This is one of my favourite film cameras - the lens is amazing and captures fantastic images. I think mine is a 1980 (first two digits of serial number). It is not really very good at capturing fast moving images but is great for landscapes, still life and portraits. I love it. Thanks for the video.

Another cracking review - so good to hear you reviewing again!

@paulomoreira007

3 жыл бұрын

Thank so much Jonathan, I will try to post more regularly. Cheers.

You should definitely post more. You have a great English, all the cameras are super interesting and I like the simplicity of your videos. Great pictures btw ;)

@paulomoreira007

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you for your kind words. I will try to post more regularly, as you have guessed, I am not an influencer, nor do I want to be one, hence the simplicity of the videos, a camera and a tripod! Cheers.

Great insights, and I think the 4a and its shutter sound are cool!

Excellent video! Thanks for covering these beautiful cameras.

@paulomoreira007

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you for your kind comment. Happy shooting!

I have a Kiyev 4a as well and it works as it worked in 1968, when my model was produced. Light sensors are working like a charm too. Nice video.

@vladnickul

Жыл бұрын

it maybe be, the only one :))

Cracking video man! 👍👌

@paulomoreira007

2 ай бұрын

Cheers!

Thanks for your review! It was very helpful for me because today I received my Kiev 4a, including three lenses and a Turret viewfinder. It has the “ugly” light meter (I don’t mind). The focusing wheel is scratching the skin of my index finger, so I will be using the other method to focus.

@paulomoreira007

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you for your comment. Like I said in the video, I don't like that focusing wheel, even when it's working as it should. I see no problem in focusing by hand. You've got off to a good start, your Kiev is nice, put it to good use! Cheers.

Hello Paulo, great video my friend I stumbled across your vlog well done keep it up!

@paulomoreira007

3 жыл бұрын

Hi Stephen! So glad to have find you here! Stay safe! 🙂

Thanks for the great review!

@paulomoreira007

2 жыл бұрын

I 'm glad you liked it. Cheers!

I swore my photographic life with a Kiev 4AM, and a 4A back in my uni years. Now I also own a reskinned 4A with the best ever shutter sound. Also to be a bit pedantic, the Kiev cameras are indeed made in the Soviet Union, but they were made in Ukraine, specifically in the camera's namesake, Kyiv, back then the capital of the Ukrainian SSR, by the Arsenal Factory.

@paulomoreira007

3 жыл бұрын

Glad I am alone in thinking about the sound of the Kiev 4a🙂 Cheers

I hope you can set the button "add to a playlist" so I could put on my "rangefinder" list... Great info!

Great video .... I have 3 .... all very good ...

Thank You for your video, as I have 5 of these babies mostly the Kiev 4m models as in which also have the 35mm, and the 85mm for these models. As I really was impressed with the optics, as the 50mm Jupiter that I found sharper like the Sonnar 50mm 2.0, I found these models better for Black & White shooting very contrasty. The models with a meter - hey what can you say of the Old Selenium model metering that the my models the meter works, as the exposure is close to normal. I do not mine with the wind mode, it is the rewind mode can be slow, and also have the external finders for the 35mm, and 85mm. Shooting Color found it kinda Soft, and muted colors. And in closing that I also have the Kiev 5 as I do use the onboard meter, and the 35mm, and 85mm without having problem in mounting them

@paulomoreira007

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you for your comment. I'm not very impressed by the optics, they are from the 1930's after all. I do prefer the Jupiter 8M to the regular Jupiter 8. I have the 85/2 but I don't really like it, no problem since I don't use tele lenses with rangefinders. The Helios 103 50/1.8 is along with the Helios-94 my favorite Kiev lens. I don't have a particular attraction to old glass, so it was only natural to like the more recent ones. I don't shoot color with Kiev/Zorki/Fed or even Nikon or Leica lenses that are 70 years old, I know their shortcomings with color film. I don't have any metered Kiev, except for the 5, I don't use meters with my old cameras, so I don't miss them, plus they make the camera look ungainly. I am so glad that you are shooting with them and keeping the Contax/Kiev flame alive in this world of photo snobbery. Best regards from Porto, city of Port Wine.

