USSRPhoto.com Forums

All Forums

General Discussion

Collectors and Users Open Forum

Fed-Arsenal

Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply.
To register, click here. Registration is FREE!

Screensize:

UserName:

Password:

Antispam question:

Please provide registration password:

Answer:

Format Mode:

Format:

Message:

* HTML is OFF
* Forum Code is ON

New! Upload Image

Smilies

[quote][i]Originally posted by Lenny[/i]
[br][quote][i]Originally posted by Jacques M.[/i]
[br]we don't know which materials were available for these cameras. Certainly, the Arsenal guys used what they had. So, to declare this camera is a fake would be a bit short. For the moment, we just have to compile...
[/quote]

Thanks Jacques,

of course we can't be sure about the history of every single camera, but some things are very unlikely. Important is only how the Fed and Arsenal factories produced cameras. 
Fed got an ordered plan to produce thousands of cameras every year. They didn't get an order to produce spare parts and they were not ordered to repair cameras. So keeping plates with 3 holes under the rewind knob makes less sense. To fulfill the plan and to use all produced parts they might have used up all 1c parts in the transition from 1c to 1d. 
Arsenal might have had lots of 1e parts. They might have started production with these 1e parts. To produce #00022 so early with a different technic from 1c makes less sense when there were enough 1e parts available. And it seems Arsenal got an ordered plan too, to produce the first 100 cameras fast. This #00022 with 3 screws makes no sense and Arsenal didn't had mass production at that time. These FED-Arsenal were pretty much produced consecutive to their serial numbers. 
In a workshop it's totally different, their job was to repair cameras and they likely used parts from other broken cameras.
[/quote]

Check here to include your profile signature.
Check here to subscribe to this topic.

