Tag: FSU

Fed 5 the Ultimate Post-apocalyptic Camera

Camerajunky22 Comments

The Fed 5 is one of the most feature-packed Soviet rangefinders which does not require a battery. It is virtually undestroyable, I bet it is going to stay operational way after mankind extinct and the cockroaches rule the world. Since it has no battery an EMP blast cannot ruin it. A nuclear winter could not make any difference neither as the kit lens (Industar-61L/D) is already rumored to be slightly radioactive.

The fact is that the lens is actually is not more radioactive than a potato (not from Chernobyl). It contains a rare-earth element called Lanthanum which indeed has a radioactive isotope but that is very rare and not used for the glass in this lens. Do these properties make the Fed the Ultimate Post-apocalyptic Camera (UPAC)? Who knows, but I hope nobody will need to prove that I was wrong or right about this.

Anyway, I hope I have managed to catch your attention with this little intro, if you want to read my personal experience with the Fed and/or want to be a bit entertained, click more!

My feelings about my Fed5 are very ambivalent, I simply cannot decide that I actually like it and should shoot more with it or I would better keep it in the dark deep down in the cabinet. It was the very first camera in my vintage camera collection and this fact itself grants the special label in my virtual camera catalog.
So here is the camera which kicked in my collector instinct and triggered the process which leads to this classic camera blog you are reading right now, yet I wrote I have mixed feelings about it. Let’s just say that the beginnings of our relationship were not an easy ride.

Never trust your old man

At least don’t trust his film development skills if he did not touch his film development kit like 20 years ago!

Shortly after I received the camera, I and some of my film enthusiasts friends set up a nice shootout in the neighborhood. They came to visit from another part of the country so we did visit all the nice places we could reach in 1 day. Of course, we burned through a couple of rolls of black and white film through our cameras. We had a great time, great locations, superb light and most of all very high level of excitement about the results.

First shooting with the Fed 5 (Ricoh Gr Digital)

We were so eager to develop our films in the bathroom that we completely trusted my father’s rusty memories and we did not “waste” much time for research. We did almost everything right, we kept the development instructions found on the film boxes, but we placed the films into the tank, not in complete darkness, but we used red darkroom lights.

As a result, all of our precious frames were ruined. Only 2 shoots survived somehow but they were also badly damaged by our careless treatment. Later I have enlarged these photos and despite they are not the top quality, I like them a lot. Eventually, these are the first photos I developed myself.

This first-time “failure” was almost inevitable for a bunch of reckless fools who we were. It taught me to be more patient when it comes to film photography and I think it is somewhat the point. You cannot rush with film and old gear, you must wait some time for the results. The waiting for the magic to happen is really spiced up the process to me. If you want the output fast, go pick up a digital camera (I also have some).

Great things

The feature set is quite outstanding among other Fed cameras and I think it provides (on paper) everything which I would ever need in a classic camera.

  1. It has a single stroke film advance lever which is connected to an automatic film counter mechanism. This lever is a huge improvement over the previous film advance knob used in the Fed 3.
  2. The coupled range-finder/viewfinder is also handy, and diopter correction is possible and for the first time, it is not prone to accidental adjustments.
  3. Also, it has a hot-shoe which is quite a big thing, so convenient flash usage became possible, and an additional flash-cable port is also available.
  4. The camera features a built-in light meter which does not require any power source apart from the light it is measuring, so you can never run out of batteries. The needle display of the meter and the related mechanical calculator makes the top plate rather cool looking.

Fed 5 top plate detail

The top plate looks so great that it inspired me to make a little comic where a similar instrument is used as a radiation meter on an imaginary space station.

It is ugly

As we all know everything comes with a price. This case the built-in light meter required a hell lot of extra space and eventually, it leads to a new shape which is very unpleasant to my eyes. I like the shapes of the older Fed (1,2,3) models. The older it gets the better it looks (and the closer to the Leica 2). The fed 4/5 are very brick like in my opinion because of the enlarged top part.

Fed 5
Fed 5

Fed 5

Hard to use

Yeap, this camera is nothing but easy to use. First of all the viewfinder is small and dark. Maybe it is only my version, but the glass has a very heavy greenish cast, which holds back a lot of light. In addition, it is very hard for me to see the boundaries of the frame. In general, it is a challenge to compose with this viewfinder. Don’t get me wrong, it is absolutely usable and I had no problem with focusing so far, but the composition is an issue.

