RLK
Loc: New Castle, PA/Stafford, VA
Does anyone have experience with the Kiev Medium Format camera.
RLK wrote:
Does anyone have experience with the Kiev Medium Format camera.
Built like a tank (probably made from left over tank parts). Not overly reliable, they seem to suffer shutter problems if I remember rightly and weighed a ton. They were the Russian answer to Hassleblad and came off a very poor third behind Hassleblad and Bronica. Assuming that a Hassy is out of your range look for a second hand Bronica. as I used one of these extensivly and it never let me down.
Hasselbladsky LOL
Other alternatives are the Pentax 645 or 67, and the Mamiya 645 or RB67. Or you could try a TLR like the YashicaMat or Rolleiflex/Rolleicord. I had a Rolleicord, sad that I sold it.
OK, at the risk of sounding stupid here, what is the difference between a DSLR and a medium format camera? Other than the price of course, I have seen them advertised and know they cost both arms and legs to purchase, but what makes them worth that much?
dtcracer wrote:
OK, at the risk of sounding stupid here, what is the difference between a DSLR and a medium format camera? Other than the price of course, I have seen them advertised and know they cost both arms and legs to purchase, but what makes them worth that much?
A medium format Hassy/Bronica/Kiev is a FILM camera that produces a negative about twice the size of a 35mm fim negative. It is possible to buy a special back for the Hassy which will turn it into a digital camera. Take out second and third mortgages to pay for it! To be quite honest I wouldn't entertain any of them unless you particularly want to stay with film. The reproduction of a digital camera with a good lens infront of it would be more than adaquate for most peoples requirements and much cheaper both in purchase price and running costs.
I have purchased 2 Bronicas (gently used--like incredibly new looking and function like new), several lenses,extenders, macro lens, spacers, pelican bags, film backs. All together 1100 dollars. For $80 I purchased a well construct all ,metal adapter so my Nikon D3100 can use those beautiful Bronica lenses. I have to shoot manually but what the heck. photographs are awesome unless my eye-sight fails/
Spindrift62 wrote:
A medium format Hassy/Bronica/Kiev is a FILM camera that produces a negative about twice the size of a 35mm fim negative. It is possible to buy a special back for the Hassy which will turn it into a digital camera. Take out second and third mortgages to pay for it! To be quite honest I wouldn't entertain any of them unless you particularly want to stay with film. The reproduction of a digital camera with a good lens infront of it would be more than adaquate for most peoples requirements and much cheaper both in purchase price and running costs.
br A medium format Hassy/Bronica/Kiev is a FILM c... (
show quote)
I saw an online demo of cleaning a Hassy sensor. The whole sensor comes right off the camera, and there it is - in your hand. Cleaning is very easy. Still, I don't plan to buy one.
Spindrift62 wrote:
dtcracer wrote:
OK, at the risk of sounding stupid here, what is the difference between a DSLR and a medium format camera? Other than the price of course, I have seen them advertised and know they cost both arms and legs to purchase, but what makes them worth that much?
A medium format Hassy/Bronica/Kiev is a FILM camera that produces a negative about twice the size of a 35mm fim negative. It is possible to buy a special back for the Hassy which will turn it into a digital camera. Take out second and third mortgages to pay for it! To be quite honest I wouldn't entertain any of them unless you particularly want to stay with film. The reproduction of a digital camera with a good lens infront of it would be more than adaquate for most peoples requirements and much cheaper both in purchase price and running costs.
quote=dtcracer OK, at the risk of sounding stupid... (
show quote)
Thank you. I am quite happy with my DSLR. I have just been hearing about medium format cameras lately and wondered what made them so desireable. What are their advantages, other than having a larger negative than a 35mm? Are the images better quality, do they print larger? I am just curious.
dtcracer wrote:
Spindrift62 wrote:
dtcracer wrote:
OK, at the risk of sounding stupid here, what is the difference between a DSLR and a medium format camera? Other than the price of course, I have seen them advertised and know they cost both arms and legs to purchase, but what makes them worth that much?