T O P I C R E V I E W
Jacques M.	Posted - Jun 30 2015 : 10:46:01 AM Hello, I have just got a Fed-Arsenal, very bad condition but very cheap. So, I won't be deceived! This camera is certainly a fantasy camera. But it seems that a small series could have been made at Arsenal's before Fed begin again their work. With Fed spare parts, of course. I don't know more than that was said here on the subject five years ago: http://ussrphoto.com/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1549 And I don't forget that Bill's one was made of Zorki 1b parts: http://ussrphoto.com/Wiki/default.asp?WikiCatID=76&ParentID=1&ContentID=21&Item=FED%2DArsenal That said, I wonder (just a little!)... On my s/n 00067, some parts don't come from Fed's: the view counter (pins between 10/15 and 30/35) and the speed dial, with a different engraving. And the 00004 (on Abramov's and Luiz's sites) has exactly the same replacing parts, as if they had missed when mounting the camera and the factory (or the forger?) had to re-make them... Here is a photo of the seller (The camera is not yet here) http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/3062015_Fed Arsenal 1.jpg Any ideas? Do we know other Fed Arsenal cameras now? Thanks. Jacques.
100 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First)
Jacques M.	Posted - Oct 07 2023 : 11:16:25 AM Just sold for 13000�...
Jacques M.	Posted - Oct 07 2023 : 10:12:42 AM A "new" Fed Arsenal has just appeared: the s/n 143, proposed by Wetzlar camera auction. It belongs to the second series (without hammer and sickle). The lesns is an Industar 22 "Moskow", very early type with a Fed plate s/n 110390/109-7. A photo from the seller: http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent2/7102023_158015920_1_x.webp By our wiki, it's only the 12th (the 13th if we count the plate found by Alzo). Amiti�s. Jacques.
Jacques M.	Posted - Jan 05 2023 : 11:03:25 AM Right. And I had said that the "Kiev Arsenal" section was logical. For me, it's certainly more an affective question... And my Fed-Arsenal is amongst other exotic Fed 1, not with its fellows from Kiev! We can compare with the Fed-KMZ cameras, but those ones had an illustrious lineage... A question: does the serial number (00226) has a special signification for the Plant? It's the last found until now: could it be the last produced? Amiti�s. Jacques.
Vlad	Posted - Jan 05 2023 : 09:28:04 AM Jacques, it is 100% made on Arsenal factory based on FED drawings so it belongs under Arsenal since it's made there. Just as Zorki belongs under KMZ.. It's under "Kiev Arsenal - Other." Kiev being the city not the camera. Best regards, Vlad
Jacques M.	Posted - Jan 05 2023 : 04:05:22 AM I had not understand... So, that document puts a final point to our discussion about the place where these cameras were made... I must say I am a bit moved! Thanks again, Alzo! You have put the camera in the Kiev section, Vlad. It is logical. But personally, I would have seen it among the Feds? Amiti�s. Jacques.
Vlad	Posted - Jan 04 2023 : 3:52:49 PM Hi Jacques, I think you've misunderstood the meaning of this photo that Alzo posted. This is a film negative from Arsenal factory archives from around the time this camera was made demonstrating a anodation process and has the top of FED-Arsenal as an example in it. For me this is an indisputable evidence of validity of such camera existence and manufacture by Arsenal plant, being this part of an official factory report for the 4 year plan. And I know for a fact that Alzo has access to Arsenal factory archive materials. Personally this puts all of the doubt about this camera to rest and I will move it to an Arsenal section in the catalog. Best regards, Vlad
Jacques M.	Posted - Jan 03 2023 : 08:47:38 AM Thanks, Alex. Of course, it would have been indisputable if it had spoken of the Fed-Arsenal production. But as it is, it's a very interesting indirect confirmation. And it shows a serial number we don't have in our listing (00226?). Thanks again, Alzo! Amiti�s. Jacques.
Alex_Rus	Posted - Jan 03 2023 : 07:58:22 AM Top: "Anodic blackening of copper alloys" Bottom: "The oxidized film of oxidized copper alloys in a 20% alkali solution has great mechanical strength and a beautiful decorative appearance. The anode oxidation bath is easy to operate, the electrolyte is highly stable." (Google translation)
Jacques M.	Posted - Dec 25 2022 : 11:17:23 AM Many thanks for this lucky find, Alzo! Could you be more precise and tell more about it (if it is possible...) And could somebody translate the Russian text? Thanks! Amiti�s. Jacques.
alzo	Posted - Dec 25 2022 : 08:42:15 AM After a long search and intense digging through the archives, I almost despaired of finding illustrative material in my search. It so happened that this year, on May 9, after a long illness, Serov Nikolai Fedorovich, the chief engineer and head of the head of photography production, died. His memory is fresh, but it was he who, during his lifetime, directed me into the mainstream of the subject and direction of searches. At one time, he suggested where there could be an illustration of what is so necessary for documentary confirmation, for which I am especially grateful to him. And so here is an image that confirms the products of the Plant, the production of fed at the arsenal. This is a frame from a formatted glass photo plate, among other reporting elements produced by the coating shop. The report was compiled by the end of the 4th five-year plan of the USSR Retaken by me through the light due to the lack of scanning equipment in this archive photo taken on a mobile phone plate in the light http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent2/25122022_320173279_1522879618192119_9098875490796308875_n.jpg http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent2/25122022_321240948_2086536421547178_2831498898881650725_n.jpg http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent2/25122022_321303778_480899073973482_2800357425551425880_n.jpg http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent2/25122022_321076106_2025411100985487_504357818180094894_n.jpg
Alfa2	Posted - Feb 20 2017 : 05:38:42 AM I saw similar sign in a FED. But it was long time ago. I don't remember in which FED it was and what was the sign.
Jacques M.	Posted - Feb 19 2017 : 11:52:59 AM Thanks, Luiz. By this article, there is an inscription inside the Fed bodies, which represents the date of making. In my Fed Arsenal, I have a "III" on the body, behind the film plate (photo already posted). http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1922017_DSCF2178.JPG Could it be for march? Jacques.
Luiz Paracampo	Posted - Feb 17 2017 : 11:15:31 AM more about FED Arsenal http://photolubitel.com/index.php?route=module/kbm/article&kbm_article_id=9 Regards to all LP
Jacques M.	Posted - Jun 14 2016 : 05:38:47 AM Two of the lenses on these Fed-Arsenal are 1935 Fed "1 turn". I have added them in the wiki. Thanks to the owners! Jacques.
Jacques M.	Posted - Jun 07 2016 : 04:50:16 AM Thanks for the translation, Vlad. The photo of this Fed 1e is too bad to see correctly the spring and what is around it. However, we can see that the speed dial and the frame counter are of the Fed-Arsenal type... The photo of the Fed-Arsenal s/n 00043 is much interesting. It shows extra holes for the screws of the slow speed spring and the connection towards the selector. It corresponds to those which can be observed on the Fed "B". http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/762016_fed arsenal s-n 43.png This Fed-Arsenal s/n 00043 could have been a Fed "B" in a better life... Note that these extra holes don't exist on any of my own Fed 1-s, nor my Fed-Arsenal s/n 00067. Amiti�s. Jacques.
Vlad	Posted - Jun 06 2016 : 10:50:57 AM Sorry for a delayed reply. Regarding the picture of the FED that I posted earlier with a initials cover, here's what the caption says and I'm not sure how accurate that is but it's a very interesting statement: FED-Arsenal" with an "Berdsk" [1e] engraving "FED №183569." The camera body was designed for model "B". [note the covered slow dial hole] Hole exists for 1\1000 in speed dial disk. All of the features characteristic of the species of Kiev's FED Arsenal except panel and lens are available. Here, the cover assembly is not sandblasted chrome and just grinded - noticeable on the surface of the cover. It seems that they just did not have sandblaster. Another feature - the shutter spring - pink colorб unpainted. Chromed panel - without nickel substrate. The description of this camera looked peculiar to me that it may have a been a leftover parts camera that was partially assembled in Berdsk as FED-B with leftover 1e cover.. and later Arsenal got same kind of camera body leftovers to do FED-Arsenal? This story has too many confusing unknowns that is why FED-Arsenal is going to sit in "contested" category until there is a undisputable passport or documentation for a specific camera. And to add to what Bill wrote, Lenny, there is a tradition on this forum to make a separate post introducing yourself, telling us a little bit about yourself, what you collect, how long, a little bit about your collection. Given your heavy participation I'm sure a lot of long time members are interested of who is the "mysterious" Lenny . It would be great if you do such a post. I promise I will not send robbers to your house while you're a member of this forum Best regards, Vlad
nightphoto	Posted - Jun 05 2016 : 8:47:52 PM The entry for FED-Arsenal was moved from the "Modified and Fantasy Cameras" section to the "Unidentified / Contested Authenticity" section. This is a step up for the FED-Arsenal ... from "Fantasy" to "Contested Authenticity". No doubt when and if there becomes documentary is proof that these cameras are the ones that were actually made by Arsenal, then they will be moved to another category. I would also ask Lenny who he is, and where he lives (just which country - no one will get his address to take his cameras) and to volunteer some information about his collection or experience. We have all done so over the years and have not been robbed because of it. Just sharing information with some other interested friends. Regards, Bill
Jacques M.	Posted - Jun 05 2016 : 3:09:15 PM Yes, of course! Very funny, indeed! We put a 1 turn Fed lens (unfindable) on a Fed-Arsenal, unfindable too! All that to fake. Certainly, we are joking... Don't you feel "we" are ridiculous ? And every day , you decide to re-evaluate the wiki, by yourself, if I understand correctly? Once more time, I ask the question: who are you to do so? Could you give us a sign showing that you are a collector rather than a troll? About the Fed s/n 155, certainly it's not the subject, or I am wrong, once more? Perhaps you should open a new thread? And please, don't use capital letters. Between us, though old, I am not deaf Jacques.
Lenny	Posted - Jun 05 2016 : 12:13:55 PM quote: Originally posted by Jacques M. But we have already decided that the s/n 00022 is a fake! And we forget too that normal rules of production cannot be applied to this period of recovery. For example, the two "1 turn" lenses that we find on the s/n 00127 and 00216 are curious. Note that I have not said that this camera is genuine: for the moment, it's just impossible to know. But I discuss for peanuts: all the series is in the "contested or unauthentified" section! "WE" decided nothing. Vlad and Bill decided to put it in the contested section. I decide every day new how I think about certain cameras. Every day I evaluate new and if I get new information I might come to new conclusions. But for now #00022 is not original to me. Could be that the top plate is original and was assembled on a broken 1c camera, who knows, but still the whole camera would not be original then. Elnur asked and I gave my opinion. And for peanuts sake, these are cameras with interchangeable lenses. If you know you have a fake camera, it is nice to put a 1-turn lens on it to make it look famous. For example, Fed-1a #155. We all know it was sold WITHOUT lens. Suddenly this #155 has a separate entry here in the wiki WITH lens and it is not even mentioned that it is not the original lens. Camera/lens combinations are mostly worth peanuts, only passports might give a hint.
