Hi Tom, this is a very exciting video, as usual ! These Kiev cameras are really beautiful, and in the actual context I really want to buy one in Ukraine, to support one of our Ukrainian friends. Live long and prosper too, and have a good day.
I still hope the war will end soon and that the camera business in Ukraine can start again. The most interesting one (for me) would be the Kiev 5, of course!
@@tomscamerasпроизводство фото и киноаппаратуры на Украине невозможно при существующем режиме. Вся индустрия на Украине рухнула одновременно с СССР. Всё что было создано в советской Украине уничтожалась в течении последних 30 лет. В настоящее время нет завода ФЭД, нет производства на "Арсенал", нет объединения "Свема", производившего фото, кино, и магнитофонные плёнки. Современная Украина, как и Россия, это мрак, воровство, присвоение, вандализм. Чего то созидательного от этих обществ не ожидается.
Absolutely love the Kiev 4 and your recent vids prompted me to pull mine out once more. I had several lenses with a Kiev 4M (late 80s vintage) which was excellent and even working selenium. I let that one go, along with all glass except I kept the incredible Helios-103 (much prefer to the Jupiter) and kept my older early 1970s Kiev 4A (without meter) in black. Not quite as smooth operation, but nearly so. I keep it for the history, the beauty and occasional shooting of that glorious Helios. Thanks for this video. :) I'll be shooting mine this week.
Hey, many thanks for your feedback! I much prefer the meterless ones because IMO they look so much cleaner. But my Kiev 4 is a gift from a friend, so I can't complain! I do have a soft spot for the Kiev 4AM even though it maybe looks "cheaper" then the older ones. But the black dial, crank rewind and half-black Helios lens give it a distinct look! Wish you a lot of fun shooting your Kiev and many thanks for the tip with the Helios lens, maybe I should really find a 4AM for myself, too!
@@tomscameras That rewind crank seems nice until you reach 1/2 thru a roll. I'ts small and pokey! LOL I much prefer the older knob even if it takes a touch longer. And very much agree about the clean looks of the meterless ones. My remaining half-black Helios-103 really does look stunning on the older blacked out Kiev I kept - like they were meant for one another, even if not quite period correct. :D Cheers mate.
The zeiss version costs over $1k, now a day. I think I should hunt for the Kiev version. Very informative video of the old film camera history🙏. We can’t turn back the time, but we can experience the good old days through the handling of these classic old cameras.😊
Yes it is always nice to experience the old cameras in real life! However the Zeiss Contax II is not that ultimately expensive. They don’t pick up in prices like Leica cameras. Also the older Leica screw mount bodies are still affordable. Yes sometimes you do see very expensive offerings on eBay etc. but often they just won’t sell for these prices. Of course, Kiev bodies are still cheaper. And all these, no matter of Zeiss or Kiev, often need some TLC to bring it back to life …
I always felt the Contax II and III without a meter was the quintessence of 35mm, at least in form. It's interested that most of the precision manufacture in the USSR was in Ukraine. (Clever people). I am sure Zeiss made the right decision, but it is interesting to imagine another scenario where Zeiss goes all in competing with the M3. For myself, just putting the Contax on the mantle in a position of central importance with periodic worship will have to do. Great video.
Yes, Zeiss (West Germany) made the right decision in the 1950s to go for SLR cameras, even though they did it all wrong in the end. I am a great fan of the more modern rangefinders that were made towards the end of the 1950s, such as Nikon SP or Canon VI or Canon 7.
@@tomscameras Yes, the Nikon SP or S series, the Canon V thru VII were great cameras for the serious photographer. I had a Canon Vt Deluxe in black enamel and it sported a 50/1.2. It was a marvel to behold with trigger advance and variable focal length finder. It was also a tank and I didn't want to beat it up. It was a bag troll to be truthful. It seldom came out in the light. Cheers!
Very interesting video. I have been strangely obsessed with Soviet and East German cameras for years. I have had a lot of fun with Kiev cameras in spite of having some problems over the years. Here in the US, you will have a lot of conversations when using one in a public place. A lot of interest. Contrary to popular online lore, for me the later examples are just as likely to work well as the older models. They just don’t feel so nice in use.
