USSRPhoto.com

Forums / Collectors and Users Open Forum

New bomb in collector's market!

New Topic Reply to Topic
Back to Forum Previous TopicNext Topic
Printer Friendly Send Topic to a Friend
36 posts in this thread showing replies 1-20 of 35
Jump to reply Jump to bottom

03/19/2009 11:29

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
Well, yuo do have the Chinese Smenas, so you have good proof they did co-operate closely in those days. Knowing all this it makes sense that even here they could have done it.

Best regards,
Juhani

03/19/2009 12:14

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
Hello Aidas

Two interesting cameras but some details are disturbing ... The first thing is the missing KMZ logo on both cameras. I never seen prototypes without such logos.

Best wishes - Guido

03/19/2009 13:03

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply

Beautiful cameras, indeed.
Of course, they do look like the prototypes shown in the JLP! Smile

If I had to compare, I should use the Canon rangefinders which were produced before: the IIB (up to 1/500th, made from 1949) and the III (1/1000th, made from 1951).
No doubt there is a sort of relationship Canon-Zorki2-Shanghai, even if this Zorki was a prototype.

I was always astonished by this period, at least by the activity of KMZ. Mass production of the 1, prototypes of the 2, proto and production of the 3, proto of the Rodina, first preseries of the 3S, soon the 4... I don't forget the army of Zenit, almost already, nor the lenses for themselves and Arsenal...
All that in 5 years or so (1950-55)... Fascinating!

Amitiés. Jacques.

03/19/2009 18:52

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
I think it is almost impossible to tell if the cameras from Viktor are authentic prototypes from the photographs. They may be authentic, however it would also be easy to make these variations from the parts of various Zorki cameras ... fit together and re-engraved.
My experience has taught me to look at the engraving with strong magnification, comparing a production model that is known from the same factory and period with the camera being examined for authenticity. Even a prototype would have been given to a factory engraver to make the engraving so the same tools would be used as on a regular production model.

As well, it is important to look at the edges of the rangefinder housing to see if they are gently rounded or have a sharper edge than a known production model. If the edges look sharper, this can be a sign that the original cast housing was ground down (to remove engraving) and then refinished and new engraving added. Comparison with a similar model helps here too.

The next thing I look for is if there is a difference in the finish between the top plate of the camera and the rangefinder housing. If so, it can also indicate the refinishing of the rangefinder housing in order to change the engraving.

Not all prototypes from KMZ have the KMZ Logo. I know that there is not one on my Zorki-35M and it is known to be authentic. There is a logo on the most prototypes, but probably it may have to do with whether the camera was going to be shown to the public in any way, rather than just as a development prototype to be shown only in house.

I would be interested to know if either camera has a serial number and if so, what are the numbers and do they have a KMZ logo on the backs? Also, it is always interesting to know where the cameras were purchased or if there is any provenance.

Regards, Bill

03/20/2009 02:22

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
quote:
Originally posted by AidasCams

... let me show you one more sample from Viktor Suglob archives Big smile It seems to be almost identical to Shanghai camera! Knowing that these cameras were made in 1955, we can make a precondition that USSR have supplied friendly China with original cameras, no?

Viktor wanted to know your opinions - what the hell is it? Big smileBig smileBig smile


http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/DSC_0002.JPG


http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/DSC_0005.JPG

Best Regards,
AidasSmile




Aidas, Thanks for the photos. The 2nd one looks indeed alomost identical to a late model Shanghai 58-2, except:
1, the engravings in Russian on top plate and around rewind setting lever,
2,Flash socket that looks like a Zorki's, but this can easily be replaced,and
3, A slightly larger rewind nob, but it could be a wrong impression from the photo.
4, 4 chromeplated screws on the front, that could also be easily replaced.

Every other details are amazingly the same, the leather covering pattern, the position of arrow on the accessary shoe, shutter release button,and the collar around it.....

I would not be surprised if someone faked it with a late 58-2.Big smile

Kind Regards,

Zhang

03/20/2009 02:30

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
quote:
Originally posted by AidasCams

Our belorussian friend Viktor Suglob had given me a permission to repost here a picture of experimental Zorki-2M camera!