Jacques M.	Posted - Jun 05 2016 : 10:58:40 AM We don't know how many Fed-Arsenal were made, nor in which conditions, nor exactly with which parts. But we have already decided that the s/n 00022 is a fake! If I had been a guy of Arsenal and found a complete 1c in a chest, I would have used it first! And we forget too that normal rules of production cannot be applied to this period of recovery. For example, the two "1 turn" lenses that we find on the s/n 00127 and 00216 are curious. It seems that parts in the chests were not only from 1e-s. Note that I have not said that this camera is genuine: for the moment, it's just impossible to know. But I discuss for peanuts: all the series is in the "contested or unauthentified" section! Jacques.
Lenny	Posted - Jun 04 2016 : 4:00:26 PM quote: Originally posted by Jacques M. A word more about that question of lenses. By our wiki, and for the 1e-s, the s/n of lenses is always under the body's ones, with just one exception. Generally, it's just the contrary. That could lead too towards a lack of lenses for the 1e-s and the Fed-Arsenal. The serials for 50/3.5 should be much lower because of FED S which were fitted with 50/2.0 Taylor-Hobson clones. The lack of lenses for FED-Arsenal might be because they were not able to produce lenses. That shows what a great factory FED was before the war.
Jacques M.	Posted - Jun 04 2016 : 2:43:31 PM A word more about that question of lenses. By our wiki, and for the 1e-s, the s/n of lenses is always under the body's ones, with just one exception. Generally, it's just the contrary. That could lead too towards a lack of lenses for the 1e-s and the Fed-Arsenal. Jacques.
Jacques M.	Posted - Jun 04 2016 : 08:17:45 AM Hi Bill and Vlad! Yes, it's probably just to put a late 1e. It seems that a number of these Fed-Arsenal were made from parts coming from that series. Anyway, I don't see anything special about that one, except, of course, the plaque. Something else. It seems that certain late Fed 1e don't have the regular 3,5/50mm Fed lens. I own one of them with a bayonet Sonnar 1,5/5cm cautiously adapted on a Fed rear crown. There is another one in the wiki. And a third one on a Fed-Arsenal (the s/n 00050) shown in the article. Aftermarket adaptation, or lack of lenses at that time? Could there be a correlation with the use of 1948 Industar 22 on most of these cameras? Amiti�s. Jacques.
Lenny	Posted - Jun 03 2016 : 11:54:34 PM quote: Originally posted by Jacques M. we don't know which materials were available for these cameras. Certainly, the Arsenal guys used what they had. So, to declare this camera is a fake would be a bit short. For the moment, we just have to compile... Thanks Jacques, of course we can't be sure about the history of every single camera, but some things are very unlikely. Important is only how the Fed and Arsenal factories produced cameras. Fed got an ordered plan to produce thousands of cameras every year. They didn't get an order to produce spare parts and they were not ordered to repair cameras. So keeping plates with 3 holes under the rewind knob makes less sense. To fulfill the plan and to use all produced parts they might have used up all 1c parts in the transition from 1c to 1d. Arsenal might have had lots of 1e parts. They might have started production with these 1e parts. To produce #00022 so early with a different technic from 1c makes less sense when there were enough 1e parts available. And it seems Arsenal got an ordered plan too, to produce the first 100 cameras fast. This #00022 with 3 screws makes no sense and Arsenal didn't had mass production at that time. These FED-Arsenal were pretty much produced consecutive to their serial numbers. In a workshop it's totally different, their job was to repair cameras and they likely used parts from other broken cameras.
nightphoto	Posted - Jun 03 2016 : 9:47:22 PM Hi Vlad, Probably just a late FED-1e 'Berdsk'. The plate is probably just put on to personalize the camera (owners initials). The plaque may even have been cut from some other object with the monogram, such as a cigarette lighter or damaged piece of silver - vase, cigarette case, etc. Maybe was put in place to cover a hole by someone trying to add a slow speed dial, but unsuccessful. Probably not very relevant to the 'Berdsk' story or history. Can you read the monogram? "NIIS"? Regards, Bill
Vlad	Posted - Jun 03 2016 : 4:45:50 PM from the article that Luiz posted in part one I am confused about this camera, it may be a bit offtopic for this thread as it's more for Berdsk thread but this Berdsk shield/logo FED-B with serial # in 180xxx range.. it goes against everything established so far... it only proves that you can't expect consistency or logic in Soviet production http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/362016_ris_6all.jpg
Jacques M.	Posted - Jun 03 2016 : 3:05:09 PM quote: Originally posted by elnur Hi guys! Help to identificate. Fake or not? About this s/n 00020, it's evident that it was not made with 1d or 1e parts: the 3 screws under the rewind button and the central screw, half hidden under the lensplate, denote a 1b or early 1c body. The absence of hole for the slow speeds in the upper plate is a confirmation. That said, we don't know which materials were available for these cameras. Certainly, the Arsenal guys used what they had. So, to declare this camera is a fake would be a bit short. For the moment, we just have to compile... Jacques.
Jacques M.	Posted - Jun 03 2016 : 2:45:59 PM I'm not Zoom... First, all my thanks to Luiz! I just wonder (as a westie!) who is behind the author who has access to these ultra rare cameras... But other USSRphoto forumers are unknown... These articles are exciting. I particularly like the proceeding of the author: collect information before any synthesis. So, we have now some more Fed-Arsenal to examine, and one of them with the 1/1000th, as it seems. Some (many?) of them with a close relationship with the Fed 1e, by the "B" inside the cover. We had guessed here that these cameras could have been made mainly from original Fed parts, and partly from Arsenal made ones. It's a confirmation. And that there were in fact two foreseen batches, if we follow the plate engravings (and the serial numbers). We have now to wait for some new discoveries. No doubt they will happen, thanks to this thread! Anyway, it's absolutely not the moment to say which is, or not, genuine. Something else: on the way "from Kharkov to Kharkhov", so, from 1941 to 1948, the real and certain history has always to be written... Amiti�s. Jacques.
Zoom	Posted - Jun 03 2016 : 09:50:21 AM quote: Originally posted by Lenny Salut Jacques, How do you think about the photolubitel articles Luiz posted above? Especially about FED-Arsenal. I'm not Jacques ;), but near to the same conclusions are here: http://www.zenitcamera.com/articles/cameras/zenit-prehistory.html (I repeat the link, that somehow went unnoticed.) In addition, the points that have remained unsolved, are explained. The whole story is not fully clarified yet. But only some details are left.
Lenny	Posted - Jun 02 2016 : 6:11:22 PM Salut Jacques, how was your vacation, good you are back. How do you think about the photolubitel articles Luiz posted above? Especially about FED-Arsenal. The VTSVS should be discussed in another thread.
Lenny	Posted - May 23 2016 : 08:07:18 AM Who can translate it, I understand only half.
levonsa	Posted - May 23 2016 : 05:32:13 AM Luiz! Bravo!!! Thanks!
Luiz Paracampo	Posted - May 22 2016 : 5:09:46 PM Some interesting information could be found in those recente done pages. http://photolubitel.com/index.php?route=module/kbm/article&kbm_article_id=3 http://photolubitel.com/index.php?route=module/kbm/article&kbm_article_id=5 two intersting articles on FED Arsenal http://photolubitel.com/index.php?route=module/kbm/article&kbm_article_id=2 and this one about VTSVS. Lots of interesting information. Use Translator Regards LP http://photolubitel.com/index.php?route=module/kbm/article&kbm_article_id=6 http://photolubitel.com/index.php?route=module/kbm/article&kbm_article_id=7 Fotokor with variations and the TEMP Shutter (Compur type)
Lenny	Posted - May 19 2016 : 3:07:20 PM quote: Originally posted by nightphoto Hello Alfa2, In general I like your idea and was also thinking that it might be very helpful to have a link to this thread from the Wiki page. Also, I agree that the photos of my camera should not be on the WIKI page as my camera was obviously either a fake or had many non-original parts and so is not representative of the cameras we are discussing. But I think that photos of both models should be on the WIKI entry page, for reference, then with the link to this thread, a person can get a good idea of what's goining on. As well, the FED-Arsenal entry should be moved into the "Unidentified / Contested Authenticity" category. However, if we go ahead and do this, how will we know that someone won't rewrite the entry, at will, to say the camera is for sure authentic, or for sure a fake, depending on their own opinion? Regards, Bill The bad thing is, users can see on the first page if an entry was edited, but they can't see what was edited. For example, on fotoua, if a camera was added you can see the number of the collector in red for one day, besides that there is a number of the amount of cameras listed. Then you can put in days to see which cameras were added recently. Very easy to follow. Here added text in the entry should be highlighted for 1 week so we all can see what has changed. Is that possible?
Lenny	Posted - May 19 2016 : 2:21:23 PM quote: Originally posted by Vlad It's a special section just for that purpose. Users can use the search feature to find it. Until there's a concrete documentation for at least one of them we can say any of these are 100% authentic. thus it goes into this section. Some readers might not be familiar with the features of this website. I can tell I searched for some minutes, others just might give up. It should be assumed that this website should have at least a little true information, and we have that in the text in the entry, but it can't be found in the Arsenal section. Very poor.
Lenny	Posted - May 19 2016 : 2:15:40 PM quote: Originally posted by Vlad It's a special section just for that purpose. Users can use the search feature to find it. Until there's a concrete documentation for at least one of them we can say any of these are 100% authentic. thus it goes into this section. Then Red-Flag should be there too. Or did you see the passport Princelle was talking about?
Vlad	Posted - May 19 2016 : 2:12:21 PM It's a special section just for that purpose. Users can use the search feature to find it. Until there's a concrete documentation for at least one of them we can say any of these are 100% authentic. thus it goes into this section.
Lenny	Posted - May 19 2016 : 2:09:22 PM quote: Originally posted by Vlad I didn't move the entry into regular Wiki category because I'm of the same opinion as Bill. Even though I'm convinced that these cameras were made based on documentary evidence that Altix provided, I'm not convinced that these are the same cameras that were made and until there is concrete evidence of that I'd like to not display these in "authentic" section. Then we should just make a note that the authenticity of each sample is not proven. Besides that I think Jacques camera might be original. Readers who search for FED-Arsenal can't find them.
Vlad	Posted - May 19 2016 : 2:00:32 PM I'm ok with putting it into contested section.