A medium format Hassy/Bronica/Kiev is a FILM camera that produces a negative about twice the size of a 35mm fim negative. It is possible to buy a special back for the Hassy which will turn it into a digital camera. Take out second and third mortgages to pay for it! To be quite honest I wouldn't entertain any of them unless you particularly want to stay with film. The reproduction of a digital camera with a good lens infront of it would be more than adaquate for most peoples requirements and much cheaper both in purchase price and running costs.
quote=dtcracer OK, at the risk of sounding stupid... (
show quote)
Thank you. I am quite happy with my DSLR. I have just been hearing about medium format cameras lately and wondered what made them so desireable. What are their advantages, other than having a larger negative than a 35mm? Are the images better quality, do they print larger? I am just curious.
quote=Spindrift62 quote=dtcracer OK, at the risk... (
show quote)
They are mainly used by photographers that want ultra maximum detail so that their shots can be printed up to billboard size without loss. However as the best I need is 20 x 30 inches, the disadvantages in carrying, cost, weight and the vast improvements made in the last few years to sensors and lenses have rendered the medium format obsolete as far as I'm concerned. You would also have to have incredble eyesight to tell the difference between photos shot on the two types of camera up to 20 x 30. However if you do want to go medium format and have money to burn then the Hassy (used on the moon landing) and the Bronica are beautiful cameras to use provided that you can adapt to looking at everything through a top mounted prism that reverses all visible motion.
Spindrift62 wrote:
dtcracer wrote:
Spindrift62 wrote:
dtcracer wrote:
OK, at the risk of sounding stupid here, what is the difference between a DSLR and a medium format camera? Other than the price of course, I have seen them advertised and know they cost both arms and legs to purchase, but what makes them worth that much?
A medium format Hassy/Bronica/Kiev is a FILM camera that produces a negative about twice the size of a 35mm fim negative. It is possible to buy a special back for the Hassy which will turn it into a digital camera. Take out second and third mortgages to pay for it! To be quite honest I wouldn't entertain any of them unless you particularly want to stay with film. The reproduction of a digital camera with a good lens infront of it would be more than adaquate for most peoples requirements and much cheaper both in purchase price and running costs.
quote=dtcracer OK, at the risk of sounding stupid... (
show quote)
Thank you. I am quite happy with my DSLR. I have just been hearing about medium format cameras lately and wondered what made them so desireable. What are their advantages, other than having a larger negative than a 35mm? Are the images better quality, do they print larger? I am just curious.
quote=Spindrift62 quote=dtcracer OK, at the risk... (
show quote)
They are mainly used by photographers that want ultra maximum detail so that their shots can be printed up to billboard size without loss. However as the best I need is 20 x 30 inches, the disadvantages in carrying, cost, weight and the vast improvements made in the last few years to sensors and lenses have rendered the medium format obsolete as far as I'm concerned. You would also have to have incredble eyesight to tell the difference between photos shot on the two types of camera up to 20 x 30. However if you do want to go medium format and have money to burn then the Hassy (used on the moon landing) and the Bronica are beautiful cameras to use provided that you can adapt to looking at everything through a top mounted prism that reverses all visible motion.
quote=dtcracer quote=Spindrift62 quote=dtcracer... (
show quote)
Sounds like my DSLR will work just fine for what I use it for! I guess if someone was a professional photographer it would be worth the expense, but I am still trying to get my wife to recover from the heart attack she had over the cost of my DSLR!
dtcracer wrote:
Spindrift62 wrote:
dtcracer wrote:
Spindrift62 wrote:
dtcracer wrote:
OK, at the risk of sounding stupid here, what is the difference between a DSLR and a medium format camera? Other than the price of course, I have seen them advertised and know they cost both arms and legs to purchase, but what makes them worth that much?
