| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Luiz Paracampo |
Posted - Jun 28 2008 : 09:15:21 AM
See
http://cgi.ebay.com/KMZ-Zoki-250-Reporter-with-electronic-motor-drive_W0QQitemZ370063366748QQihZ024QQcategoryZ15234QQcmdZViewItemQQ_trksidZp1742.m153.l1262
http://cgi.ebay.com/Lomo-Smena-Stereo-prototype_W0QQitemZ370063366686QQihZ024QQcategoryZ15234QQcmdZViewItemQQ_trksidZp1713.m153.l1262
and this of course is the easiest to make fake of them all
http://cgi.ebay.com/KGB-Ring-camera-1965-Years-original-condition_W0QQitemZ370063700158QQihZ024QQcategoryZ709QQcmdZViewItemQQ_trksidZp1713.m153.l1262
|
| 27 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| nightphoto |
Posted - Jul 01 2008 : 5:15:53 PM
Hi Vlad and Everyone,
I would be careful to put too much faith into the "UltimateSpy" book of Melton as he has many mistakes. I doubt that this modification of Yolochka / Yelka was made by KGB, especially by the "Illegals Directorate" which I have not even heard of. Probably, like many of the things that are in the book, this camera was mis-represented to Melton. ... Not to say that there is not some very good information in the book as well.
The KGB was a huge organization, and although the Border Guards were part of KGB, when we are talking about the KGB-used cameras, we are probably talking mostly about things like F-21, Totchka, Zakhod, F-27, Zola, etc. made and used mostly by the Fifth Chief Directorate (Internal Security) and possibly the First Chief Directorate (Foreign Operations) which were likely to use concealed or hidden cameras for surveillance.
The Border Guards was a huge Directorate, but probably not engaged in covert surveillance. Probably, given the size of the entire KGB, almost all Soviet cameras were used by them to some extent, just as in the Military.
Here is a pretty good link that shows the different divisions of the KGB:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KGB#The_Directorates
Regards, Bill
|
| Zoom |
Posted - Jul 01 2008 : 4:10:39 PM
quote:
Originally posted by okynek
Well Border Guards "Porranichniki" was part of the Ministry of Internal Ofears – "MVD"...
Sorry... Do not dispute against me... ;)
From 30.03.1918 -- in Narkomfin
In 1919 year -- in Narkomtorgprom
From 24.11.1920 -- "Osoby otdel VChK"
From 27.09.1922 -- in OGPU
From July 1934 -- in NKVD
From 1946 year -- in MGB
Only from 1953 to 1957 years -- in MVD!
Then up to 1991 year -- in KGB
From 1992 year -- in the Ministry of security
From 30.12.1993 -- a separate service (named as FPS from December 1994)
From 2003 year -- in FSB.
|
| okynek |
Posted - Jul 01 2008 : 12:36:03 PM
<quote> Btw., the Soviet border guard (Pogranichnye voyska == frontier troops) was a KGB department... ;)</guote>
Well Border Guards "Porranichniki" was part of the Ministry of Internal Ofears – "MVD";
same as VV "Vnutrennie Voiska" - internal guards or prison guards;
same as "Milisia" - police; same as KGB.
They are different branches of same Ministry of Internal Offears, they usually do not intersect in they work.
And GAI- government auto inspection or road polis belong to some other agency and it has nothing to do with Milisia.
While this info has nothing to do with cameras  |
| okynek |
Posted - Jul 01 2008 : 12:15:03 PM
So we should agreed at this point that we have NO any indication that this camera made by Soviet camera industry.
No any paperwork, no publications, no press realize,
no any witness, no users, no makers, no one basically can came forward to testify for this camera.
Then it could be made:
1. in 90-th "on Arbat" what means that it intentionally fake camera.
2. by some privet person in 50-60th for personal use.
3. by small legal shop to use with some special equipment.
4. outside the Russia to full collectors and strictly for profit.
Somewhere else ????
|
| Vlad |
Posted - Jul 01 2008 : 10:26:43 AM
Here is one use of Yolka for KGB
(C) H. Keith Melton - Ultimate Spy
Zoom - I did not know that! Thanks for that bit of info, although I can't say I'm very surprised |
| Zoom |
Posted - Jul 01 2008 : 09:06:06 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Vlad
I did not mean that Yolochka and Neper were produced by KGB, I just meant that if they wanted a reproduction camera they would've used those two as they probably have..
Btw., the Soviet border guard (Pogranichnye voyska == frontier troops) was a KGB department... ;) |
| Zoom |
Posted - Jul 01 2008 : 09:01:38 AM
quote:
Originally posted by okynek
...The problem I see:
1. a lot of copies would exist, hundreds or thousands.