Lenny	Posted - May 19 2016 : 1:59:48 PM quote: Originally posted by nightphoto Lenny, I have read all of the posts on this FED-Arsenal thread, but I don�t know if you have read them carefully as the documents were not from the FED archive, but rather the Arsenal archive. It may be that you and others on the forum have come to the conclusion or opinion that the FED-Arsenal cameras that we know were made at FED-Arsenal just after the end of the War. However, there is no proof that the cameras we have seen are the ones that were envisioned to be made at FED-Arsenal. We probably have proof that officials thought that Arsenal could make FEDs and maybe even that the process was started to some extent, but that is different from knowing for sure that the cameras known are the ones (if there were any). So far we only have eight examples and at least two of those seem to be fakes or at least made up of different, non-original parts. That is - 25% fake. As well, the idea that if they were made for the military, cameras would not have passports is not very likely. All Soviet military technical equipment was required to have passports including that from the more secretive branches like the KGB. The idea that cameras were just given to workers (�the milk maids�) is also unlikely as they would more likely have been sold, if possible, and would have also had passports if either gifts or sold. They would have had serial numbers and detailed passports. I have originated and edited many Wiki entries but I have never deleted another authors� opinion and substituted my own because I did not agree. So, as I asked you � why did you take away the text reflecting my opinion that there is uncertainty that these cameras are authentic examples? You are sure they are authentic and so my opinion does not matter? Also, I have long wondered where you live and if you have a collection. Another subject, indeed, but your profile seems to be quite anonymous and uninformative on a personal level and we have not seen any photos of your collection. Regards, Bill Bill, of course I meant the FED-Arsenal archives. I'm sure and I think others are sure too that FED-Arsenal cameras were made at Arsenal, otherwise Altix and Alzo wouldn't have stopped searching. If the cameras listed in the wiki are original or not is a totally different story, as in every other entry we can't be sure that all listed serials are original. But FED-Arsenal cameras are real and the entry should be moved to the Arsenal section, this is not a Phantasy camera. I meant if cameras were made for the military passports were likely stored somewhere central at the military and were not together with the cameras and those passports could still be somewhere at the military. It seems the camera of Davidenko's friend was given as a gift. What is written in the wiki is anonymous, I'm not able to check who wrote what. I thought from reading the thread that all agreed that FED-Arsenal cameras were produced. Again, if those serials listed in the wiki are original or not is a totally different story, those are only known examples, original or not. It's the same with listed serials with the same number, they are not marked which is real or fake, but someone who reads the listing can make own conclusions. Also Vlad doesn't like to mark cameras as fake because we can't be 100% sure. But FED-Arsenal is not a Phantasy. Normally, I always try to keep what is written in the wiki, but not if there is false information. So do you think that no FED-Arsenal camera was made at Arsenal? There are other entries with fake cameras listed in my opinion but I don't mark them as fakes because we can't be 100% sure. And in this entry #00020 is marked with Zorki parts but not as a fake and I also changed nothing of that information which was already there. I'm sure you heard about collectors who are well known and their cameras were stolen from their homes. Besides that, it shouldn't matter if posters are anonymous or not, only important is their contribution to the community. I posted photos already.
Vlad	Posted - May 19 2016 : 1:59:44 PM I didn't move the entry into regular Wiki category because I'm of the same opinion as Bill. Even though I'm convinced that these cameras were made based on documentary evidence that Altix provided, I'm not convinced that these are the same cameras that were made and until there is concrete evidence of that I'd like to not display these in "authentic" section.
nightphoto	Posted - May 19 2016 : 1:57:16 PM Hello Alfa2, In general I like your idea and was also thinking that it might be very helpful to have a link to this thread from the Wiki page. Also, I agree that the photos of my camera should not be on the WIKI page as my camera was obviously either a fake or had many non-original parts and so is not representative of the cameras we are discussing. But I think that photos of both models should be on the WIKI entry page, for reference, then with the link to this thread, a person can get a good idea of what's goining on. As well, the FED-Arsenal entry should be moved into the "Unidentified / Contested Authenticity" category. However, if we go ahead and do this, how will we know that someone won't rewrite the entry, at will, to say the camera is for sure authentic, or for sure a fake, depending on their own opinion? Regards, Bill
Alfa2	Posted - May 19 2016 : 1:32:37 PM This is interesting thing with FED-Arsenal. There is no proof FEDs were produced in Arsenal. So I have another idea. We can put FED-Arsenal into Wiki with description that probably FEDs were made in Arsenal but there is no proof and link to this thread and without any photos because we don't know which camera is original, if some is original. This is in order somebody may look for informations about FED-Arsenal and it is beter to read this thread than find nothing. What do you think about that ?
nightphoto	Posted - May 19 2016 : 12:29:43 PM Lenny, I have read all of the posts on this FED-Arsenal thread, but I don�t know if you have read them carefully as the documents were not from the FED archive, but rather the Arsenal archive. It may be that you and others on the forum have come to the conclusion or opinion that the FED-Arsenal cameras that we know were made at FED-Arsenal just after the end of the War. However, there is no proof that the cameras we have seen are the ones that were envisioned to be made at FED-Arsenal. We probably have proof that officials thought that Arsenal could make FEDs and maybe even that the process was started to some extent, but that is different from knowing for sure that the cameras known are the ones (if there were any). So far we only have eight examples and at least two of those seem to be fakes or at least made up of different, non-original parts. That is - 25% fake. As well, the idea that if they were made for the military, cameras would not have passports is not very likely. All Soviet military technical equipment was required to have passports including that from the more secretive branches like the KGB. The idea that cameras were just given to workers (�the milk maids�) is also unlikely as they would more likely have been sold, if possible, and would have also had passports if either gifts or sold. They would have had serial numbers and detailed passports. I have originated and edited many Wiki entries but I have never deleted another authors� opinion and substituted my own because I did not agree. So, as I asked you � why did you take away the text reflecting my opinion that there is uncertainty that these cameras are authentic examples? You are sure they are authentic and so my opinion does not matter? Also, I have long wondered where you live and if you have a collection. Another subject, indeed, but your profile seems to be quite anonymous and uninformative on a personal level and we have not seen any photos of your collection. Regards, Bill
Lenny	Posted - May 18 2016 : 11:20:36 PM quote: Originally posted by nightphoto Hi Lenny, As far as I know the authenticity of any of the FED-Arsenals known and in the WIKI is in question. They may all be fakes or only some may be. Until it is proven that actual FED cameras were made at Arsenal, not just intended to be made there as the documents shown on this thread indicate, we can't know if cameras were made there. An actual passport would have no doubt been made for any cameras made at Arsenal at that time. If a passport for a FED-Arsenal is found and shown to be authentic, then we may be more sure. But Lenny, you did seem to rewrite the entry taking away any text that cast doubt on the authenticity of these FED-Arsenals? Or, am I wrong? Regards, Bill Bill, didn't you read the last posts Altix wrote with documents from the FED archives? I'm sure that FED-Arsensal cameras were produced and in Vlad's post you can read the same. I also know that Jacques is of the same opinion and there are others. It is more known about FED-Arsenal than about Red-Flag because nobody saw the passport Princelle was talking about. So I don't know how you come to your conclusion that these cameras are still in doubt. The first batch of FED-Arsenal might have gone to the military with all the passports, some of the others might have been given as gifts, I don't think that they needed to make passports for them. But you are free to put #00022 into the wiki too. To me #00022 is a fake, same as your #00020 was. I'm not sure about #00216 because there is no hollow at the rewind clutch.
nightphoto	Posted - May 18 2016 : 6:33:36 PM Hi Lenny, As far as I know the authenticity of any of the FED-Arsenals known and in the WIKI is in question. They may all be fakes or only some may be. Until it is proven that actual FED cameras were made at Arsenal, not just intended to be made there as the documents shown on this thread indicate, we can't know if cameras were made there. An actual passport would have no doubt been made for any cameras made at Arsenal at that time. If a passport for a FED-Arsenal is found and shown to be authentic, then we may be more sure. But Lenny, you did seem to rewrite the entry taking away any text that cast doubt on the authenticity of these FED-Arsenals? Or, am I wrong? Regards, Bill
Lenny	Posted - May 18 2016 : 5:37:28 PM quote: Originally posted by nightphoto Lenny, Shouldn't you add this camera to the WIKI list with a note concerning authenticity? If this camera is not authentic then shouldn't it be compared with other examples known? Regards, Bill Hi Bill, I'm not the wiki guru, I only offered to arrange wiki entries if they are messed up. Everybody should feel free to add to the wiki what seems to be important for them. To me, it's not important to add photos of fakes, and this one with those 3 screws was a kind of easy case. Maybe it would be worth to check closely how well the top plate was engraved, but I think it won't help much in the future. Before I copied many photos of fakes too and put them among the original ones in my base, with bad results, because they should be separated. No, I wouldn't add fakes into the wiki, but if there are fakes already in the wiki I would mention what's wrong with them. But those who own those fakes might delete that the next days. Our goal should be to teach everybody how to recognize fakes, like you did with describing the corners around the shoe on your #00020, because every single collector has to make his own decision to buy a camera which could be faked.
nightphoto	Posted - May 18 2016 : 3:03:33 PM Lenny, Shouldn't you add this camera to the WIKI list with a note concerning authenticity? If this camera is not authentic then shouldn't it be compared with other examples known? Regards, Bill
elnur	Posted - May 18 2016 : 2:38:05 PM Thx a lot Lenny )) its really so easy ))
Lenny	Posted - May 18 2016 : 06:48:43 AM quote: Originally posted by elnur Hi guys! Help to identificate. Fake or not? Hi Elnur, this is very easy, 3 screws under the rewind knob.
elnur	Posted - May 17 2016 : 1:14:10 PM Hi guys! Help to identificate. Fake or not? http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1752016_image.jpeg http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1752016_TD0alnuH9KE.jpg http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1752016_4Qor-j3KKJc.jpg http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1752016_shVRVC_rWOU.jpg http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1752016_zJ7wZt68jZw.jpg
Alfa2	Posted - May 13 2016 : 04:52:32 AM Thanks Jacques.
Jacques M.	Posted - May 13 2016 : 03:25:54 AM quote: Originally posted by Alfa2 Is it known how many FED-Arsenal camera were produced ? No. For the moment, we know seven of them, the last one having s/n 00222 (cf the wiki). We don't know either if really 222 cameras were made... Probably we will discover other ones in a near future, thanks to this thread! Amiti�s. Jacques.
Alfa2	Posted - May 13 2016 : 01:29:33 AM Is it known how many FED-Arsenal camera were produced ?
