Before you buy a Soviet Camera • Hacker News Board

Re: Before you buy a Soviet Camera

#61

Post by steveBK123 » Mon, Mar 01, 2021, 10:41 PM UTC

Around 2000 there were deals to be had on eBay.. Somewhere in the last 20 years or so the Lomography fad and general internet consciousness about soviet "copy" cameras got ahead of the value.

Even then I usually had to buy 2 cameras to cobble together 1 good working camera, but at least they were cheap.

Since then there's been enough people marking them up beyond their value or recycling the same broken cameras over and over.

Lenses may be a better bet as there are less moving parts and they are to some degree more easily re-adjusted by a competent repair person.

Re: Before you buy a Soviet Camera

#62

Post by int_19h » Mon, Mar 01, 2021, 11:31 PM UTC

overcastsky wrote: post #39

AcerbicZero wrote: post #10

I judge Soviet quality off of the 20 or so Mosins I’ve shot. Sounds very similar to their cameras, but at least the rifles are more fun.

As a former military man myself, I found that Soviet rifles (AK pattern) and even the RPK were far more robust and trustworthy than the fragile Swiss-watch approach of the American M-16A2/M4/M249 series of rifles. Many people preferred them, even some of the junior officers who carried them around, but for them, it more of a badge of office (look at me) since they were armed with handguns as well.

M4 and M249 don't really have anything in common, and the latter is a Belgian (FN) design. On the other hand, RPK is really the same gun as AK in essence, just beefed up.

But even when comparing M4/M16 vs AK, it depends. The Stoner design is more sensitive to dirt, but it's also much better at keeping it out:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DX73uXs3xGU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YAneTFiz5WU

(Not coincidentally, the AK slit for the charging handle that opens up whenever the gun is off safe is not-so-affectionately referred to as "slit for dirt" in Russian Army speak.)

Re: Before you buy a Soviet Camera

#63

Post by 908B64B197 » Tue, Mar 02, 2021, 12:24 AM UTC

rvba wrote: post #22

gambiting wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's mentioned in the Zenit-E review[0]: "Most Soviet camera designs were perfectly sound – it was more often that the construction itself was lacking. TOE engineers learned on the assembly line, then went back to the UK and stripped and reassembled every single camera that came into the UK." I grew up in Poland and my dad said the exact same thing - that when he was young, if you managed to somehow buy yourself a br…

Designs were sound since they were stolen by KGB from the West.

You are being downvoted and yet it's still happening today.

https://blogs.cisco.com/news/huawei-and-ciscos-source-code-c...

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/former-raytheon-engineer-sent...

Re: Before you buy a Soviet Camera

#64

Post by 908B64B197 » Tue, Mar 02, 2021, 12:26 AM UTC

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #51

kevinstubbs wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a comical comparison, but do any companies actually measure progress like this without even looking at the end result? Presumably if velocity stays high but everything is broken, somebody will say something (and hopefully not just continue with the broken process that produced the problem).

You'd be surprised how many companies have totally broken software development process. Basically most companies where software isn't the core product and moneymaker (semiconductors, automotive, 100 year old german companies, etc). Remember how the compilation time of Nokia's Symbian OS was two weeks ? As long as money keeps rolling in nobody cares that your development process is totally whack and your promotions as…

> Remember how the compilation time of Nokia's Symbian OS was two weeks?

I feel there's an interesting story right here.

Re: Before you buy a Soviet Camera

#65

Post by stan_rogers » Tue, Mar 02, 2021, 2:14 AM UTC

cesaref wrote: post #35

iSnow wrote: post #19

I used to own the infamous Kiev 88 TTL with a range of lenses, and while I loved the knock-off design and heft, the build quality was disastrous. The film cassettes leaked light which ruined some films, the transport would jam, and the shutter as well. I've never been too fond of the softness of the 35mm's, the 120 photos were just that much better. But then digital happened and both lenses and sensors outgrew anythi…