I can imagine that a camera with kyrillic letters on it will always start a conversation in the US :) As for the quality: I once had a Kiev 4AM in the early 1990s. It worked, but the rangefinder was horribly misaligned, and back then the camera wasn't old at all, so I assumed it was out of alignment already when leaving the factory. That sort of problem would have never happened with an original Contax II! But I totally agree with you: The older cameras today are so old that they all need CLA's, but the newest ones maybe more likely still work as-is ... so overall it doesn't matter that much which one you're buying. BTW I just added my Contax II review video a few minutes ago to this channel! ;)
@@tomscameras What surprised me is how many people know exactly what it is and even a little bit about the background of Soviet copies of German cameras.
Great video, Tom . Just watched a second time, I have recently bought a Kiev 4, in a black Contax body serial number 272 . Question, what do you know about Kiev 4's in Contax bodies. It is estimated , mine is about 1974-75 . I have also purchased a second body, in Contax body (black) as a backup (no serial number) , in the mail coming from Ukraine. Thanks, Ken B
I don't know anything specific about that topic. However, there are several instances where Contax cameras broke down and the internals have been simply swapped with the Kiev assembly. Remember that Kiev's were dirt cheap and extremely plentiful especially 20-30 years ago, just after Glasnost and Perestroika. By the way all factory Contax II and III cameras have chrome bodies. If there's a black one, it's been repainted later in its life. The only Contax that came with black paint from the factory was the very early Contax I model from 1932-36, but those are pretty rare today and also have a completely different body design.
@@tomscameras Thanks for the info. I did recently have this camera CLA'd. It's in pretty good shape . Have shot 13 rolls film and not an issue. Again thank you Tom.
Nice vid, very informative, thanks for the upload. I always thought the whole toolings came from Jena (Saalfeld) as part of reparations, two sets afaik, together with drawings that had to be done from scratch as the original plans were destroyed (which explains internal differences). Had a Kiev II from 1951 once, very good shooter and high quality.
Thanks for your comment and information! Yes the tools were incomplete and some had to be produced again which was also (at least partially) handled by the German staff that was allocated to the Kiev project. A side note on the lost technical drawings: there was a very interesting SLR prototype called the Zeiss-Ikon Syntax. But both prototypes as well as all documentation were destroyed. This is the reason why Zeiss Jena started all over again with a completely new and also completely different design for their Contax SLR after the war. And in West Germany they also had to start all over again but went for a new rangefinder design again, the Contax IIa …
I have a 1983 [?] 4M with a Helios 103 lens. Seems reliable, so far. Lovely results from the lens, however I prefer the handling of the Leica M3 and IIIf.
Начинал фотографировать с конца 1980-хх годов на Киев-4 ( без башни экспонометра, с синхроконтактом для вспышки под видоискателем) из ранних годов выпуска, мой был 1959г.в.. Этот аппарат когда-то мой покойный отец покупал на барахолке в городе Киев с рук, аппарат он говорил был явно ворованный, он его покупал за 10 рублей советских, новый купить себе не мог позволить, так как был студентом. Я начинал им фотографировать, когда у него был поломанный дальномер, он наводился на резкость только до 2-х метров, а дальше я пользовался по шкале глубины резкости с объективом Юпитер-8, выгравированным на ободе байонета. Самый удивительный фотоаппарат для меня Contax II /Kiev-2 с сенсационной линейкой предлагаемых объективов как для начала 1930-хх годов, безусловно Бертелле, Рудольф с их оптическими схемами Sonnar, Biogon, Planar , прогрессивные наработки стеклянного производства Шот позволили сотворить легенду по праву. Фотоаппараты Киев-2,4 для фотографирования считаются оптимальным с годов производства на заводе Арсенал с начала 1950-хх, когда произошла полная отладка производственной линии и обучение персонала немецкими специалистами, заканчивая ориентировочно до 