ruben_bittermann2

<p>The basic problem of the Kiev rangefinders is the illusion of the buyer that in exchange of $100 (2014) he will get a working camera. <br> It is the same with a $300 or $ 400 Contax. With both rangefinders what you are buying at those ridiculous prices are bricks in their way to the repairman. It cannot be otherwise taking into consideration the age of both cameras, and the level of knowledge required to operate them, which many times is the source of the problems you inherit from the previous user.<br> It is true that there are exceptions in which you get a rough working camera. <br />But on those prices you will not get a top notch camera. In order to get a top notch camera you must know beforehand what should be working, and this implies first of all an additional knowledge of the many many features of the Kievs and Contaxes. For this level of knowledge you will have to make some research, as the information in the manuals is more or less to prevent you from ruining the camera at your very first roll.<br> What you do can expect at least is that the camera after being sent to a good repairman will not have issues, specially with the very delicate shutter mechanism. Up to this point everything goes equal both for the Kievs as for the Contaxes.<br /><br /><br> The status of the Kiev user and the Contax user vis a vis having a top notch camera is different. It is easier to have a full and decent and honest CLA from Mr Henry Scherer, www.zeisscamera.com, given several hundred dollars and time to wait. The issue here is having enough money. Other repairmen you cannot be sure they will tell you have bought a Kiev in Contax clothes, and will do the CLA anyway, and at a lower level in any case. Since the Contax market is very very profitable, hidden traps are waiting at next corner, one after the other. <br> The problem of the Kiev user is that no one performs a full CLA, even not a non-decent one, no matter what the seller claims. After that, no repairman offers CLA to the Kievs, no matter what they advertise. Once you start asking deeper, the repairmen will confirm what I am saying, Or will pose as he takes offense from you, for not trusting him blindly despite his 40 years knowledge in how to reap you.<br> Vis a vis the decent Kiev repairman, who will gently answer your detailed questions, specially "what exactly your CLA includes, what do you check ? ", you have to tell him exactly what do you want to repair. No CLA available. In exchange of the little money you pay (compared to the Contax CLA, after all they are the same mechanism, and the same work-time) you cannot expect otherwise. Therefore the Kiev user, in order to have a top notch Kiev must be even more knowledgeable than his fellow Contax, and do some minor works by himself.<br> To complain about the defects of those cameras after paying cheap and not sending them to a repairman, it is a bit of practical no-sense.<br> As for which Kiev model to buy, the issue again is the repairman and your knowledge of what should be checked. The list is not short.<br> Now that you hear me "knowledge, knowledge", you can make better sense of the meaning that these are professional cameras. The meaning is not the professional wedding photographer, but technical knowledge. You may not have the talent to fix the camera yourself, but you must know what it is about.<br> Nevertheless, here are there, there are Kiev 4 cameras never used since manufacture, that will astonish you if you get them. But you have to be lucky and concentrate your attention on models from the decade of the 60. Most of them, of the relatively few being sold at the same low price, will have non working meters, and this should be no issue at all for you. The issue is to have a fine mechanism. Pay great attention to the cosmetics in order to select those new-from-Arsenal beauties. Here is where the real lottery exists.</p> <p> </p>

<p>After purchasing a SBOOI, and looking for some info, 7 years later after this discussion, I would like to contribute with a response somewhat out of the box, but directly related at the same time.<br />I am not a Leica user, nor a Voight user. Nevertheless it seems to me problematic to use any viewfinder with several marks inside for different lenses. A camera changing viewfinder lines with a different lens is ideal, but marking two different focal lengths in the same window, I do not think it is better than a single frame line for each lens. In my view it is not better but bad, bad. The inner frame line makes the subject very small, therefore every gain for having two or three (!) marked focal lengths inside the viewfinder, goes to the basket. The more lines inside the viewfinder, the more the mess.<br />I know I am talking against a tradition, but tradition is not necessarily a good habit. All these speak in favor of the single focal length finder, like the Sbooi, but not in favor of every other accessory finder with more than one focal length mark.<br />I assume the Leica folk, like its Voight counterpart, is used to this style of multiple lines.</p>

<p>I have found an old bulk of xp2 among my stuff. I do remember very well that through a long time manual processing, some 12 or more minutes, the results were stunning, just stunning far beyond the c41 destination.</p>

<p>With your kind permission, I think that when comparing cameras we must remember that there is no quality, money cannot buy. The intelligent thing is to know if I am buying cheap for great quality, if I am buying a fair price for a fair quality, or if I am paying a highly excessive price for a great quality. This is more or less the value per buck equation. If you are paying far beyond more for a little bit of more quality, then I would not like to be in your shoes.<br /> At the times of film, Olympus Maitani took to the slr field what the Leica brought to the rangefinder: compactness. Compactness with quality is an absolute winner. This is the direction of evolution.<br /> Now the micro 4/3 system is carrying all the past advantages and adding two strategic ones. the capacity to use any lens on earth in manual mode. Be it said, additionally, I have purchased a digital Sigma 17-70 to use in my Panasonics as 35-140 manual focus zoom !<br /> The second strategic and revolutionary advantage is the Electronic Viewfinder. Whoever has not seen through it, should do it. At low light you see brighter. And highly highly important related to the use of non dedicated lens, and dedicated lens too, you can enlarge the image x10 times !!!! Now, you, owner of a DSLR, tell me how do you use any manual focus lens, how do you focus with your DSLR mirror, and I will be in solidarity with you. Mirror ? Reflex Mirror ?, kindly excuse me but you are still in the paleanthologic stage of camera evolution. Full frame though, delivers quality, the highest one, but it It delivers as a view camera delivered at slr time, through a backward way. <br /> Have you seen those wedding photogs shadowing their LCD backs with their hand to see what have they fished ? With an Electronic Viewfinder, the image after clicked jumps back to the viewfinder automatically ! The dslr in this sense is in the middle of the road between the Electronic viewfinder and the film camera when you couldn't see at all what you have photographed.<br /> The micro 4/3 system doesn't stand on the same grounds as DSLRs,in terms of absolute quality although it has many more advanced features the DSLRs do not. The micro 4/3 systems are a challenge to the compact pro cameras. That's their arena. They carry a half frame sensor, while at the same time have exchangeable lenses, either manual or AF.<br /> <br />Their price value is absolutely in their side. The compactness / quality is in their side too. What the G3 has brought new is a certain shortening of the overall size. Along the relatively new pancakes, and zoom pancake either (!), the OP is in the right direction.<img src="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contax#mediaviewer/File:Contax-s.jpg" alt="" /></p>