I own a few Contax ii and I love them

@paulomoreira007

3 жыл бұрын

You are quite right to love them. I used to have a Contax II but it was stolen, a shame. Enjoy your Contaxes.

Thanks for your review! Just a small reminder: at 17:15 you said that "even by this time in 1962, no rangefinder...has achieved this high speed (1/1250)." Actually, Japanese manufacturer Chiyoda Kogaku, also known as MINOLTA, released their "V2" rangefinder model in 1958, with a shutter speed up to 1/2000. Interestingly, this achievement was done cleverly by a leaf shutter. At that time, leaf shutters rarely reach speeds faster than 1/500, and focal plane shutters rarely reach speeds faster than 1/1000. MINOLTA V2 claimed to be the fastest camera. Then in 1960, MINOLTA released another model "V3", further upgrading shutter speeds to 1/3000.

@paulomoreira007

7 ай бұрын

Thank you for your comment. I should have wrote focal plane rangefinder. I am not familiar with those Minolta's but I think they may have used the same trick as on the Minolta Uni which is to restrict apertures in order to have higher shutter speeds as the leafs travel a lot less at f11 than f1.8. This trick is still used today on the Fuji X100 series and the Ricoh GR Digital to go beyond 1/1000 of shutter speed. All the best.

Hi! I have a Kiev 4a camera. But the shutter speed doesn’t work. It looks in good condition but it doesn’t open at all. There a way to fix it? Thank you 🙏

@paulomoreira007

2 жыл бұрын

Hi! I'm sorry to tell you but a shutter problem is nomally a death sentence for these cameras. They are very complicated to fix and there is very few technicians that will repair them, even if they do, it will be expensive. You should considering buying another one. Best of luck.

What film did u use for black and white?

Will this camera click without film? I have one and I’m trying to dry fire it, all my other old cameras have levers.

@paulomoreira007

2 ай бұрын

This camera will dry fire, it doesn't need film in it for the shutter to work, just advance and cock the shutter with the shutter speed dial.

are the finders identical on the 2A and 4A? are they much inferior to the M6?

@paulomoreira007

Жыл бұрын

Yes, the viewfinder is the same on both models. Nothing comes close to M viewfinder, except the modern Voigtlander/Cosina rangefinders. Don't forget that these Kievs come from the 1936 Contax II, so you can't expect anything like a M camera in terms of viewfinder.

I didn't hear you say the shutter must be cocked before you change the shutter speed. And rewind wasn't clear on this. I didn't see you press anything or show a button to release the film to be rewound. If you work on the other shutter, I hope you show the work. I'll be getting a working but dirty looking model 4M in whatever time it takes these days from Ukraine, and will look forward to cleaning it up, which I find very satisfying to do. I remember the stuff from car parts stores that restores leather finishes or those rubberized roof finishes...whatever it takes to make the blacks rich again.. I'd love to be able to clean in the inside of the rangefinder glass too, somehow. Thanks.

@paulomoreira007

Жыл бұрын

Mechanically it's not necessarily to cock the shutter before winding, the Contax shutter is not the Leica type shutter that equips the other Soviet cameras. However, you must cock it before choosing a speed as it will become impossible to choose a shutter speed. The camera is really silent, shame the Contax is not as simple and strong as the Leica shutter because it's very silent and virtually vibration free.

Great video. Love these old cameras. You mention 1936 often, don’t you mean 1946 for these Kyiv/Zeiss cameras? The Russians were so fortunate to have the Zeiss factory virtually untouched after the war, and moved all the operations to Kyiv to mass produce these Contax cameras. Sad they did not share the same Zeiss values on maintaining high quality standards as time marched on.

