Selecting an FSU camera: Beginner's Guide

FSU Leningrad anyone ?

FSU Leningrad anyone ?

Thinking of buying a Leningrad, just from the looks of it. Does anyone have any experience with this camera ? Thanks !
 
Only one!! Read the instructions BEFORE operating it!!!
It is easy to jam through. for example. misuse of the self timer. (Bitter experience!!)
also not all m39 lenses fit, as there is a protruding ledge above the lens mount.
 
I just got a 1956 Kiev 3A with flash sync. It also has the self timer removed and replaced by an ordinary flash sync! Can anyone tell memore about the Kiev 3A?
 
I have 3 Zorki-4s, 2 Kievs, 1 Zorki-1 and Zorki-S, 1 Fed-3. Now, I prefer the bottom-loaded cameras due to their compactness and accurate viewfinder.
 
wolves3012 said:
Zorki 4
This is just about the same as the 3C. It has the same features but adds a self-timer. There is also a later variant, the 4K, which has a lever wind but is otherwise the same. Early models (pre-1965 ish, there's variation) have engraved text, an engraved shutter-speed dial and strap-lugs. Later models have no strap-lugs, printed text and dials and, sadly, the print wears off with use. Early models are usually better made and are more sought after. The Zorki 4/4K was produced in large numbers and is common and cheap, yet is a very capable camera. Framing isn't overly accurate. A variation on the Zorki 4 was made, called the Mir (meaning peace). This is a standard 4 without the slow-speed mechanism. Due to when they were made, the Mir has engraved markings not printed. Top marked speed is 1/500 not 1/1000, although some at least still actually have the 1/1000 speed, marked only by a dot.
Click to expand...
Zorki.4 was built 1956 to 1973(?). As mentioned, early models had engraved shutter speeds, etc. Like the 3C, early examples also had attractive [IMHO] embossed or raised trim framing the front VF and RF windows. Later versions did not. There were several variations / styles of the name Zorki engraved or painted across the front all during Zorki.4’s production.
 
Great thread by the way.

Though one question I do not believe I saw addressed was that of batteries. I say this because I had an issue with an Yashica G (from what I have been able to determine was a second series), which takes a battery to operate certain functions. A battery of which has a tendency to left in and forgotten, but I digress.

Which of the FSU rangefinders takes batteries, if any actually do?
 
Last edited:
kometman said:
Great thread by the way.

Though one question I do not believe I saw addressed was that of batteries. I say this because I had an issue with an Yashica G (from what I have been able to determine was a second series), which takes a battery to operate certain functions. A battery of which has a tendency to left in and forgotten, but I digress.

Which of the FSU rangefinders takes batteries, if any actually do?
Click to expand...
None of the usual FED, Zorki or Kievs does. I think some of the MF Kievs, with metering and the Kiev 35 take some form of battery. All the "usual suspects" have mechanical shutters and if they have a meter it's a selenium cell powered one.
 
Wouter said:
Thinking of buying a Leningrad, just from the looks of it. Does anyone have any experience with this camera ? Thanks !
Click to expand...

The Leningrad is actually quite a capable camera. It has an excellent finder, and as far as I know, it is the only FSU camera with multiple frame lines, for 50, 85, and 135mm lenses. The full finder area is probably correct for 35mm. It provides dioptre correction through a rotating eyepiece.

Conventional wisdom, and writeups I have seen state that the framelines are not parallax-correcting, however, the framelines in my late model and very ordinary Leningrad DO move to correct for parallax.

Leningrad-1.jpg



It has styling that only a mother could love, but it manages to appear strange as opposed to aggressively ugly like some of the later FEDs. There is a raised area just above the lens mount that will foul the Industar-26 or 61 lens with the large focus ring at the back. The various Jupiters will fit properly. The J8 with the focus lever fits with no problem, but it is a little more difficult to get at the lever than for some other cameras. It looks ridiculous with a little Industar collapsible lens, and it's not as if this beast is pocketable anyway. Please note that it is pictured here with an 85mm Jupiter 9 lens, which provides about the same proportions as a J8 on a smaller camera.

This is a relatively big and heavy camera. Here is a list of several FSU's with their weights (body only). Only the scarce and enormous Kiev 5 manages to score higher.
FED 1 435 gm
FED 2 525 gm
Zorki 6 570 gm
Zorki 4 625 gm
Leningrad 745 gm
Kiev 5 765 gm

From the few of these cameras I have examined, I would say that the build quality is very good, a cut above other FSU's with the exception of very early Kievs. The paint, leather, and chrome are all really good.

The whole reason for this camera is of course the spring motor drive, which provides for single shots only for any version of the Leningrad anyone is likely to ever find. This uses a very heavy spring, and moves the film fast. It makes an alarmingly loud CLANK when advancing the film. I do not have real data on the reliability of this system, but I would think that it would not be a great idea to fire this camera too much with no film in it.

I do not understand the reason behind the rumoured reliability problem with the self timer, but I have heard this often enough that I am willing to believe it. The story is that the self timer should never be set when the shutter is not cocked. Of course, if the spring motor is wound to any degree, this situation will never happen.