Lenny	Posted - May 12 2016 : 08:26:43 AM Thanks Zoom. Amazing is that the first FED-Arsenal camera might have been produced in Kiev in January 1946 and at the same time the first Red-Flag was produced in Berdsk. When the FED factory moved back from Berdsk to Kharkov in September 1946 Arsenal was still producing FED-Arsenal cameras for 1 more year, even when it was only in small quantities.
Zoom	Posted - May 12 2016 : 07:17:19 AM quote: Originally posted by Lenny Interesting to me is that the old Arsenal plant number was #393 and the new KMZ plant number was also #393. Wish Zoom could tell more about this coincidence, the timeline or if there was intention behind that. It is simple: number 393 was free... Kiev Arsenal plant joined the plant number 235 NKV (aka Votkinsk Machine Building Plant) and ceased to exist as a separate entity. See also http://www.zenitcamera.com/articles/cameras/zenit-prehistory.html (in Russian, sorry).
Lenny	Posted - May 12 2016 : 02:33:39 AM quote: Originally posted by Zoom http://www.zenitcamera.com/archive/history/davidov-from-lupe.html (a brief plants' history and an information about numbers) Interesting to me is that the old Arsenal plant number was #393 and the new KMZ plant number was also #393. Wish Zoom could tell more about this coincidence, the timeline or if there was intention behind that.
Alfa2	Posted - May 11 2016 : 04:58:40 AM Yes, and this "lovely" price - 8000 $
Jacques M.	Posted - May 10 2016 : 3:11:10 PM Another one, the s/n 00010: http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1052016_Fed Arsenal 10 7.jpg
Lenny	Posted - Jan 19 2016 : 2:45:13 PM wow Altix. You are the Man, loved to read all this. How do you think about that #00216 has no hollow? Could it be that the Arsenal maids knew that it wasn't needed, even before KMZ cowboys did. Ilyas's #00127 looks the same, at least the engravings on the top plate, wonder if there is no hollow either, wish Ilya could post another picture. Bill's #00020 looks definitely like a fake, good he sold it. So I need to live for some years more till all the archieves in Ukraine open and we will know more about Feds too. Altix, thank you so much for all this
altix	Posted - Jan 02 2016 : 04:55:22 AM Dear Juhani, Jacques and Vlad, yes, probably the story is not as complete as we would like to see it. some further research is needed. This archive is rather a collection of letters, orders and year-reports, so there is no technical drawings or documentation. I've got an impression that the rests of FED (and FED-Arsenal) tools after unsuccessful FED Arsenal program were transported to KMZ. I believe it is the most probable scenario since FED factory in Kharkov subordinated to another Ministry. It is also important to mention that Arsenal was unable to produce its own optics in 1945-48. I would like to thank Alzo personally for his persistence. I was skeptical all the time that the work performed by Alzo is possible in the condition when archive workers are persuaded that 70 years old documents should remain secret at least one more century. altix
Vlad	Posted - Jan 01 2016 : 4:39:57 PM Yes!!! Altix, Alzo, this is it! Without a doubt the most concrete evidence that puts all doubts to rest about the existence of this model, thank you for all your amazing work, I know how much labor and negotiations that took from both of you!
Jacques M.	Posted - Jan 01 2016 : 07:27:56 AM Congrats and thanks for your job, Altix and Alzo... Fabulous! If the cameras were sold only in 1947/48, as it is suggested by the page 172, it explains why we can find different lenses. The "one turn" Fed lenses, made for the 1a, and which probably came at Arsenal's with the Fed body parts. And early "Moskva" lenses, made in 1948, put on the bodies after the decision of selling the cameras... As for the "incomplete production", certainly they had hoped to mount several hundreds of cameras with the available spare parts. But it would have been necessary to make special tools to achieve the work. Probably too much for the factory: the present was already on the side of the Vega-Kiev project... So, certainly we will never know how many of these cameras were made. But at least, now we know they were made at Arsenal's! Amiti�s. Jacques.
cedricfan	Posted - Jan 01 2016 : 02:35:31 AM Wow! Amazing reading, many thanks! Best regards, Juhani
altix	Posted - Dec 31 2015 : 10:34:32 AM The second document is the 172nd page of Arsenal factory archive dated by late 1947. The quality of paper is very bad so I reproduce the Russian text as well http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/212016_ark177WM.jpg "Остатки незавершенного производства на конец года составляют реальную сумму по всем заказам, за исключением незавершенного производства аппарата ФЭД, какое списать с баланса по представленным ведоместям Министерства не разрешило, а предложило реализовать его как гражданскую продукцию найдя покупателей. " http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/212016_ark177WM1.jpg "The rests of incomplete production at the end of the year make up the real sum on all orders. The only exception is the incomplete production of camera FED. The Ministry prohibited to write off it from the balance. Instead the Ministry proposed to sell cameras as civil production by finding the buyers." So the whole project of FED Arsenal cameras was not successful. The production was started in 1945 and ended in 1947. The proposition of Ministry to sell the cameras to civil market is interesting. This means that initially these cameras were intended for military use. This explains why some of the cameras have "military-Arsenal" logo.
altix	Posted - Dec 31 2015 : 10:01:16 AM Dear all, I wish you a happy New Year! In order to put an end to the topic of FED Arsenal originality I will share two more documents. These Arsenal factory documents are taken by Alzo from State Archive of Kyiv http://kiev-arhiv.gov.ua/en/. There is a long story about all difficulties he met on the way to make these photocopies. The documents are still under the seal "Secret" and this causes a lot of problems. I want to declare that the following documentation is published the first time. The last time Arsenal factory archive was inspected by factory employers in 1985. Any claims that everybody knows this fact and everything is well known are ridiculous. The first document is the letter of factory director Smirnov to the Head of 2nd Main Administration of NKW comrade Dobrovolskiy dated by 22.12.45 (almost exactly 70 years ago). http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/212016_ark98WM.jpg In the letter Smirnov informs that "...The factory does not have an equipment for (the production) of photo-camera "FED". The first batch of 100 cameras will be produced by factory in primitive way. Simultaneously the proof of developed technology will be conducted. For broadening of production of photo-camera "FED" and grinding machines the factory plans the increase of incomplete production to the tune of 300 thousands of Rubels." http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/212016_ark98WM2.jpg Honestly to say, I do not understand what does it mean "the increase of incomplete production". Anyway, from this letter it is clear that the production of FED cameras was planned in 1946 but already in 1945 it was evident that the shortage of needed equipment will influence the production numbers and their quality.
Jacques M.	Posted - Nov 13 2015 : 05:51:34 AM It looks like a very early "1 turn" Fed lens, no? Like on the s/n 00216 that Altix showed above in this thread. Jacques.
ilyast	Posted - Nov 12 2015 : 4:52:54 PM Thanks, FED f=50
Jacques M.	Posted - Nov 12 2015 : 09:46:22 AM Nice! And with light traces of brushing on the chrome, like the others, as it seems? Congratulations, Ilyast! Could you tell which sort of lens you have? Thanks. Jacques.
ilyast	Posted - Nov 11 2015 : 2:20:08 PM http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/11112015_20151111_141703.jpeg One more
altix	Posted - Sep 25 2015 : 2:24:36 PM Dear Bill, I think it is high time to postpone all discussions on the camera until new documents will appear. There exist some problems with taking permissions to copy the documents we are looking for. I am unsure about the outcome but I hope everything would be fine. I did not know previously but in Ukraine the documents with the seal secret should be kept 75 years under this seal. Anyway, if we will not succeed with the permission to copy in 5 or 6 years it will became possible. I hope to finish with the FED Arsenal ambiguity earlier quote: Of course we will miss your insights if you decide not to participate in those discussions as they occur Thank you Bill, but I feel that I wrote in this thread too much that people would start to believe that I have a great passion for this camera or I can give some useful insight in discussions. In fact, I like Contax and Kiev cameras (Zeiss and early KMZ optics), even more to shoot with them as to discuss them And of course Carl Zeiss Jena history (and Arsenal history in a connection with this subject) is what fascinates me since the time I visited Optical museum in Jena for the first time. I hope to appear here very soon with the new information. with best regards, altix
nightphoto	Posted - Sep 25 2015 : 10:18:30 AM quote: Originally posted by altix I think it is better to wait other Arsenal documentation on this camera from archive. I just point out that the way of writing "N�" varied in time on Arsenal. Actually my task here was to show that such camera existed. I hope to complete this task in the nearest future. Concerning the originality of each concrete sample I would not like to debate because it can last forever. Official documents from Arsenal dating to 1945 - 1947, and concerning the actual production of a FED camera by Arsenal, would be most welcome and would absolutely prove that a FED-Arsenal camera was made. If the document(s) confirming actual manufacture are found, then of course it will be necessary to try to examine the technical details of each known example to ascertain which of them may be authentic examples, or which may not be authentic. Especially necessary as there appear to be technical differences, serial number groups, and at least two versions of the logo on these cameras. Maybe all are authentic, maybe some are authentic, maybe none are authentic. This can be the case even if proven that actual examples were made by Arsenal during 1945 - 1947. Of course we will miss your insights if you decide not to participate in those discussions as they occur, Altrix, but thank you very much for your researches already finished and future documents you may find. Very big thanks to Zoom as always, as his website, posts, and insights are a wealth of factual information concerning many subjects we are all interested in. Regards, Bill
Zoom	Posted - Sep 25 2015 : 09:25:43 AM quote: Originally posted by altix I know the factory Nr 237 or Kazansky optiko-mekhanicheskiy zavod. But now, from me, you know that originally it was publicly called as: "Volzhskiy" ("�� -�� " or "�� "). I agree that this name (or better to say: nickname) is rare and has been used more for conspiracy for a plant's number replacement... But exactly the same situation was with other plants (KMZ, NPZ)... From http://militera.lib.ru/memo/russian/novikov_vn/09.html , for example: quote: �� , �� . �. ��. �� , �� . �� . �� , �� , �� -�� . �. �. �� , �� , � �� , �� , �� . �� , �� , �� .