@paulomoreira007

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you so much for your nice comment. No, when I mentioned 1936 ,it was the year of launch of the Contax II, so it's the year of birth of the Kiev as it was made with the original tooling and plans. This is a unique case, a miracle almost how the Soviets kept the Zeiss Ikon quality for so long. 🙂

@Hunter-nu7uw

2 жыл бұрын

Totally agree, Paulo, the Contax II camera legacy does start in 1936 before WWII. Good to connect the history of this Kyiv camera from its beginning. The rangefinder accuracy was amazing, and exceeded Leica by a significant amount for its day.

@paulomoreira007

2 жыл бұрын

@@Hunter-nu7uw Yes, the rangefinder accuracy was far superior to the LTM Leicas. It had to be, the Zeiss lens line up for the Contax were of apertures that Leica could only dream of. Also, the design of the rangefinder is different from Leica's, no feeler at lens mount, Contax/Kiev needing a rangefinder adjustment is very rare, unlike Leica cameras.

I have a 1976 Kiev 4a. Light leaks through the roller blind shutter so fogging occurs. I love the looks so I keep it. I prefer to use my Zorki 4k rangefinder with the sharp Jupiter 8 50mm f2 lens. It is easy to use and gives great results.

@paulomoreira007

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you for your comment. It's a shame that your Kiev 4a is faulty, given it's manufacturing date, it isn't surprising. I love the Zorki 4 too, especially the first ones with the big viewfinder. There is nothing wrong with the Jupiter 8, the only problem is that you´re stuck to just one fast lens (except for the J3) as a standard lens, while the Kiev offers 2 types of Jupiter 8 and the Helios-103. Happy shooting with your Zorki 4!

Another great video, thank you. I've got a Kiev but have never handled a Contax - how similar are they in handling/quality?

@paulomoreira007

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you! There are no differences between the Contax II and early Kievs in terms of handling and feeling. Build quality is very high, deliriously high in Russian terms and basically on par with the pre-war. However, as the years production progressed, quality suffered, the Russians introduced plastic, tried to simplify the shutter by eliminating the 1/1250 top speed. These 1970's and 1980's cameras are best avoided. Mind you, Kiev cameras inherited all the good things from the Contax II but also the same recurrent faults, like the shutter straps, the supet complex mechanics. Normally, Contax II cameras are normally found with the exact same problems, it's the same camera after all. Cheers.

@paulomoreira007

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you my friend, I really think the shutter sound is like anything on earth, really sweet. Take care.

The Kiev was made in USSR but in Ukraine . « In Russia if you want »….and so on during this video. The Arsenal factory was in Kiev . Cmeras and lenses were produced there.

@paulomoreira007

Жыл бұрын

And may I ask where the incorrection/inaccuracies are? The Kiev was produced in the USSR, today Russia, in a today's independent country, Ukraine. Just like Praktica cameras were made in GDR, not Germany, but when they unified it became a German camera. It's tough to deal with these geopolitical changes and being politically correct. I have no intention of downgrading Ukraine or Russia, believe me.

@metphmet

Жыл бұрын

@@paulomoreira007 USSR was a federation . Ukraine was a soviet republic. Russia was another soviet republic . USSR is not Russia today. It is what Putin tries to let people believe when he speaks about the Great Patriotic War against the 3rd Reich and the 25 million death. This war was won by russians, ukrainian, kazakh etc..Within the 25 million deads , 7 were ukrainians! But nobody contradicts Putin. Officialy Arsenal, which still exists, was never russian . It was soviet and then ukrainian. Praktica? Germany was divided but then reunified but it was always Germany . It is not about to be politicly correct. It is about the reality. Don't be sorry. All the western medias participate to this confusion between Russia and USSR .

@paulomoreira007

Жыл бұрын

@@metphmet I do apologize for the lack of accuracy, I have been many times to Moscow and I have also been in Ukraine, in Kiev. I do have my political views but I am always as neutral as possible with these videos. I am very aware of the difference between Russian people and Ukrainian people. One of my best friends is Ukrainian, there are lots of Ukrainian and Russian emigrants here, they came in the early 2000's and have been integrated into our society in an exemplary way. In my building, there is an Ukrainian family living here for many years. We also start to see many young people coming from Russia to escape going to the war. We accept them and ask no questions. Like you say, our information is not the best about both countries, especially their history.

