By Roman Yarovitsyn
Every camera collector surely has his favourite shelf, where he or she stores the most rare or expensive cameras. I’m not a collector, but I have small set of film cameras and some of them lie on my favourites shelf.
This shelf is dedicated to 1964, the best year for Soviet camera industry in my humble opinion. Those models most interesting for me because of their uncommon design, I suddenly discovered, that production of almost all of them started in 1964 or very close to this date. For example: the Kiev-10, LOMO Voskhod, FED-10 and at last, Zenit-4 series.
A natural question arises: what the hell was happened with Soviet industry that year?! And why were the next years were not so successful? Let’s look turn the pages of USSR history for a moment. Of course! In October 1964 Khrushchev was retired from the post of CPSU General Secretary by Leonid Brezhnev and his team. Historians consider this moment as the end of Khrushchev Thaw.
Several years (almost a decade, if we count the period of palace intrigues immediately after Stalin’s death) before Khrushchev’s overthrow, the USSR enjoyed the least repressive period of the Soviet era. So, the cameras on that shelf are the harvest of the Thaw.
I like all of these four cameras. I don’t know why, but the Zenit-4 was always most interesting for me. Maybe, because of its’ “tricky” design: the leaf shutter in SLR is the real perversion. The Nikon F and Pentax Spotmatic are so perfect, it’s boring.
Unfortunately, the Zenit-4 series (which include the Zenit-5 and Zenit-6) are very unreliable. It’s hard to find any example in working condition here in Russia. I guess, the reason is that most of 20,000-odd copies were moved abroad to earn hard currency. It was the major purpose of Soviet camera industry.
But a few days ago my dream came true: a wonderful Zenit-4 in mint and… Oh, God!… working condition ended up in my hands! At last I heard this, unusual for an SLR, rustling sound of the working shutter! Of course, I immediately decided to load a film and make sure, that this complex device can still take pictures.
But first, I must tell something about this camera history. All these facts I discovered long before the Zenit-4 and me found each other.
The Zenit-4 series were the only leaf shutter SLRs in the USSR, but certainly not the only ones in the world. The first LSR (Leaf Shutter Reflex), as it was called that years, was made in West Germany in 1953. The Zeiss Ikon Contaflex was an answer to the young Japanese camera industry’s market expansion. In those years it was considered, that classic Leica-type shutter approached the limit of perfection and engineers started to find the new ways of camera design.
Leaf shutters seemed most promising: nowadays such a device would be called a “global shutter”. It had a major advantage for the mid 1950s: unlimited compatibility with increasingly popular electronic flash! In that era such a powerful and convenient light source was so fashionable, that a special aesthetic has emerged. This especially affected photojournalism, allowing shooters to take a successful photo in the most unimaginable conditions, even backlit sunshine. Of course, the possibility to use the flash at any shutter speed couldn’t be ignored.
The problem of blinding the viewfinder with the closed shutter leaves was easily resolved: the shutter was equipped with an additional drive, which opened it for viewing and closed just before realising the main exposure drive. Metallic curtains connected to the mirror protected the film from fogging.
In a couple of years leaf-shutter SLRs appeared in product lists of most self-respecting camera makers, not only German (Kodak Retina Reflex, Futura, Voigtlander, Balda), but Japanese (Kowa SE, Nikkorex 35). The leaf shutter became extremely popular in SLR for a few years, because all the attempts to create focal plane shutter compatible enough with electronic flash had been unsuccessful. Nevertheless, the major leaf-shutter limitation of a top speed 1/500 remained unimprovable.
Moreover, using this type of shutter in an SLR created some inconveniences for the designers. The most optimal location for any leaf shutter is between lenses, as close as possible to the diaphragm. Otherwise, vignetting around the frame corners became inevitable. It means that any interchangeable lens must have its own leaf shutter: this makes it too expensive for 35mms camera and acceptable only for mid and large formats.
To make a camera leaf shutter common for all interchangeable lenses, the designers of different companies chosen several ways. Zeiss Ikon split the lens into two parts: the rear one was located behind a shutter and the front other became interchangeable. It doesn’t add to the quality of the image.
Voigtlander placed lenses entirely in front of shutter, but the rear glass element almost touched the shutter leaves. Moreover, every lens must had a dedicated optical design, with the rear element made extremely narrow. It strongly limited optical designers, but this didn’t deter engineers of Krasnogorsk mechanical plant in USSR.
The Zenit-4 designed with the same principles, but it’s not a copy of the Voigtlander Bessamatic. In some ways it even better: for example, Zenit has an interchangeable viewfinder. If you study a product list of KMZ in 1964, it is clear that the Zenit-4 family was conceived as a flagship. On the assembly line it took the place of the discontinued Start SLR with traditional focal plane shutter.
But unfortunately, this complex and expensive camera appeared right at the moment when all the major camera designers turned their back on the leaf shutter. The reason is simple: Japanese engineers created at last a perfect focal plane shutter for the Konica F. This shutter type later was called “square-type” and has survived to this day in modern DSLRs.
Lear-shutter SLRs were still produced for several more years, but the reason was just the inertia of consumer demand. The leaf shutter negated almost all the advantages of SLRs, including macro photography and using long telephoto lenses, so its days were numbered.
So why did the leaders of one of the largest camera plants in Europe make such a big mistake? To understand it, we must look behind the scenes of Soviet designers’ community, the magazine from the most authoritative in USSR optical organisation the “State Optical Institute” (ГОИ).
In February 1966, “Optical-mechanical Industry” magazine published an article “Single-lens reflex photographic devices, making shots in size of 24×36 mm with leaf shutters”. Such complex headlines were common for such a scientific magazines intended not for general public. An article full of scientific terminology, output and sales analysis with detailed tables makes a review of Western SLR market: Nikkorex-35, Kowa SE, Ricohflex, Fujicarex, Topcon E, Canonex and many others. In the end of article a conclusion has been reached, I translate literally:
“Over the last decade, interest in 24×36 mm SLRs with leaf shutters has been steadily increasing. … One can express the wish that our industry pays attention to the production of inexpensive SLR devices in the 24×36 mm format with leaf shutters, the prerequisite for which is the production of shutters in the appropriate modification.”
To understand, what means such an articles in that era, you must know, that GOI was the final authority for all the Soviet camera makers. Only a naive representative from the free world may take this ending as just an opinion. Any Soviet reader knew that “one can express the wish” was an order, but not an opinion. Camera designers and top management of plants were the readers of “Optical Mechanical Industry”.
It doesn’t matter that the article was published two years after the start of Zenit-4 production. It reflected the opinions “at the top”, which was long ago formed under the impression of Western camera design. Ordinary engineers, not to mention photographers, did not have access to Western models, and trusted the word of management. This is how Soviet industry worked. Despite any patriotic rhetoric, developments were carried out on the basis of knowledge of how they do things THERE. Such industry could only lag behind. As a result, a not-too-bad camera appeared at least five years too late. Considering its high price and the fact that interchangeable lenses never appeared on the shelves, the fate of the device was inevitable.
The top model of this family, was the Zenit-6 with the first Soviet photographic zoom lens, the Rubin-1. It eloquently played the role of an expensive toy in the Soviet movie ‘Zigzag of Success’ (1968). The main character, the photographer Oreshnikov, looks at it in a store window with a price sticker showing 400 roubles (he is dreaming about journalistic career). His attempt to win the money in a lottery becomes the centre of the entire movie.
Apart from the price and unreliability, the major problem of camera family was the impossibility of attaching M39 Zenit lenses; no adaptor existed. As we remember, lenses had to be designed exclusively for leaf shutter cameras.
The next KMZ top model, the Zenit-7, was equipped with high-speed focal plane shutter, but it’s a different sad story. If you are still alive and have not closed this boring article, let’s look at the Zenit-4 which arrived at my house, and which by some miracle still works, although it is a year older than me.
Excluding the leaf shutter, this SLR had the more important novelty for Soviet photographers: selenium light meter, totally coupled with shutter and iris. To set the correct exposure you must only combine two arrows by rotating the wheel at the top cover with your left hand.
And one more miracle: these arrows are visible in the viewfinder! Unheard in the USSR before! Just look into the viewfinder, compose the image, combine arrows at the right side of frame and push the button! Add to this the first in Soviet SLR really automatic diaphragm, driven from shutter spring instead of a release button.
But that is not all. Zenit-4 uses one more thing, which made leaf shutters so popular in the 1960s. This is a principle of exposure value scale. Once installed a correct exposure, you can choose any correct aperture/speed combination in one touch. Two more cameras on my favourites shelf – the FED-10 and Voskhod – can do the same thanks to coaxial aperture and shutter speed rings. I can rotate them together, keeping correct exposure.
The Zenit-4 achieves this in a different way. If you need to choose a faster or slower speed just rotate shutter ring by two black levers on it. Then the aperture ring starts to rotate synchronously in reverse direction thanks to a gear. So, the exposure value remains constant. Simultaneously one more miracle happens: two red arrows move or move apart at the lens distance scale, marking depth of field.
All this machinery was taken from the West German Bessamatic of course and made an impression for Soviet photographers. I was impressed by different thing: camera complexity. A working example of this camera did not fall into my hands right away. The first two I tried to fix and discovered a million tiny parts inside. I still don’t understand really how I was smart enough to put it all back together, but I couldn’t get the camera to work.
The complexity is a reason why a serviceable Zenit-4 is almost unavailable nowadays. That’s why I didn’t dare to take such a treasure onto our frosty streets this winter and make most intriguing test with flash photography at sunshine. But my hands were itching to shoot a test roll with Zenit-4 and I decided to limit myself in apartment.