The frame counter is a nice to have feature, but it adds some extra resistance when you try to advance the film. It could give you the impression that something is broken inside the camera. I have got used to FSU cameras, so strange sounds and resistance during film advance are not new things to me, but this camera could be scary even for me.

The light meter is completely worthless, as selenium cells do not age well and they became inaccurate after a few decades for sure. Mine is working acceptable in good light, but as it gets darker the more it gets unreliable. I think it is possible to replace the cells, but usually, I can take my time to measure the light with an external meter. Still, it is too bad that the light-meter is actually the reason for the new shape (I don’t like) and now it is more or less serves as extra weight I need to carry.

Conclusion

On one hand, the Fed5 has a poor viewfinder experience and I am not the biggest fan of its shape. On the other hand, this is my first vintage camera. It never failed me and actually, this is the only L39 mount rangefinder camera of mine which has a reliable shutter so I can test such lenses only with this body.

I am mainly an available light shooter, but I like to have a hot-shoe and I already used the one on my Fed.

If you are looking for a rangefinder but you have a small budget and you want to use flash, you can’t go wrong with this camera. It will survive all of us and keep going to take pictures as long as somebody can press the shutter.  Plus it can be turned into an effective melee weapon against polar bears.

Links

Samples with Industar 55mm f/2.8 N-61 L/D

Bus stop (Miskolc 2010) Fed 5, Industar 55mm f/2.8 N-61 L/D

Eszter (Miskolc 2010) Fed 5, Industar 55mm f/2.8 N-61 L/D

Lord Percy and Magni (Miskolc 2010) Fed 5, Industar 55mm f/2.8 N-61 L/D

(Miskolc 2010) Fed 5, Industar 55mm f/2.8 N-61 L/D

Jupiter 8

Camerajunky16 Comments
Jupiter 8 50mm f/2 LTM and Contax version

The Jupiter 8 is undoubtedly a magnificent piece of glass! To me it is more than a great lens it is a magical item like an exotic rare wand which can be really powerful in the hands of a trained wizard. What makes it so special is the underlying optical formula at the first place which is the pre-war Zeiss Sonnar 50mm f/2 [1] developed by Ludwig Bertele in the early 1930s.

In other words, the Jupiter 8 is a post-war Soviet copy of the pre-war Zeiss Sonnar initially made for the Contax copy Kiev cameras like the Kiev 4 I have already written about. The optical formula alongside the Contax II camera was acquired after the war by the Soviet Union as well as machinery and technical personnel as part of the war compensation.

So let’s look at the formula itself!

Jupiter 8 (Zeiss Sonnar) formula

The Jupiter 8 is 6 elements in 3 groups partially glued anastigmat. The first group is a separate meniscus, the middle group consists of a meniscus, two times convex and two times concave lenses glued together and the third group is a composed of a two times convex lens and a meniscus.

The sonnar negative triplet consisted of a high-index outside and a lower-index element between. The design uses less elements than Planar, so when coating tech was primitive, the lens had much less flare due to less surfaces in design. Simpler than Planar, smaller and comparatively inexpensive. Good contrast at edges at all apertures. Exhibits some softness at wide apertures. Sharp when stopped down.[2]

Interesting fact that the name Sonnar was derived from the German word “Sonne” (Sun).

With the addition of more lens elements, the lens speed can be further increased like the Zeiss Sonar 50mm f/1.5 or the Soviet counterpart  Jupiter 3 50mm f/1.5 which contains 7 elements in contrast to the 6 elements only f/2 version I am writing about here.

Naturally, as anything can be advanced even further,   the Sonnar formula can be modified to achieve aperture greater than f/1 like in the case of the Tachon. But this is really a different story and I should not get that far in this post. So let’s go back to the starting point (Jupiter 8 and Zeiss Sonnar 50mm f/2 formula).

To make you more excited (I know you are already itching because of the Sonnar formula :-)) here is a photo where I “accidentally” inserted THE mighty Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 180mm f/2.8 Pentacon Six mounted lens into the frame as a comparison. This lens is not mine (Thank you László for lending it to me!) but you can expect exhaustive writings about it at some point as well

Jupiter 8 lenses vs CZJ Sonnar 180mm f/2.8

My Jupiter 8 lenses

I have got my first Jupiter 8 with my beloved Kiev 4 camera from a Hungarian auction site. I was so pleased with the results I have got from this lens that I have picked up two more instances with L39 thread mount for my screw mount rangefinders (Fed 3, Fed 5).  I have got them in one package from the same auction site for a real bargain. One of these will go to a friend who will hopefully enjoy it a lot on a digital mirror-less system camera. Yes, these lenses can be great fun on MILC cameras and here is an excellent article of what can you achieve.