1969-1970 года. Дальше пошел вал по плану. Хромирование у Киевов лучше, встречал истертые возле фокусироыочного колесика только Contax и Киев ранние, когда ещё детали все были вывезены из Германии с заготовками оптического стекла в СССР. Обьективы предпочтительно тоже ранних годов выпуска, в 1954 году в Красногорске пересчитали уже формулу оптического стекла, и не в худшую сторону, хотя качество для дальномерных Киевов всех объективов Юпитер-3 (Sonnar 50/1.5), Юпитер-8 (Sonnar 50/2.0), Юпитер-9 (Sonnar 85/2.0), Юпитер-11 (Sonnar 135/4.0), Юпитер-12 (Biogon 35/2.8), Гелиос-103 (Planar оптическая схема Рудольфа почему-то не выпускалась для Contax-II в Германии, советские оптики использовали проект 6 линз в 4 группах, считается самым резким объективом для дальномерных Киевов) по мнению многих опытных фотографов СССР было очень стабильным видимо из-за байонетного крепления. Разницу под микроскопом вероятно надо искать, если из ранних годов выпуска объектив, есть вероятность, что на немецком стекле произведены. Когда цифровая фотография начала стремительно развиваться, задался целью собрать полный комплект себе Киев с объективами из ранних годов выпуска , видоискателями, родными блендами для Юпитеров (они лучше всего по моему опыту защищают от лишних переотражений) начиная с 2006 года, но в отличном состоянии их уже найти и купить не было возможности, пришлось договориться с одним из скупщиков в Москве, он мне выбрал из своей коллекции Киев-2 (1951г.) внешне аппарат был пользованным активно, черная краска стерта немного сзади аппарата, хром, кожа, видоискатель все отлично, мастер в Украине был, полностью почистили, смазали, новую тесьму на затворе установили, купил я ещё себе у скупщика Юпитер-8 (1951г. КМЗ), Юпитер-9 (1951г. КМЗ ), Юпитер-12 (1962г.в КМЗ), видоискатель металический 35мм. видоискатель турельного типа именно для Киева (лапка крепежа слева для Contax/Киев, для Зоркий/Фэд справа ). Остальные объективы у меня уже были куплены к 2011 году, за 5 лет удалось купить в идеальном состоянии Юпитер-3 (1956г. КМЗ), Юпитер-11 (1958г. Казанский завод), новый Юпитер-12 (1986г. в черном цвете ЛЗОС) и не поверите, абсолютно новый Киев-4 (1964г. с работающим экспонометром), видимо кому-то в СССР сделали подарок, было отснята 1 или 2 пленки, и фоторафирование было заброшено навсегда, но могу сказать, что крутится вертится все в аппарате 1964 года лучше, чем после профессиональной профилактики в аппарате 1951 года. Все таки с завода они выпускались в 1960-хх годах очень качественно. Самое главное, если покупать, то смотреть, чтобы аппарат никто не вскрывал из неопытных мастеров, потом делать профилактику, ну и по объективам точно также. СОВЕТ: в перерывах между длительными съемками аппаратом, или при хранении, выдержку установите на значение 1/125с., так гласит инструкция и совет мастеров опытных, так как Contax /Kiev имеют два замедлителя для длинных выдержек, первый замедлитель срабатывает для выдержек 1/50 и 1/25, другой замедлитель срабатывает от 1/10 и дальше, вплоть до режима В. Тесемки для затвора у Contax были более нежные шелковые, в Kiev получше говорят мастера были, сам не знаю этого лично, по качеству исполнения затвор надежный,но игнорировать рекомендацией не следует, прослужит точно дольше. Экспонометр если рабочий, после замера окошко закрывать необходимо, на солнце впрямую не наводить никогда, и потом диск выдержек повернуть до упора по часовой стрелке, это необходимо делать каждый раз после замера. Купив в 2007 новую Bessa R3M с тремя объективами Фойхтлендер, имея сейчас Fujifilm XH-1, система Contax / Kiev конечно невероятна по прежнему, насколько были талантливы сотрудники Zeiss, и какая проведена работа над ошибками после неудачной модели Contax-I, оптика тоже великолепна, в новом дизайне в линейке ZM Zeiss переиздали классический Sonnar 50/1.5 и Biogon 35/2.8, но цены на новые объективы уже улетят скоро в космос, в принципе для байонета Leica M всегда дорого объективы стоили.
Wow! A long comment, thanks for sharing all your experience with the Kiev cameras and lenses! I had to run it through Google translate or deepl.com to understand everything, though :)
@@tomscameras Я смотрю ваши видео на канале через китайскую ТВ приставку, у меня в версии приложения RUclips поддерживается автоперевод с английского на русский язык субтитрами, поэтому понятно, о чем Вы рассказываете зрителям.
