[abruzzi]

yeah, I'm looking for fair prices, not necessarily steals. the 50/1.5 is expensive everywhere and the 85/2 is a bit pricy, so I'll probably pass on those. But if the other prices are current, they undercut ebay or Fedka a bit. I have a Kiev IIa with Jupiter 8 getting CLA'd for me by a guy in Novgorod, and I'll pick it up in Moscow for 6500 rubles ($100). The guy in Moscow playing middleman has been incredibly helpful, so I'll probably 'tip' him since he hasn't asked to make any money on the deal. I'll look at some other cameras, but I definitely want to get a couple other lenses for the Kiev in St. Petersburg. I expect I'll make it home with two or three cameras and some lenses and other misc odds and ends.

For those of you with Kiev cameras--a quick question I haven't seen spelled out anywhere--does the viewfinder have brightlines, or is the extent of the view in line with the 50mm?

[g026r]

More or less in line with the 50mm. No brightlines. No parallax correction.

[stevebrot]

I’ll be getting a 50/2 Jupiter 8, and I’m hoping to find a 35 (Jupiter 12) and something long—preferably an 85 (Jupiter 9), but for price I may have to get a 135.(Jupiter 11)

While you are there, you might want to pick up an Arsenal Helios-103 53mm f/1.8. The J-8/J-8M are fine lenses, but the Helios-103 is a step up in my opinion.

As for the J-12 and J-9, be sure that the focus is smooth with low resistance. The reason being that even though both use the outer bayonet, the rangefinder coupling involves moving the full internal bayonet linkage (focus dial included) in addition to the in-lens helicoid. Any mechanical resistance is multiplied making focus a pain, particularly on a J-9. Be sure that both mount/unmount easily and smoothly and that you fully understand how they go on and off before leaving the store.

One other thing to remember is that customs duty may be very high for cameras and lenses. You can check this before leaving for Russia.*


Steve


* Unlike China, they are not favored trade partners.

[stevebrot]

For those of you with Kiev cameras--a quick question I haven't seen spelled out anywhere--does the viewfinder have brightlines, or is the extent of the view in line with the 50mm?

No brightlines...The physical edge of the viewfinder is approximate to the edge of the 50mm FOV. That coupled with fairly low magnification meaning that using both-eye-open is clumsy and maintaining peripheral sense is hard.

One other thing to consider/remember. The first is to make sure you have a couple of take-up spools. The second is to pick up a few of the proprietary film canisters if they have them. I can't say whether it is typical of all Kiev, but a standard canister in my Kiev 4 camera fits too "low" in its space to allow a properly-aligned film path. This can cause problems on both ends. Ideal is to have the special canisters on both ends despite the clumsiness and trouble to load.

I have modified the take-up spool on my camera to have better tracking and compatibility with other than center-position film tail. So far, it works fairly well. Google "Kiev 4 take-up spool" for references detailing the why and how.

One way...
http://www.elekm.net/zeiss-ikon/repair/spool.html

To which Rick Oleson adds:

If you use the spool without the cassette, it will fit a little loose in the camera and may be wobbly when you try to load the film. I have made takeup spools exactly as described in Mike Elek's site above, but I take the end cap off of an old film cartridge and epoxy it to the bottom flange of the spool. This makes the spool the same diameter as a factory takeup spool an things fit a bit better.

Photo HERE


Steve

---

Last edited by stevebrot; 05-02-2019 at 11:03 PM.

[abruzzi]

BTW, this is what I'll be getting:

[g026r]

One other thing to consider/remember. The first is to make sure you have a couple of take-up spools. The second is to pick up a few of the proprietary film canisters if they have them. I can't say whether it is typical of all Kiev, but a standard canister in my Kiev 4 camera fits too "low" in its space to allow a properly-aligned film path. This can cause problems on both ends. Ideal is to have the special canisters on both ends despite the clumsiness and trouble to load.

It's likely typical to all Kievs, and would all trace back to Zeiss.

The 135 film cannister is a bit of a compromise design: a way for Kodak to sell 35mm film in a format that fit multiple 35mm cameras, all with incompatible cassettes. So while Kodak designed the cannister to work in the Contax, Zeiss did not design their cameras specifically for it.

Rather, the Contax was intended to be mainly used with either film loaded into those reusable cassettes or with Zeiss-produced paper-wrapped spools. The main reason this matters is because, while the film itself was the same, the core of those Zeiss spools was just a tiny bit taller than 135.

(Kodak designated Zeiss-style rolls "235 film" during the period that they also produced them. They were effectively a perforated 35mm version of 220. Kodak also sold "435 film" at the time, which was also a paper-wrapped spool but with the leader cut with a "Leica tongue" — something that anyone who's shot a bottom-loading FED or Zorki will probably immediately appreciate.)

