========================================================================= Exakta 66/Pentacon 6/Kiev 60 FAQ Version 1.2 07/28/95 compiled by Fuu-diing Chen I am one of the lovers of these series of cameras and the following is the information I have collected for the past years. The main reasons for this FAQ are: (1) all these cameras share the same lense mount and look alike; (2) the prices for Pentacon 6/Kiev 60 are lower than other medium format SLR cameras; (3) the lenses for these cameras are all great for their price. This FAQ can be accessed from "http://kbssun1.tamu.edu/~fdchen/" Please E'mail any comment and correction to fdchen@kbssun1.tamu.edu ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Sources: (1) Exakta 66 manual (2) December 1987 issue of PHOTOMETHODS (3) B&H photo ads. (4) June 1992 issue of SHUTTERBUG (5) Russian/Ukrainian Camera FAQ from kievrpt@aol.com (6) McBroom's Camera Bluebook, 1994 edition Contributors: Alan Bell(blk@netcom.com) bob bolton (boltor@eve.adam.com.au) Fred McKenzie (frederick.mckenzie-1@kmail.ksc.nasa.gov) hargitai (hargitai@acf2.nyu.edu) Juan F. Sanz Cervera (JSANZ@vm.ci.uv.es) Marc James Small (marcsmall@aol.com) Tony Porczyk (messina@netcom.com) Ralf Radermacher (R.RADERMACHER@rrader.dinoco.de) ========================================================================= Table of Content ================ I. Exakta 66 II. Pentacon 6 III. Kiev 60 IV. Lenses made by Schneider for Exakta 66 V. Lenses made by Carl Zeiss Jena or Pentacon for Pentacon 6/Praktica 6 VI. Lenses made by Kiev for Kiev 60 VII. Comments about Exakta 66/Pentacon 6 VIII. Comments about Kiev60/88 I. Exakta 66 ============= Shutter speed: focal plane shutter 1 ~ 1/1000 sec + B, Sync 1/25 (or 1/30 for mod II) Self timer: after 10 sec Image size: 6x6cm, effective 55x55mm Film size: 120/220 Size(WxDxH): 170x89x116 mm Weight: 900 g Weight: (body + 80/2.8 lense + TTL prism): 1900 g Distance from film plane to lense flange: 74mm Viewing system: (1) waist level finder (2) Prism (3) TTL prism (mod I) Focus screen: interchangeable, (1) split image (2) microprism (3) matt Mirror: return after advancing the film crank Preview button: on lenses but not on body Flash connection: PC socket Film crank: one turn advancing and locking with automatic exposure counter Lense mount: bayonet mounts with 60mm diameter locking mechanism Available adapters: to (1) Mamyia 645, (2) Nikon AIS, (3) M42 Screw mount (2) prism viewer shows 69% and 80% of real image Price: US$1099 for body + waist level finder + 80/2.8 lense at B&H photo, 06/01/95 Test report: December 1987 issue of PHOTOMETHODS by Life Ericksenn Distributor: Schneider USA Made in (West) Germany Main differences between Exakta 66 Mod I and Exakta 66 Mod II: (1) Prism finder shows 69% and 80% of real image in Mod I & II respectively; (2) Flash sync speed is from 1/25 to 1/30 sec; (3) The locking mechanism of camera back is safer in Mod II; Note: Someone may want to use these lenses on smaller format. A good and expensive source of adapters is: Zorkendorfer Film- u. Fototechnik Gollierstrabe 70, 8000 Munchen 2, Germany TEL: 089/508568 II. Pentacon 6 ================ Price: US$400~500 for Mint body + waist level finder + 80/2.8 lense Made in (East) Germany Main differences between Pentacon 6 and Exakta 66 mod I: (1) Exakta 66 is rubber-covered; (2) Focusing screens for Exakta 66 are brighter and interchangable without using a screw driver; (3) Exakta 66s have electronic contacts between lenses and bodies; III. Kiev 60 ============= Shutter speed: focal plane shutter 1/2 ~ 1/1000 sec + B, Sync 1/30 Size: about 10% bigger than that of Exakta 66/Pentacon 6 Weight: heavier than Exakta 66 Depth-of-field button: on body Self timer: No Viewing system: (1) waist level finder (2) meter prism Name plate has been in cyrillic "KNEB 60" but not in English "KIEV 60". Year of manufacture: the first two digits of serial number. Test report: June 1992 issue of SHUTTERBUG Other comments: Russian/Ukrainian Camera FAQ from kievrpt@aol.com Made in Kiev, Ukraine Main differences between Kiev 60 and Exakta 66 model I (or Pentacon 6) (1) Mechanism for advancing films in Kiev 60 is simpler and robuster; (2) The focusing screen in Kiev 60 is bigger; IV. Lenses made by Schneider for Exakta 66 =========================================== ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- lenses filer angle shortest preview element/ weight price** size of view fosus dis button group diag/hori (mm) (degree) (m) Yes/No (g) US$ ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 40/4.0 104* 89/69.5 0.5 yes 9/8 700 55/4.5 104* 71/53.5 0.5 yes 10/8 1650 60/3.5 67 66.5/50 0.6 yes 7/7 570 $1580 80/2.8 67 52/38 0.6 yes 7/6 500 $500 150/4.0 67 29.5/21 1.5 yes 5/5 760 $1580 250/5.6 67 18/13 3.0 yes 5/4 900 $1850 75~150/4.5 95 56.3/41 1.8 yes 15/13 1770 $4050 30/21 140~280/5.6 86 31.3/22.5 2.5 yes 17/14 2070 $4150 16/11.3 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Footnote: * External bayonet fitting ** The prices are from B&H catalog of June, 1995. V. Lenses made by Carl Zeiss Jena or Pentacon for Pentacon 6/Praktica 6 ====================================================================== ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- lenses filer angle shortest preview element/ price** size of view fosus dis button group diag/hori (mm) (degree) (m) Yes/No US$ ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 50/4.0 86 75 0.5 yes 7/4 200 65/2.8 64 6/5 80/2.8 58 54 1.0 yes 5/4 80 120/2.8 67 39.5 1.3 yes 5/4 225 180/2.8 86 26 2.2 yes 5/3 350 300/4.0 86 4.0 yes* 5/3 380 500/5.6 10 6.0 4/4 775 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- FootNote: * A preview switch ** The price are from McBroom's 1994 bluebook. You should expect to pay $50 to $100 more for good used ones. VI. Lenses made by Kiev for Kiev 60 ==================================== ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- lenses filer angle shortest preview element/ Resolution price* size of view fosus dis button group center/ diag/hori edge (mm) (degree) (m) Yes/No (line/mm) US$ ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 30/3.5 38** 180 0.3 No 10/6 60/14 650 45/3.5 82 83 0.5 No 8/7 45/16 445 65/3.5 72 66 0.5 6/5 42/18 350 80/2.8 62 45 0.6 6/5 50/20 120/2.8 62 36 1.2 6/5 50/30 375 150/2.8 82 28 1.8 No 4/4 45/18 445 250/5.6 62 18 2.5 5/5 55/40 250/3.5 82 19 3.5 4/3 45/25 450 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- FootNote: * The prices are from The Lens Exchange or Kiev USA and are higher than other suppliers. You can expect to pay $100 less from other suppliers. ** Rear element filter. VII. Comments about Exakta 66/Pentacon 6 ======================================== ### 1 ### From Ralf Radermacher (R.RADERMACHER@rrader.dinoco.de) <10 Jun 95> MP> Is anyone familiar with the dependability/durability of Exaktas and MP> Pentacons? I'm interested in getting one, but I don't know anyone whose MP> used them over a period of time. The dependability of the original Pentacon can be everything from excellent to miserable. Particularly since the fall of the Berlin Wall, a lot of Pentacon Six cameras have made their way into the West which are not of the so-called export quality. Cameras which didn't quite meet the full spec used to be sold on the GDR domestic market. Unfortunately, there is no easy way of telling them apart. Also, the dependability depends much on the previous owner. A good example for this is the film transport mechanism. Letting the transport lever flip back after winding is a a major sin with the Six. Within a short time, this will wear out the transport gears, knock off one or more teeth and lead to overlapping exposures. Known weaknesses of the Pentacon Six are the transport mechanism, as described above, and problems with film flatness. The latter can be cured to a certain extent by not transporting the film until immediately before the actual picture is taken. The Exakta 66 is a Pentacon Six body which has been re-worked in