altix	Posted - Sep 25 2015 : 03:31:09 AM quote: Altix will certainly tell us if the specific "N�", on theodolites, existed before 1947... No I will not since I never saw theodolites from 1945 or 1946. I think it is better to wait other Arsenal documentation on this camera from archive. I just point out that the way of writing "N�" varied in time on Arsenal. Actually my task here was to show that such camera existed. I hope to complete this task in the nearest future. Concerning the originality of each concrete sample I would not like to debate because it can last forever. quote: What another plant could use this trademark? I don't want discus this issue further. I will go to Jena and look on documents by myself. I played in your game and used the name "Volzhskiy optiko-mekhanicheskiy zavod" that I copied from you. I know the factory Nr 237 or Kazansky optiko-mekhanicheskiy zavod. According to your logic the camera working-name should be not "Volga" but "Kazan" or instead "Kiev" cameras we would have "Dnepr" cameras. Even using your name "Volzhskiy optiko-mekhanicheskiy zavod" the semantic analogy Volga-Volzhskiy optiko-mekhanicheskiy zavod is very poor proof. Say using this photo http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/2592015_kmz.jpg I can draw a lot of ridiculous conclusions about KMZ in Krasnogorsk using the semantic analogy. I find your site very interesting and you did a great job, but I do not accept some your interpretations and comments. Sorry. Zoom, please send me the message in private since I do not know how to send you the files I promised.
Jacques M.	Posted - Sep 25 2015 : 03:04:38 AM Right, Bill, the "7" is similar and the "6" slightly different. The devil is in the details! Altix will certainly tell us if the specific "N�", on theodolites, existed before 1947... Always about details: it seems that the 00004 and the 00216 have a specific vulcanite, not far from the Red Flag's. And this vulcanite looks varnished... Amiti�s. Jacques.
nightphoto	Posted - Sep 24 2015 : 5:04:27 PM Jacques, The "6"s are similar, but the end of the "6" on the theodolite almost is touching the body ... on the FED-Arsenal there is some room between the end and the body. The differences of the "N" are distinct. Maybe means something, maybe not. Regards, Bill
Jacques M.	Posted - Sep 24 2015 : 4:22:05 PM Bill, Yes, the "N�" is different. But the drawing of "67" seems made by the same pencil-plate on the two photos... It would be interesting to know if there were different shapes of "N�" at Arsenal's, and when they appeared. Amiti�s. Jacques.
Zoom	Posted - Sep 24 2015 : 3:37:01 PM quote: Originally posted by altix I do not see much logic in your connection of Volga name with Volzhskiy optiko-mekhanicheskiy zavod. What another plant could use this trademark? Somehow I reminded this song (sorry, my translation): In this world there is no accidental events, Each step leaves its trace, And there is no miracle, and coincidences are extremely rare, And the course of the time is invariable, And often a takeoff turns to a fall, And I saw how the fall becomes the rise... ...
nightphoto	Posted - Sep 24 2015 : 2:25:42 PM One more detail that I have noticed about the actual engraving on the FED-Arsenal: The letters "No." before the serial numbers are different than the same "No." before the serial numbers of the Theodolites pictured. On the theodolites from Arsenal, even as late as 1952, the large "N" curves over the small "o". On the FED-Arsenal cameras the "N" is straight with no curling at either end. Also the chrome looks pretty good on all of the theodolites shown in the recent posts. The "dairymaids" sure got good at chrome-plating quickly !;.)) http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/2492015_resize_image.jpg http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/2492015_resize_image-1.jpg Regards, Bill
Jacques M.	Posted - Sep 24 2015 : 10:59:54 AM I love Zoom's "bla-bla-bla" in a previous post! In fact, probably we all agree. As for me, I don't say "Fed Arsenals were made at Arsenal's" but "I think that Fed Arsenals...". A great difference, certainly. And I will wait before I swear anything even if I feel a reasonable certitude now. As for the dairymaids, the cows and the Polish milkman... Like Bill, I think that the scenery is suddenly changing. After that episode, who is able to say, for example, when and where a late Fed 1e was made? Or even a Red Flag? For sure? Even before, it was difficult! If Fed's remaining parts, tools and documents were scattered in several places during the war (and after), of course the factory had great problems to recover... Jacques.
nightphoto	Posted - Sep 24 2015 : 10:03:32 AM The problem is not whether or not some female workers at Arsenal had previously been dairymaids, or which farm they exactly came from, but the problem is that this 'dairymaid' idea is being used to try to prove that the FED-Arsenal camera examples that we know of, are authentic, and that the poor chrome job on them is due to 'dairymaids' or untrained workers! I have not seen this kind of thin and poor chrome job on any Soviet camera (even made right after the war), except on fakes that were chrome-plated in a home workshop. ( Maybe the Polish and Ukrainian fakes are made by dairymaids when the milk prices are down! ;.)) You can not take propaganda statements that are written as propaganda, whether from Soviet or American or anywhere else, and use it as proof. To my friend Jacques: Yes, we can think that the FED-Arsenal cameras we know of are authentic even though not proven, or we can think of them as fake until proven (given certain technical details). But, I think it is best just to withhold judgement as to authenticity until there comes a time when some actual proof is available. At this point, through the good work of Zoom, Alzo and Altrix, there is much more information easily available (regarding the Arsenal Factory history), but it all just leads to the idea that some camera production was thought of (ordered) for the city of Kiev. Nothing shows that the FED-Arsenal camera was made at Arsenal or at that time period. So, better not to jump to conclusions without facts. Look at how the story of the FED Berdsk has changed over time. Look at how the story of the migration of the Contax to Kiev has changed over time. Probably more will be uncovered about FED-Arsenal over time. Regards, Bill
altix	Posted - Sep 24 2015 : 09:36:56 AM quote: You made me a day. I am glad to hear this. I doubt that existed some severe restrictions on the plan that was under repairmen and reconstruction. If it was allowed to people to sleep inside the factory walls I think that your statement about the high security standards in 1945 in Arsenal is under the question. Specially for you I wrote quote: Kiev Arsenal was prepared for merely civil production (at least those workshops where dairymaids were working) In 1945 to my knowledge they did not produced any military device. There were a shortage in human resources and in transport. This caused delays in final preparation of factories to accept dismantled Zeiss plant. The involvement of people from near villages and ex-kolhozes were completely possible. quote: If you do not want to use logic - I do not insist. Btw, the documents are also lie. I do not see much logic in your connection of Volga name with Volzhskiy optiko-mekhanicheskiy zavod. I do not know any document that proves that a part of Zeiss production was planned for transfer there. In the same time I know that for Soviet side all decisions about the future dismantling strategy were rendered before Volga name appeared in Zeiss documentation. And in these decisions were no place for Volzhskiy optiko-mekhanicheskiy zavod. So strictly logically (using Occam's razor amd the Laplace's principle of sufficient reason) one should accept that Volga name has nothing to do with Volzhskiy optiko-mekhanicheskiy zavod. To prove the opposite you need to show any document that gives a proof of such connection.
Zoom	Posted - Sep 24 2015 : 09:13:34 AM quote: Originally posted by altix Sorry, but we went in the middle of the thread to the level when decided to abandon rumors and logical guess. If there is no documentary proofs... If you do not want to use logic - I do not insist. Btw, the documents are also lie. quote: Originally posted by altix And military Arsenal remained in Ural region. Kiev Arsenal was prepared for merely civil production... :D The plant number 784 of NKV (People's Commissariat of weapons) -- "was prepared for merely civil production"... You made me a day. quote: Originally posted by altix The observation about workers from nearest villages did also one Zeiss worker in his letter from Kiev. From "nearest villages" is not equal "from kolkhozes". quote: Originally posted by altix I will send you then scans with data about dismantled equipment tomorrow in private. �� .
altix	Posted - Sep 24 2015 : 08:29:32 AM Sorry, but we went in the middle of the thread to the level when decided to abandon rumors and logical guess. If there is no documentary proofs about Contax production in "Volzhskiy optiko-mekhanicheskiy zavod" then I consider your logical conclusion is doubtful. Also in the article of Bernd K. Otto there is no evidence that supports your conclusion. This was a working -name for a camera. Zeiss factory was divided among several factories and this was decided in summer -autumn 1945. Volzhskiy optiko-mekhanicheskiy zavod is not figured in any of the lists. The camera Volga was just a legend for German workers. It was strictly prohibited to speak with Zeiss directors or workers about planned dismantlement. Any intentions of Soviet side were hidden by legends, one of which for me seems to be the mythical Volga camera. Some time ago I thought in the same way as you, but now in the view of documents that I've read recently, for me the most logical conclusion is that there never existed any intention to transport Contax production to Volga region. I do not know how to answer your questions about dairymaids. If there shortage in working force for some peasants were made exclusions. And military Arsenal remained in Ural region. Kiev Arsenal was prepared for merely civil production (at least those workshops where dairymaids were working). The observation about workers from nearest villages did also one Zeiss worker in his letter from Kiev. I cannot find it at the moment but probably I've read it in W. M�hlfriedel, E. Hellmuth "Carl Zeiss in Jena 1945-1990" K�ln 2004 (I do not have this book at the moment by hand to confirm it). I will send you the scans with data about dismantled equipment tomorrow in private.
Zoom	Posted - Sep 24 2015 : 07:37:39 AM quote: Originally posted by altix if you need these data, please contact me. I have already contacted... Here. ;) You can send them. quote: Originally posted by altix Say, Peter Hennig writes that Volga is the working name for Contax cameras production in USSR. Yes. http://fotos.cconin.de/ussrphoto/conkie_3.pdf -- for example. Then there is a simple logic: what brand is peculiar to the "Volzhskiy optiko-mekhanicheskiy zavod"? If known that on this new plant was planned to produce cameras... Do not wait for documents. Many puzzles are solved by an ordinary logic. P.S. You read this text: "�� , �� ." and think that: quote: Originally posted by altix And dairymaids came from nearest villages. You believe on this bla-bla-bla ("she came to the plant from the kolkhoz")? That she was taken to work in a military factory without a passport? There is no logic.
altix	Posted - Sep 24 2015 : 04:31:17 AM Dear Zoom, quote: Thank you! You helped me a lot! if you need these data, please contact me. I can share them with you for your cite. And dairymaids came from nearest villages. The post-war years were a good chance to stay in the city and I think it was much easily to survive in cities (I think). If you really have documentary proof that the creation of optical plant in Kazan was planned together with the production of Volga cameras I would be very appreciated for such documents. Say, Peter Hennig writes that Volga is the working name for Contax cameras production in USSR. In the view of available information I have the same opinion. I agree with Bill that there is a long way to get the whole picture about this period of history and probably many aspects would remain unclear. But it is nice that we discuss the subject and there are a lot of new information and interesting opinions.
Jacques M.	Posted - Sep 24 2015 : 04:06:31 AM To come back to our main discussion, we can think, now, that one or two series of Fed-Arsenal were really made at Arsenal's. I have said "think"! Of course, we don't have any material proof. But thanks to Altix's and Alzo's researches, we know really much more about these years. There is something which puzzles me too. The history of Fed seems more and more complex. The way from Kharkov to Kharkov, during and after the war, was tortuous. Berdsk, and now Kazan and Kiev: what was the exact role of these places in Fed history? Finally, which camera was mounted or made where? I had ideas, but I am not sure they are always valid! Jacques.