2. it does not explain all this aging marks, dirt, rust, scratches.
3. does not explain all this extra stuff on the bottom plate, or 36 frame counter.
1. Not so many. 10--20 billets...
2. As I know, fake Zorkies-250 were made in 1990s...
Are you know a term: "to washing money"? A counterfeiters literally "wash" (without water, but with a pebble and pieces of wood etc.) a new spurious bank notes to making an "old view".
3. Yes, this is a question... Wherefore?..
And one important moment: a paper works (documentation, user manuals, packaging etc.)... Btw., oddly enough, it is more difficult and complex to falsify this things... Therefore we don't see a papers... ;) |
| fedka |
Posted - Jul 01 2008 : 08:54:35 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Vlad
Hello Gentlemen,
I definitely do not think this was made to sell as a fake, very possible it was a custom order of some high ranking journalist, or any other person of means or even an organization needing a specialized camera like that.
.
Vlad
Vlad,
I do not think this was actually ordered by an end user (reporter, etc). These are only guesses, but I'd say this was meant to be a curiosity/collector piece, made by an enthusiast with access to good machine tools.
as a side note - there were hundreds and thousands of factories in the USSR, most of them has a special 'instrumental'nyi' shop (a tooling shop) with top-class machinists. These shops made custom parts to repair production equipment, make dies for presses, etc. It is incredible what they could do.
Those old enough to remember - the weakest part of a Lada motor was its camshaft, and they were very hard to find. So a few guys from the tooling shop at my factory manufactured these camshafts.
This is a very complex part, a hollow shaft with many special profile polished surfaces, tempered in a certain way (soft inside and hard on the surface), with a gear on one side - all in one piece. A Zorki-250 body would be a child's play for these guys.
It was also very common in the USSR to use company resources (machines, materials, time) for your own projects.
My point is - it was NOT difficult to produce this Zorki-250. I am only surprised they did not make many more of them. Perhaps at the time they were made the price was not high enough to justify the hassle, and the few (or one?) Zorki-250 were made more for fun and love than for business.
Yuri
|
| nightphoto |
Posted - Jul 01 2008 : 12:40:28 AM
Vlad,
But this camera had an electronic motor drive. Did the Leica 250 have that? Yeah, one good use would be for photo journalists, but there could be other uses as well. Maybe it was for the Air Force after all, as the seller states? I think most photo-journalists would rather change film than have such a bulky camera. Probably KGB had something better than Yolochka for copying stuff, but you're right that maybe they used it too.
Regards, Bill
|
| Vlad |
Posted - Jul 01 2008 : 12:06:13 AM
Bill,
I did not mean that Yolochka and Neper were produced by KGB, I just meant that if they wanted a reproduction camera they would've used those two as they probably have.. I think this Zorki-250 was just made for "Reporter" purposes as stated, someone in press needed a camera that did not need film changing every 36 exposures for lengthy and intensive events, so they just replicated the Leica-250 in some shop... may have been cheaper than to buy one of those...
Vlad |
| nightphoto |
Posted - Jun 30 2008 : 11:45:19 PM
Hi Zoom,
I would just say that it might be of use to the KGB to have a hidden camera somewhere that would not run out of film after 36 exposures... a camera that would not be hidden on a person, but instead hidden in a stationary object. I have seen miniature examples of KGB-used cameras hidden in lamps and other stationary objects. The only reason I think it is a possibility is that I noticed that the construction of the inside of the bottom plate has some similarities to some KGB work I have seen ... such as a use of many screws and machined parts that are similar. On the other hand, I see details that do not look like the work of the KGB workshop ... So, just a thought and as I have said, probably not KGB because of the Zorki engraving which would probably not be left intact by KGB workshop. But, maybe some other police or security department? ... even one outside of USSR... just some ideas.
Hi Vlad,
Of course not all interesting Russian cameras can be attributed to the KGB! In fact Yolochka and Neper are not KGB cameras, and were not made in the KGB workshop. They were made, probably by BeLomo, for customs and border guards, and also used by some of the military services. Very little, if anything to do with KGB (except that KGB was probably sometimes made aware of the documents that were copied by other agencies with those cameras).
Also, I would not assume that this camera was made for reproduction purposes. It may have been made for any application where a large amount of exposures were needed without changing film, possibly even a situation where the camera was activated with a remote control or a timer, since the "electronic motor" that is missing seems to have had the capability of not only winding the film and cocking the shutter, but also releasing the shutter, as can be seen by the modification of the bottom of the shutter cage and the bottom plate where it is cut out. So it is probably not just a reproduction camera in my opinion.
