy historic pieces. No doubt there are other reasons too. I'll continue to enjoy mine, warts and all and let others fret over the "inferiority" of my cameras.

[Dez]

FSU cameras were relatively unknown in North America. Jason Schneider in his interesting column on collectible cameras in Modern Photography, would occasionally mention one- I can recall a description of a FED 2, but these were exotic things that nobody saw. An article in the late 70's described Kievs as Contax clones, but the ones pictured were 4/4A's which had just made an appearance at a NYC dealer. No mention of the history of these cameras or any discussion of the far better versions of the 50's. They were not generally available here before the 90's, when the floodgates opened. So the perception of poor quality was generated here fairly recently, based on rough cosmetics, heavy controls, and generally second rate fit and finish rather than real experience with their reliability in the field.

Personally, I have had very good luck buying from Russian and Ukrainian vendors on ebay. I think the only cameras I have abandoned are ones that I broke by doing something stupid (look for LH threads on some newer Zorkis), or bought with the idea of stripping them for parts.

I have a few rules for buying on ebay:
- don't buy from any vendor selling obvious fakes as the real thing
- assume that if the vendor states that something is untested, it is indeed tested and doesn't work properly
- only assume that something works properly if the vendor explicitly states that it works in the listing, or will give specific answers to questions asked.
- read the feedbacks
- avoid vendors who are obviously overcharging on shipping, or who refuse to combine shipping

I am reasonably handy with a screwdriver, so I tend to look for easily fixed things like screwmount Leicas with sticky slow speeds or dirty viewfinders. If I assume that I will have to pull off the top and clean things up underneath, there are all sorts of bargains to be found.

I think FSU cameras are sort of like old British motorcycles, which I also have. Very good value, and lots of fun, but be prepared to do a bit of wrenching. The alternative of having to pay a repair professional for any needed service can soon cost more than the camera is worth.

Cheers,
Dez

[pakeha]

[quote=wolves3012;1954056]Roger,


Nevertheless, there does seem to be a surfeit of posts of the "all FSUs are rubbish" variety. Considering that we users of this sub-section clearly do like FSUs and try to help and support oneanother, it's not particularly welcome - unsurprisingly.


yes, and i will add that it is very rare for someone to jump on the Leica repair threads that probably equal the FSU repair threads in number.

[pakeha]

Originally Posted by Dez

FSU cameras were relatively unknown in North America. Jason Schneider in his interesting column on collectible cameras in Modern Photography, would occasionally mention one- I can recall a description of a FED 2, but these were exotic things that nobody saw. An article in the late 70's described Kievs as Contax clones, but the ones pictured were 4/4A's which had just made an appearance at a NYC dealer. No mention of the history of these cameras or any discussion of the far better versions of the 50's. They were not generally available here before the 90's, when the floodgates opened. So the perception of poor quality was generated here fairly recently, based on rough cosmetics, heavy controls, and generally second rate fit and finish rather than real experience with their reliability in the field.

Personally, I have had very good luck buying from Russian and Ukrainian vendors on ebay. I think the only cameras I have abandoned are ones that I broke by doing something stupid (look for LH threads on some newer Zorkis), or bought with the idea of stripping them for parts.

I have a few rules for buying on ebay:
- don't buy from any vendor selling obvious fakes as the real thing
- assume that if the vendor states that something is untested, it is indeed tested and doesn't work properly
- only assume that something works properly if the vendor explicitly states that it works in the listing, or will give specific answers to questions asked.
- read the feedbacks
- avoid vendors who are obviously overcharging on shipping, or who refuse to combine shipping

I am reasonably handy with a screwdriver, so I tend to look for easily fixed things like screwmount Leicas with sticky slow speeds or dirty viewfinders. If I assume that I will have to pull off the top and clean things up underneath, there are all sorts of bargains to be found.

I think FSU cameras are sort of like old British motorcycles, which I also have. Very good value, and lots of fun, but be prepared to do a bit of wrenching. The alternative of having to pay a repair professional for any needed service can soon cost more than the camera is worth.

