[Leica] Zorki and J-8 Industar 61 as "car camera"

[pklein at 2alpha.net (Peter Klein)]

Thanks, Mark and Don.  After I posted my query, I went out shooting at 
Seattle's Golden Gardens Park (right on Puget Sound, spectacular view of 
the mountains).  I took the Zorki, the Jupiter 8 and the Industar 61.  I 
was wearing glasses rather than contact lenses, which lent a whole new 
meaning to the proceedings.

The combination of my face shape and vision make it impossible for me to 
see the whole 35mm frame on a .72x M camera with glasses.  I can just about 
see the 50mm "M" frame with glasses.  I need more eye relief than even many 
glasses wearers.

Well, Zorki cameras and even 50mm V/C brightline viewfinders are not made 
with eye relief in mind.  The Zorki viewfinder is impossible with glasses. 
Even the brightline finder gives me tunnel-vision.  The result was an 
exercise in frustration.  Fumble city. I was reminded why I got rid of my 
IIIf with very few regrets once I got an "M."

While the Zorki would be a cheap way to go, it's not the best way for 
me.  It's OK when I'm wearing my contacts.  With glasses, it would only 
work for static subjects.

Mark, you make a very good point about the value of our time.  I have a 
sentimental attachment to the Zorki as it belonged to a late friend of 
mine.  It works reasonably well *if* I'm wearing contacts.  But I can't 
guarantee I'll be wearing contacts when a good picture comes along. If the 
Zorki it isn't a good match for my particular set of eyes, I probably 
shouldn't invest much more time in it, sentimental value or no.

OTOH, I'm interested in the way different lenses render real photographs. 
The way the J-8 does people appeals to me. But using them on the Leica 
brings up the compatibility issue.  Again, it may not be worth my time now. 
In December or January when it's raining a lot may be time for a few 
experiments in Russo-Teutonic relations. A digital rangefinder would make 
such experiments much easier.  So maybe they await the vaporous Zeiss or 
Leica digital, or an Epson R2D2 with the traditional Bessa R/R2/R2a 
viewfinder.

Don, you make a good point about the Kiev.  But I would have to see the 
viewfinder before I could tell if it will work for me.  I remember once 
looking through a Contax with glasses--if I recall correctly, I had the 
same problem as with the Zorki.

Does anybody in Seattle have a Kiev I could look through to confirm this?

OTOH, I remember looking through a Bessa R at Glazer's several years 
ago.  I *was* able to see the 35mm frame with glasses on those.  So maybe 
there's a used Bessa in my future.  We'll see. I'm sure there are many 
people on the Gulf coast who wish they had my problems.

Any further comments welcome.

--Peter

Mark Rabiner wrote:
>Can we afford the down time
>just trying to figure out what's wrong with our negs it is us or the
>developer a cheap UV filter or a cloudy day? I wasted a year of my life
>trying to get results from a bum Leitz Tele Elmarit 90 on my white backdrop
>so that's exotic as I get during my formative years. Other than
>Cosina-Voigtl?nder most of which are groovy.

Don Dory wrote:

>Soviet cameras are cheap enough that I would suggest starting anew. 
>Tryeither a Kiev 2 or a Kiev 4am. Both of these are pretty close Contax II
>clones that will mount all Contax glass. You will avoid issues of bad lenses
>due to improper focal length (see Cameraquest.com <http://Cameraquest.com>).
>Shutters are reliable, lenses are quite good and you will spend between $50
>and $100 for a good example. What you will get is a solid camera with a very
>long base rangefinder and a good assortment on lenses as long as you like
>35-50-85-135. If you catch the bug, I believe Stephen Gandy has some Cosina
>lenses that will work down to 21mm.
>  For a car camera, you could not ask for a better performance/price ratio.
>  0.02