Agreed, the Kiev 88 isn't reliable. A number of years back I ordered a Hartblei - they take new Kiev 88s and fix the obvious shortcomings, before applying any modifications you require. My Hartblei is configured for Hasselblad backs and hoods, and takes Pentacon six lenses. I use this with an Arsat 35mm fisheye lens as the hasselblad equivalent is very expensive by comparison. The result is a strange mixture of multi…

The pentaprism finder, though, was an absolute bargoon, and there were probably more Kiev prisms on Hasselblads than there were on Kievs in my day. You could buy an awful lot of film with the literally hundreds of dollars you'd save over what 'Blad wanted for theirs. The only wedding photographers I knew who didn't have the Kiev finder were waist-level purists (who'd probably forgotten how to pan unflipped by that point).

Re: Before you buy a Soviet Camera

#66

Post by phs318u » Tue, Mar 02, 2021, 5:48 AM UTC

kevinstubbs wrote: post #50

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "But when the development started things often went wrong. Frontend, backend, dev-ops and other teams, had to crank out hundreds of thousands of Jira tickets, and their quantity, not quality, were the only thing that counted. To meet a quota, teams could substitute senior devs for more juniors, skip testing steps to speed up agile velocity – the list goes on.”

It's a comical comparison, but do any companies actually measure progress like this without even looking at the end result? Presumably if velocity stays high but everything is broken, somebody will say something (and hopefully not just continue with the broken process that produced the problem).

I contracted with a big-4 consulting firm on an acquisition of a demergered business and the program had to set up a "one of everything" IT shop and demerge and migrate the data. The program had us coordinating and 4-5 other vendors delivering bits of it. I was there for a year (the program ran for another year+). At the time I left, the Jira count was over 35,000 - though that also included risks, decisions, issues and less common issue types. They probably got close to 100K by the time they were done.

I don't know if "progress" was measured by Jira tickets, but I'm sure it helped some to justify the extortionate rates we charged.

Re: Before you buy a Soviet Camera

#67

Post by possiblelion » Tue, Mar 02, 2021, 11:23 AM UTC

I have a Fed-3 that my grandfather, a photojournalist in Soviet Estonia used for his work. After simple repairs it works great and shoots gorgeous pictures. It's a lot of fun to use as well!

https://ibb.co/HCCkNXZ

Re: Before you buy a Soviet Camera

#68

Post by hinkley » Wed, Mar 03, 2021, 5:59 PM UTC

kevinstubbs wrote: post #50

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "But when the development started things often went wrong. Frontend, backend, dev-ops and other teams, had to crank out hundreds of thousands of Jira tickets, and their quantity, not quality, were the only thing that counted. To meet a quota, teams could substitute senior devs for more juniors, skip testing steps to speed up agile velocity – the list goes on.”

It's a comical comparison, but do any companies actually measure progress like this without even looking at the end result? Presumably if velocity stays high but everything is broken, somebody will say something (and hopefully not just continue with the broken process that produced the problem).

They do, it's just that many of them don't do it for long.

The bosses don't stick around long enough to learn that what they are doing doesn't work, and go try to repeat it somewhere else.

Re: Before you buy a Soviet Camera

#69

Post by hinkley » Wed, Mar 03, 2021, 6:05 PM UTC

gambiting wrote: post #12

rob74 wrote: post #9

“There were several cameras I bought, boxed and with factory seals and signed certificates of worthiness, and yet when opened revealed a camera which could never work,” says Javier. Next paragraph: "Why did the myth about the low quality of Soviet cameras appear?" Errr... am I missing something here? Sounds pretty obvious to me?

It's mentioned in the Zenit-E review[0]: "Most Soviet camera designs were perfectly sound – it was more often that the construction itself was lacking. TOE engineers learned on the assembly line, then went back to the UK and stripped and reassembled every single camera that came into the UK." I grew up in Poland and my dad said the exact same thing - that when he was young, if you managed to somehow buy yourself a br…

If you buy a high end wood plane today, it's still recommended you disassemble the whole thing, lap the faces and then reassemble.

They do a good job, but you can achieve better tolerances using equipment that costs less than the first plane (and which you might be able to borrow)