A medium format Hassy/Bronica/Kiev is a FILM camera that produces a negative about twice the size of a 35mm fim negative. It is possible to buy a special back for the Hassy which will turn it into a digital camera. Take out second and third mortgages to pay for it! To be quite honest I wouldn't entertain any of them unless you particularly want to stay with film. The reproduction of a digital camera with a good lens infront of it would be more than adaquate for most peoples requirements and much cheaper both in purchase price and running costs.
quote=dtcracer OK, at the risk of sounding stupid... (
show quote)
Thank you. I am quite happy with my DSLR. I have just been hearing about medium format cameras lately and wondered what made them so desireable. What are their advantages, other than having a larger negative than a 35mm? Are the images better quality, do they print larger? I am just curious.
quote=Spindrift62 quote=dtcracer OK, at the risk... (
show quote)
They are mainly used by photographers that want ultra maximum detail so that their shots can be printed up to billboard size without loss. However as the best I need is 20 x 30 inches, the disadvantages in carrying, cost, weight and the vast improvements made in the last few years to sensors and lenses have rendered the medium format obsolete as far as I'm concerned. You would also have to have incredble eyesight to tell the difference between photos shot on the two types of camera up to 20 x 30. However if you do want to go medium format and have money to burn then the Hassy (used on the moon landing) and the Bronica are beautiful cameras to use provided that you can adapt to looking at everything through a top mounted prism that reverses all visible motion.
quote=dtcracer quote=Spindrift62 quote=dtcracer... (
show quote)
Sounds like my DSLR will work just fine for what I use it for! I guess if someone was a professional photographer it would be worth the expense, but I am still trying to get my wife to recover from the heart attack she had over the cost of my DSLR!
quote=Spindrift62 quote=dtcracer quote=Spindrif... (
show quote)
The answers easy don't tell her!
Spindrift62 wrote:
dtcracer wrote:
Spindrift62 wrote:
dtcracer wrote:
Spindrift62 wrote:
dtcracer wrote:
OK, at the risk of sounding stupid here, what is the difference between a DSLR and a medium format camera? Other than the price of course, I have seen them advertised and know they cost both arms and legs to purchase, but what makes them worth that much?
A medium format Hassy/Bronica/Kiev is a FILM camera that produces a negative about twice the size of a 35mm fim negative. It is possible to buy a special back for the Hassy which will turn it into a digital camera. Take out second and third mortgages to pay for it! To be quite honest I wouldn't entertain any of them unless you particularly want to stay with film. The reproduction of a digital camera with a good lens infront of it would be more than adaquate for most peoples requirements and much cheaper both in purchase price and running costs.
quote=dtcracer OK, at the risk of sounding stupid... (
show quote)
Thank you. I am quite happy with my DSLR. I have just been hearing about medium format cameras lately and wondered what made them so desireable. What are their advantages, other than having a larger negative than a 35mm? Are the images better quality, do they print larger? I am just curious.
quote=Spindrift62 quote=dtcracer OK, at the risk... (
show quote)
They are mainly used by photographers that want ultra maximum detail so that their shots can be printed up to billboard size without loss. However as the best I need is 20 x 30 inches, the disadvantages in carrying, cost, weight and the vast improvements made in the last few years to sensors and lenses have rendered the medium format obsolete as far as I'm concerned. You would also have to have incredble eyesight to tell the difference between photos shot on the two types of camera up to 20 x 30. However if you do want to go medium format and have money to burn then the Hassy (used on the moon landing) and the Bronica are beautiful cameras to use provided that you can adapt to looking at everything through a top mounted prism that reverses all visible motion.
quote=dtcracer quote=Spindrift62 quote=dtcracer... (
show quote)
Sounds like my DSLR will work just fine for what I use it for! I guess if someone was a professional photographer it would be worth the expense, but I am still trying to get my wife to recover from the heart attack she had over the cost of my DSLR!
quote=Spindrift62 quote=dtcracer quote=Spindrif... (
show quote)
The answers easy don't tell her!
quote=dtcracer quote=Spindrift62 quote=dtcracer... (
show quote)
Yeah...about that...Doesn't work! :lol: :lol: :lol:
RLK wrote:
Does anyone have experience with the Kiev Medium Format camera.