Jupiter 8 L39 screw mount

The Jupiter 8 was made originally for the Contax copy Kiev cameras with the matching bayonet mount, but later it was made in many different versions for L39 (Leica thread) mount rangefinders.

The advantage of the L39 screw mount version over my original Contax mount lens is the ability to focus with the lens itself. On Contax system cameras the focusing is done by a mechanism integrated into the camera body and the lens has nothing to do with it. The only thing you can do with the lens is set the aperture.

Focal length:50mm
Construction:6 elements in 3 groups
Angle of view:45°
Distance scale:1m – infinity
Diaphragm:Manual; f/2 – f/22
Filter size:40.5mm thread
Length:±45mm
Weight:±130g
Fitting:L39

Specification table [3]

Construction and handling

My L39 Jupiter 8 lenses (1960, 1963) are made of aluminum alloy, therefore they are very light but at the same time vulnerable too. I never drooped any lens so far, and I hope I will keep this good habit.

The aperture rings on both lenses are a bit dry and have no stops or clicks, therefore, the aperture must be set with great care. The focusing rings are nice and smooth on both lenses, which gave me the impression that these lenses were lubricated once after their production. What I do like the most is the metal lens caps though.

The overall build quality is fair but nothing outstanding, yet pretty good for Soviet lenses. By the way, Jupiter 8 is one of the most reliable FSU (Former Soviet Union) lenses in terms of quality. Most instances are focusing good and have a nice optics while Jupiter 3 instances are a real gamble.

How do they look like

Jupiter 8 L39 mount
Jupiter 8 L39 mount

Jupiter 8M Contax mount

The Jupiter 8M differs from the Jupiter 8 in only one thing! The 8M has stops/clicks while setting the apertures. This is a nice improvement indeed although some videographers might prefer the original version.

As I mentioned the Contax mount type has no focusing mechanism on the lens, therefore, it never needs lubrication and probably it was a bit cheaper to produce for the more complicated and expensive camera body.

Construction and handling

My instance (1965) is made of steel which makes it heavier than the screw mounts aluminum versions despite the simpler mechanical construction. It also feels much more solid and the click stops on the aperture ring are very welcomed additions. Overall, this version just feels and handles better for me and does suggest a higher quality because of the steel barrel.

How does it look like

Jupiter 8M Contax mount
Jupiter 8M Contax mount aperture shape at f/4

Image quality

So what is the big thing with this lens (and any other Sonnars)? Of course, the way it renders the image is the thing for me. Many claims that the contrast is a bit lower than the Tessar type lenses and Sonnars are not outstandingly sharp wide open but fast apertures can be achieved,  they deliver a wonderful creamy bokeh and less resistant to flare due to the few glasses to air transitions. All this sounds like a great portrait lens especially because Sonnars are typically short and medium telephoto lenses.

Well, this is the theory, but let the samples talk.

3D-ness and character

The following image is taken by me with the lovely Kiev 4 rangefinder and it was on the very first roll I have ever shot with that camera.

First of all, I really love the 3D like the character of this image, the backgrounds fall to be blurred slowly while the model is quite sharp. I don’t remember what aperture I used but it must have been around f/4, so in theory, this effect could be even more emphasized by a wider setting. On the other hand, I like that the background is recognizable.

I have not done any serious post processing apart from crop and a tiny bit of contrast increase, so this lens/film combination is capable to produce similar images without any super scientific computerized evilness.

Note the flare effect on the top right corner of the frame! I know Sonnars must be less prone to flare but in reality, these old lenses have got a not too effective coating to compare to modern standards. Therefore the lens hood is a must if you (like me) prefers to shoot in back-light.

Flare

Flare can be a real issue but not because of the formula rather the ancient coating used for these old lenses.

This example (left) shows what could really happen when the sun shines (almost) directly into the lens. Although the sun is not in the frame (It was upper a bit) it did ruin the shoot by this ugly flare. This could have been way better by the usage of a lens-hood or by shooting from a different angle.

I know I have already written down here a couple of times but it is never enough to emphasize: Always use lens-hood for vintage lenses when possible unless you want to get more flares (which could be fun for some).

