shimo-kitasnap
everything is temporary..
Hi everyone,
I'm starting to get interested in Kiev RF's but have never used one before.
I'm curious what are the size differences between a kiev 4 and a leica M3, annyone got any pics for comparison?
Thanks,
I'm starting to get interested in Kiev RF's but have never used one before.
I'm curious what are the size differences between a kiev 4 and a leica M3, annyone got any pics for comparison?
Thanks,
pschauss
Well-known
I don't have an M3 to compare, but the body on my Kiev 4 is about 1.5" deep by 3" tall by 5.5" wide. The advance knob sticks up and additional 3/8" and the rewind knob sticks up an additional 1/2". If you get one with a light meter add 5/8" to the 3" height of the body. Overall, a Keiv 4 is not appreciably smaller than a 1970's vintage SLR like a Minolta SRT.
BillBingham2
Registered User
Besides quality, let's just look at handling. The Kiev 4 has a focusing wheel which I have to say is fun to use. You have to hold the 4 (or like cameras Nikon RFs, Contax) and use your middle finger to focus, but it works great. The 4 has a BIG light meter on her, some work others do not. The 4A is a somewhat sleeker body (no light meter). The take up spool no both comes out and can get lost on the 4 perhaps more often (but they are easy to build replacement ones for). I think the shutter on the 4 is very quiet, different from the Leica but I think very close in stealthiness. Two levers to close the back on the 4 vs one on the M. The entire back comes off on the Kiev where as it's only the bottom plate on the M. The M has a quick wind lever where you need to crank the wheel to wind the 4. You should not change shutter speeds on the 4 when she is not wound (cocked and ready to fire) were as on any M you can change the speeds wound or not. I had a 4A that I made that mistake on, it cost me more than I paid for the camera to get her fixed. While they say there are great folks to do CLAs on the Kievs, they do not compare to DAG or Sherry. Yes they cost less but some times not matter how much you poor into the Kiev you still do not get a great camera.
I had several Kievs and switched to Nikon. I really like the handling and the Nikkor glass. While the Russian 35/2.8 is a fine lens, Nikkor 50s and 105s are world class and the new CV wides are wonderful and affordable. I was never really happy with my 4s even after I had them CLAed by Oleg. It could have been an off day or he could have done as good as he could. My Nikon S2, which I paid just a bit more than the two Kievs and CLAing cost me worked much better and IMHO handled much better. While there are folks who have had much better luck that I, folks who have the time to tweak their cameras, it is just not me.
I would recommend looking at a good Nikon S2 user and a Nikkor 50/2. I think you would be much happier with it.
Karen's site below has great links on it and she does a fine job of comparison.
http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/index-frameset.html?Kiev4a.html~mainFrame
Here is some stuff she has on the Nikon RangeFinder family.
http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/index-frameset.html?Kiev4a.html~mainFrame
B2 (;->
I had several Kievs and switched to Nikon. I really like the handling and the Nikkor glass. While the Russian 35/2.8 is a fine lens, Nikkor 50s and 105s are world class and the new CV wides are wonderful and affordable. I was never really happy with my 4s even after I had them CLAed by Oleg. It could have been an off day or he could have done as good as he could. My Nikon S2, which I paid just a bit more than the two Kievs and CLAing cost me worked much better and IMHO handled much better. While there are folks who have had much better luck that I, folks who have the time to tweak their cameras, it is just not me.
I would recommend looking at a good Nikon S2 user and a Nikkor 50/2. I think you would be much happier with it.
Karen's site below has great links on it and she does a fine job of comparison.
http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/index-frameset.html?Kiev4a.html~mainFrame
Here is some stuff she has on the Nikon RangeFinder family.
http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/index-frameset.html?Kiev4a.html~mainFrame
B2 (;->
Last edited:
shimo-kitasnap
everything is temporary..
Oh cool, my Japanese Prof. at my university was a graduate student friend of Karen's at Cornell in the early 90's. Thanks for the advice on the Nikon, may just have to give it a go.
spiderfrank
just a dreamer
The real beauty of the Kiev (and Contax of course) is the shutter, make some surfing in Internet, you 'll find how incredible it is!
Franco
Franco
Spyderman
Well-known
This is not true. On Kiev you can change speeds anytime.
Only problem is that if the curtains are not correctly locked together, some light leaks might appear if you change speed before cocking.
kievman
Kievman
Since this thread has turned into a Nikon vs Kiev thead I would put the kievs rangefinder accuracy over the Nikons, and the Kievs have bigger rangefinder patchs which are easier to focus especially in low light. In addition to that my kievs all show close to 100 percent of the image area with a 50mm lens, What are the nikons- 80 percent? And in the last catagory price a well tuned kiev with 50mm lens & case and strap can be bought for around a 100 bucks, whats a unCLA S2 without lens or case going to cost 200-300 bucks? not to mention the cost of a decent 50mm lens and case and strap. Unless you can afford one of the newer millenium nikon RF cameras (Big bucks$$$$$$$) Your stuck with 50 year old stock from Nikon or not so cheap newer stock from CV, wihich has been discontinued. either way going the Nikon route is not going to be cheap. plan on spending big bucks, At least $1000 to $2000.00 for a complete system. A complete Kiev system can be easily put together for $300 or $400. I Know, I just did it- Michael
Paul T.
