nzeeman
Well-known
for all people who ask themselves if they should tranfer from fsu gear to leica i made a small site where i compared zorki 4k and leica m4
http://www.geocities.com/srdjaneftimovski/
if that dont work try this one
http://nzeeman.tripod.com/index2.htm
http://www.geocities.com/srdjaneftimovski/
if that dont work try this one
http://nzeeman.tripod.com/index2.htm
Last edited:
brachal
Refrigerated User
I like it, thanks. Sooner or later somebody will give you grief about putting an I-61 on your leica. 
Not too long ago, a photographer noticed my Jupiter-3 on my IIIf, and he acted like it was going to poison my leica somehow. I still laugh thinking about it.
Not too long ago, a photographer noticed my Jupiter-3 on my IIIf, and he acted like it was going to poison my leica somehow. I still laugh thinking about it.eleskin
Well-known
Funny how some people think Russian lenses are trash
Funny how some people think Russian lenses are trash
I too have an Industar 61 LD and am blown away by the sharpness and contrast for the price. I have tested this lens on both my M6 and my M8 and I cannot believe how sharp it is, as sharp as my Dual Range Summicron!!!! People who say it is a sin to shoot with it on a Leica are full of it. The resulting photo is what matters, and if one can achieve quality results with a lens I regard as the greatest value I have ever seen, that is not only a sign of thrift, but extreme intelligence!
Thanks for the comparison photos of the two cameras!
Funny how some people think Russian lenses are trash
I too have an Industar 61 LD and am blown away by the sharpness and contrast for the price. I have tested this lens on both my M6 and my M8 and I cannot believe how sharp it is, as sharp as my Dual Range Summicron!!!! People who say it is a sin to shoot with it on a Leica are full of it. The resulting photo is what matters, and if one can achieve quality results with a lens I regard as the greatest value I have ever seen, that is not only a sign of thrift, but extreme intelligence!
Thanks for the comparison photos of the two cameras!
pesphoto
Mentor
Yes, thank you. Nice work. I think I have to buy myself a Zorki 4 now
nzeeman
Well-known
i added another free server also, because i have small hour bandwidth as a free user.
Last edited:
dee
Well-known
i use a Fed collapsible , an I 22 rigid and black Jupiter 8 on my M8 , my I 61s all seem out of register !
... and an '' oleged '' Fed 1g leica copy is the equal of my CLA Leica IIIc - results indistinguishable .
dee
who cares what other's think ?
dee
... and an '' oleged '' Fed 1g leica copy is the equal of my CLA Leica IIIc - results indistinguishable .
dee
who cares what other's think ?
dee
monemmer
Established
Thanks for posting this nice comparison! From the pictures it seems that the Leica is prone to brassing... I guess I will go for a Zorki instead
nzeeman
Well-known
From the pictures it seems that the Leica is prone to brassing... I guess I will go for a Zorki instead
i bought this leica in very bad cosmetic condition on photo market. i dont mind cosmetics of camera, so i tried it and as everything worked fine i bought it... price was pretty small because no collector would buy something like this.
monemmer
Established
I am totally with you, that's the only kind of Leica I would ever spend money on. What you paid is exactly what that Leica is worth to someone who is only interested in taking pictures with it, anything more is just a collector and brand name mark-up.
Now, if I could just find one like yours...
nzeeman
Well-known
there is only one thing that concern me - what when it dies? i think that it didnt have cla recently. i dont have money to pay for cla. but ill think about it when it happen...
i think you should check keh as often as possible - sometimes they have bargain leicas. for example they have cl and m4-2 for around 520$. i think you will not find many cheaper than that.
Last edited:
ray*j*gun
Mentor
Just a word or two, a reality check. I own a wonderful Fed 2 as well as 2, I-61's which perform well and have very nice glass. I also have Barnack Leicas and an M6 which are also all wonderful rigs. When the casual person looks at the equipment the FSU hardware looks and feels much cheaper and less precise. We know better because we are users and have the experience but you can't blame the average bloke for missing that.
Ray
Ray
principe azul
Ian
Thanks, nzeeman, nice comparison. Have an M4, had a 4K or two briefly.
You come out with, conveniently, four ticks for each. The M4 finder is superior in that it has parallax-corrected framelines and the Zorki doesn't. These framelines are also closer to actual coverage than in later Leicas with .72 finders that squeeze in 28mm framelines. +1 for Leica. On the other hand, though the 4K has a shorter base length, its higher magnification gives it a superior effective baselength.
I much prefer the M4's crank rewind, but knob rewind is something I'd only have to deal with at the end of each roll. Where I think the 4K is a real pig, though, is the trouble you have to go through to change speeds, especially if you're hovering around 1/30. Probably didn't help that my 4Ks had stiff, razor-sharp dials...
Again, I don't find the removeable baseplate a problem. But you could add that the Zorki has a better tripod socket position, like a normal camera. Like my Nikon F3, which has a perfect tripod socket position until you add a motordrive to it, when it's back at one end, but Nikon has an accessory which moves it back to the centre again...
