Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2014 11:01:30 GMT -5
Stephen:
At least in the case of the Zorki 1, some cameras received special attention since they were going to VIPs. I have a "Double Zorki" Zorki 1B (with Zorki in both Cyrillic and regular text) that has a shutter as smooth as butter. Even the case is covered with a very nice green felt rather than the standard red. It also has an electronic flash pc connector but I suspect that was added after it left the factory.
Back when the Russian sellers first got on Ebay, you could sometime find cameras that were awards for special achievement in factories, the part or the military. They were engraved with the name of the award and sometimes the recipient's name. The Zorki 2C was used a lot for achievement awards.
W.
|
|
Stephen
Lifetime Member
Still collecting.......
Posts: 2,718
|
Post by Stephen on Jul 28, 2014 11:36:41 GMT -5
On the difference between the FED Industar and the Zorki versions, I asked at TOE(uk), the official Russian owned importer about this, and he said they are identical in every respect, and came from the same plant. Only the front plate changed with supplier.
And that was the deepest mystery of all, why did they have separate, at times rival makes? It was all State owned, controlled from Moscow, so what was the rational behind the various models, with clashes and overlaps in designs?
I have tried to lay out an over view list, but it is irrational, and is not understandable in places. Did Moscow work like Hitler did, appoint rivals to posts, and let them fight it out for approval from the top?
Anyway it gave a lot of variants on a theme!
Stephen
|
|
Stephen
Lifetime Member
Still collecting.......
Posts: 2,718
|
Post by Stephen on Jul 28, 2014 18:23:48 GMT -5
As I have several Russian standard lenses I think I will do a test shot programme on film and M 4\3 digital to see exactly what they are capable of.
I will use my own aReid with the TTH 50mm as the test standard, and use the Reid body for the film tests. This will give a good known performance to compare each Russian lens to.
I only have one pre-war 50mm Russian lens and age has not been kind to it, but I will include it out of curiosity. It has been cleaned and the surfaces re-polished, but the glass is discoloured, and the balsam is cracking in the glued joint.
I also have an Elmar 50mm F3.5, which is in good order for it"s age. There are four Industars of various ages with fixed bodies, the same for the Jupiter models, plus the two Industar collapsables coming at the moment.
There is also a 28mm, 35mm, and 135mm in F3.5 and F 2.8, all M39mm Leica screw fit.
I will set up a standard view outside and take the same view with each lens, on Digital, then pick the best and worst to take test target optical bench resolution shots.
I am sure the TTH can beat the lot, but I will test that against the Kern 50mm lens on the Alpa. I suspect there will be little in it, both are known to be as good or better than Leica's best.
I have some old Kodak Technical Pan film in a roll, which can test the resolution of any lens. But I will need some fresh developer, not sure if Tetenal still do the special type. ID-11 will do it if diluted right down.
Anyway a few days till both items arrive and can be tested out.
Stephen.
|
|
|
|
Post by julio1fer on Jul 28, 2014 18:54:52 GMT -5
I will be interested in your results. There is supposed to be a lot of variance in Russian glass, but anyway it is a sample.
As for Technical Pan, indeed it could test any lens. Amen.
|
|
Stephen
Lifetime Member
Still collecting.......
Posts: 2,718
|
Post by Stephen on Jul 28, 2014 18:59:18 GMT -5
Stephen: At least in the case of the Zorki 1, some cameras received special attention since they were going to VIPs. I have a "Double Zorki" Zorki 1B (with Zorki in both Cyrillic and regular text) that has a shutter as smooth as butter. Even the case is covered with a very nice green felt rather than the standard red. It also has an electronic flash pc connector but I suspect that was added after it left the factory. Back when the Russian sellers first got on Ebay, you could sometime find cameras that were awards for special achievement in factories, the part or the military. They were engraved with the name of the award and sometimes the recipient's name. The Zorki 2C was used a lot for achievement awards. W. On specials I once had an old lady come into the shop, asking if we bought old cameras, and I said yes, if it was working etc. But she got out a Kodak 127 vest pocket folder, it was in a Kodak outer cardboard box, and at first glance I was working out how to break it to her that it was a very common camera. But my manager butted in and said we did not buy such old Kodak items. Whilst he was talking to her I opened the outer box to find a green inner case, in shagren finish, with a silver metal rim round the split, arranged like a very high quality jewellery case. The manager was called away to another customer, and I asked if I could examine the camera in the office. I opened the case to find a plush lined interior in green silk, with a green finished camera in perfect condition. It was as standard 127, but the plated parts were like silver, not nickel plate. The shutter surround was gilt or plated gold. There was a cable release in green silk covering, and a gold finish lens cap. I carefully examined it, all worked fine. It was plainly a special production, and I went back to ask if she knew any history to it. She said it belonged to a family member who had it given to him pre-war. He worked in the Diplomatic service. I was turning the camera over when I noticed that the interior of the box came out, and underneath was a letter. A thank you, a suitable gift, on US Embassy Headed note paper, signed Edward....US Ambassador to the UK just before the war, Edward Kennedy. She had not known of the letter, or it's unusual content. I passed over the manager to ask about it to the shops owner, who arranged for a check to be made to the US Embassy. They confirmed it was genuine, and later the lady customer sold the camera at Christies by auction. It seems each year Kennedy ordered several green finish cameras from Kodak in the UK for gifts to staff and friends. I did not find out the exact figure she got, but it was reported in Modern Photography some time later that a Kodak VP in green from Kennedy sold for several thousand dollars. Needless to say our manager got an instruction to check older cameras a bit better in future. Stephen. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2014 21:32:03 GMT -5
On the difference between the FED Industar and the Zorki versions, I asked at TOE(uk), the official Russian owned importer about this, and he said they are identical in every respect, and came from the same plant. Only the front plate changed with supplier. And that was the deepest mystery of all, why did they have separate, at times rival makes? It was all State owned, controlled from Moscow, so what was the rational behind the various models, with clashes and overlaps in designs? I have tried to lay out an over view list, but it is irrational, and is not understandable in places. Did Moscow work like Hitler did, appoint rivals to posts, and let them fight it out for approval from the top? Anyway it gave a lot of variants on a theme! Stephen From what I have read about manufacturing in the Soviet Union I think they had several different camera factories simply because it was a way of keeping more people employed and to make the common folk feel like they had a choice. Not every good Communist could afford a car or a refrigerator or a TV set. But the FEDs and Zorkis were priced within reach of the masses and if you really wanted to show off you could splurge on a Kiev. Never mind that some of them didn't work right out of the box. You could still show off your camera to friends and neighbors -- a sign of your success -- that the system worked. |
|
|
|
Post by philbirch on Jul 29, 2014 4:28:13 GMT -5
Stephen a nice story about the old Kodak. I seriously would have been tempted - not even knowing the value - to make her an offer privately. But for a nice old lady, you did the right thing as I suppose I would have done in reality.