Mentor
If you're going for the 'better' camera, you might as well stay with an M3! If you want a bargain, funky, reliable camera with incredibly underpriced lenses, especially at 50mm, it's hard to beat a Kiev.
My impression is that my Kiev II is a bit smaller than the M3. It feels just as solid and, really, at the time when I sold my M4 and was looking for an M3, I was just as happy with the Kiev - mine was a 50s model, for around $100, and was an absolute bargain. Again, you can buy a Jupiter 8 in Kiev mount for $20 or so, I've accumulated three or four and they all give terrific results. The VF is pretty good, the huge rangefinder base makes focusing easy and precise, while the focus wheel, although quirky, is very handy.
I'm supposed to be working today, if no-one's posted any comparison pics by this afternoon, I'll do so.
My impression is that my Kiev II is a bit smaller than the M3. It feels just as solid and, really, at the time when I sold my M4 and was looking for an M3, I was just as happy with the Kiev - mine was a 50s model, for around $100, and was an absolute bargain. Again, you can buy a Jupiter 8 in Kiev mount for $20 or so, I've accumulated three or four and they all give terrific results. The VF is pretty good, the huge rangefinder base makes focusing easy and precise, while the focus wheel, although quirky, is very handy.
I'm supposed to be working today, if no-one's posted any comparison pics by this afternoon, I'll do so.
Highway 61
Revisited
The M3 and the Kiev II (2A, 4A) bodies measurements are exactly the same. The Kiev quite protruding winding knob makes it for a slightly larger camera.
Not surprising as the M3 Bauhaus design borrowed a lot from the Contax II Art-Deco design. And the not metered Kiev II, 2A, 4A are just Contax II cop... ahem, well, clones.
And yes, the Nikon S2 is a way better camera. Its superb 1:1 brightlines viewfinder is a huge improvement over the Contax/Kiev viewfinder. Its shutter is 100% reliable even after having spent many decades resting in a cupboard because it's designed to run dry with no lubrication. Nikon took the best from both the main RF systems (Leica and Contax) and made it for a very, very nice camera, the S2.
The rangefinder baselength issue is irrelevant. Yes the Contax/Kiev have the longest one but the Nikon rangefinders have the same baselength as the Contax IIa and the M3 do. AFAIK nobody ever said that the Leica M baselength was too short, period.
I recently shot close-up flowers photos with a Nikon rangefinder camera and a Nikkor-Q-C 135/3.5 lens. Dead-on focus with no issue whatsoever.
A Nikon S2 costs what it costs, but the price reflects its build quality, and reliability. You will never find a Nikon S2 on which film plane to bayonet mount optical registry (also called the "camera working distance") is wrong from factory. No shutter capping, no frames overlapping or other funny thing that you may very well find on a Kiev, even on a sparkling one.
Of course you can grab a very nice and very well working Kiev for $50. But you may very well have to grab five nice $50 Kievs to get one that works well and is reliable. A nice and very well working $250 Nikon S2 body isn't that hard to get if you are persistant and patient.
As Karen N. shows it on her website, the Jupiter-12 35/2.8 will mount on a Nikon S2, and focus correctly. It won't even scratch the S2 frontplate if you are lucky...
I have bought a nice Nikkor-H-C 50/2 for $65 (yes, $65, not "bigbucks$$$$$"). This is probably the best vintage/classic 50mm lens I have ever used/owned. It's obviously even better than any of the best Zeiss/Leitz lens of that time.
Not surprising as the M3 Bauhaus design borrowed a lot from the Contax II Art-Deco design. And the not metered Kiev II, 2A, 4A are just Contax II cop... ahem, well, clones.
And yes, the Nikon S2 is a way better camera. Its superb 1:1 brightlines viewfinder is a huge improvement over the Contax/Kiev viewfinder. Its shutter is 100% reliable even after having spent many decades resting in a cupboard because it's designed to run dry with no lubrication. Nikon took the best from both the main RF systems (Leica and Contax) and made it for a very, very nice camera, the S2.
The rangefinder baselength issue is irrelevant. Yes the Contax/Kiev have the longest one but the Nikon rangefinders have the same baselength as the Contax IIa and the M3 do. AFAIK nobody ever said that the Leica M baselength was too short, period.