West Germany, or nowadays by Schneider Feinwerktechnik of Dresden (this is NOT the lens manufacturer of the same name), before being sold. Also, it has a more modern exterior coating. The newer version, the Exakta 66 Model 2, has a Rollei viewfinder screen which is larger and brighter. The original Pentacon viewfinder only shows about 69 percent of the actual frame, whereas the Exakta 66 Model 2 shows about 80 percent. Also, the flash synchronizing time of the later Exakta has been raised from 1/22nd to a spectacular 1/30th second... I don't know of any particular problems with the Exakta's though I would be cautious with their film transport, too. ### 2 ### From Juan F. Sanz Cervera (JSANZ@vm.ci.uv.es) <13 Jun 95> I bought two Pentacons Six right after the fall of the Berlin Wall, and luckily, have had no problems with them. I think that the lens quality is excellent for the price. The only serious problem I've found has no solution: these cameras have no mirror lock-up, and the mirror slam is unbelievably strong. Even with a good Bogen/Manfrotto 3Kg tripod the whole thing moves, and of course picture quality suffers. I have a question now. Do any of the Exakta 66 cameras have mirror lock-up? Thanks for any input. ### 3 ### From hargitai (hargitai@acf2.nyu.edu) <21 Apr 1994> >I'm studying in Germany right now and have come across quite a few used > Pentacon 6 and Exacta 66 cameras at camera shops. I remember reading > somewhere that they were made in East Germany during the >Cold War. The Exacta 66 looks quite modern. Can anyone tell me > about these ca meras? >Are they still being produced? If so, how is the quality, etc.? Pentacon lenses and the Exacta would be a good combo. The Pentacon 6 is famous for jamming transport and shutter, however the lenses made for it are good. ### 4 ### From Tony Porczyk (messina@netcom.com) <30 Apr 1994> >I had one of these which I bought used at a camera store in Chicago. It was OK >but not terrific. I saw one selling new for $600 with the meter prism in a >magazine a year or two ago. I would never pay that much for it. No way... I owned one (Pentacon 6) many years ago, and I wouldn't pay that much for a new one. It was a reasonable body with an unbelievable mirror shock, so for crucial pictures I had to lock the mirror in the up position. The lenses also left quite a bit to be desired (don't be fooled by the famous names you see on those lenses, they were East-German ripoffs). VIII. Comments about Kiev60/88 ============================== ### 1 ### From Marc James Small (marcsmall@aol.com), <13 Feb 1995> the Russian MF lenses are direct clones or close developments of West German Zeiss Oberkochen Hassie lenses; look at the lens diagrams! Please consider joining Zeiss Historica! <6 Mar 1995> Getting anything Soviet or Post-Soviet repaired is NOT a problem -- Active Camera in New York, among others, is extremely inexpensive and quite fast. These are fine cameras with superlative opticks -- lenses like you've never used before in resolution, contrast, and colour saturation. The '60 is rather clunky, the '88 more complex, but they are both quite nice systems. The 3.5/30 Zodiak fisheye is an extraordinary buy. The 3.5/45 and 3.5/65 lenses will run rings around anything which lacks the Carl Zeiss nameplate. You can do a heck of a lot worse than buying a Kiev! ### 2 ### From Fred McKenzie (frederick.mckenzie-1@kmail.ksc.nasa.gov) <09 May 1994> I bought my Kiev 60, a couple of months after the review was published in Shutterbug. As I recall, it was a couple of years ago. I purchased it from Saul Kaminsky's Lens Exchange, which advertises in Shutterbug. Mine was one of the last with the "KNEB" name plate. Later copies have "KIEV". The one in the review used a unique Russian battery for the light meter, but mine uses three common silver oxide button cells. The light meter, located in the pentaprism housing, is one of the weak points. To start with, it was off by about two stops. While there may be an adjustment