In my experience most of the time it's not really an issue, but if you've ever noticed sprocket holes creeping into the bottom of your images, that slight difference is why.

The Kiev also maintains one other holdover from those Zeiss spools. Ever notice those 2 red dots on the shutter release? If you hold down the release button and give it about a quarter turn counter-clockwise so that the dots no longer line up, it will lock in place and the shutter dial can be turned without stopping. (IIRC the shutter will still fire. It will just do so immediately.) This was intended to allow quick advancement past the paper leader found on those 235 spools.

Edit: Actually, there's a question: does the Kiev still have a red dot around the 27th frame on the counter dial? From that red dot to the 36th frame roughly corresponded to the length of the paper leader.

I want to say that Soviet film was sold for a while with a paper leader, so it wouldn't surprise me if that counter dot remained, but the Soviet Union is one of the countries that I have never shot expired film from so I can't say for sure.

[stevebrot]

The main reason this matters is because, while the film itself was the same, the core of those Zeiss spools was just a tiny bit taller than 135.

I stole this image from an article on Robert Capa's D-Day photos illustrating the difference between Kodak and Zeiss Contax cassettes.


Taken from: Guest Post 16: Rob McElroy on Robert Capa, 2 (a) « Photocritic International Photo © 2015 by Rob McElroy linked as "Fair Use" with attribution.

One can easily see the difference in cassette height and the implications regarding the ease and accuracy of film loading, a factor important to the Capa/D-Day controversy. What is particularly problematic on the Kiev (Contax as well?) is that the index flange around the rewind prong on the camera displaces most (all?) modern cassettes' opening below the film guide rails.

Ever notice those 2 red dots on the shutter release? If you hold down the release button and give it about a quarter turn counter-clockwise so that the dots no longer line up, it will lock in place and the shutter dial can be turned without stopping. (IIRC the shutter will still fire. It will just do so immediately.) This was intended to allow quick advancement past the paper leader found on those 235 spools.

I had not noticed the dots on the Kiev 4A before today, but yes, they are there and the film wind does behave as you describe. I had always thought the intent was as a lock-down for shooting in Bulb, now I know what it is really for.


Steve

---

Last edited by stevebrot; 05-03-2019 at 09:23 AM.

[g026r]

What is problematic is that the index flange around the rewind prong on the camera that displaces most (all?) modern canisters' opening below the film guide rails.

Ah ha. I never had the large-flange take-up spool.

Looking at these, it's possible that my spool was homemade by the previous owner.

I had not noticed the dots on the Kiev 4A before today, but yes, they are there and the film wind does behave as you describe. I had always thought the intent was as a lock-down for shooting in Bulb, now I know what it is really for.

It's probably usable for bulb as well, assuming you can push and turn without shaking the camera too much.

The first (and only) time I did it was by mistake, which left me very confused as to why my Kiev was no longer stopping when I advanced the shutter.

[stevebrot]

Ah ha. I never had the large-flange take-up spool.

Ooops! Edited out the images I originally included. Well, here they are here:

The older type with center feed and offset flanges...



...and a later type with conventional feed and a fat lower flange...



Fedka will also sell us a genuine one with offset flange, but designed for modern films.

https://fedka.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=649




Steve

[nickthetasmaniac]

Super wide GAS

Pentax SV + Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 20/f4.5

Hasselblad SWC/M + Zeiss Biogon 38/f4.5

[Racer X 69]

Super wide GAS

Pentax SV + Super-Multi-Coated Takumar 20/f4.5

Hasselblad SWC/M + Zeiss Biogon 38/f4.5

What's with the fishing line around the lens Nick?

[TwoUptons]

What's with the fishing line around the lens Nick?

I figured it keeps him from losing the viewfinder

-Eric

[asharpe]

I figured it keeps him from losing the viewfinder -Eric

Seems like a small shim in the flash mount would accomplish the same thing, and actually allow you to remove the viewfinder if you wanted to.

[nickthetasmaniac]

What's with the fishing line around the lens Nick?

What Eric said - a very ungraceful way of not losing the viewfinder (which is incredibly expensive to buy separately)...

It was actually put on by the previous owner. It does the job and doesn't get in the way so I left it

[Racer X 69]

What Eric said - a very ungraceful way of not losing the viewfinder (which is incredibly expensive to buy separately)...

It was actually put on by the previous owner. It does the job and doesn't get in the way so I left it

I see.

Resourceful, to be sure.

Aren't the rails of the cold shoe made of metal? If so, couldn't the ends be bent slightly downward to exert pressure on the viewfinder foot?

Or maybe a shim could be made that wedged it in tight?