I recently shot close-up flowers photos with a Nikon rangefinder camera and a Nikkor-Q-C 135/3.5 lens. Dead-on focus with no issue whatsoever.
A Nikon S2 costs what it costs, but the price reflects its build quality, and reliability. You will never find a Nikon S2 on which film plane to bayonet mount optical registry (also called the "camera working distance") is wrong from factory. No shutter capping, no frames overlapping or other funny thing that you may very well find on a Kiev, even on a sparkling one.
Of course you can grab a very nice and very well working Kiev for $50. But you may very well have to grab five nice $50 Kievs to get one that works well and is reliable. A nice and very well working $250 Nikon S2 body isn't that hard to get if you are persistant and patient.
As Karen N. shows it on her website, the Jupiter-12 35/2.8 will mount on a Nikon S2, and focus correctly. It won't even scratch the S2 frontplate if you are lucky...
I have bought a nice Nikkor-H-C 50/2 for $65 (yes, $65, not "bigbucks$$$$$"). This is probably the best vintage/classic 50mm lens I have ever used/owned. It's obviously even better than any of the best Zeiss/Leitz lens of that time.
dee
Well-known
i guess it's how much do you want to spend ?
The sensible option still has to be a cla M 3 - the Kiev will never be as reliable , and is more awkward to use - however ,I love my Oleg 4M - see avatar - and am dee-termined to get my K 2 serviced sometime !
I don't know much about Nikon , but there are just so many lenses for the Leica !
I have an M 8 .
dee
The sensible option still has to be a cla M 3 - the Kiev will never be as reliable , and is more awkward to use - however ,I love my Oleg 4M - see avatar - and am dee-termined to get my K 2 serviced sometime !
I don't know much about Nikon , but there are just so many lenses for the Leica !
I have an M 8 .
dee
wolves3012
Mentor
No offence meant here, but next time you come to renew your car and you stroll into the garage and have (say) a Chevrolet in mind, would you expect the salesman to say something like "well, I recommend you look at a Rolls Royce, you'd be far happier with that. For starters, the build quality is higher. Depreciation is also far lower: a true, reliable classic" and so on?
spiderfrank
just a dreamer
There are some unique features in the Kiev cameras (and old Contaxes of course) that in my opinion well worth the interest for the camera "for itself", and not only for "I like Leica, but cannot afford it, so let me look at a Kiev).
Franco
Franco
Highway 61
Revisited
Before I read this I just had a nice Nikon S2 and a 50/2 Nikkor-H-C.
I now have the Rolls-Royce of all the rangefinders. Thanks.
oftheherd
Mentor
Can you elaborate on that? It is the first time I have heard that.
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
IMHO, size differences isn't the deciding factor, the two cameras are different enough merit trying out each one anyways.
I like my Kiev 4A because of the focusing wheel, and it looks cool in black, and I can get it along with three lenses without having to sell my car, oh, and it takes darn good photos
matchat
Member
Too true, I have a main camera system (Minolta SLR c/w a reasonable collection of Minolta primes) for when I want to carry out serious photography and be assured of consistently high quality images. Otherwise I chose to buy into the FSU rangefinders because (A) they look cool, (B) they're fun to play with, (C) they don't cost me an arm and a leg to buy and they shouldn't because I don't intend them for serious heavy duty shooting.
Not everyone can afford a luxury such as a Nikon or Leica for the limited use they might actually recieve and so the FSU equipment is a happy stopgap. Besides finding a good user is all part of the excitement - consider it photographic russian roulette, the thrill is in the chase!
> You will never find a Nikon S2 on which film plane to bayonet mount optical registry (also
> called the "camera working distance") is wrong from factory.
I'll have to mark mine. I modified it to use Zeiss Lenses. I know which one it is. When I got it, one of the shims was missing. The S2 uses three shims, like washers, to space the helical from the body. So my S2 was off and the lens mount was crooked! I had two other S2's, and decided to make this one work with the Sonnar 50mm F1.5 lens. I can also use it with a Contax 13.5cm telephoto without a focus problem.
> called the "camera working distance") is wrong from factory.
I'll have to mark mine. I modified it to use Zeiss Lenses. I know which one it is. When I got it, one of the shims was missing. The S2 uses three shims, like washers, to space the helical from the body. So my S2 was off and the lens mount was crooked! I had two other S2's, and decided to make this one work with the Sonnar 50mm F1.5 lens. I can also use it with a Contax 13.5cm telephoto without a focus problem.
Highway 61
Revisited
Spyderman said:
Ondrej speaks of the well known Kiev shutter capping issue : the two shutter curtains not getting linked together well enough when the shutter has just been fired, and, as a result, spoiling the film with light on next time the shutter is cocked, because there is a gap between the two shutter curtains when the curtains are lifted again.oftheherd said:
But - when it happens, it does not depend on before/after speeds changing and shutter cocking. It happens each time you cock the shutter, had you changed the shutter speeds before cocking the shutter, or not. This is an absolute non-using camera issue before the capping problem is cured.
kievman
Kievman
The Too Shaa!!!!!! goes to Brian Sweeney...
