Reasons for export

Printed from: USSRPhoto Forums

Topic URL: http://localhost:8088/modern/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1415

Printed on: 5/30/2026 9:02:50 AM

Topic

Topic author: Vlad

Posted on: 20091102154720

Zhang's question about existance of early Kiev with Russian/English export logo brought me to another topic I always wondered about. It's purely historical in nature I guess within the context of Soviet photographic industry:

From all the historical literature I've read, during period of 1940 to 1960 all Russian/Soviet photographic historians are writing how it was such a difficult period for camera industry, how there was so many people wanting to buy cameras and factories not being able to keep up with demand. Question begs: Why export then when there is such high domestic demand? And if you look at the numbers there was a seriously large amount of the export cameras that came out from USSR... is it because USSR needed the hard currency? Is it because of the spreading of the "superior" Soviet products abroad - due to national proletariat pride? Just curious as to what had been the main driving factor behind the export of such highly demanded products....

Vlad

Replies

Reply author: Zoom

Replied on: 20091102182645

Reply author: Vlad

Replied on: 20091102214100

I see, thanks. Do you think matter of soviet pride was a factor at all?

Reply author: cedricfan

Replied on: 20091102234510

And at least seen from Finlands point it was only for business, USSR was a very important trade companion for us. They had no money to pay, and Finland had no other country to sell to = no money was used but Zenits, Lad-Vaz, Popeda/Volga-Gaz and so on was sent here as payment.

Best regards,
Juhani

Reply author: Vlad

Replied on: 20091103000827

Hi Juhani,
I am curious as to what Finland was supplying in return. I am always interested about historical context.

Reply author: cedricfan

Replied on: 20091103044635

Mostly timber products, also some "heavy machinery" industrial things like ships and paper mills. Actually same as we sold elsewhere (UK, USA) and what we had to give as war compensation.

Still in the 70ies time Nokia was a company making rubber boots and car tyres but in the 30ies Finland was 101% agricultural...

Best regards,
Juhani

Reply author: Zoom

Replied on: 20091103070354

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Vlad
 Do you think matter of soviet pride was a factor at all?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
I don't understand what you mean... Yes, the soviet people were proud of their achievements, but to be engaged in an export of this pride... A pride export: what is it? ;)

Reply author: Vlad

Replied on: 20091103092534

Zoom I mean a lot of things the Soviet government did to promote the Soviet image of their industry abroad, like the superiority of the space program etc.. I was wondering whether the reasoning behind camera export was a major factor here or it was for the most part just to get some hard currency on hand to international trade...

Vlad

Reply author: Gelios

Replied on: 20091103155108

Due to the lack of "technology" of soviet camera exports, difficult to speak of pride there! That's why I also lean toward the hard cash reason.... less romantic but much more practical.
The same applies to other countries of the communist world: East Germany had a strong industry and they also sold tons of stuff to western countries to get currencies.

Reply author: cedricfan

Replied on: 20091103231848

Nicolas: which decade are you talking about? In the 60ies Zenit-E was highly competitive, and in the 70ies EM wasn't that bad at all compared to rivals. Price for the cheap crappy japanese SLRs was almost double! Even Practica couldn't compete with Zenit prices, and felt much more crude in those days.

Best regards,
Juhani

Reply author: nightphoto

Replied on: 20091104002349

I can remember when I bought my first enlarger in 1969, when living in the Lower east Side of New York City, it was a small "suitcase" portable Soviet enlarger. I bought it because it was the cheapest and all I could afford. So, usually there is a market for the cheapest equipment that works sufficiently well, as this enlarger did (for small enlargements, up to 8 x 10). I loved the little thing even though I could not read the labels on it!

However, I can remember that it was quite a shock having to use that little thing after having been accustomed to my father's darkroom at home which had an Omega B-22 with color head! But the little Soviet enlarger fit nicely in my bathroom which I used for a darkroom when I needed one.

Regards, Bill

Reply author: Gelios

Replied on: 20091104045052

Even in the '60, Zenit were not comparable to the japanese cameras. Most of them had TTL meters, a wide range of speed, an automatic diaphragm feature and a global reliability which was not even approach by Zenit products. Praktica was a better attempt to compete with western products with up-to-date features cameras (TTL metering, 1sec - 1/1000 shutter, vertical travel metal blades shutter - a Copal Square copy?-, auto diaphragm, 1/60 synchro flash, etc).

I don't know what you mean by "cheap crappy japanese SLR"...? Pentax Spotmatic, Konica Autoreflex, Yashica Electro-TL, Minolta SR or Nikkormat?

Reply author: mermoz37

Replied on: 20091104054147

I agree whith Juani,
in 1963 I bought my first couple Meopta "Opemus" enlarger + Zenit E...
nothing on the market to compete prices :
even Practika where more expensive .
Then, in 1966 , in Tanger Morocco Indian's photo shop , I bought my first Pentax "Spotmatic"...so more money necessary...
later I discover UPA enlarger in little Parisian "Montmartre" shop specialized in bargain market : nothing be compared - good cheap result for low invest !
then I work in French school and I bought for many schools and Colleges photo club , only soviet's equipments cameras like : Lubitels, Zorki 11, Zenit and Zenit E but at this time enlargers are Polish "Krokus" best invest and very very good results for low cost... till 1990 communists equipments where the best for poor photo clubs here.

