|
|
Post by kiev4a on Nov 30, 2007 12:56:24 GMT -5
My Zorki 4 celebrating "50 years of Communism" arrived today. The rigid I-50 grease is totally hardened and focus won't move--but that's an easy fix. Initially, the wind knob on the camera (which looks brand new), freewheeled and wouldn't cock the shutter. Apparently someone--a long time ago, rewound a roll of film and never set the collar back to advance so when the grease hardened everything froze in rewind mode. A little exercise of the mechanics got it working but a CLA would be needed for practical use.
Also got a 1982 Kiev 4AM (Contax clone). This one is almost new and seems to work. About 1980 the Kievs got so bad some cameras were hauled directly from the factory to the dump. But from 1982 to 1986 when production ended, the quality actually improved to some degree.
|
|
|
|
Post by kiev4a on Nov 30, 2007 13:03:28 GMT -5
Ooops. Posted on wrong rangefinder area
|
|
|
|
Post by nikonbob on Nov 30, 2007 13:05:27 GMT -5
Wayne
I haven't had much to do with Zorkis but I sure love a working late model Kiev. Congrats on your new toys.
Bob
|
|
|
|
Post by kiev4a on Nov 30, 2007 13:29:29 GMT -5
I now have Three Kievs and a Contax II. The funny thing is I've never cared much for the Contax design from and ergonomic standpoint.
|
|
|
|
Post by doubs43 on Nov 30, 2007 16:26:24 GMT -5
I now have Three Kievs and a Contax II. The funny thing is I've never cared much for the Contax design from and ergonomic standpoint. I also have a few Kiev copies of the Contax including one I bought new in London in 1986 (IIRC) from the Soviet-run store that sold goods from the USSR. I'm with you on the ergonomics. I've never found the Contax/Kiev cameras to be nearly as nice or as easy to handle as the Leicas. Oddly enough, my father expressed a preference for the Contax. He owned a pre-war Contax II for a few years and even had the 28mm lens and finder for it. From an historical standpoint, your Zorki-4 will always hold it's value and interest I'm sure. That's a nice find. Walker |
|
|
|
Post by kiev4a on Nov 30, 2007 18:35:11 GMT -5
Although there were quit a few of the commemmorative Z4s made it may have some value in the years to come not because it is a camera but because it is a memento of a 20th century experiment in government.
|
|
|
|
Post by herron on Nov 30, 2007 23:24:47 GMT -5
Wayne: I've got the same commemorative Zorki-4. Mine takes excellent pictures, although I don't use it as often as I should.   |
|
|
|
Post by kiev4a on Dec 1, 2007 0:09:43 GMT -5
I didn't have a late Z4 with the painted numbers (although the 4K is the same except for the wind lever). This one fills in the missing piece. The lens focus is really seized up but as I remember the rigid I50 is easy to lube.
|
|
|
|
Post by drako on Dec 3, 2007 19:47:49 GMT -5
What a beautiful camera!
|
|
|
|
Post by kiev4a on Dec 4, 2007 0:06:02 GMT -5
They are a little misleading as the quality--especially on later FSU cameras of all types is spotty. On the Zorki 4s the earlier ones had engraved names and speeds on the shutter speed dials. One the later ones, like the 50th Anniversary model, the Names and numbers are painted and can be rubbed off fairly easily. Here's the earlier 1956 version (first year) with the Jupiter 8 lens. A much higher quality camera. You can almost track the success and decline of the Soviet government through the camera construction.  |
|
Dave
Lifetime Member
Posts: 124
|
Post by Dave on Dec 26, 2007 21:19:51 GMT -5
I have an '82 and an '83 Kiev ( the latter without the meter which I prefer) both of which are working well. While I agree that the egronamics are subject to debate, they are the same as the Nikon rangefinders, fine cameras. One simply has to get used to them (not necessarily easy). Dave
|
|