It is with a somewhat bruised ego that I admit to you that while we were here in this country making cameras out of cardboard and plastic, behind the "Iron Curtain" the Russians had quietly gone around the word buying up quality products and "knocking off" some of the best merchandise the 'free world' had to offer, Hassleblad, Leica, Zeiss Ikon, Nikon, Canon, etc., and did a pretty fair job of it. While a Kiev medium format is not a Hassy, it will use Hassy lens which is a major part of what's needed. And yes, perhaps they weren't originally quite as reliable as a Hassy, Bronica, Kowa, Mamiya, they are well worth the money and the lens produced by them aren't half bad. I have a few Russian cameras in my collection and it is my humble opinion that, while they are often the butt of jokes, they are not junk by any stretch of the imagination and can be bought for a fraction of the cost of other medium format cameras. Google 'complaints about Kiev cameras' and you should find some. Google 'experience with Kiev cameras' and you might find another story. You might find
http://kievcamera.net/ interesting also, not that I have a horse in this race.
Oh yow, I think the negative is about four times the size of 35mm, not two, and the advantages are huge, just as it is huge when you go to the next level of 4 x 5, or 5 x 7, or 8 x 10. Each leap takes you into a new world of photography that makes you want to wonder why you ever settled for 35mm.
CamObs
Loc: South America (Texas)
RLK wrote:
Does anyone have experience with the Kiev Medium Format camera.
I bought one in the '80s. My right shoulder now hands 1" lower than the left from carrying it. Optics marginal, shutter works on and off again...on the up side I did run over it with a VW and still worked. Better used for a boat anchor than photos unless you have friends in the Ukraine who can repair it..
gessman wrote:
RLK wrote:
Does anyone have experience with the Kiev Medium Format camera.
It is with a somewhat bruised ego that I admit to you that while we were here in this country making cameras out of cardboard and plastic, behind the "Iron Curtain" the Russians had quietly gone around the word buying up quality products and "knocking off" some of the best merchandise the 'free world' had to offer, Hassleblad, Leica, Zeiss Ikon, Nikon, Canon, etc., and did a pretty fair job of it. While a Kiev medium format is not a Hassy, it will use Hassy lens which is a major part of what's needed. And yes, perhaps they weren't originally quite as reliable as a Hassy, Bronica, Kowa, Mamiya, they are well worth the money and the lens produced by them aren't half bad. I have a few Russian cameras in my collection and it is my humble opinion that, while they are often the butt of jokes, they are not junk by any stretch of the imagination and can be bought for a fraction of the cost of other medium format cameras. Google 'complaints about Kiev cameras' and you should find some. Google 'experience with Kiev cameras' and you might find another story. You might find
http://kievcamera.net/ interesting also, not that I have a horse in this race.
Oh yow, I think the negative is about four times the size of 35mm, not two, and the advantages are huge, just as it is huge when you go to the next level of 4 x 5, or 5 x 7, or 8 x 10. Each leap takes you into a new world of photography that makes you want to wonder why you ever settled for 35mm.
quote=RLK Does anyone have experience with the Ki... (
show quote)
Yes you are quite right about the neg size, I'd forgotten how big they are and have since delved into my neg archives to remind myself. I only comment on cameras that I have used which is why I never mentioned the twin reflexes and the uprated 6 x7 standard lay out cameras. I did use a Kiev for about a week. It malfunctioned twice, the standard lens was soft and I got a hernia from carrying it(joke). I then got the retailer to exchange it and the new one wouldn't work from the box. I then changed that for a second hand 'guaranteed' one. The shutter went after about 20 activations. I bought a Bronny! I do agree with you that there are some Russin Cameras that are well worth the investment if you are into film. The Zorki - Leica copy being one of the best with an amazingly sharp lens that doesn't need Leica money to buy.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