Regards, Bill
|
| Vlad |
Posted - Jun 30 2008 : 10:10:54 PM
Hello Gentlemen,
I've been following this thread with great interest.. Bill, I don't think ALL interesting cameras can be attributed to KGB  , KGB had Yolochka and Neper that were mass produced (if you are thinking of it being a reproduction camera) rather then ordering a custom one.. there was quite a number of wealthy individuals in USSR that could place a custom order with some great camera master (maybe even a factory worker, but probably not, just a skilled repairman/mechanic possibly? Whoever lived in USSR knows there were quite a few of those around) asking for a modification. I don't think this was uncommon, I am actually surprised there aren't that many of these custom cameras for sale.. I would've expected more with the great amount of talented people other there..
I definitely do not think this was made to sell as a fake, very possible it was a custom order of some high ranking journalist, or any other person of means or even an organization needing a specialized camera like that.
The camera is definitely worth a lot of money, it being unique like that but I agree, it may not justify the current price tag  , although Boris is known in collector's circles to make some decent deals for interested parties .
All I can say is this Zorki-250 is very cool looking piece! Also you've probably heard me say it numerous times - one person's fake is another one's treasure (I only wish I could afford it ).
Vlad |
| okynek |
Posted - Jun 30 2008 : 9:57:47 PM
I have to agree with Zoom that today's CNC machinery make job for fakers much easy indeed. The problem I see:
1. a lot of copies would exist, hundreds or thousands.
2. it does not explain all this aging marks, dirt, rust, scratches.
3. does not explain all this extra stuff on the bottom plate, or 36 frame counter. |
| Zoom |
Posted - Jun 30 2008 : 6:31:40 PM
quote:
Originally posted by nightphoto
but maybe made for KGB in the special secret section?
What the devil for KGB this camera? ;)
Yes, this camera has many details, that confirm it, say, "industrial origin". May be even: "legal origin"... This driving gears are to superfluous to a simple selfish ends of falsification...
I asked many serious Russian collectors about this cameras. As they say, all known Zorkies-250 was made in a present days. One man said that he know this cameras authors... It is really easy in our days to take a Leica-Reporter or Leicavit, etc. and make a copies -- Zorki-250 or Zorki-sport...
|
| dgillette4 |
Posted - Jun 30 2008 : 1:33:38 PM
I just got a reply from the seller, He says that (it is not a series manufactured camera), I guess that explains the counter dial. But not the price???Don
ZORKIE'S Survive |
| nightphoto |
Posted - Jun 30 2008 : 11:01:18 AM
Hi Zhang,
You may be right about a die-cast body ... hard to tell from these photos. Zoom says "no" to KMZ shop, but maybe made for KGB in the special secret section? They might have a use for 250 exposures, but, in my opinion and from my experience, would not leave the Zorki name on it.
Regards, Bill
|
| dgillette4 |
Posted - Jun 30 2008 : 10:58:06 AM
Did any body look at the exposure counter? This had to be a major job but why a 36 top number? Don
ZORKIE'S Survive |
| Kievuser |
Posted - Jun 30 2008 : 07:19:02 AM
Hi Bill,
I noted that the camera shell looks like a die-cast part that would require a die(mould) to make it.It would be too expensive for an individual person just for the purpose to make a fake camera. But I could be wrong. I would suspect it was made by one of the prototype shops of those factories to an order for some cameras. Shops could make a few such shells with a milling machine,or a die.
My 2 cents
Kind regards
Zhang |
| nightphoto |
Posted - Jun 29 2008 : 9:04:30 PM
Yes, in some ways I agree with Okynek that this camera was probably not made as a fake to sell, but more likely is a home-made 250 Reporter, made by a serious user, basically to have the features of the Leica 250. I agree that the use and wear marks look authentic.
Maybe it is from the 1950s - 1960s. Maybe made by a factory worker on his own time or for an "incentive contest".
It looks well engineered, but not made by KMZ or engineers at the Air Force, as the quality of the modifications and fabricated parts is not up to the quality of either.
Serial # 22707 puts the camera as a Zorki from 1950.
The lens is from LZOS - Lutkarenko and appears to date from 1964.
The curtain tension bolts are cross-shaped which occurs about one year later.
The paint on the inner surface of the bottom is not matte, but is shiny and applied in a careless way (although could be re-painted at some time).
