Unknown Zenit-1 prototype? Please help!

There was no reason to fake cameras at that time. For example the 1959 Zorki-2C with a remarked top-plate of a Zorki-C. Nobody wanted this trash at that time, they were used as giveaways for the political party if you believe this story mentioned here on this site. Now a remarked Zorki-2C has a much higher value. The intention to fake cameras at that time can hardly be believed.

Hello Bill

I agree with you in your points 1 and 2. A remark to point 2: Zoom told me long time ago about such "experimental" models that they were made in spare time.

Your question about if it was allowed to use serial numbers on such a experimental camera is a very good one. I can only tell that later so called experimental cameras used to have serialnumbers from the batch the modified camera came from. Maybe a serial number was useful even for experimental cameras for reference? And so it may be used under this aspect freely in this time? Even the ominous Zenit-L [1] had a serial number, even when I couldn't read it because all pictures of this camera I have are too bad (but it's probably the 000001).

Maybe it would be worth to take a closer look at this camera because the prism housing has some resemblance with the one of the camera in question here. More pictures you can find at the brasilianian site from Luiz [2] and a description in russian on zenitcamera.com [3].

For now a last experimantal cameras not so well knowed but very interesting because it was also a missing link between the Zenit 3M and the Zenit E, the Zenit 3EM documentet by Alexander Schulz in his book "Zenit" [4, in german].

This camera I mention because of the question of prices. It was sold in an online auction some years ago for a price around 350 Euro if I remember correctly. On eBay the 00010 Zenit prototype was sold for 10000 US$. That's the difference. Okay, this may be extreme prices but it gives also an idea of what we talking about.

If the camera in question is a real one made in 1950 my main question is if there are any influence from this camera to the prototype line?

Best wishes - Guido


[1] http://ussrphoto.com/Wiki/default.asp?WikiCatID=69&ParentID=1&ContentID=197&Item=Zenit+L+Prototype
[2] http://www.novacon.com.br/zenita2.htm
[3] http://www.zenitcamera.com/archive/zenit-1/zenit-l.html
[4] http://www.g-st.ch/privat/kameras/zenitbuchtext.html#71

Hello Lenny

I don't think we should talk of a fake. And the person who made this camera was not the same that was the source of the camera sold to the father of Iurii. But the identity of this person was veryfied by Zoom in the personel records of KMZ. That should be possible even 60 years later.

Best wishes - Guido

In my opinion, this camera is the prototype of the first series of cameras (with a "round head").
But not all experts agree with me.
The dating of this camera (1950) destroys all history of ZENIT's creation. The time of creating cameras must be shifted to a few years.

Hello Zoom

I'm happy to see you with us! Your opinion is the mine too and I have had also some problems with the year. But it don't destroy the histroy of the Zenit creation.

Maybe Zenit prototypes are made earlier than the "official" dates? Or maybe there were build not within tree years (1950 to 1952) but only within two (1949 to 1950)? If we now say the first prototype was made 1950 it could be that it was finished in this year. From the idea to drawings, functional models of parts (shutter, mirror ...), build of the parts for the prototypes will take a lot of time, so I even think the development must have begun in 1948. The development of the Zorki line begun in 1945/1946 I think, after the preserie in 1947 the first batches were in production from 1948 on. For the next six years the development was modernization and only a small team was needed. And the other developers could began with a new project, the Zenit. Given the fact that the production of Zenit startet 1952 and the second prototype is dated 1951-1952 I don't see no time were the production line and the tooling could be prepared and build.

Maybe we should rethink the timeline?

An other thing that striked me was the fact that the known prototypes are very nice cameras with an attractive prism housing. The camera in question here has a nice housing too but is an optimization after all. Before four parts of vulcanit were needed, with the camera in question here only one. For the production it was desided to mix both variants and used two parts.

Best wishes - Guido

Thanks for the clarification of your position, Zoom. I also agree with you that it could be the beginning of the cameras with the rounded prism housing. Then the serial number would also make sense with the first prototype cameras just having the serial number without a year, and then moving to production or pre-production with this camera having a year before the serial number.

Of course the problem is the time between this and the lowest known serial numbers of production Zenit. If the answer to this time gap can not be found by KMZ official records and no other cameras with serial numbers from 1950 or 1951 can be found either, then the mystery remains to some extent.