Sharpness and contrast

The next two images are supposed to stand here as examples of how nice sharp, contrasty and colorful images can you get when the conditions are appropriate and of course you don’t mess up with the exposure.

Church (Szentendre, Hungary) Kiev 4, Jupiter 8M, Fuji Superia 200, Canoscan 9900F
Designer’s chairs (Girona Spain) Kiev 4, Jupiter 8M, Fuji Superia 200, Canoscan 9900F

The second shoot with the chairs is done through the glass of a showcase and you can even see my reflections on it, but still, I am very satisfied with the result especially the colors which I like the most. Fuji Superia is a consumer level “cheap” film, yet what it delivers is simply lovely to my eyes.

Portraits and bokeh

The Jupiter 8 being a 50mm “standard” lens is quite versatile and can be used for many different purposes and portraiture is not an exception. It is just long enough to take nice upper torso portraits while showing some of the environment around the model thus giving a little bit of context. Also as you can see, it can produce a nicely blurred background which is essential for the separation of the model.

Yolanda (Catalonia) Kiev 4, Jupiter 8M, Fuji Superia 200, Canoscan 9900
PepLluis (Catalonia) Kiev 4, Jupiter 8M, Fuji Superia 200, Canoscan 9900F

These portraits were taken in a restaurant in mixed light and with maximum f/2 aperture. The depth of field is certainly shallow enough and the background is pleasant in my opinion.

The next photo has been already published in my Kiev-4 post but with heavy post-processing including black&white conversion. The original version looks like this and notices the character of the bokeh at f/2.8.

Pista bácsi(Szentendre, Hungary) Kiev 4, Jupiter 8M, Fuji Superia 200, Canoscan 9900F

I didn’t like the photo because of the dark foreground, so I created this processed version in black and white with aggressively increased contrast.

Pista bácsi (Processed) (Szentendre, Hungary) Kiev 4, Jupiter 8M, Fuji Superia 200, Canoscan 9900F

Final words

All in all, I really love these lenses because of their great character, bokeh and overall image quality which together leads to a unique classic look. It is true that they are not the only and probably not the best Zeiss Sonnar type of lenses ever made but surely the Jupiter 8 is the cheapest to start with.

You can find many more advanced versions made by Zeiss, Nikon, Canon, and others. Even today you can find new Sonnar type lenses by many manufacturers and of course, you can get a new Zeiss Sonar T* 1.5/50 ZM which was reviewed by Ken Rockwell here.

These lenses are not perfect but they have a unique fingerprint on the images and it is only a matter of taste to love or hate. I am definitely will carry this or similar lenses with me all the time.

I hope I could transfer a part of my excitement related to the Jupiters, Sonnars and their siblings and you will have great moments with them too.

Morning lights (Girona, Catalonia) Kiev 4, Jupiter 8M, Fuji Superia 200, Canoscan 9900F

Links and references

Zenit 3M

Camerajunky13 Comments
Zenit 3M silhouette

A little bit of Zenit History

The Soviet Union had a colossal internal market and the demand for a simple, affordable yet reliable SLR was just as huge. Despite the need, there was no such camera in the Soviet Union even after the Word War II apart from the East German products (Contax, Pentacon, Praktina, Praktica, Praktisix, Pentaconsix, Exakta, Exa) but these cameras did not fulfill the requirements for simpleness and they were pricey too.

Therefore KMZ constructors became a bit of Frankenstein and built the camera they needed. They took a Zorki rangefinder camera, thrown away the rangefinder, added a mirror-box and a prism so the first Zenit was born.

The Zenit is a real descendant of the Leica IIc. I know this statement is a bit harsh to hear at first but here is why. The Soviet Union had officially bought the license of the legendary Leica IIc in 1932. All the early FED and Zorki models were based on this license and as I mentioned the first Zenit was the direct modification of the Zorki. Even the lens mount was inherited from Leica being an M39x1 thread mount but because of the mirror the rangefinder lenses although fit but unable to reach the infinite focusing distance.

So the first Zenit (Zenith for export) were introduced in 1952 with Industar 50 (50 mm, f/3.5) lens which was manufactured for Zorkis as well. The proceeding version was the Zenit C which featured synchronization for single-use flash bulbs with the adjustable synch timing advance (from 0 to 25 ms). This camera was extremely reliable due to its simple construction, it was so simple that the mirror was lowered by a single string.

