|
Avis sur le Kiev 60
de
Stephe Thayer
newsgroup rec.equipment.medium-format le 12 décembre
2001
Well I got to thinking about the question posed to me
about trading my kiev-60 even for a blad system and I
changed my mind. I'll keep my K-60!
I thought I'd turn this around. Why should I have bought
a 500 blad instead of a kiev-60? 99% of my shooting is
outdoor landscapes or closeup work and I looked at
several cameras before I bought my K-60. I like the 6X6
format so wasn't interested in a 6X7 plus the pentax 6X7
is much heavier and larger. Also I wanted an SLR as I
have a fuji 6X9 rangefinder and found it limiting plus no
macro work can be done with one.
Some people here seem to think these kievs are worthless
cameras and blads
are "IT". So what can "IT" or any
other camera do that a K-60 can't? In fact I'm going to
list the things "IT" can't do very well <G>
Also I'm talking about a recent upgraded camera, or one
that has been CLA'd and tested (either camera) I'm not
talking about a straight from Russia $100 K-60 that was
made 15 years ago (that's what those real cheap ones are),
nor an old blad, that has been sitting around somewhere
getting gummed up. Many people on the kiev "group"
I've been reading have been using some for 10 years with
no problems and any camera can break or jam so don't
bother with the often claimed by blad users "reliability"
rant, probably experience from the cheap old stock "gummed
up" models, which a blad in the same shape wouldn't
work well either. You can't compare a $100 version of
this camera to a blad when there are GOOD versions
available.
|
Mes commentaires
En ce qui me concerne j'ai déja un 4.5x6 Bronica
comme moyen format moderne.
J'ai un dos 6x9 pour une chambre. C'est autre chose.
(approche des possibilités du grand format mais pas de
maniabilité)
Je pense aussi qu'il y a une part de fierté à
vouloir
proner Hasselblad
beaucoup plus couteux que le Kiev.
OK pour ne comparer que le neuf.
Tant mieux quand l'occasion de l'est fonctionne.
|
Here was my list good and bad for an upgraded K-60
1) 1/30 flash sync. I never use a flash with my landscape
photography so
flash sync speed wasn't an issue for me. I've shot with a
fuji rangefinder
for 5 years and never have even tested to see if the
flash sync even works!
2) Many of the lenses for a kiev are faster so the slower
blad lenses wasn't something I wanted. Having the lenses
"sweet spot" start one or two stops faster is a
GOOD thing IMHO.
3) I had many more lenses and focal lengths/speeds to
choose from than blad
makes. The only missing lens in the line is a good 38-40mm.
That isn't a
focal length many blad users own anyway and the 50's are
at least equal if
not in favor of the p-6's flektogon. If I end up needing
a 40, I could have
something fabricated later and shouldn't be too difficult
for a machinist
to do at least a manual stopdown version.....
4) Using a 35mm slr shaped K-60 at eye level felt much
better than holding
a brick up to my face did and I could still use a waist
level finder if I
want.
5) The meter is easily user calibrated so if a brighter
screen is installed
later (like a maxwell) it's no problem to recalibrate the
meter. I planned
on installing one of these in either one so was concerned
about later
calibration issues.
6) It was easy to find a bellows and reverse ring for
this camera and even enlarging/specialty macro lenses
could be easily mounted to a body cap for "REAL"
macro work. With a focal plane shutter, the shutter isn't
an issue like it is with a blad 500 series. Are there any
blad lenses that work well at 1:1 - 2:1 and beyond? I
didn't see any made for this and the leaf shutter makes
it all but impossible to hack up a real macro setup.
7) The film is held flatter and doesn't get distorted if
left in the camera
between shootings. Also it's a simple camera to load the
film out in the
field.
8) Can't change film between rolls. I'm never shooting B&W
and color at the same time (l would never compose/think
the same for B&W and for color) so I didn't see the
point in having a back the changes for my type of
shooting. Maybe for some people this is important? I
thought about it a bunch and decided this just wasn't
very important.