hidden inside, I couldn't see an easy way to get into it. I loosened the setscrews on the meter knob, and rotated the knob until it was close to accurate. Even so, I found it difficult to understand how to use! So far, I have used the camera very little. Recently, after sitting up for a long period of time, I noticed that the meter was again about two stops off. I'm not sure of the cause, but suspect an oil coating that has formed on the focusing screen, is responsible. I have no complaints about the mechanical integrity of the camera. If one were to use an accurate hand-held light meter, exposure should be accurate.From what others have written, the Kiev 60 doesn't match the quality of similar, more expensive cameras. The consensus seems to be, that it would be better to get a good used camera like the Praktica , Pentacon or Exacta. I chose mine more for the novelty of owning a Russian camera, since I wasn't familiar with the competing models at the time. <08 Mar 1995> 1. I prefered the Kiev 60 style to the 88. 2. I suspect my 60's lens may not be as sharp as a good 35mm lens. However, images look good. They aren't enlarged as much, so lens un-sharpness and grain are less obvious, than for 35mm. I have little experience with medium format for comparison. (How's that for a non-answer!?) 3. The Shutterbug review of the Kiev 60, suggested that the light meter was a possible weak point. When I discovered mine was a little off, I proceeded to remove the meter knob, and re-attach it so the error was minimized. I didn't notice the grease problem until I it was a year or so old. Even if the meter were perfectly accurate, it isn't exactly easy to use. This is an area where the 60 could stand some improvement. However, a good, integrated match-needle meter system, would probably increase the cost. ### 3 ### From Alan Bell(blk@netcom.com) <19 Mar 1995> Buzz Burgess (buzz@dfw.net) wrote: : I have read some good articles on the KIEV-88, especially the export : version of the lenses. Anyone have any info on the medium format : Hassey 1000 lookalike? I am in the market for a $500 medium format camera as well and am considering the Kiev. I have read practically everything I can find, and here is what various people are saying: 1. The cameras are junk. 2. They are fine when they work, which they often don't. 3. If you get a good one you've got the deal of the decade, but you *may* and likely will get a lemon. 4. The camera body is prone to problems, but the optics are superb. Just yesterday, I spoke with a salesman at Adolph Gasser Inc., one of the larger photo stores in San Francisco, about the Kiev. He said he presented the store's Hasselblad rep with two series of pictures, one taken with a Hassy the other with a Kiev. Same subject and conditions, of course. He said the rep couldn't tell the difference. (I should have, but I didn't ask for technical details on the nature of the comparison and how it was done). Also, yesterday, I held a brand new Kiev in my hand for he first time. I visited Russian Camera Exchange at 300 Third St. in San Francisco. The camera and the packaging (but not the lens) look third class. The camera doesn't look like it was made in a modern factory where machines produce identical copies of some product. It looks hand-made. I asked the guy with whom I spoke, who is apparently the importer, owner and chief bottle washer, how the same camera could be thought be some to be junk that is never in good repair and others capable of producing pictures that rival a Hassy. His explanation was that the bad press comes from experiences of five or six years ago, and the good press comes from experiences in the last year or so. He said that five years ago 50% of the cameras didn't work, but says that percentage has dropped to 5%. Now this guy wanted to sell me a camera so you have to consider his remarks in that light. But it is true that bad raps die hard. After Jaguar fixed the problems that plagued it, it still couldn't sell cars because everyone