Cheers,
Dez

very good analogy..gee would`nt a british car sub forum be fun: austin allegro anyone

[je2a3]

Originally Posted by pakeha

very good analogy..gee would`nt a british car sub forum be fun: austin allegro anyone

+ 1, but I vote for a classic mini, better parts availability

[Moto-Uno]

Contrary to the general consensus my Mockba-5s frequently give me pictures
that are totally satisfying.(and yes,I did have to fix a light leak in each ;but, they're older than many members here!)
Regards,Peter

[David Hughes]

Hi,

" ... I remember quite clearly the annoyance of the driver of a Porsche Carrera (spelling?) who told me a track through a snow-filled car park was impassable. He was treated to the sight of a humble 2CV negotiating said "impasse" with ease; the route his Porsche had slid all over and got nowhere... "

2CV's were/are great in snow (and across ploughed fields). I wish I had one nowadays for the fun of it but the better half worries about being able to steer it after decades of power assisted steering.

Regards, David

[wolves3012]

Originally Posted by David Hughes

2CV's were/are great in snow (and across ploughed fields). I wish I had one nowadays for the fun of it but the better half worries about being able to steer it after decades of power assisted steering.

Regards, David

David,

The steering isn't that bad, it's a lightweight vehicle. Don't get me started, I regret selling mine a few years ago. If only they'd been made with modern rust-protection techniques. Yes, I've driven mine across a ploughed field (the technique is not to go slowly!) and in snow and through floods too deep for most 4WD vehicles.

A unique and unconventional piece of motoring history, the 2CV still holds some world records that are unlikely to be surpassed. 70 years after its design, it's also a far more practical vehicle than most would imagine and a DIY mechanic's dream.

However, all this is rather OT!

[Roger Hicks]

Originally Posted by wolves3012

David,

The steering isn't that bad, it's a lightweight vehicle. Don't get me started, I regret selling mine a few years ago. If only they'd been made with modern rust-protection techniques. Yes, I've driven mine across a ploughed field (the technique is not to go slowly!) and in snow and through floods too deep for most 4WD vehicles.

A unique and unconventional piece of motoring history, the 2CV still holds some world records that are unlikely to be surpassed. 70 years after its design, it's also a far more practical vehicle than most would imagine and a DIY mechanic's dream.

However, all this is rather OT!

The 2CV is without doubt a wonderful and fascinating vehicle, but I'm a bit surprised at the first highlighted bit. After all, the plugs are going to short out in -- what? -- a foot of water. I've driven a Yugo 45 through more than that in New Orleans, with water coming up through the drain-holes in the floor. My Series III Land Rover is supposed to have a maximum safe wading depth of 20 inches but a couple of feet doesn't seem to worry most people.

Second highlight: except (I have been told) for those front inboard drum brakes. Is this true?

I'd buy one but (1) they're now surprisingly expensive here in France and (2) Frances doesn't fancy fencing with the dashboard in order to change gear.

Cheers,

R.

[Sparrow]

Working on the 2CV's brakes, stub-axles or king-pins are not for the faint hearted ... not to mention the hydraulics, roller-bearing swinging arm suspension and general French weirdness

[pvdhaar]

Originally Posted by Dralowid

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

I remember my dad borrowing a 105 for a couple of days between selling the old and arrival of a new car.. Despite that 105 being only about 2 or 3 years old at the time, the bodywork actually squeeked when taking a left turn. Right turns would be OK, left turns were really weird.. You'd think that it would break in half if stressed even a tiny bit more. Of course, the engine was dimensioned in such a way that you couldn't accelerate all too fast, so that was something of a failsafe

[pvdhaar]

Originally Posted by Roger Hicks

...Frances doesn't fancy fencing with the dashboard in order to change gear....

That's what keeps me from getting a Ferrari.. those darned gear flippers behind the steering wheel..

Just kidding of course, but the phrasing was priceless..

[Roger Hicks]

Originally Posted by pvdhaar

That's what keeps me from getting a Ferrari.. those darned gear flippers behind the steering wheel...

Well, the Daimler Fluid Flywheel 'flipper' was easy enough to use...

Cheers,

R.

[Dralowid]

Don't give me your Wilson epicyclic pre-selector gearbox reminiscences...can't be doing with that English rubbish, apart from the Skoda my other car is a DS with gear change operated by hydaulics...which makes messing about with a Contax seem simple.

[wolves3012]

Originally Posted by Roger Hicks

The 2CV is without doubt a wonderful and fascinating vehicle, but I'm a bit surprised at the first highlighted bit. After all, the plugs are going to short out in -- what? -- a foot of water.