The next in the row was the Zenit 3 (1960-1962) which was mechanically a very similar camera to the original Zenit and to the Zorki, but it introduced the advance lever as a huge improvement over the less convenient advance knob.

You would suggest that the Zenit 3 was the direct predecessor of the 3M, but there was another camera called Crystall which has much more in common with the 3M. The Crístall was the first KMZ SLR with a hinged back, the film could be loaded and removed with ease compared to the previous bottom loaded models. The Crystall was short lived and many say because it was extremely ugly (tractor-like) of a camera due to the ridges on the top of the prism.

Finally, we have reached the camera (this post is about) the mighty Zenit 3M in the story. It was manufactured between 1962 and 1970, designed by N. Marienkov and the M in the name probably stands for modernized. The camera had all the technological advancements of its predecessors such as built-in flash synchronization (1/30s), standard shutter speeds, hinged back and film advance lever. But the mirror was still not a returning type,  there was no auto-aperture support on the body and the shutter speed dial did rotate during exposure. In other words, the camera was modernized indeed but was still many years behind the rest of the word.

This camera had got a new kit lens, the Helios 44 (58mm f/2). This is an excellent lens with the exact the same parameters as the pre-war Zeiss Biotar. This lens was much more stable in terms of quality compared to the Tessar like Industars as most Helios’ are very good but the Industars could vary between fantastic and horrible.

The story of course continues and Zenit cameras are being made even today, but for the rest, you have to wait until the next post featuring some of the more advanced evolution steps of the Zenit line!

Style vs robustness

We all know that Zenit cameras are traditionally tank or tractor like and because they are all full mechanical constructions, it is literally impossible to destroy them.  Soviet engineers didn’t have to face with the lack of materials but the lack of quality materials. That is why they simply made everything more robust to prepare the mechanics for the worst possible materials. The result is more like a weapon than a camera at first glance, but at least it can be used for self-protection without risking the photo taking ability.

Generally I agree with the opinions that these are not the most beautiful cameras (to be modest) ever made, but actually, in my opinion, the Zenit 3M is a pleasing exception. I really like how the Zenit 3M looks like, this is much much smaller than later models and to me, the front plate with the engravings and the shape of the prism is very appealing.  To prove the point, here is a little montage about my Zenit 3M. In addition, I have found a very stylish photograph on this blog about the legendary Weegee holding this camera taken by Richard Sadler. In my opinion, the camera looks very good in Weegee’s hand.

My Zenit 3M with Helios 44

Weegee with a Zenit 3M in Coventry England in the 1960's © Richard Sadler
Weegee with a Zenit 3M in Coventry England in the 1960’s © Richard Sadler

Weegee was the pseudonym of Arthur Fellig(June 12, 1899 – December 26, 1968), a photographer and photojournalist, known for his stark black and white street photography.

Richard Sadler is one of the UK’s leading portrait photographers, shooting the famous ‘Weegee’ picture that was featured in the 2011 NMM exhibition ‘The Lives Of The Great Photographers’.

My Zenit 3M

I have found my Zenit 3M on an antique fair in Miskolc, Hungary. This fair is held on the first Sundays of every month and usually, it is a very rich and colorful occasion attracting many people even from the surrounding countries. The camera belonged to an old man trying to sell very few things and I knew he was the first and only owner from the way he showed it to me. The camera itself looked quite well and I was really touched by the lens at the first place as it was and it is as clean as new. The second thing grabbed me was, of course, the shape of the camera. I hadn’t seen such an old Zenit before and my preconception of a tractor-shape was gone as this camera was very pretty. Finally, the original box and the lens cap was part of the deal so I simply couldn’t resist.

The original price can be seen on the box (2800Huf) which must have worth way more at the time this camera was sold in 1965 (At least the production date is 1965).

Zenit 3M datasheet

  • Produced 1962-1970
  • Producer KMZ
  • Frame size 24x36mm
  • Lens mount L39 screw mount
  • Lens Industar-50  50mm f/3.5, Helios 44 58mm f/2
  • Shutter cloth curtain (traveling horizontally), mechanically controller
  • Shutter speeds 1/30s, 1/60s, 1/125s, 1/250s, 1/500s + B
  • Sync speed 1/30s
  • Mirror not returning type
  • Viewfinder pentaprism with simple matte screen

Repairs

I did not check all the shutter speeds correctly when I bought the camera and as it turned out the shutter is not in the best shape. The slower speeds look very inaccurate and overall I don’t trust in any speeds enough to risk film and moments. I haven’t even tried this camera yet. So the shutter needs a repairman to clean and set it up, and there will be a day to come for this. The trouble is, the repair would cost more than the camera worth itself.