@@olegzironka5374 I am happy that this works for you so well! I always edit the English subtitles very carefully in all my videos. So it helps everyone who can't play the sound, and it also is the best possible text for translations.
My 1959 Kiev 4A and Contax II are almost identical when it comes down to mechanical precision. Something that does not apply when i compare my Leica III with a 1955 Zorki. I mean Zorki is fine, but not a Leica. Thanks for the upload.
Thanks for sharing your experience. It does make sense - the Zorki was a copy of the Leica, tooling and production were all set up in the USSR without any help from Leica. Whereas the Kiev tooling is the exact Contax tooling, and they had some German staff working there in the early years as well. So maybe it's no wonder that your 1950's Kiev is every bit as good as a Contax!
The Fed1 production started yeas before the war… 1934. Sure a copy of Leica II but almost identical. It was a production under Leica licence… Not sure if your statements are completely true…
The FED was launched in 1934, yes! But there was no licence from Leica. At the time, the economical ties between central Europe and the USSR weren't strong, and the USSR cameras were basically produced for their own market. So from a point of view of the Soviet government, no licences were needed anyway, because no export was intended. Leica was not involved in getting FED production started. Of course, there were many other companies all over the world that eventually produced "Leica copies", some very close to the original (as the first FED model) and some were altered or modified more. After WW II, the situation had changed: All German patents were made freely available to the world as part of war reparations. That's when the Kiev came into existence, which was not a "copy" like the FED, cause it was made on the original Zeiss Contax tooling, early models were made with original Zeiss parts from Germany, and some of the Zeiss workforce also worked for a couple of years in Kiev to aid with starting up the production. I think that is a big difference regarding the origins and history of these cameras. Not that it means that FED cameras are bad in any way. Many Leica copies are very interesting cameras. I also have a later model FED camera here.
Hi Tom, this is a very exciting video, as usual ! These Kiev cameras are really beautiful, and in the actual context I really want to buy one in Ukraine, to support one of our Ukrainian friends. Live long and prosper too, and have a good day.
I still hope the war will end soon and that the camera business in Ukraine can start again. The most interesting one (for me) would be the Kiev 5, of course!
@@tomscamerasпроизводство фото и киноаппаратуры на Украине невозможно при существующем режиме. Вся индустрия на Украине рухнула одновременно с СССР. Всё что было создано в советской Украине уничтожалась в течении последних 30 лет.
В настоящее время нет завода ФЭД, нет производства на "Арсенал", нет объединения "Свема", производившего фото, кино, и магнитофонные плёнки. Современная Украина, как и Россия, это мрак, воровство, присвоение, вандализм. Чего то созидательного от этих обществ не ожидается.
Absolutely love the Kiev 4 and your recent vids prompted me to pull mine out once more. I had several lenses with a Kiev 4M (late 80s vintage) which was excellent and even working selenium. I let that one go, along with all glass except I kept the incredible Helios-103 (much prefer to the Jupiter) and kept my older early 1970s Kiev 4A (without meter) in black. Not quite as smooth operation, but nearly so. I keep it for the history, the beauty and occasional shooting of that glorious Helios. Thanks for this video. :) I'll be shooting mine this week.
Hey, many thanks for your feedback! I much prefer the meterless ones because IMO they look so much cleaner. But my Kiev 4 is a gift from a friend, so I can't complain!
I do have a soft spot for the Kiev 4AM even though it maybe looks "cheaper" then the older ones. But the black dial, crank rewind and half-black Helios lens give it a distinct look! Wish you a lot of fun shooting your Kiev and many thanks for the tip with the Helios lens, maybe I should really find a 4AM for myself, too!
@@tomscameras That rewind crank seems nice until you reach 1/2 thru a roll. I'ts small and pokey! LOL I much prefer the older knob even if it takes a touch longer. And very much agree about the clean looks of the meterless ones. My remaining half-black Helios-103 really does look stunning on the older blacked out Kiev I kept - like they were meant for one another, even if not quite period correct. :D Cheers mate.
Thoroughly enjoyable and interesting Thomas! Beautiful camera. Thanks!
Thanks for your feedback! 🙏
Fabulous video Tom! Really looking forward to the next installment!! So much history.