Does anyone know what the lowest serial number on a production Zenit is? Zoom, do you think it would be possible that after this camera was made in 1950 (maybe towards the end of the year) that regular production of the Zenit could be delayed for some reason until early 1952 ?

Regards, Bill

Hello Bill

First production serial numbers for Zenit "Block Logo" was #520019 according to Alexander Schulz and for Zenit with rounded logo #520298 according to www.sovietcams.com.

Hope this helps.

Best wishes - Guido

Well, then I have noticed that:

the prototypes have serial numbers with - 5 digits, no year designation (examples: No.00003 or No.00010)

this camera has serial number with - 5 digits, preceded by two-digit year designation (No. 5000002)

the production cameras from 1952 - 4 digits, and year designation before them ( examples: No.520019 or No.520298)

So, maybe the extra '0' in the serial number of this camera designates a 'pre-series' or 'pre-production' example.

So: maybe, prototypes made up to 1950 ... then some pre-production models ... then production models starting in 1952 (or even 1951, a few, none of which have been found). Possible?

Regards, Bill

Seems KMZ produced only 200 Zenit-1 in 1952. Not many, enough room and time to improve the model during production. KMZ tried to change models during production many times. In some cases they did not proceed with those changes after some time for whatever reason. They restored the former versions again. These changes were also technical-changes to improve the shutter-mechanism. Not only changes for a new look. Why even build a prototype only for the reflex-top like it seems the case here with the #5000002. But as already mentioned this #5000002 is not an original KMZ product.

For example I own a Zorki-1 from 1952 and the shutter-mechanism is different in a small area. A difference original made by KMZ, not changes made by a faker. I never found this difference in the later production and KMZ restored the former version again till they changed to the small shutter-spring. But even with the small shutter-spring they kept the former version in this small area. And there are other examples when KMZ changed the shutter for maybe 2000 Zorkis and then came back to the former version. And they did this all during production. No need to build a prototype only for a different reflex-top.

Hi Lenny,

I think that some believe that this is an actual KMZ product and some believe it was made privately by a KMZ worker (probably using the KMZ facilities). There are differences of opinions by experts, it seems, if you read all the latest posts from Zoom.

I think it is probably an original KMZ product (and so does Zoom, I believe). For me, since it has been found not to be a recent fake by research into the history of ownership, I think it is a KMZ product because it has an official serial number. I have seen cameras made in the factory workshops by workers and they only have either no serial numbers or they have serial numbers that are from the parts that were used to make the camera. In this case, the serial number does not appear to be from an old part. Also, I have seen the same type of construction (cutting and joining) on prototypes such as the Zorki 35M. So, are the reasons I am of the opinion that it is an actual KMZ product ... as Zoom says "a prototype of the first series of camera (with the round head)".

Many times prototypes with relatively small design changes are built, rather than just drawn. There are a number of reasons for this including: (1) The actuality of how the design change could affect the production process. (2) How the design change might change the function of the camera, both mechanically and physical handling aspects. (3) To compare, side by side, from all angles, the appearance of the new model with old models or prototypes. (4) The show )and put into their hands)to the executives or decision makers what the camera will be like so that they can give a go-ahead or not. So there are needs to make a prototype like this and it is relatively easy to make a prototype camera with a small design change, and this is the engineers job in any case, so why not make it?

However, my own opinion would be that this may not technically be a prototype, but rather a pre-series (considering the serial number and the closeness to the final design of the production Zenit that we know).

Regards, Bill

quote:

---

Originally posted by nightphoto

I think it is probably an original KMZ product (and so does Zoom, I believe). For me, since it has been found not to be a recent fake by research into the history of ownership, I think it is a KMZ product because it has an official serial number.

---

It was said that this person who was responsible that this #5000002 was made was not a member of the design department. It was said that it was unoffically made. Also this 7-digit serial-number is not the type which KMZ used at that time, it is NOT an official serial-number.

The joint on the refex-top is poorly made because there is a gap to the plate below. I am sure KMZ could have made this joint in much better quality at that time.
The bottom-plate is the older version with the additional two screws, while #00010 has the newer bottom-plate without those two screws.
It would not surprise me if the vulcanite-housing has screw-holes on the frontside above the lens-mount which would mean it is a newer production-part and then everything would make sense.