Otherwise, all features including self-timer work properly, the lens, prism, and mirror are clean and free of fungus so it is really a joy to look through the system especially after the viewfinder of my entry-level Canon DSLR which has a dim and tunnel-like finder compare to the old Zenit.

The way it looks

Zenit 3M box
Zenit 3M ever-ready case
Zenit 3M top (really small little camera)

Final words

Although I have not used this camera I have enough experience from other FSU cameras to see how this would handle. This camera offers everything needed for photography but nothing more. You can have reasonable shutter speeds, a bright viewfinder,  self-timer, a truly magnificent lens, flash sync, and convenient film loading and advance mechanisms.

Yes, there are things which you would miss like a self-returning mirror and the support of auto aperture lenses. You have to pre-set the aperture on the lens and the body does not close the iris when you push the button.

If you can live with this limitations and you don’t care of the L39 lens mount, this little elegant camera could be a great fun to use or it would look great in the collection and surely this one will not make you bankrupt.

Test Shots

I have not used this camera because of the unreliable shutter of it, but I did mount the lens to my Canon body and I used another Helios 44 on another Zenit a few years before. Eventually, the lens what matters here and not the camera as it uses film anyway.

In general, I very like the image quality of the Helios 44. I compared it with my Canon 50mm f/1.8 lens I use on my DSLR and although the test was not scientific it seems that the Helios actually beats the Canon lens in some cases wide open in terms of sharpness and contrast. I am going to repeat the experiment in a much more planned and controlled way to approve or confuse it. It seems sure that the two lenses are quite close in performance. Probably the Helios is less coated and I suggest the results will be different when I will test challenging back-light situations. We will see until that here are some test shots.

Helios 44 Digital

The following shots are taken with my Canon 450D with a half-elf made a DIY adapter. I used my M42->EOS adapter and used the lens mount of the Zenit plus some tape to securely put this two together. The Zenit mount (L39 thread in an aluminum ring) is attached to the body with four small screws. The mount almost fits perfectly into the M42->EOS  adapter. Luckily with some tape, these could be connected tightly enough without the risk of damaging the M42 thread thanks to the rubber tape.

I don’t recommend to do it for anyone and it was not really stable in fact, it was really hard to focus without ruining this evil construction. So I did better move with the camera back and forth instead of screwing the focus ring. On the other hand, it was good enough for some tests, but I need to get a real adapter for more serious tests or even for portraits. Alternatively, I am thinking to get an M42 mounted version of this lens.

These shoots have been taken wide open f/2 and I did not process them at all apart from basic raw->jpg conversion and resizing for the web. I think the bokeh is very pleasing and I am happy with both the sharpness and contrast of the images.

Canon 450D, DIY adapter, Helios 44 58mm f/2 @ f/2,  L39 mount
Canon 450D, DIY adapter, Helios 44 58mm f/2 @ f/2,  L39 mount

Helios 44 Kodak 100 film

These were taken with a Helios 44 and a Zenit E camera so the picture quality must be very similar. In fact, these were one of my first shoots on film ever.

Zenit E, Helios 44 58mm f/2 (M42), Kodak Gold, Fuji lab scanned
Zenit E, Helios 44 58mm f/2 (M42) with extension ring, Kodak Gold, Fuji lab scanned
Zenit E, Helios 44 58mm f/2 (M42) with extension ring, Kodak Gold, Fuji lab scanned
Zenit E, Helios 44 58mm f/2 (M42) with extension ring, Kodak Gold, Fuji lab scanned

Links

Kiev-4

Camerajunky20 Comments

The Kiev-4 -according to my opinion- is an extremely outstanding camera. It has a fascinating history, an extraordinary construction, a very attractive outfit and on top of all these, it is still a very capable performer if you don’t mind to shoot in full manual.