9) It's easier to carry a K-60 around with a neck strap
shooting handheld intown stuff, I do this quite a bit.
Plus you can just smack someone with it if they try to
take it from you. <G>
|
Voyons ces arguments pour le Kiev:
C'est exessif. On utilise un flash un jour ou l'autre et
une synchro rapide peut être utile en extérieur.
C'est vrai que la gamme d'optique Kiev est amplement
suffisantes.Elles sont surtout moins chères!
Le style "reflex 24x36" est pratique en effet.
Le viseur de poitrine peut être discret.
En fait j'utilise une cellule à main actuellement.
C'est vrai et l'amateur de macro que je suis est d'accord.
Les bricolages sont plus faciles avec un obturateur focal
Je ne suis pas si sur de cela,
mais en tout cas il n'y a pas de problème de chargement.
Il suffit d'acheter 2 boitiers Kiev pour changer de film
en cours!
Il est facile à porter mais lourd le Kiev! L'usage comme
massue doit rester exceptionnel!
|
|
Here was my list for a
blad
1) Modern glass available. Better coatings and less flare
problems. I
normally use hoods and avoid flare prone scenes from
using older single
coated lenses in the past so decided this wasn't that
important to me. Most
p-6 mount lenses are available as multicoated anyway,
just not as good a
coating as the modern hassy stuff.
2) Interchangeable backs. Again I decided this would be a
nice feature but
it make the camera harder to handle and more complex.
3) Easier to find lenses to rent to try them out. There
is no where to try
the pentacon style lenses without buying them first. Oh
well.
4) Flash sync at any speed. If I was doing more flash
work, this might have
been important. For landscape use this isn't a plus
except if a shutter
dies in one lens, the other might still be OK.
5) Able to shoot more rolls between service. I would like
to have had the option of a camera in this "K-60"
style that was proven more reliable/less quirky but I
liked the way it handles so "agreed" to deal
with it's possible quirkyness. The earlier pentacon's
were as bad in this regard or so I read.
6) Ability to shoot Polaroid proofs. This would be nice
but then again I though about having to carry around a
back for this and since it would be mostly for exposure
proofing (the reason I use one of the "pack backs"
on my 4X5) I figured I could just bracket a little more.
Maybe if I shot with flash more, was REAL into the zone
system with B&W or did weddings and needed backs
preloaded etc I could see these camera's as being useful
tools -for me-. Also as I'm not a pro, it would be years
before either camera had enough film run through them to
be an issue. For my landscape photography needs a blad
looked like another "two shelves where none were
needed", having a shutter in every slower lens (making
the total system much heavier having redundant shutters)
and a convoluted film path back that is harder to load,
could jam and cause a light leak. Even the F series has
many of these same issues with them also being harder to
find lenses for. The pluses for the hassy were outweighed
by the pluses for the kiev for my type of use, even
factoring in reliability. I am planning on getting
another body for a backup on longer trips.
From my research before my purchase, the K-60
looked easier to use/carry/deal with doing landscape
photography. I can't see any advantage to a blad or
really any other SLR 6X6 or 6X4.5 on the market for this
type of use. Even if I end up spending a bunch of money
to some specialty repair place to "Fix" either
a K-60 or a pentacon-6 into a -totally reliable- camera,
I'd still rather have this over anything else I've seen.
Might try one of the hartblei upgraded versions for my
backup. Supposedly they replace the slow speed gear train
and rework the shutter with a better brake.
So you hard core hassy guys, what IS the advantage for
landscape use if there is one?
--
Stephe
|
c'est vrai que le 30mm arsat que j'ai n'est pas
multicouche.
Je n'ai jamais loué avant d'acheter
Ce serait bien d'aller au dela du 1/.15e en
synchronisation flash!
Un dos polaroïd serait couteux et pas exploité au
maximum avec un 6x6
On peut effectivement bracketter pour assurer une image.
|