I stand by what (BigBucks$$$$) I say about the costs of getting into a older or newer Nikon RF System, Maybe Highway 61 hasn't seen what a S2 is going for on ebay these days, 600-900.00 on my last search a few days ago. and according to Karens website, the one BillBillingham2 mentioned, S2's go for $600-1000.00, or maybe I am liooking in the wrong place. Hey 61 could you tell me where I can get a S2 for 250 bucks????? The Nikkor lens seemed a lot more reasonable although.
Of the 4 keivs I have purchased, none of which have been CLA'd, as far as I know. only one has has any serious issues that are factory related (rangefinderr off) All the rest work fine. Either I am really lucky or the keiv's are better cameras then people say it is - Peace - Michael
I stand by what (BigBucks$$$$) I say about the costs of getting into a older or newer Nikon RF System, Maybe Highway 61 hasn't seen what a S2 is going for on ebay these days, 600-900.00 on my last search a few days ago. and according to Karens website, the one BillBillingham2 mentioned, S2's go for $600-1000.00, or maybe I am liooking in the wrong place. Hey 61 could you tell me where I can get a S2 for 250 bucks????? The Nikkor lens seemed a lot more reasonable although.
Of the 4 keivs I have purchased, none of which have been CLA'd, as far as I know. only one has has any serious issues that are factory related (rangefinderr off) All the rest work fine. Either I am really lucky or the keiv's are better cameras then people say it is - Peace - Michael
40oz
...
An ode to my home, shot almost entirely with my Kiev's (Might take a few minutes to load every thumbnail):
http://lakespc.com/pics/BlackAndWhite/Minneapolis/
See my gallery as well for a few more.
I have three Kiev's. A 4, 4A, and a 4AM. That's one with a working meter and two with no meters. All are excellent cameras. The 4 and 4A have very minor light leaks that I would never expect from a $600 camera, but are non-issues for me given everything else. For starters, I got each for ~$65US with a very fine J-8, in fantastic cosmetic condition, and did I mention the working meter on the 1979 vintage Kiev 4?
Don't let my very minor issues with my bodies scare you off. You'd no more buy the bodies I did for what I paid than you'd pay $200US for a Leica M body without expecting some issues. To put it in perspective, M bodies in similar cosmetic condition would command top dollar despite 100% breakdown of the mechanics. My issues are not rare when people are buying the discards of a civilization half a world away, but happily they are typically the worst you can expect - minor issues that become the quirks of a well-loved body rather than constant irritants that spoil anything. Certainly worth fixing if it detracts from the photos.
In short, "Kiev Rangefinders.... do it." I love mine, and don't lust for anything when out shooting them. They don't do anything a Leica doesn't do except arrive in your cupboard without resorting to Ramen and ketchup for a month That said, don't get the cheapest one you can find. Just as with Leicas, you'll end up with a fixer-upper. Get one from someone like Fedka, and I'd even be willing to pay for film and processing by the seller to ensure a vetted body. They really are that good, IMHO. You'll never be asked to pay what they are actually worth.
http://lakespc.com/pics/BlackAndWhite/Minneapolis/
See my gallery as well for a few more.
I have three Kiev's. A 4, 4A, and a 4AM. That's one with a working meter and two with no meters. All are excellent cameras. The 4 and 4A have very minor light leaks that I would never expect from a $600 camera, but are non-issues for me given everything else. For starters, I got each for ~$65US with a very fine J-8, in fantastic cosmetic condition, and did I mention the working meter on the 1979 vintage Kiev 4?
Don't let my very minor issues with my bodies scare you off. You'd no more buy the bodies I did for what I paid than you'd pay $200US for a Leica M body without expecting some issues. To put it in perspective, M bodies in similar cosmetic condition would command top dollar despite 100% breakdown of the mechanics. My issues are not rare when people are buying the discards of a civilization half a world away, but happily they are typically the worst you can expect - minor issues that become the quirks of a well-loved body rather than constant irritants that spoil anything. Certainly worth fixing if it detracts from the photos.
In short, "Kiev Rangefinders.... do it." I love mine, and don't lust for anything when out shooting them. They don't do anything a Leica doesn't do except arrive in your cupboard without resorting to Ramen and ketchup for a month
That said, don't get the cheapest one you can find. Just as with Leicas, you'll end up with a fixer-upper. Get one from someone like Fedka, and I'd even be willing to pay for film and processing by the seller to ensure a vetted body. They really are that good, IMHO. You'll never be asked to pay what they are actually worth.