Unfortunately all my Canon flash units don’t come with a PC-cord. You can’t even dream about any hot shoe in Zenit-4: Soviet cameras of the 1960s were equipped with just a cold shoe only and sometimes not at all. My Hensel studio strobe saved the situation. There is one PC-cord inside the set. Except a couple of duty shots without flashlight the main test I made to check camera possibilities with impulse lighting. Of course, I made at least one shot at 1/500 to make sure that flashlight passes through the shutter.
One other detail was interesting for me: how the dedicated film cartridge works with proper camera. In one of my previous articles I told about a cassette with flocked drop-down slot, designed by KMZ for the first cameras with hinged back cover. Such cassettes were used in the Zorki-6, Kristall, Zenit-3M, Drug and early Zenit-E. The Zenit-4 family supports them too.
When you close a back cover its special lug pushes to the inner sleeve edge and rotates it slightly. So, a flocked slot opens and the film passes free without any friction and scratches. In ordinary cameras, such cassette works the same way as type-135 disposable or reusable. I don’t know why, but these didn’t work as well with ordinary cameras; they scratched the film mercilessly and photographers who was not familiar with real purpose of KMZ cassettes had thrown away most of them back in the late 1970s. At one time I ruined more than one film with such a cassette and its capabilities were strongly doubted.
But the developed film appeared absolutely clear. I deliberately did not retouch the scans to show amazing fact: there is not one scratch! Additional reason is a glass pressure plate, just like in the Leica M3.
As for impressions about camera using, I can’t express delight, except the light meter convenience. I will not compare the viewfinder image of Zenit-4 with my daily modern instruments, such as Canon EOS-1D Mk IV. The old viewfinder is not even close to a modern one, and even a professional one. Even the viewfinder in the contemporary Zenit-E is much better.
I don’t tell about ground glass with rounded corners: this is a tribute to the fashion of those years, remember the aquarium TVs. Despite almost full-frame covering, the viewfinder of the Zenit-4 is too dark and not very informative. Even the split image doesn’t make easier focusing. Plus, the camera handling cannot be rated as perfect. Comfort is affected by the placement of the shutter lever, placed just where right hand fingers must be situated. A traditional button on the top cover seems much more comfortable.
The shutter cocking lever made in the fashion traditions of sixties: it appears right from narrow slit between body and top shield. But in my humble opinion this lever is a bit tight. Look at the picture of disassembled Zenit-4 one more time and imagine: all these gears have to be cranked by that lever.
Add to all of this an almost full absence of interchangeable lenses. If you don’t have the Rubin-1 zoom, forget about any focal lengths except kit 50mm Vega-3. As in many similar cases, the lenses for the Zenit-4 family existed only in illustrations in magazines and in experimental workshops.
The mount was similar to the Western DKL, but had an almost 3mm-longer flange focal distance. I guess, the reason is a longer shutter body. It is generally accepted that KMZ used for this camera the foreign shutters Synchro-Compur, but I didn’t see any Western marking on disassembled cameras. Most likely the shutters were domestic and this affected their bulkiness. That’s why foreign lenses were not compatible with Zenit-4 too.
These facts are a very good illustration about Soviet camera industry essence. This camera family was one of the most ambitious projects of the whole camera making of USSR in that era. Remember that Zenit-6 was equipped with the first ever Soviet photo zoom Rubin-1 and Zenit-5 had the first electric drive in the USSR. Moreover, this drive was a world first: earlier electric drives were detachable, but KMZ first decided to install electric motor right into the take-up spool! Good, but too expensive for domestic photographers and too late for foreign market.
There was no any competition in the USSR in the Western sense. There was no need to divide the market in a planned economy between different plants. The competition was unselfish: who can do it better? That’s why Zenit-4 had a competitor, launched in the same period: the Kiev-10. It was not so ambitious project: there were no electric drives, high speed sync and arrows for depth indications, but that camera supported interchangeable lenses from different SLRs.
The most eloquent thing is a comparison of the standard lenses of these cameras. The closest focusing distance of Helios-81 is 0.5 metre, usual for a 35mm SLR. But Vega-3 can be focused not closer than one metre. And it’s not a peculiarity of lens barrel. The back glass of a lens cannot shift from shutter leaves too far without vignetting. For the same reason focusing limit for telephoto lenses is even longer: 1.5 meters for the 135mm Tair-38!
It’s better not toe compare the self-returning mirror of the Kiev-10: most of leaf-shutter SLRs couldn’t dream about this. As a result, the Kiev-10 survived in production for six years and gave birth to offspring as Kiev-15. Old photographers are still shuddering in horror every time remembering the Kiev but admit these bricks shot kilometres of film before the shutter jammed irrevocably.
Zenit-4 broke down too fast due to its excessive complexity, and left almost no traces in Russia. It was all the more interesting to look at this camera up close. My verdict is simple: this camera is only suitable for collection. If you intend to start shooting as a street photographer or any other film photographic career, never buy Zenit-4 or its brothers. If you like Soviet SLRs, buy Zenit-E or at last, Zenit-19. They are really usable.
But a collection of Soviet cameras cannot be considered complete without a Zenit-4.