@studiosnch

11 ай бұрын

I mentioned in my comment from years ago that the Kiev camera was built in the Arsenal Factory in Kiev, Ukrainian SSR. Hence the camera can be better described as a "Soviet" camera, just as the FED (made in Kharkiv, Ukrainian SSR) and the Zorki (in Krasnogorsk, Russian SSR). That way you can recognize the historical background of when the camera was made, and avoid the political pitfall of calling this camera "russian" when in fact is was built in the territory of Ukraine.

The Planar is not a modern lens ( end of the 19th century) . It might be even older than the Sonnar. Both are Zeiss designs. I like this Helios but ,as you say, it has flare and therefore lacks contrast . It has 6 elements in 4 groups like the first Planar. PS : I checked the Sonnar design came 30 years after the Planar.

@paulomoreira007

Жыл бұрын

I meant modern because of the coatings that made the Planar the reference for all modern 50mm lenses. The Planar was created long before the Sonnar but the number of glass surfaces/air made it impossible to work well, hence the Sonnar. When Zeiss invented lens coating the Planar became the standard for all lens manufacturers. The mention "modern" was used in that context, opposite to the J8 that is a 1930's design. It wasn't the only Soviet lens that used the post war "modern" Planar design, the Helios-94 for the Kiev 5 also used the same design, like 99% of manufacturers after WW2 and to the present.

@metphmet

Жыл бұрын

@@paulomoreira007 I understood what you ment. The Planar and all its derivatives were the most popular post WWII standard fast lenses for 35mm cameras. The Sonnar design was used mainly for short tele lens by many maufacturers. Nowodays the Planar design is relegated to the nifty fifty AF lenses and to some manual lenses. Regarding soviet lenses , I like very much the Zenitar 50 f1.7 , a Planar derivative.

@paulomoreira007

Жыл бұрын

@@metphmet In a a way or another, all 50 mm lenses are of Planar design. In nowadays, the 50mm has fallen out of love with digital photographers, hence the small field of application of the Planar. I don't have the Zenitar 1.7/50, I have a few Soviet M42 lenses but except for the Jupiter 37 AM 135/2.8, I am not too impressed by them

I miss your videos Paulo.

@paulomoreira007

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you Nico, that's really kind of you to say that. I haven't lost my interest in old cameras or film photography, it's just that I got fed up with being insulted by people who never owned the camera featured in my video, much less take pictures with it. I am thinking of a new video, perhaps just concentrating on old unknown cameras is a better option. Greetings from Porto.

@nico.m8346

2 жыл бұрын

@@paulomoreira007 I think anyone publishing any kind of content will always get trash. Your videos are unique, they are far from all the ''vlog'' videos out there. Also they helped me greatly in choosing cameras.

@flowermaze___

Жыл бұрын

Agreed. Your videos are very classic and have soul. As well as some beautiful cameras and excellent info! Keep at it and don’t let the internet murmors keep you from creating

As I said on the taken-down video, the G2 video should happen. It's not like you're being contrarian for the sake of being contrarian, you always have thought-out reasons to say what you say

@paulomoreira007

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you so much for the encouragement. I´ve had the G2 for some years now, I always wanted one when it was released (yes, I am that old!) but couldn´t afford it. Now the damn thing has become a toy for hipsters and people with little talent and too much money. I've always avoided making a video about the G2 in order not to be associated with the rich, ignorant and bored. You are right of course, I don't have the habit of making things up in order to prove me right. Well, next time I decide to present myself again, I'll present the G2 as well, two events in one! Cheers!

@FreezerKing

3 жыл бұрын

@@paulomoreira007 I kinda know what you mean about the "toy" thing. I just bought a Mamiya 7 and that has a lot of "hipster cache" that's really annoying (though I try not to get into the "real photographers vs. posers" business). But, a tool is a tool I guess, we can't blame the camera for what happens to it. Intent in use is what matters, I suppose.