As I see, Suglob like a fake cameras...

03/20/2009 04:15

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
First of all let me tell you, that particular 2M cameras are not from Viktor Suglob collection! Viktor never saw them alive so he's not able to say anything about the authentity of these 2 cameras indeed ... That's why he asked me to show you these cameras in order to know your opinion about this. The pictures of Zorki-2M were received from the same secret source in Moscow (you should find an old Topic about Iskra-3 in archives to read the Viktor's story).

Zhang,

My first impression was these Zorki-2M cams are identical to Shanghai 58-II (4th version), according to Douglas S Denny book, but the decorative rim around the finder's window is still confusing me ... Smile

Zoom,

I doubt any of us have enough competence to say it's a fake from the picture, sorry ...

Best Regards,
Aidas

03/20/2009 05:50

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
quote:
Originally posted by AidasCams

First of all let me tell you, that particular 2M cameras are not from Viktor Suglob collection! Viktor never saw them alive so .....

Zhang,

My first impression was these Zorki-2M cams are identical to Shanghai 58-II (4th version), according to Douglas S Denny book, but the decorative rim around the finder's window is still confusing me ... Smile

....

Best Regards,
Aidas




Aidas,

I only have doubt about the 2nd one, The 1st one would not be easy to fake with a Shanghai 58-2 IMO.Smile

Cheers,

zhang

03/20/2009 06:30

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
quote:
Originally posted by AidasCams

Zoom,
I doubt any of us have enough competence to say it's a fake from the picture, sorry ...

This is the experience...

Btw., my email is known to Victor. It is not a problem to ask me about this cameras directly without through my very poor English...

03/20/2009 08:05

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
hmmmm....
no doubt, no confuse Approve! .... for me , "Zorki 2u" is a fake from shangai camera(if I compare whith mine two shangai camera on shelves :
- 3 little screws in accessorie shoe whith particular drawwing tiny arrow on (and right very close to the edge).
- "B" timer exactly same engraved.
- round front lense finder exactly same .
- large shinny flat top shutter button, , etc, etc ....

seemed easy to make on former Shangai because originals engraving are not very deep in brass material...
alain

03/20/2009 09:24

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
Viktor Suglob says:
"
У меня этого фотоаппарата нет, а есть только фотографии, потому ничего о нем не знаю. Достоверных данных о Зорком 2м у меня просто нет.

Не обижайтесь на меня, мне часто приходят фотографии неизвестных камер, которые мы не можем классифицировать. Мы специально выставляем фото камер, может кто-то, что-то знает.

I don't have this camera but only picture so I don't really know anything about it. Actual real information about Zorki-2m I just don't ahve.

Don't be offended at me, I often get pictures of unknown camera which we cannot classify, that is why we specifically post these cameras here maybe someone knows anything about them."

03/20/2009 09:59

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
quote:
Originally posted by Vlad

Viktor Suglob says:
"I don't have this camera... I often get pictures of unknown camera which we cannot classify..."

Ask him: That's why to write something similar to a "copyright" in this cameras pictures ("MIRFOTO 2009")? The one copyrighter (I mean David Tomlinson) is enough for us... ;)

03/20/2009 10:11

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
quote:
Originally posted by Vlad

Technically it's not a copyright but a source.

'Technically' I wrote: 'something similar to a "copyright"' ;)
You say: source? OK. Source of this cameras, as AidasCams wrote: "the secret source in Moscow", but not "Mirfoto". So... :P

03/20/2009 10:33

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
I would consider Viktor the source of these photos from this forum's point of view though since he provided them for us to discuss.

Technicalities aside, I don't really have enough formed opinion about this particular cameras, but it does seems to be an exact copy of the Chinese unit posted by Zhang and Jacques besides the rangefinder and viewfinder windows which I would not be surprised if there is a variation of this Chinese camera with same exact attributes.. I would think it wouldn't be too hard to replace the rangefinder ring but viewfinder is still a puzzle..

Vlad

New Topic Back to Forum

Reply to Topic

Forum code enabled