I think the Leningrad should be considered a special application camera, rather than something to use every day. It is a real good conversation starter though when people on the street get startled by the noises it makes!

Cheers,
Dez
 
But Helios Multi-finder does not have parallax correction, does it? This should become a real limitation in longer focals?...

I am hesitating between a turret and a Helios, but if I get with Helios the same kind of parallax error that I get with the internal viewfinder, I really don't think it is worth it.
 
mszargar said:
But Helios Multi-finder does not have parallax correction, does it? This should become a real limitation in longer focals?...

I am hesitating between a turret and a Helios, but if I get with Helios the same kind of parallax error that I get with the internal viewfinder, I really don't think it is worth it.
Click to expand...

I think this post may have been referring to something further up in the string..

You don't get parallax correction with any accessory finder I know of other than the special ones Canon made for their V and VI series cameras. With FSU equipment, the only available parallax correction I have ever seen is with 50 and 85mm lenses on the Leningrad camera.

Cheers,
Dez
 
Dez said:
You don't get parallax correction with any accessory finder I know of other than the special ones Canon made for their V and VI series cameras. With FSU equipment, the only available parallax correction I have ever seen is with 50 and 85mm lenses on the Leningrad camera.

Cheers,
Dez
Click to expand...
Actually the Zeiss-copy turret finder *does* have parallax correction. The correction is rather limited but is still quite useful at times and better than none.
 
Welllllll...yes, there sort of is parallax correction in the FSU turret finder; rather primitive, with only 1m and infinity selections for 50mm and shorter. I was really thinking of automatic parallax correction as you focus, and for that, the only choice is the Leningrad.

Can you imagine a Zorki 6 with frame lines and automatic parallax correction? Maybe we should toss in slow speeds at the same time without changing the housing. Add in a light meter and you have a Bessa R!

Cheers,
Dez
 
Recently I was given a FED-5V and I had fiddled with the exposure head quite a bit while not having read that "The exposure can be set only with the shutter cocked. Do not turn the exposure head in the interval between «30 and «1»".
Is it any possible way to test if the shutter speeds are properly set and fired? Have I damaged it?
 
Too late! The exposure head started moving around freely. Took a few screwdrivers and explored the inner parts of a FED-5V :) The best 5 bucks ever spend!
 
Few post earlier Dez made nice list of weight of different FSU bodies. I acquired late Zorki 1 body and really fell in love. I own FED 2 and their weight feels about the same but Zorki is as you know just more narrower, slimmer, lower. FED 2 is not big and those two make nice couple but the thing, why I'm posting is Zorki 3. Where its place among these two. There is many differences between these two, removable back and other "improvements" but is the body size roughly the same? Bottom and top plates are different which makes comparison slighly difficult (especially that bottom plate and its legs which make Z3 look already taller).
 
I am in the process of moving, and all my Russkii treasures are packed away, so I can't weigh it, but the various Zorki 3 versions are probably about the same as the Zorki 4. The original 3 is probably my favourite of them, followed by the M. the 3C is a Zorki 4 without the self-timer.

Cheers,
Dez
 
Aapo said:
Few post earlier Dez made nice list of weight of different FSU bodies. I acquired late Zorki 1 body and really fell in love. I own FED 2 and their weight feels about the same but Zorki is as you know just more narrower, slimmer, lower. FED 2 is not big and those two make nice couple but the thing, why I'm posting is Zorki 3. Where its place among these two. There is many differences between these two, removable back and other "improvements" but is the body size roughly the same? Bottom and top plates are different which makes comparison slighly difficult (especially that bottom plate and its legs which make Z3 look already taller).
Click to expand...
Roughly speaking, all the usual FSUs (FED/Zorki/Kiev) are quite similar in weight and they're hefty, being all-metal/glass. In terms of size, the Zorki (1), Zorki 2/2C and FED (1) are noticeably smaller than the rest. All the later ones are close to the same size, give or take a few millimetres here and there. The differences in apparent size are more illusion than reality and not really significant in actual use - except that some fit better in the hand as a matter of personal preference. The Zorki 3/3M looks a bit smaller but that's because there's a chunk "missing" where the top is stepped. The FED 4/5 looks taller because the top is deep to accommodate the meter cell. The FED 2 is a bit wider but not quite as tall as most others. And so on...

In terms of your specific question: the overall dimensions of the Zorki 3/3M are that it's a couple of millimetres wider than a FED 2, about the same depth but probably 5mm or so taller - most of which is due to the bulges for the case-locks. The top-plate, not counting the RF housing, sits lower. Against a Zorki 1, it's a fair bit bigger - it looks rather like its big brother.
 
After my Kiev 4 I would like to try something different and I basically hesitate between Fed 2 and Fed 3.

Most of the arguments about the Fed 2 is that it is more reliable because there are no slow speeds. I was just wondering the following:

- Would you say that because of the slow speeds the Fed 3(a) is less reliable than the Fed 2? What kind of problems can arise?

- Would you say the slow speeds are useless? do you ever shoot with the slow speeds that the Fed 3 can offer compared to the Fed 2?

Thanks
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top