Your comparison of shutter sound with the Leica M6 is wrong. The Leica is *much* quieter when a lens is installed (as was the case with the Kiev you compared it to). For a fair comparison, mount lenses on both cameras, then you'll find the Leica is quieter with its fabric shutter curtains compared to the Kiev's metal "roller blind" curtains. Nice video otherwise👍

@paulomoreira007

Жыл бұрын

Thank you for your comment. You're right about the lens missing in the M6 but believe me it makes no difference at all, meaning the M6 is not as quiet at low speeds as the Kiev. Perhaps I should have used the M5 as it's more quiet than the M6 but the result wouldn't differ a lot. Of course, this is a dumb video, there is no science involved, no sonometer, just my years😀 Still, I always liked the Contax shutter sound better than the cloth one in Leicas but it's of no relevance when taking pictures. Happy shooting!

Soviet cameras, are just not comparable with "the originals" . and no they are not contax not zeiss they just look like them. the materials, the metal, the brass, the steel the glass is inferior quality. The best lens for the kiev rf's are the helios ;) When they were in production nobody said, i prefer kiev salyut zorki not the leica contax or hasselblad. They are cheap for a reason.

@paulomoreira007

Жыл бұрын

Thank you for your comment. I think you are half right. Soviet cameras were cheap for many reasons, they normally didn't have development costs as they would copy most things.They were cheap to attract foreign currency, many times they were sold at a loss. That's the case with LTM rangefinder models, the Kiev was a whole different story. As Contax II and Nikon rangefinder user, I can tell that the fit and finish of 1950's Kiev rangefinder is better, they don't rust or corrode like the Nikons. In the 50's, the Kiev was old fashion already and the truta is, the Contax models never catched on like the Leica did. The Kiev was the same camera, same problems, there was no reason to be successful with pro photographers. There are many Helios lenses, the 103 is very good, far better than the Júpiter 8, although in my opinion, the best One is the Helios 94, only available in the Kiev 5.

@vladnickul

Жыл бұрын

@@paulomoreira007 I did grow up with them. :) There are people that made award getting photoes with plastic diy garbage cameras thats not the point. One does not have a leica with just the named changed, one own leica like camera. stuff made in the comunist countries that were sold at a lost , was not because they were made that good, the reason more simple... bad managers and A TON of corruption. As a fact in my country, Romania people had to buy russian crap (CAER members crap), i mean they can't refuse to buy it. as it was detucted from their salaries, so we had feds smenas lubitels zorkies and so on galore plus shitty radios blendershair driers and other crap. The nikon "contax style" cameras had even titanium shuters and iluminators....in the 60s, For a hobbiest with no govt. conections a non soviet camera was a wet dream. How many soviet bodies broke on you? 5-6 ? how many other brands ?

@vladnickul

Жыл бұрын

I do not owned a five.. i did not like the look at all. I enjoy shooting with soviet cameras and sometimes a little cla's(now none) teh fact they are decent is a little thing beside the price :)

@paulomoreira007

Жыл бұрын

@@vladnickul looks aren't everything 😀 the Kiev 5 has a the best ever seen viewfinder on a Soviet camera. It's a shame it uses a different bayonet mount and the 1930's Contax mechanics. I have no Illusions about Soviet cameras but if one can't take a decent picture with a Soviet camera like a Zorki or a Kiev, then it will never take decent pictures with any camera! 😁

@vladnickul

Жыл бұрын

@@paulomoreira007 For sure! They are a nice, and even nicer when if it craps on you you can buy another :D and keep the lens. They are comparable cameras, at what axim a tenth of the price, brake one and you will replace it in a couple of days. not cry, and one will not buy as investment or something like that. Anyway. i recently found "the cult of soviet cameras" outside soviet era of influence. I found it strange.... I will try to try the 5, maybe is the time...