Reply author: cedricfan

Replied on: 20091104060558

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Gelios
 Even in the '60, Zenit were not comparable to the japanese cameras. Most of them had TTL meters, a wide range of speed, an automatic diaphragm feature and a global reliability which was not even approach by Zenit products. Praktica was a better attempt to compete with western products with up-to-date features cameras (TTL metering, 1sec - 1/1000 shutter, vertical travel metal blades shutter - a Copal Square copy?-, auto diaphragm, 1/60 synchro flash, etc).

I don't know what you mean by "cheap crappy japanese SLR"...? Pentax Spotmatic, Konica Autoreflex, Yashica Electro-TL, Minolta SR or Nikkormat?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Those Prakticas you mention were not in the same priceclass as Zenit-E/EM. And EM did have auto diphgram, one main reason why I chose that instead of E as my 1st SLR.
Cheap crappy japanese = Hanimex, Cosina etc. Brands like Fujica, Pentax and Yashica cost at least TRIPLE the price of EM, and that was body only!

Best regards,
Juhani

Reply author: Gelios

Replied on: 20091104063156

Prakticas were more expensive than Zenit but IMO were closer to the market expectations. In that sense, they were competitive with japanese brands. If your argument is to say that Zenit were cheapest, I fully agree. Now, being competitive is another story... where is Zenit now???

Reply author: cedricfan

Replied on: 20091104065811

Where is Fujica and Yashica? Konica and Minolta almost died. And so on...

Best regards,
Juhani

Reply author: Gelios

Replied on: 20091104073836

In a open market, some live and some die. So, no big surprise that brands disappeared. But numerous japanese brands are still alive and kicking, even the "crappy" ones (Cosina). What are buying russian customers today (at least they have now the choice...)?

Reply author: cedricfan

Replied on: 20091104083036

You also stated the main reason and fact: "at least they have now the choice"!
Even other USSR-brands are in a chrisis: Lada-VAZ is in great difficulties (even with/because GM-connections) and Moskvitsh already died.

Best regards,
Juhani

Reply author: Vlad

Replied on: 20091104090719

I think you guys are taking it into modern context which is not fair to film cameras.. I was talking about 1950s-1960s. Now the digital took over and who didn't jump on the bandwagon had mostly disappeared..

It seems to me now that the Soviet cameras did have the competitive standing in the world in the "lower-end" spectrum by offering the most features and quality for the price range. That's a good thing to know.

Vlad

Reply author: cedricfan

Replied on: 20091104121243

Exactly.
I remember when I bought a brand new Nikon F3 back in 1980 and it cost me TWO months salary, 2500 finnish marks, and the official price would have been over 3000 FIM.
Zenit EM approx five years earlier cost 495 FIM which should have been two weeks pay for a low paid worker.
Put those figures into nowadays money using a normal salary level and you get the idea how truly expensive cameras were...

Best regards,
Juhani

Reply author: Gelios

Replied on: 20091104155354

Yes, all things being equal, camera prices are lower today than they were 30 or 40 years ago. Now, to say the truth, the Nikon F3 was the professional camera of Nikon as the Canon F1 was also. They were expensive but targeted professional users, not the consumer market. For that, they had other mundane cameras which were far less expensive but very capable.

Reply author: cedricfan

Replied on: 20091104221249

Very true, reason why I took F3 into cmparison was my memory. I do remember EM-price in numbers, but not "how much" it meant in real life. The F3 was so staggering that I still do remember it...
Also I upgraded my gear step by step, so at that stage I already had the lenses and F2 which I had bought as used.

Best regards,
Juhani

Reply author: Kievuser

Replied on: 20091211211013

In 1950-60's those Kiev II,III,IV were among the best rangefinder cameras in the world,especially those made before Leica M3 and Contax 3A. They were used as 'state gift's, and many Chinese professionals used them. I believe they were exported with a pride, but also an aim for hard currency.

Reply author: Valkir1987

Replied on: 20091216124852

My grandfathers first reflex camera was a Zenit 3 (bottom loader)he bought in the Netherlands. East West agencies sold system camera's with interchangeble lenses for a low price. Maybe even lower then the West German camera's like Braun and Agfa, which had a fixed lens. "The camera's of the space century" (I still have to scan and post the brochure)

At that time, products of different nations where competive at international fairs. The Russians where the first one to fly into space. For them (At least I think) it was important to share products over europe and the rest of the world to convince the public of the succes of their nation and perhaps politics. Like every exporting country does. How often do we associate the quality and feeling of a product with its origins? [:)]

Reply author: draganflame

Replied on: 20101108153040

hello
i need advice from professional photograther.
i want to buy Nikon d90 package

is it good camera?

Nikon d90

Reply author: Vlad

Replied on: 20101108193454

Sorry Danny, this is a bit off-topic for this forum. Try http://DPReview.com .

Off the record, I have D90, it's a great camera [:D].

Cheers,
Vlad.