Many thanks Kim!
The zeiss version costs over $1k, now a day. I think I should hunt for the Kiev version. Very informative video of the old film camera history🙏. We can’t turn back the time, but we can experience the good old days through the handling of these classic old cameras.😊
Yes it is always nice to experience the old cameras in real life! However the Zeiss Contax II is not that ultimately expensive. They don’t pick up in prices like Leica cameras. Also the older Leica screw mount bodies are still affordable. Yes sometimes you do see very expensive offerings on eBay etc. but often they just won’t sell for these prices.
Of course, Kiev bodies are still cheaper. And all these, no matter of Zeiss or Kiev, often need some TLC to bring it back to life …
Thank you very much! Very informative.
Thanks Robert!
I always felt the Contax II and III without a meter was the quintessence of 35mm, at least in form. It's interested that most of the precision manufacture in the USSR was in Ukraine. (Clever people). I am sure Zeiss made the right decision, but it is interesting to imagine another scenario where Zeiss goes all in competing with the M3. For myself, just putting the Contax on the mantle in a position of central importance with periodic worship will have to do. Great video.
Yes, Zeiss (West Germany) made the right decision in the 1950s to go for SLR cameras, even though they did it all wrong in the end. I am a great fan of the more modern rangefinders that were made towards the end of the 1950s, such as Nikon SP or Canon VI or Canon 7.
@@tomscameras Yes, the Nikon SP or S series, the Canon V thru VII were great cameras for the serious photographer. I had a Canon Vt Deluxe in black enamel and it sported a 50/1.2. It was a marvel to behold with trigger advance and variable focal length finder. It was also a tank and I didn't want to beat it up. It was a bag troll to be truthful. It seldom came out in the light. Cheers!
Very interesting video. I have been strangely obsessed with Soviet and East German cameras for years. I have had a lot of fun with Kiev cameras in spite of having some problems over the years. Here in the US, you will have a lot of conversations when using one in a public place. A lot of interest. Contrary to popular online lore, for me the later examples are just as likely to work well as the older models. They just don’t feel so nice in use.
I can imagine that a camera with kyrillic letters on it will always start a conversation in the US :)
As for the quality: I once had a Kiev 4AM in the early 1990s. It worked, but the rangefinder was horribly misaligned, and back then the camera wasn't old at all, so I assumed it was out of alignment already when leaving the factory. That sort of problem would have never happened with an original Contax II!
But I totally agree with you: The older cameras today are so old that they all need CLA's, but the newest ones maybe more likely still work as-is ... so overall it doesn't matter that much which one you're buying.
BTW I just added my Contax II review video a few minutes ago to this channel! ;)
@@tomscameras What surprised me is how many people know exactly what it is and even a little bit about the background of Soviet copies of German cameras.
@@jonlouis2582 That's great to hear! People often know much more than we think :)
Great video, Tom . Just watched a second time, I have recently bought a Kiev 4, in a black Contax body serial number 272 . Question, what do you know about Kiev 4's in Contax bodies. It is estimated , mine is about 1974-75 . I have also purchased a second body, in Contax body (black) as a backup (no serial number) , in the mail coming from Ukraine. Thanks, Ken B
I don't know anything specific about that topic. However, there are several instances where Contax cameras broke down and the internals have been simply swapped with the Kiev assembly. Remember that Kiev's were dirt cheap and extremely plentiful especially 20-30 years ago, just after Glasnost and Perestroika.
By the way all factory Contax II and III cameras have chrome bodies. If there's a black one, it's been repainted later in its life. The only Contax that came with black paint from the factory was the very early Contax I model from 1932-36, but those are pretty rare today and also have a completely different body design.
@@tomscameras Thanks for the info. I did recently have this camera CLA'd. It's in pretty good shape . Have shot 13 rolls film and not an issue. Again thank you Tom.
Nice vid, very informative, thanks for the upload. I always thought the whole toolings came from Jena (Saalfeld) as part of reparations, two sets afaik, together with drawings that had to be done from scratch as the original plans were destroyed (which explains internal differences). Had a Kiev II from 1951 once, very good shooter and high quality.
Thanks for your comment and information! Yes the tools were incomplete and some had to be produced again which was also (at least partially) handled by the German staff that was allocated to the Kiev project.