No, they sit on top of the cylinders like a BMW boxer and the plug leads seal in much the same way. The first issue in deep water is when the bottom of the fan hits and throws water around. If you did swamp it, there is the trick of putting it in first gear and using the crankhandle to wind it out; of course you'll get your feet wet then. I'd say it probably takes 18" of water to kill it, minimum. Remember, they have high ground clearance anyway - unless heavily loaded! Also, many 4WD are pretend offroaders and I'm not including the "real" ones.

Originally Posted by Roger Hicks

Second highlight: except (I have been told) for those front inboard drum brakes. Is this true?

The inboard drums were dropped long ago (1981 for the 2CV and earlier on Dyanes) for inboard force-cooled discs which are a doddle to change the pads in. The drums are less fun but once setup they stay good for a fair while.

Originally Posted by Roger Hicks

I'd buy one but (1) they're now surprisingly expensive here in France and (2) Frances doesn't fancy fencing with the dashboard in order to change gear.

Cheers,

R.

They're surprisingly expensive here too; rarity value is kicking in as more and more got scrapped due to terminal tinworm. The dashboard gearchange is actually very easy to use and doesn't clutter the floor. Just pretend it's a 5-speed and 1st is missing (that's where reverse lives).

[wolves3012]

Originally Posted by Dralowid

Don't give me your Wilson epicyclic pre-selector gearbox reminiscences...can't be doing with that English rubbish, apart from the Skoda my other car is a DS with gear change operated by hydaulics...which makes messing about with a Contax seem simple.

I envy you the DS but not the cost of buying or running one. Voted the most beautiful car ever and also (recently) voted the most technically advanced car ever. If I could afford it, it'd be my number one pick.

[wolves3012]

Originally Posted by Sparrow

Working on the 2CV's brakes, stub-axles or king-pins are not for the faint hearted ... not to mention the hydraulics, roller-bearing swinging arm suspension and general French weirdness

The only issue I had in 10 years plus of ownership was the rear brake pipes. That's because later cars had rear seat belts and lost the access panel to the t-junction because of the belt-anchorage, making the job a nightmare. The kingpins are straightforward with a drift-set, the roller bearings rarely give trouble and the hydraulics are mainly unconventional in having no flexible hoses and using LHM fluid (which never needs changing). By French weirdness I think you probably mean Citroen. Unconventional is often innovative and that it was. Find me another engine that LJK Setright was unable to criticise and which can shrug off being run for 100 hours non-stop at maximum power and revs.

[Dralowid]

Bought ours many years ago when Summars were cheap.

The running costs are not that severe if you know what's what (and we have the Skoda!) but the prices seem out of step. Do they sell for the prices you see around? I doubt it...a bit like old cameras.

What one man might call a design icon another might call an MOT failure....

[wolves3012]

Oh, and please stop feeding my 2CV interests! The Mods will complain! Back to whether FSUs rock or not...

[Gabriel M.A.]

Originally Posted by 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.

Oooh! Hater! Hater!


But, seriously: it's been 50/50 for me. And I'm not a hater.

[Pentudlian]

Originally Posted by pakeha

very good analogy..gee would`nt a british car sub forum be fun: austin allegro anyone

No: just no!!! I started learning to drive on one of those. I gave up for the next dozen years or so.

I do have a FED2, however................

[Roger Hicks]

Originally Posted by Gabriel M.A.

Oooh! Hater! Hater!


But, seriously: it's been 50/50 for me. And I'm not a hater.

Perhaps the difference is between those of us who bought them new, or as recent second-hand cameras, in the 60s and 70s, and expected them to work as cameras (as even 30- and 40-year-old Leicas did, i.e. cameras from the 1930s) and those who are buying them today as toys.

If you're expecting a usable camera, even a 20% failure rate isn't too good.

Cheers,

R.

[pakeha]

Originally Posted by Roger Hicks

Perhaps the difference is between those of us who bought them new, or as recent second-hand cameras, in the 60s and 70s, and expected them to work as cameras (as even 30- and 40-year-old Leicas did, i.e. cameras from the 1930s) and those who are buying them today as toys.

If you're expecting a usable camera, even a 20% failure rate isn't too good.

Cheers,

R.

Wilfred Thesiger purchased a new Leica in the early 1930.s. It did not work `out of the box'
French cars and FSU cameras - masochists