Zoom	Posted - Sep 24 2015 : 03:36:54 AM quote: Originally posted by altix I do not understand you when you want to show some superiority of KMZ. I'm not going to claim this. So I don't understand what you don't understand... ;) Btw.: There is such a thing in the Russian railways: The default city. You see only the ends of the roads, the destinations... But in any case, all railway carriages will pass through this Default center. quote: Originally posted by altix Yes, in Arsenal among few specialists worked ex-dairymaids. Sorry, but where in Kiev you can find dairymaids? Just logically explain me this point... However, you may not answer. It is not an interesting discussion... quote: Originally posted by altix The complete list of what was transported to what factory and how much you can find here "Short report on the results of dismantling Zeiss and Schott factories in Jena " 2.4.1947 RGAE 7572/2/1129 Thank you! You helped me a lot!
altix	Posted - Sep 24 2015 : 01:37:19 AM quote: I see that you didn't read notes in the page http://www.zenitcamera.com/archive/misc/letter-snk-ukssr-13021945-552.html :( Btw, a collection center of all documentation, most part of optical instruments and equipment, coming from Germany, was Krasnogorsk. Alas, it seems that we speak about two histories that happened in parallel universes. So far on the given link I see only some your thoughts that are doubtful. I know that during the first stage of dismantling (fall 1945) some documentation on military optics was brought to Krasnogorsk. During the complete dismantling (fall 1946) the documents were transferred to KMZ by specially ordered planes. The documentation from Zeiss Ikon (Dresden) was lost in fire. Krasnogorsk was chosen as the main optical production center much latter than the time I am speaking about. I can give you the exact weight of dismantled equipment and raw materials for every factory in a list. And Krasnogorsk was only one among another factories that are in a list. Say, Krasnogorsk obtained 722 t semi-assembled pieces of production, Leningrad (factory Nr 349) - 1705.95 t, Lytkarino (factory Nr 233) - 3843 t, Kiev - 667.7t. The distribution of machinery among factories was almost equal. Kiev obtained less machinery since it had already some tools brought from Dresden. I do not understand you when you want to show some superiority of KMZ. Its superiority in some sense appeared in 1948-49. Krasnogorks was the first factory among the others which successfully started its production. The factory tried to use the production discipline of Zeiss factory. It is true. I was always amazed by high quality of early Krasnogorsk products and appreciate your work done on its history but I have different opinion concerning some of your comments and interpretations. Yes, in Arsenal among few specialists worked ex-dairymaids. There is no wonder since after the war males were rare to find in post-war Kiev. Some people were still on their way back to home. Krasnogork escaped the destiny to be demolished in war fire two times as Kiev was and this is not a reason to put irony here quote: Sorry, no comments... Kiev... an ex-dairymaids... P.S. The complete list of what was transported to what factory and how much you can find here "Short report on the results of dismantling Zeiss and Schott factories in Jena " 2.4.1947 RGAE 7572/2/1129.
nightphoto	Posted - Sep 24 2015 : 01:03:23 AM Thank you for the information. I believe that the story and most details concerning the 'Contax to Kiev' story are well-known and the political relationships are interesting. What I was saying about the propaganda style newspaper articles is that basically they did not know about the Contax - Kiev story at the time the articles were written and so it may have been confusing to the authors of the article when the officials just told them that there was going to be large camera production in Kiev soon. They may have thought that it would be FEDs when in reality the plan was for Contax-like cameras, what we now know as the 'Kiev'. Whether this is the case or not, I believe that the main starting point of this forum subject was: Are the cameras that we know of and call 'FED-Arsenal' (Serial numbers: 00004, 00020, 00067, 00070, 00216, 00222) authentic made by the Arsenal Zavod during immediate post-War times, or are they fakes, made by forgers at a much later time? This is the question. I agree that the historical facts that are coming to light, or have been known for some time by some, lead to a clear conclusion that camera manufacturing was directed to Arsenal Zavod during this period, and the exact history is very interesting, but so far does not show clearly or prove that either any FED cameras were made at Arsenal or that the cameras we have seen (serial numbers above) are not fakes or forgeries. I will not say that they are fakes, but that they have not been proven to be authentic. To prove they are authentic there will have to be dated photographs showing them with details visible, passports or instruction manuals, or actual documents that describe them in detail from the factory. In addition, the details of construction of the cameras will have to make sense in the constraints of the time period that they were thought to have been made. I have no doubt that if these cameras are authentic that there will be indisputable proof in one of these forms existing, and that it will eventually show up. Or enough examples that can be examined in detail and be compared will accumulate over time and tell a story. But to try to obtain a consensus of authenticity for these cameras without actual primary documentary proof, or consistent viewable details on a number of examples, is just not possible. There are many questions still unanswered. For example why are there two models or varieties of logos, each group with a different range of serial numbers. It is okay to guess things like some were given to factory workers and poor workmanship of chroming is due to 'milkmaids' (of course most women in Ukraine were milkmaids during hard times of war and they had to milk the cows, and the women in the photo with theodolites look highly skilled, very intelligent). But two ranges of serial numbers can also mean that the first range is authentic and the second higher range are fakes made in a much higher serial number range so that there would not be two of the same number (why a number of cameras up to 00070 and then none until 00216?). It is a strange numbering and needs an explanation. So maybe I go on too long (as we can all agree and I am always certain to provide material for controversy) and I appreciate the hard work and good results of the research that has been done, but volume of information alone will not make it be so. It will have to be proven and I hope that real proof about these cameras will come soon. Sometimes it can take a while as we all can see with the evolving story of 'FED Berdsk' and the untold story of TSVVS. Regards, Bill
Zoom	Posted - Sep 24 2015 : 12:48:47 AM quote: Originally posted by altix So, first of all, everything connected with optical production was regulated by Ustinov bureau. That is why Khrushchev wrote the letter to him. I do not consider his letter idiotic. During the war no FED cameras production was started in Kazan as we infer from the letter. I doubt that after the war this production would be organized there. At the same time in destroyed Kiev were people who wanted to assemble optical devices. Why the letter is idiotic? I see that you didn't read notes in the page http://www.zenitcamera.com/archive/misc/letter-snk-ukssr-13021945-552.html :( quote: Originally posted by altix FED Arsenal was probably a good idea to teach ex-dairymaids how to assemble cameras. Sorry, no comments... Kiev... an ex-dairymaids... quote: Originally posted by altix The statement that Khrushchev decided to bring Zeiss Jena production in Kiev is wrong. The only person who decided was Ustinov. Yes, but he can be ordered through GKO. What was done. quote: Originally posted by altix I do not really understand any mythology connected with Volga camera. To my knowledge there were no definite plans of optical plant construction in Stalingrad. I see that you didn't read notes in the page http://www.zenitcamera.com/archive/misc/letter-snk-ukssr-13021945-552.html :( Btw, a collection center of all documentation, most part of optical instruments and equipment, coming from Germany, was Krasnogorsk.
altix	Posted - Sep 23 2015 : 10:32:21 PM quote: Here, my question (maybe not an important question) is: What are these items and are �appendix1� and �appendix 2� available to see? I've found that these appendices are not interesting. But I can share them if you really want. quote: The newspaper articles are very interesting but more like propaganda than documentary. It is not clear to me that the articles speak of actual production of a FED at Arsenal, or if possibly the writers are just relaying information from Government officials that there will be new camera production of rangefinder cameras. At the time, the idea that these cameras could be like a Contax was probably not thought of yet, except by the people who were involved in bringing the equipment and parts from Germany, and so it may have been assumed that it would be a �FED� camera that was going to be made. In archives one can find other documentation on FED Arsenal cameras that are more official. There exists a problem to obtain the permission to copy them but interested people can find them and read them directly in the archive. But we are working on getting such a permission to copy. The mention of Contax camera is connected directly with Contax camera production.In the beginning of October 1945 Zeiss specialists were asked to start Contax camera production for Soviet Union. The article in the newspaper is from 15.10.1945. The director of Arsenal plant knew since August 1945 about the future dismantlement of Zeiss Jena factory and was preparing the place for it. 17.10.1945 Major Turygin ordered blueprints of Contax camera and lenses for the future production in USSR. Note that there is no official name for the camera. Probably for Zeiss workers the conventional name "Volga" is used in blueprints (from 9.11.1945). Kiev logo appeared one year later. It is worth to note that nobody from Zeiss factory was aware of future dismantlement. In August 1945 one Soviet lieutenant-colonel said on meeting in Carl Zeiss Jena factory "We have with certain intention completely dismantled Zeiss Ikon in Dresden and Berlin, since we needed the machinery for our serial production in Russia. The situation with Zeiss (Jena) is completely different. The factory should remain in its original place to be able to solve the plethora of tasks, since in this field the factory is unique in the whole world " (Bestand Betriebsarchiv Carl Zeiss Nr 15135).
altix	Posted - Sep 23 2015 : 9:53:18 PM So, first of all, everything connected with optical production was regulated by Ustinov bureau. That is why Khrushchev wrote the letter to him. I do not consider his letter idiotic. During the war no FED cameras production was started in Kazan as we infer from the letter. I doubt that after the war this production would be organized there. At the same time in destroyed Kiev were people who wanted to assemble optical devices. Why the letter is idiotic? Since already in February 1945 it was realized that Zeiss factory would be in the Soviet occupation zone it is completely reasonable that its dismantling was only a matter of time. Khrushchev was most probably aware about these plans and started actively prepare the place and workers for the future production. I can only wonder his speed (11 February - end of Yalta conference, 13 February - Khrushchev's letter). FED Arsenal was probably a good idea to teach ex-dairymaids how to assemble cameras. The statement that Khrushchev decided to bring Zeiss Jena production in Kiev is wrong. The only person who decided was Ustinov. Ustinov (and I assume Berija) were the people who decided to split the factory into 6 parts. Ustinov's subordinate, Dobrovolskiy, thought that the factory should be transported to Leningrad and Sverdlovsk. If Ustinov decided that time to take Dobrovolski's opinion into account, then I would hardly imagine KMZ or optical division in Arsenal. I do not really understand any mythology connected with Volga camera. To my knowledge there were no definite plans of optical plant construction in Stalingrad. Probably that were dreams of Dobrovolski or Turygin? The later asked to prepare the drawings of a new camera with conventional name "Volga". The transportation of equipment from Goerz factory in Berlin, Zeiss Ikon factory in Jena, Voightlaender production line in early 1945 to Moscow, Kiev and Leningrad, was also regulated by Ustinov.