One correction. The Leica self-timer starts with a small chrome button that's revealed once you turn the self-timer lever. You can turn the lever but continue to shoot with the usual shutter release button, and the self-timer won't start up.
Haven't met any actual photographers who say this, but I was once in a posh shop and had an assistant fawn over my M4, only to turn his nose up at the Voigtlander on it.
You come out with, conveniently, four ticks for each. The M4 finder is superior in that it has parallax-corrected framelines and the Zorki doesn't. These framelines are also closer to actual coverage than in later Leicas with .72 finders that squeeze in 28mm framelines. +1 for Leica. On the other hand, though the 4K has a shorter base length, its higher magnification gives it a superior effective baselength.
I much prefer the M4's crank rewind, but knob rewind is something I'd only have to deal with at the end of each roll. Where I think the 4K is a real pig, though, is the trouble you have to go through to change speeds, especially if you're hovering around 1/30. Probably didn't help that my 4Ks had stiff, razor-sharp dials...
Again, I don't find the removeable baseplate a problem. But you could add that the Zorki has a better tripod socket position, like a normal camera. Like my Nikon F3, which has a perfect tripod socket position until you add a motordrive to it, when it's back at one end, but Nikon has an accessory which moves it back to the centre again...
One correction. The Leica self-timer starts with a small chrome button that's revealed once you turn the self-timer lever. You can turn the lever but continue to shoot with the usual shutter release button, and the self-timer won't start up.
Haven't met any actual photographers who say this, but I was once in a posh shop and had an assistant fawn over my M4, only to turn his nose up at the Voigtlander on it.
principe azul
Ian
Nice to see a user M4, too. Mine's a user, and it was half the price of a mint one on the same shelf, which is about a month's salary for most people! Even so, I couldn't tell the difference until I got pretty close.
But mine's still in much better condition than yours, not that that matters to either of us, except I'm a bit poorer for it.
Of course, the ultimate beaters are Jim Marshall's M4 and Garry Winogrand's M4.
But mine's still in much better condition than yours, not that that matters to either of us, except I'm a bit poorer for it.
Of course, the ultimate beaters are Jim Marshall's M4 and Garry Winogrand's M4.
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
I had a zorki 4 once, returned it because the clutch that holds on to the removable film spool was worn out.
I thought it looks pretty cool then, but then I got a Fed 2 and then a Zorki 1. The zorki 1 is the best looking of all, I think
I thought it looks pretty cool then, but then I got a Fed 2 and then a Zorki 1. The zorki 1 is the best looking of all, I think
Last edited:
Roger Hicks
Mentor
I have emphasized what I believe to be the key words.
Are there many who REALLY believe that the premium paid for a Leica is pure snob value? Or maybe you can put a price on reliability, consistency, quality control, smoothness, ergonomics, design evolution, extra features...
(All right, I've owned more Leicas than Zorkiis, but I must have had at least four or five Zorkiis over the years, and I have no difficulty in answering the question.)
Cheers,
R.
David Murphy
Mentor
Roger you are right of course. It is ridiculous to compare these two cameras. The only tangible thing they have in common is that they both (sometimes) take pictures. I say sometimes, since a typical Zorki suffers light leaks, shutter tapering, jammed mechanics, dragging shutter speeds, irregularly spaced frames i.e., the usual host of anomalies that plague poorly made old cameras. (and yes I've owned them both)
wolves3012
Mentor
Zorkis are old cameras and since they were cheap, they tend not to get serviced. As such it's not uncommon for them to suffer problems. However, I have two Zorki 1s, a 2C, 3M, Mir, 4, 4k, 5 and 6. They have all been serviced (mostly by myself) and none of them has (or had) a light leak. The shutters run perfectly well, no capping, tapering or jamming and the very nature of the film-wind mechanics makes irregular frame-spacings unlikely.
Based on the condition when I received them (unserviced except for one), I'd say the typical Zorki holds up quite well with neglect. If serviced they run as well as any other old mechanical camera. The FEDs and Zenits I have tell the same story.
nzeeman
Well-known
i think i used effective baselength for both. (zorki is 4cm long with 1:1 finder it is 4 cm so it is still less than leicas 4.8cm)
you are right about self timer. i never use it so i didnt even check it out.
and about giving both cameras four ticks. yes they have four but zorkis ticks are not so important features as leicas IMHO - so leica is still better.
Last edited:
nzeeman
Well-known
that is absolutely right. when i said better in my earlier post i just meant better when comparing characteristics. best camera is one that makes you enjoy while making photos. in my case my favorite cameras are those i repaired myself - fed2 , canonet and one kiev 4. i love to see them working fully when i know they were taken in half working state.
nzeeman
Well-known
maybe for bodies it is true that leica price is justified, but for lenses i think their prices are a bit too high. especially when i compare their lenses to zeiss lenses. maybe leica have sharpness but zeiss lenses are technically much better, for example at wide angles they have much better controlled distortion imho. so in a world of lenses leica price include big part of snobbery.
i would love to see photos comparing modern Elmar 2.8/50mm and industar 61... i dont think differences are too high. if someone have both please show us.