initially , the 1957 Kiev 4 had no strengthening ridges on the meter cover which led to indentations on the ultra thin aluminium . Some appeared in 1958 alongside the revised version with the familiar stamped ridges.
Despite preferring the original Kiev 4 re-working as a closer copy of the post war Contax , and when standards were still acceptable, I would not consider paying Oleg around £100 with shipping to restore one when I could , and did , buy a rough Contax to revive , in this instance by Arsensal techs .
The fact is , is that a 1957 is 'just another Kiev 4' which have little market value , especially in the rough broken condition of my 3x , but as donors for my Kiev/Arsenal rebuilt Contax III/Kiev 4 and KNeB III / Kiev 4 rebuilds they have genuine ' value ' to me .
To me, it's a shame that this almost prototype run of early Kiev 4 when the Technicians were proud of their modifications using restricted materials and facilities are not recognised , but then I would not have been able to pick mine up at around £30 each inclusive .
it may be increasingly likely that quite attractive early film cameras will not be ' worth ' repairing as digital continues to take hold , but then , who would have predicted the return of the record deck !?
Dee's ruptively Gender indee'terminate . Autistic Glitch - cameras help contain and focus an out of phase world . Contax / Kiev surround and ground me in chaos . I may even take a photo or two with my several Digi-boxes . OOPs I stated Female , which was weird . I am actually XY , but my head does not recognise that 'frequency' so forgive me if I don't change it . Love puns - Miss-aligned etc LOL
Attractive cameras like your 90's Contax T2 and the one in your avatar may well keep their value. Mass produced ones like the Kiev, zenit and other 'regulars' will always have a relatively low value. Rarity is not a reliable indicator either, but relatively unknown models (to UK at least) maintain a highish price e.g. the medium format SLR's,and the Leningrad RF's.