A side note on the lost technical drawings: there was a very interesting SLR prototype called the Zeiss-Ikon Syntax. But both prototypes as well as all documentation were destroyed. This is the reason why Zeiss Jena started all over again with a completely new and also completely different design for their Contax SLR after the war. And in West Germany they also had to start all over again but went for a new rangefinder design again, the Contax IIa …
I have a 1983 [?] 4M with a Helios 103 lens. Seems reliable, so far. Lovely results from the lens, however I prefer the handling of the Leica M3 and IIIf.
Exactly, even though the Contax and Kiev was far ahead of its time in 1936, the Leica M is just a different beast and much nicer to actually use!
Начинал фотографировать с конца 1980-хх годов на Киев-4 ( без башни экспонометра, с синхроконтактом для вспышки под видоискателем) из ранних годов выпуска, мой был 1959г.в.. Этот аппарат когда-то мой покойный отец покупал на барахолке в городе Киев с рук, аппарат он говорил был явно ворованный, он его покупал за 10 рублей советских, новый купить себе не мог позволить, так как был студентом. Я начинал им фотографировать, когда у него был поломанный дальномер, он наводился на резкость только до 2-х метров, а дальше я пользовался по шкале глубины резкости с объективом Юпитер-8, выгравированным на ободе байонета. Самый удивительный фотоаппарат для меня Contax II /Kiev-2 с сенсационной линейкой предлагаемых объективов как для начала 1930-хх годов, безусловно Бертелле, Рудольф с их оптическими схемами Sonnar, Biogon, Planar , прогрессивные наработки стеклянного производства Шот позволили сотворить легенду по праву. Фотоаппараты Киев-2,4 для фотографирования считаются оптимальным с годов производства на заводе Арсенал с начала 1950-хх, когда произошла полная отладка производственной линии и обучение персонала немецкими специалистами, заканчивая ориентировочно до 1969-1970 года. Дальше пошел вал по плану. Хромирование у Киевов лучше, встречал истертые возле фокусироыочного колесика только Contax и Киев ранние, когда ещё детали все были вывезены из Германии с заготовками оптического стекла в СССР. Обьективы предпочтительно тоже ранних годов выпуска, в 1954 году в Красногорске пересчитали уже формулу оптического стекла, и не в худшую сторону, хотя качество для дальномерных Киевов всех объективов Юпитер-3 (Sonnar 50/1.5), Юпитер-8 (Sonnar 50/2.0), Юпитер-9 (Sonnar 85/2.0), Юпитер-11 (Sonnar 135/4.0), Юпитер-12 (Biogon 35/2.8), Гелиос-103 (Planar оптическая схема Рудольфа почему-то не выпускалась для Contax-II в Германии, советские оптики использовали проект 6 линз в 4 группах, считается самым резким объективом для дальномерных Киевов) по мнению многих опытных фотографов СССР было очень стабильным видимо из-за байонетного крепления. Разницу под микроскопом вероятно надо искать, если из ранних годов выпуска объектив, есть вероятность, что на немецком стекле произведены. Когда цифровая фотография начала стремительно развиваться, задался целью собрать полный комплект себе Киев с объективами из ранних годов выпуска , видоискателями, родными блендами для Юпитеров (они лучше всего по моему опыту защищают от лишних переотражений) начиная с 2006 года, но в отличном состоянии их уже найти и купить не было возможности, пришлось договориться с одним из скупщиков в Москве, он мне выбрал из своей коллекции Киев-2 (1951г.) внешне аппарат был пользованным активно, черная краска стерта немного сзади аппарата, хром, кожа, видоискатель все отлично, мастер в Украине был, полностью почистили, смазали, новую тесьму на затворе установили, купил я ещё себе у скупщика Юпитер-8 (1951г. КМЗ), Юпитер-9 (1951г. КМЗ ), Юпитер-12 (1962г.