still believed all the bad stuff. And remember the problems Audi had with one particular model that colored people's view of the company's entire line of cars. Plus there was some evidence that the model in question (I don't remember which) had no greater problems than any others in its class. ### 4 ### From bob bolton (boltor@eve.adam.com.au) <6 Nov 1994> I have a Kiev 60 (Pentacon copy). It's actually the domestic version, so it's called a Kneb 60. Being curious, I have partly disassembled the camera to see what's there. Comparing its innards with those of my Nikon F is like comparing those of a farm tractor with a f1 racer - it's very heavily built. I'm told it has corrected 2 problems with the Pentacon: film wind and film flatness. Certainly I've had no trouble with these so far. I did find some loose screws, and the TTL exposure meter was improperly adjusted. (I use a Lunasix anyway). The standard Volna-3 f2.8/80mm lens is very pleasing: sharp and contrasty and pretty good right out to the edges at maximum aperture. One of the reasons I bought this (it was new, and cheap) was that it has the same lens mount as the Pentacon 6. This means I can use Pentacon 6 Carl Zeiss Jena lenses. These don't command much of a price at all, as they can't be used for much else (although some techs. here in Australia are now waking up to this and marketing adapters to use them with Mamiya 645's). I swapped a wobbly old Nikon F body for a w/a f2.8/65mm Zeiss. This is interesting indeed! It doesn't have quite the contrast of the Volna, and drops away at the edges at 2.8, but below that the definition is absolutely lovely. I've just spent nearly as much as I paid for the camera on a couple of 86mm filters for it! (I do all B&W work). This 65mm Zeiss is a Flektogon. I am about to buy (cheaply again!) a huge 300mm Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar, again a leftover from a broken-down Pentacon 6 kit. I'm told it will also be a pleasant experience. Luckily, it appears it will take the same filters as the Flektogon! I intend to use these Zeiss lenses for landscape work. I've just finished adapting a Nikon eyepiece diopter to the Kiev 60 (-4...I'm old!), which was a tricky story of urethane glue, and shows that I'm satisfied enough with this camera to go that far. I've seen the Kiev 88 'Blad copy and can confirm that it looked pretty good; but even the dealer told me it was no good!!! <25 Mar 1995> : > Do the lenses on the Kiev 60 and the Kiev 88 (they are different) both : > twist into place and stop (like a regular light bulb), or do they twist : > into place and lock (like Nikon lenses)? from memory, the K 60 lens just fits up against the body (in one position only) and a locking ring is screwed tight to secure it. The same with the Zeiss Jena Pentacon 6 lenses, which fit the Kiev 60 because it's a direct copy (with more modern lines around the TTL head) of the old East German Pentacon 6. So here's what I did: bought a Kiev 60 because it looked great and was about 10% of the price of a Pentax 6x7, which is more or less what it's like. I thought it would be OK because it was new. It wasn't OK, but by then I'd bought it a Zeiss Jena (ex-Pentacon) Flektogon 2.8/65mm very cheaply, because most Pentacons are dead. Also had bought a couple of 86mm filters for the Flektogon, at $75 each. So to try and save the investment, I chased all over Australia for a good, working Pentacon 6. Then learned that one of the few things Kiev did to improve the Pentacon was to cure an innate weakness in the wind-on. (Other weaknesses were introduced, though - like chickens nesting behind the mirror ;) Chicken Kiev...) So, one fine day when the Kiev was actually working, I found a dealer who swapped the lot for an excellent Rollei TLR with Tessar, and a cute little leather case full of filters, lens hood, etc. Phew! At last, reliability, sharp lens... But I have to admit I missed the feel of the poor old Kiev. Someone should try to make it properly. End of Page