Datasheet

  • Produced 1947-1987 Arsenal, Kiev, Ukraine reference
  • Film type 135 (35mm)
  • Picture size 24 x 36mm
  • Weight 27.2oz (771.1g) with Jupiter-8 (“white”)
  • Lens Jupiter-8 (Arsenal copy of Zeiss Sonnar) 50mm 1:2.0
  • Focal range .9m to infinity
  • Shutter metal curtain (traveling vertically)
  • Shutter speeds 1-1/25s, 1/50s, 1/100s, 1/250s, 1/500s, 1/1250s + B
  • Viewfinder coupled rangefinder
  • Exposure meter uncoupled selenium cell
  • Self-timer
  • Accessory shoe, PC sync connection

History

As I have already mentioned this camera has a very interesting history which you’ve probably heard of. I am not the biggest expert of this story, therefore I don’t even try to reveal every twists and detail, but I do try to make a good summary of the research I have done.

Surprisingly it is more a German camera than a Soviet, but most importantly it is not a plagiarism of the Contax but it is a legal replica. But how it is possible?

After World War II. the Soviets acquired the Zeiss Contax II and III from Germany as part of war reparations. They got everything, machines, technologies, spare parts, and key personnel as well. That is why the first Kievs have original Contax parts and eventually, most of these cameras were made on the very same machines.

After some pilot production series, the production lines were set up in Kiev, Ukraine in the Arsenal factory. Even though the production was based on local workers, the technical coordination was done by a small group of German professionals, most notably Wolfgang Hahn.

Despite the initial lack of trained personnel, the fact that the entire production line was moved and the high pressure to produce cameras in very big quantities, the Kiev is a very well built camera (The design itself is very fault tolerant). It is in fact much closer to the original Contax in quality than any other Soviet cameras especially early models were very high quality.

It has to be said that there were significant drops in quality as the camera was simplified in the sake of productivity and as the members of the original crew went retired. Therefore if you intend to buy a Kiev camera, the older is the better (before 1970 if possible).

All in all the original design from the 1930’s is so rigid that despite the circumstances the Kiev cameras was based on it during many decades until 1987.

If you want to read more about the history with way more details, I can recommend to check out this site.

My Kiev-4

My Kiev-4 is made in 1965 and sold (first) in 1966 in Budapest for 2400 HUF – 500 HUF discount (for unknown reason) which was a ridiculously high price at the time (I will figure out how to convert it to today’s values).   Hungary was a  part of the Eastern block and there was only 1 company which sold photographic equipment in the country called Ofotért. The funny part is, I have got a catalog of this company from 1979 and this camera was still listed for 2140 HUF.

The warranty was 1 year and the camera is still working! I have the original box, invoice, warranty, lens caps, ever-ready case and the camera itself with a Jupiter-8M lens. The M stands for the feature that the aperture values click as you change them (quite advanced technology).

How did I get it

I always wanted a usable and good looking rangefinder. I usually don’t demand much in terms of usability as I am a camera addict, so what I really wanted can be summarized as accurate shutter speeds, interchangeable lenses and a viewfinder which is combined with the rangefinder and bright/big enough to let me enjoy the rangefinder characteristics.  My other concern was of course price because a Leica or even an original Contax is way out of my scope.

I did not know too much about the Kiev until one day I have found one in a very good shape (almost mint condition) on a Hungarian auction site, similar to eBay. The camera was listed with the excellent Zeiss Sonar copy Jupiter-8M lens, the original box, and documents including the original warranty, which is, of course, had expired way before I was even born. It was so attractive that I couldn’t resist. After a few hours of research, I decided to buy it and I haven’t regretted my decision so far.  The whole package cost me 14.000 HUF. If there was no inflation some could think the camera actually gained some value, but in fact, it is now below 50€ at the time of writing and I think it is extremely low for such a beauty.

The way it looks

Personal experience

Shutter

It has a metal vertical traveling shutter. Both vertical and metal are rare if not nonexistent at this era of FSU (Former Soviet Union) cameras. With the vertical movement, the shutter needs to travel a shorter distance as the frame is (24 x 36mm) and thus higher shutter speeds are available. 1/1250 of a second is indeed a short amount of time, and my camera is still able to produce it. The metal part doesn’t make much difference, however, it will certainly not tear or puncture easily compare to a canvas material.

It is worth to note, that you have to advance the film before changing shutter speed because you might cause some trouble and your settings could be inaccurate. If you want to know why to visit this site.

In my experience, the shutter is very quiet, maybe not as quiet as a Leica as some would claim. But it is quite enough to be able to take street shots in a very discrete way.