The seller says: "... made for air force ..." ... but,
I would think that if it was used by the Soviet Air Force it would have some identification markings and numbers on it. And, if made by KMZ or the Air Force, it would probably have a proper film counter that would keep correct count.
Too bad the "electronic motor drive" is not present, as it would likely tell us more about the origin and maker of the camera.
Regards, Bill
|
| okynek |
Posted - Jun 29 2008 : 7:41:27 PM
I can only take off my heat for master(s) who made this camera. Workmanship is top notch by any respect.
I do not think FED, KMZ, or any other factory could make it any better.
By some reasons I'm filling not easy to call this camera fake.
Then more I look on the pictures, then more questions I have.
I'm trying to imaging myself to fake such camera; first I would put more engravings,
like on FED Sport, then I would made frame counter up to 250, camera has standard 36 frames.
Now let look on the spools. They are look really use up. Same top plate: rust, scratches, dirt.
If I would fake camera like this I wouldn't spend time to make all this wear and tare in such details.
To hard to do, and to easy to overdo and make something wrong, not realistic.
Easy to left camera in perfect conditions and claim that it was "meticulously restored" –
it will yield more money and less troubles.
Now, let look on bottom plate. What is all this stuff? Extra gear, some kind of lever, access window, holes,
why would I make all this for fake camera?
Then look on vulcanite; many damages was fixed and/or painted on. To do this faker must put new vulcanite,
then damage it, then paint it. Would it be more realistic to live damages unpainted or did not do them?
Again to yield more money and have less trouble.
Next argument – why this camera has only standard set of shatter speeds and nothing to tell about lens?
1/1000 speed is really easy to make, just one more hole and extra number on the dial.
Slow speeds for such modification desirable and possible too.
If I would fake such kind of camera I probably use Zorki 4 or Fed 3 harder to prove that camera fake and
with more shatter range and better lens it make it more convincing for buyer that camera existed indeed.
No mention it cheaper and easier to find Zorki 4 then Zorki 1 and more spare parts available for experiments.
Finally last argument: as I mention before, this camera sold few years ago on eBay for much less money.
So if for $47K someone can go though all the troubles of make such camera, it hard for me to justify to
make this camera to get less then $2K(much less).
I'm not trying to say that this camera is authentic, but something does not let me to say that this camera
is fake.
Can it be spoils of some special project what was made outside of the major optical manufactories,
in some classified laboratory in the middle of the Ural Mountains?
Let look careful on the pictures before we jump to conclusions.
|
| dgillette4 |
Posted - Jun 29 2008 : 11:12:05 AM
Look closely at the area between the film chamber and where it joins the body of the camera, Also look at the leatherette in those areas, I see a roughness as though it was welded and smoothed and leather didn't adhere well. Looks like a regular body that was modified. And at an inflated price. Maybe I will make a 500 capacity one...he he he..Don
ZORKIE'S Survive |
| Zoom |
Posted - Jun 29 2008 : 09:31:08 AM
quote:
Originally posted by okynek
Just a guess, can it be a real Leica Reporter with new top from Zorki?
LOL... It is impossible... |
| okynek |
Posted - Jun 28 2008 : 6:53:31 PM
Just a guess, can it be a real Leica Reporter with new top from Zorki?
|
| Zoom |
Posted - Jun 28 2008 : 6:12:18 PM
quote:
Originally posted by okynek
May be Zoom can comment indefinitely on this issue?
Zorki-250 Reporter? Fake.
|
| nathandayton |
Posted - Jun 28 2008 : 6:10:49 PM
I wish him well selling them! But I think he is nuts and could not get what he is asking if he held a gun to someones head! |
| okynek |
Posted - Jun 28 2008 : 1:36:18 PM
Zorky 250 was sold on eBay few years ago as I remember for $2100. Seller was saying that his
friend brought camera from Moscow. Seller was camera collector, but not russian cameras collector,
and he was claiming that camera is authentic.
At that time I ask few russian collectors about this camera they all was thinking that this camera
is not authentic, but no one can say on sure.
They was only saying that no information that such camera ever live KMZ doors.
May be Zoom can comment indefinitely on this issue? |
| nightphoto |
Posted - Jun 28 2008 : 11:37:57 AM
My opinion is: Zorki-250 is probably not authentic. Smena Stereo Prototype probably is authentic (looks like factory prototype construction, not home made). KGB Ring camera probably is authentic and although Boris does not picture the miniature camera inside, if it is like other KGB Ring cameras that I have seen (and it looks like one) it would be the hardest to fake because of the extreme miniaturization of the camera itself.
Here is a photo of one from my files:
http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/77_a.jpg
Regards, Bill
|
|
|