|
|
|
|
Post by philbirch on Jul 29, 2014 5:44:16 GMT -5
I'm happy with my Zorki 2C, made in 1957 it came fitted with a 1957 Industar 50, but I think looks so much better with the I22. I've not done a meaningful test of both lenses yet so I'm not sure which will be best. Stephen If you intend to use the I22 with a mirrorless, you can make a small adjustment to the adapter to accommodate the locking mechanism. photos below.   |
|
Stephen
Lifetime Member
Still collecting.......
Posts: 2,718
|
Post by Stephen on Aug 1, 2014 6:54:08 GMT -5
The camera and the Zorki lens have arrived, initial examination shows both in excellent condition, the Zorki lens looks very good indeed. I will pop a colour film in to test both the body and the two Industars, over the weekend.
Stephen
|
|
Stephen
Lifetime Member
Still collecting.......
Posts: 2,718
|
Post by Stephen on Aug 1, 2014 10:32:03 GMT -5
I am revising the tests, all digital at first, then all the lenses checked out with film in the Periflex, which will give accurate infinity check, and confirm target focus.
It seems real image target sheets are no longer made, and downloading them and assembling complex, so a newspaper chart plus small target will be assembled soon. There's little point in an exact lines per millimetre chart, just comparisons.
Phil... first checks on the Zorki lens show 100% condition, it is a late collapsible Industar and seems larger and has the diaphragm position like an Elmar. Maybe all the late models are Elmar design.
The FED lens works fine too......
Stephen
|
|
Stephen
Lifetime Member
Still collecting.......
Posts: 2,718
|
Post by Stephen on Aug 1, 2014 11:12:02 GMT -5
The only mistake the seller of the Zorki Industar made is the date, he mentioned 1970, which I thought rather unlikely, and I referenced the Soviet Camera site lens lists, which says 1957, far more likely. The number 7 indicates the year, it starts with 70, but the zero is discounted. The Zorki body is from 1955, a ZORKI 1 (D), so the lens is the right type, and can remain together. The Fed Industar is unknown date, Soviet site says work in progress on types and dating, but I would say it is the same as a I950/51/52 lens I have. The Leica lens cap is un-dated.........  Stephen |
|
|
|
Post by philbirch on Aug 1, 2014 15:24:28 GMT -5
The only mistake the seller of the Zorki Industar made is the date, he mentioned 1970, which I thought rather unlikely, and I referenced the Soviet Camera site lens lists, which says 1957, far more likely. The number 7 indicates the year, it starts with 70, but the zero is discounted. The Zorki body is from 1955, a ZORKI 1 (D), so the lens is the right type, and can remain together. The Fed Industar is unknown date, Soviet site says work in progress on types and dating, but I would say it is the same as a I950/51/52 lens I have. The Leica lens cap is un-dated......... Stephen Stephen, does that mean that my lens bought from the same seller may be a 1956 rather a 1962?  |
|
Stephen
Lifetime Member
Still collecting.......
Posts: 2,718
|
Post by Stephen on Aug 1, 2014 20:37:28 GMT -5
According to the Soviet Camera site the number system changed three times and my lens was the last type and the year calculated is correct, but your lens is one of the earlier and have one of two other numbering systems, but they both start with the year so 1962 for yours.
Stephen
|
|
|
|
Post by philbirch on Aug 2, 2014 2:59:53 GMT -5
Thanks. So not contemporary to my camera then.
|
|
Stephen
Lifetime Member
Still collecting.......
Posts: 2,718
|
Post by Stephen on Aug 2, 2014 9:25:48 GMT -5
Why the numbering change overlaps is a mystery, maybe the English translated pages on Soviet Cameras is a bit wrong. It is all written in English, but the grammar is sometimes a bit mashed up.
Maybe Wayne knows the answer to the dates, the overlap might be explained by the Russians simply continuing to make the earlier lens to use up the existing parts, despite already putting the later version into the production line. After all they never had to take a commercial view, they just built what they were instructed to make. I expect a lot of body numbers did not match the lenses, they had no reason to do so, unlike commercial makers.
Stephen.
|
|