altix	Posted - Sep 23 2015 : 9:23:46 PM quote: Khrushchev was not an idiot, but his proposals in this letter* were idiotic... I am not a great expert to evaluate Khrushchev's level of idiocy or stupidity of his orders. I address you to the nice survey on the topic of Zeiss reparations of Dr. Matthias Uhl in the book "Sowjetische Demontagen in Deutschland 1944-1949. Hintergruende, Ziele und Wirkungen" (Berlin 2002). I translate some parts from this book to make the matters clear. in the following RGAE is the Russian State Archive on Economics. (sorry for my poor translation) "In September 1944 the State Planing Committee by Council of People Commissariats of USSR asked every People Commissariat to provide the information about the German factories that are interesting for them to be dismantled. In the beginning of 1945 this information was further specified and updated. For every People Commissariat was created the "target lists". (cf. letter of the Head of agricultural-machine building by People Commissariat of Mortars, Hlomov, to the director of production department, Dolozhenko, 13, 11. 1944 in RGAE 7962/1/196; Letter of assistant of director of State Optical Institute (GOI), Vanin, to the chief of 2. Main Administration of NKV, Frejberg, 13.8.1945, in RGAE, 7572/2/1018 )" "Finally in Moscow was decided which administration departments would obtain factories in Jena. The special committee by Counsel of People Commissariat hand over the firma Carl Zeiss to People Commissariat of Armament immediately after the occupation of Thueringen, i.e. in July 1945 (The letter of Ustinov to Berija, 26.10.1946, in RGAE, 8157/1/1089). This commissariat applied for this factory by State Planing Committee previously (in 1944). Since the People Commissariat for Armament was the main producer of optical goods this decision did not meet any protest of other Commissariats. In this situation, the People Commissar of Armament, Dmitriy Ustinov, asked other Ministries, which were interested in optical production of Zeiss factory, to apply through the 2nd Central Administration of his Commissariat. This administration tried to fulfill all incoming requests. at the same time the applicants were able to have a look on necessary technical documentation and blueprints. (For example the People Commissariat for Shipbuilding obtained from Jena rangefinders, cf. the letter of Head of 2. Central Administration of People Commissariat of Armament, Dobrowolskij, to commissioner of Zeiss factory of people Commissariat of Armament, Nikolaev, 6.10.1945 RGAE 7572/2/1018). In this way all possible concurrence from other ministries was eliminated from the very beginning. In August 1945 the Committee of 2nd Central Administration inspected the conditions in Jena for dismantlement. In their report they propose to Soviet specialists the following actions: "a) Organisation of thorough inspection of production in Zess factory and Shott by Soviet scientists, constructors, technologs and specialists within the period not less than 6 months. Afterwards the Zeiss factory must be dismantled. b)During this period Zeiss and Shott factories in Jena should continue the production of civil optics and optical glass. Simultaneously in Soviet Union the production and leaving places must be prepared for transported Zeiss factory." (The report of commission of Ministeriums of Armament about Zeiss factory and Shott, 18.8.1945, RGAE, 7572/2/1019 ) ...In plans of People Commissariat of Armament in Moscow the idea to transport the whole Zeiss factory to one place was considered as impossible. They decided therefore to split the factory into six Soviet optical factories. The expert commission in Jena was against this proposition. They were afraid that the split of production line into separate pices could badly influence the production quality and that "this can cause the demolition of production that has universal importance". As an alternative the specialists of 2nd Central Administration proposed to empty completely the optical factories Nr 349 in Leningrad and Nr 356 in Sverdlovsk and transport there the machinery from Jena, Saalfeld, Poessneck and Gera. (Report on assignment in Zeiss factory, 18.8.1945 in RGAE 7572/2/1127, In Leningrad was planned to produce measurement-, military- , astro-equipment and microscopes, whereas in Sverdlovsk - Geoequipment and optical lenses. ) Simultaneously expert commission concluded that successful reconstruction of factory in USSR would be possible only in the case when many German specialists would also arrive. In the beginning of September 1945 the People Commissariat for Armament started the concrete planning of dismantling process.
Zoom	Posted - Sep 23 2015 : 4:04:30 PM quote: Originally posted by nightphoto ... And, that No. 237 did not work on the construction of cameras (and so parts and equipment was probably sitting at Kazan between 1941 and 1945). Between November 1942 and 1945... So they in Berdsk had about six months in 1942... ;) I can't say anything, because never interested in these (FED-Berdsk) cameras. May be "yes", may be "no"... But during the war not to the production of cameras. (Btw. in summer of 1944, FED factory management building fired. All design and technological departments documentation was destroyed.) quote: Originally posted by nightphoto What is �Ukropromsovet�? Is it the Arsenal Factory, or is it a military or government department? This "Ukropromsovet" (more correct name is: "Ukrpromrada") was an Ukrainian Industrial Cooperatives Union head organization. See notes on the page http://www.zenitcamera.com/archive/misc/letter-snk-ukssr-13021945-552.html Khrushchev was not an idiot, but his proposals in this letter* were idiotic... Nevertheless, he achieved his goal. Not quite as planned, but... *) -- Btw, this letter looks like an order.
nightphoto	Posted - Sep 23 2015 : 3:08:11 PM As I see it, so far, from the information and documents found or now known to us through the forum (thank you, Alzo, Altix, Zoom) : 1. The Khrushchev - Ustinov document states that all the FED parts and manufacturing equipment were sent to Zavod No. 237 (The Volga Optical and Mechanical Plant , ��future Kazan - KOMZ). And, that No. 237 did not work on the construction of cameras (and so parts and equipment was probably sitting at Kazan between 1941 and 1945). If true: This may leave Berdsk out of the picture. There may be no �FED Berdsk�. Also it would mean that all the FEDs were made at Kharkov before Sept. 1941��(with the exception of ��some possibly being made by Arsenal in 1945 - 1946) - not some at Berdsk. 2. The Khrushchev document requests Ustinov to order factory No. 237 to transfer of all equipment, devices, incomplete production, and documentation to �Ukropromsovet�. Here I have a ��question, which is: What is �Ukropromsovet�? Is it the Arsenal Factory, or is it a military or government department? 3. The Khrushchev document also asks Ustinov to assist in the starting of camera production through use of the mentioned optical and control-measuring equipment. Which ��is listed as: a) Equipment 23 items (appendix 1) b) Control-measuring equipment 26 items (appendix 2) Here, my question (maybe not an important question) is: What are these items and are �appendix1� and �appendix 2� available to see? 4. The newspaper articles are very interesting but more like propaganda than documentary. It is not clear to me that the articles speak of actual production of a FED at Arsenal, ��or if possibly the writers are just relaying information from Government officials that there will be new camera production of rangefinder cameras. At the time, the idea that ��these cameras could be like a Contax was probably not thought of yet, except by the people who were involved in bringing the equipment and parts from Germany, and so it ��may have been assumed that it would be a �FED� camera that was going to be made. To me, although the Khrushchev document may clarify a certain question about where the FED parts were during the War and possibly change the �Berdsk� story, it does not authenticate the actual two versions of the FED-Arsenal that we have been discussing. I still have many questions about these specific cameras that can best be answered by careful examination of the parts they are constructed from. If they are made from evacuated parts from Kharkov then the parts should all be consistent with pre-War FED parts. They will not be considered authentic if they are made of mixtures of parts, especially if the engraved rangefinder housings are from later cameras, but the engraving is identical to examples that�have pre-War rangefinder housings. Also, between different examples, the vulcanite used must be compared, as well as the indentations on the housings for the rewind lever and other construction and parts details. As Zoom has said: �Yes... These cameras have long been known. As I understand, they were considered as fakes. This is not surprising: the market was swamped with forgeries made in Ukraine (plus Poland). However, it is possible that some "made in Arsenal" FEDs are fakes. Unfortunately, this story is interesting to me only as a part of the KMZ's history. The rest I'm not interested... In particular -- this cameras themselves. From the word "absolutely". ;)� I am not ready to make the leap to authenticity of the FED-Arsenals that we know exist, just because there is documentation that Khrushchev ordered a transfer of parts and equipment and wanted to start camera production in the Ukraine. This is good historical information, but, in my opinion, is not solid proof of the authenticity of either of the versions of �FED-Arsenal� that we have seen. Regards, Bill
altix	Posted - Sep 23 2015 : 1:20:47 PM I need to have a look but as far as i remember it was cited as 12th November and not as 12th October. That misprint caused a problem by first request in archives.
Zoom	Posted - Sep 23 2015 : 1:10:51 PM quote: Originally posted by altix P.S. the citation of Radianska Ukraina in the book is given with the mistake (wrong datum). You mean the page 337, note #6? The source: "�� , 1945, 12 ��" -- what is wrong? The list number 12?
altix	Posted - Sep 23 2015 : 10:18:00 AM quote: Is not fully clear? Not for me... ;) this great, Zoom. I think it is easy to understand for people from the territories of former Soviet Union. But I had some private discussions where this quote was not considered as a definite proof (especially taking into account that the book is from 1986). Therefore some additional effort was needed. It is pity that you joined this discussion late enough. P.S. the citation of Radianska Ukraina in the book is given with the mistake (wrong datum).
Zoom	Posted - Sep 23 2015 : 10:04:18 AM quote: Originally posted by altix Yes, this book cites the article from Radianska Ukraina that is given here. This citation alone cannot serve as a proof of Arsenal camera originality since the phrase there "...soon here would appear the camera on which people would search usual trademark FED but would find another - a Kiev one. " is not fully clear. Is not fully clear? Not for me... ;) The Khrushchev's persistent desire to drag manufacture cameras to Kiev was known. FED, Exakta, Contax cameras... This letter is not the only one. It was still appeal to the GKO (not sure what to Stalin). This history as a whole is clear, just some details are unknown... P.S. Sorry my English...

USSRPhoto.com Forums

Snitz Forums 2000