Viewfinder and focusing

The viewfinder fits the view of the standard 50mm lens and it is large and bright compare to my other FSU rangefinders  (the collection is not complete though). It is true that it could be brighter and it has some greenish color casting. I think it is probably because it is used to increase the contrast between the small internal and the bigger external frame of the viewfinder to aid focusing. It is still very usable, but I could wish brighter among dim conditions.

It is combined with the rangefinder,  you can use the same window to compose and make your subject sharp. If you want to read more about how the rangefinder device works, visit this site in general, and this site specifically to Kiev-4.

Personally, I think the viewfinder is very usable for a camera this old. All of my shoots so far were spot on. This is way better than my average focusing results with manual SLRs without a Fresnel type split screen.

The focusing is especially accurate because the two windows of the rangefinder have an unusually big distance between each other. This and the small focusing wheel on the body makes focusing extremely precise.

As a downside, it is very easy to hold a camera in a way that one of the rangefinder windows are covered by hand thus compromise it. Therefore the proper holding is a bit aardvark and called the “Contaxt hold”.

Keep your index finger on the shutter release, your middle finger on the focussing wheel and the other two below the RF window and you’ll be fine! (Tobi’s camera page)

This is something that you get used to it or you will hate this camera forever. For me, it is not a big price to pay for the accurate focusing at all.

Metering

This version of the camera has a built-in selenium cell meter at the top plate while the Kiev-4A is the same camera but without the meter. I think the no-meter version is more stylish and in addition, these light-meters are generally inaccurate nowadays. It is still working (no battery needed), but it is not reliable plus the difference is according to a non-linear function, thus it cannot be easily corrected. Making it worst the film-speed scale is GOST instead of ISO or DIN. This is not a big issue if you carry a convertion table or you stick to one film speed only, but inconvenient for sure.

That is why I have to use an external light-meter or a digital camera to measure the light. I know it sounds tricky, but most of my cameras have no meter at all,  plus many great photographers could live with this limitation just fine before us.

Film loading and advance

You have to remove the back plate in order to load the film. This is not too special, but you need to get used to it.

Advancing a film is done by rotating a knob at the top plate instead of having a fast-advance-lever. Again this is not really ergonomic, but you can accept it unless you shooting fast actions.

Winding back the film is a similar experience, but you need to hold a button located at the bottom of the camera. In fact, this is the part I dislike the most about this camera because the rewind knob is very small compared to the force you have to apply. It doesn’t mean you had to force it badly! If you feel something needs to be forced, better not to do it because the film and the camera are both very sensitive instruments.

The lens

According to Camerapedia “The Jupiter-8 (sometimes marked in Cyrillic, ЮПИТЕР-8) is a postwar Soviet copy of the prewar Zeiss Sonnar 50mm f/2 for the Contax, built with six elements in three groups. It was made in Contax and M39 mounts, both for rangefinder cameras. “

The lens has a big reputation of being sharp, fast, with a good contrast and a nice bokeh (quality of out of focus elements), but it is prone to internal reflections by direct sunlight hitting the lens. I can confirm all these and yes, it is much better if you are having a lens-hood (5€). The lens is a bit soft wide open, but this is not unusual. You just need to stop down a bit and you will get pin sharp results.  On the other hand, the lens has a very pleasing character, which can be revealed best wide open and I think it is great for portraits.

It is true that the quality of your lens highly relies on how lucky you are because the quality control was not the best in that part of the world. Generally speaking the older the lens is the better with the notion that the coated versions are preferable.

The body itself supports a wide variety of lenses. It has the standard Contax bayonet (in fact 2 bayonets inner, outer), so all Contax and Kiev lenses are accepted plus there are Japanese lenses available -Nikon and  Canon also made cameras with this mount, but those might be not fully compatible because of the differences in the film distance.

For lenses different from the standard 50mm focal length you need to use an external viewfinder.

Final words

I am very happy with this camera. It looks great and as you can see in the sample photos it can produce very good results (in my opinion). I sent some photos to the original owner of the camera, and he was also surprised, how well it perform for me.

It is indeed not as easy to use, but it gives you a very unique feeling of using something really special, and you are taking pictures in the same fashion as photographers were doing 60 years ago.

In fact, this is one big thing I really like in film photography. You can use the equipment of the elders, yet as you put a modern film in it, you can achieve state of the art results.

I recommend it to anyone who likes the way around and doesn’t mind to learn the “Contax hold”. It is not a big investment but can give so much fun and works perfectly on the exhibition cabinet as well.

Links

Test shoots