в КМЗ), видоискатель металический 35мм. видоискатель турельного типа именно для Киева (лапка крепежа слева для Contax/Киев, для Зоркий/Фэд справа ). Остальные объективы у меня уже были куплены к 2011 году, за 5 лет удалось купить в идеальном состоянии Юпитер-3 (1956г. КМЗ), Юпитер-11 (1958г. Казанский завод), новый Юпитер-12 (1986г. в черном цвете ЛЗОС) и не поверите, абсолютно новый Киев-4 (1964г. с работающим экспонометром), видимо кому-то в СССР сделали подарок, было отснята 1 или 2 пленки, и фоторафирование было заброшено навсегда, но могу сказать, что крутится вертится все в аппарате 1964 года лучше, чем после профессиональной профилактики в аппарате 1951 года. Все таки с завода они выпускались в 1960-хх годах очень качественно. Самое главное, если покупать, то смотреть, чтобы аппарат никто не вскрывал из неопытных мастеров, потом делать профилактику, ну и по объективам точно также. СОВЕТ: в перерывах между длительными съемками аппаратом, или при хранении, выдержку установите на значение 1/125с., так гласит инструкция и совет мастеров опытных, так как Contax /Kiev имеют два замедлителя для длинных выдержек, первый замедлитель срабатывает для выдержек 1/50 и 1/25, другой замедлитель срабатывает от 1/10 и дальше, вплоть до режима В. Тесемки для затвора у Contax были более нежные шелковые, в Kiev получше говорят мастера были, сам не знаю этого лично, по качеству исполнения затвор надежный,но игнорировать рекомендацией не следует, прослужит точно дольше. Экспонометр если рабочий, после замера окошко закрывать необходимо, на солнце впрямую не наводить никогда, и потом диск выдержек повернуть до упора по часовой стрелке, это необходимо делать каждый раз после замера.
Купив в 2007 новую Bessa R3M с тремя объективами Фойхтлендер, имея сейчас Fujifilm XH-1, система Contax / Kiev конечно невероятна по прежнему, насколько были талантливы сотрудники Zeiss, и какая проведена работа над ошибками после неудачной модели Contax-I, оптика тоже великолепна, в новом дизайне в линейке ZM Zeiss переиздали классический Sonnar 50/1.5 и Biogon 35/2.8, но цены на новые объективы уже улетят скоро в космос, в принципе для байонета Leica M всегда дорого объективы стоили.
Wow! A long comment, thanks for sharing all your experience with the Kiev cameras and lenses!
I had to run it through Google translate or deepl.com to understand everything, though :)
@@tomscameras Я смотрю ваши видео на канале через китайскую ТВ приставку, у меня в версии приложения RUclips поддерживается автоперевод с английского на русский язык субтитрами, поэтому понятно, о чем Вы рассказываете зрителям.
@@olegzironka5374 I am happy that this works for you so well! I always edit the English subtitles very carefully in all my videos. So it helps everyone who can't play the sound, and it also is the best possible text for translations.
My 1959 Kiev 4A and Contax II are almost identical when it comes down to mechanical precision.
Something that does not apply when i compare my Leica III with a 1955 Zorki. I mean Zorki is fine, but not a Leica.
Thanks for the upload.
Thanks for sharing your experience. It does make sense - the Zorki was a copy of the Leica, tooling and production were all set up in the USSR without any help from Leica. Whereas the Kiev tooling is the exact Contax tooling, and they had some German staff working there in the early years as well. So maybe it's no wonder that your 1950's Kiev is every bit as good as a Contax!
The Fed1 production started yeas before the war… 1934. Sure a copy of Leica II but almost identical. It was a production under Leica licence… Not sure if your statements are completely true…
The FED was launched in 1934, yes! But there was no licence from Leica. At the time, the economical ties between central Europe and the USSR weren't strong, and the USSR cameras were basically produced for their own market. So from a point of view of the Soviet government, no licences were needed anyway, because no export was intended. Leica was not involved in getting FED production started.
Of course, there were many other companies all over the world that eventually produced "Leica copies", some very close to the original (as the first FED model) and some were altered or modified more.
After WW II, the situation had changed: All German patents were made freely available to the world as part of war reparations. That's when the Kiev came into existence, which was not a "copy" like the FED, cause it was made on the original Zeiss Contax tooling, early models were made with original Zeiss parts from Germany, and some of the Zeiss workforce also worked for a couple of years in Kiev to aid with starting up the production.
I think that is a big difference regarding the origins and history of these cameras.
Not that it means that FED cameras are bad in any way. Many Leica copies are very interesting cameras. I also have a later model FED camera here.