Lenny,

Although it was said that it was not made by a member of the design department at one point in in this thread about the camera, Zoom has clarified that statemnet. Please read his last post, above. There he says that he believes it is a prototype, although not everyone agrees. Very often, pre-series serial numbers on Russian cameras contain one or two extra '0's. This serial number would appear to be more in the official style of a pre-series camera. The joint on the top plate is very similar to the prototype camera that I owned, Zorki-35. You can see this in the entry in the WIKI for that camera, if you look closely. The fact that it has a joint at all probably means it is a prototype for the rounded prism of the Zenit production model. Would you think that they would change from an angled prism housing to rounded without making a prototype?

Regards, Bill

Hello Bill

Your last phrase is a very important one I think. If the camera in question will be authentic. Still waiting for someone to take a look inside this camera ... ;->

Best wishes - Guido

Hi Guido,

I agree and if I was still buying cameras I would want to take a look at some of the inside parts just to be sure.

Regards, Bill

quote:

---

Originally posted by nightphoto

Would you think that they would change from an angled prism housing to rounded without making a prototype?

---

For this change to a different style a prototype would not be necessary. They could have tried this change during production like KMZ did many times. A prototype is not easy to make because many parts for this new camera could not be taken from mass-production. And with #00010 you have to assume that they already made at least 10 prototypes.

Also interesting is why they only sold 200 Zenit-1 in 1952. Maybe they were not satisfied with the results and tried to improve the production during 1952.

Hello! Sorry for the delay.
"With the prototype 00010, as we agreed, the similarity is how the shutter is made in this camera and my camera. I will try to show that diopter adjustment is alike to the prototype 00010 as well.
If you take a look at Guido’s picture (the perspective from behind, showed by arrow) we can notice a dot on the housing- it seems like there was supposed to be diopter adjustment on this camera as well, but it wasn’t done probably because of the absence of available space. Therefore, the project has been realized on my camera, prism was reduced in size and the pit was done differently. I think there is prism form a prototype 00010 on К1020 and К1010 that’s why the pits are big. We could compare their pits with the pit of 00010.

The dot pointed at the picture doesn’t look like a factory defect or damage.

Besides this, my camera has (possibly on the prism) a thin black line throughout the frame in the form of +. I recently understood its function.
When the camera focusing on the object, firstly you need to get a sharp image of this line (corrected for vision) with the diopter adjuster and then focus the lens zoom. It seems to me that this procedure proves the relevance of the diopter adjuster.
After that, when the producers removed the adjuster in serial samples, I do not exclude that some of the cameras were produced with such a line as they needed to readjust the equipment before making new samples. Wear and tear of the adjuster I explain by the fact that it extends out of the camera body to 6mm - fragile item".


http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/10102014_55555.jpg

Hello again!
My father has some knowledge of mechanics, so he probably can do a simple disassembly of the camera.
He asked to explain what you want to see, how to get to it, and what’s the sense in seeing this or that part.

Another thins we are cautious about is that the camera had never been disassembled. Since the camera is to be for sale we are wondering if disassembly would affect the price.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nordmannen

Hello again!
My father has some knowledge of mechanics, so he probably can do a simple disassembly of the camera.
He asked to explain what you want to see, how to get to it, and what’s the sense in seeing this or that part.

Another thins we are cautious about is that the camera had never been disassembled. Since the camera is to be for sale we are wondering if disassembly would affect the price.

---

First take away the bottom-plate and the lens.
The serial-number is placed on a rim. Also on this rim are 7 screws around the camera. Screw all those 7 screws out but remember which screw belongs to which hole, especially the one under the wind-knob. Those screws may be different in length.
Then you only need to take away the 4 screws on the vulcanite on the frontside.
Now the vulcanite-housing can be easily moved down. It is only needed to move it down for 1cm.

Newer productional-cameras have 2 screws ON THE FRONTSIDE on the rim above the lens-mount. But the prototype-cameras like the #00010 and the #5000002 have those 2 screws ON THE SIDE on the rim, left and right.
When moving down the vulcanite-housing for 1cm it must be recognizable if the vulcanite-housing has also screw-holes ON THE FRONTSIDE above the lens-mount. This would indicate that the vulcanite-housing could be a newer productional-part and not a part made for a prototype. Because the prototypes do not have screws ON THE FRONTSIDE on the rim.

After moving the vulcanite-housing down for only 1cm to check the housing move it up again and put all screws into the same holes again. Everything must work fine again after it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nordmannen

Hello again!
My father has some knowledge of mechanics, so he probably can do a simple disassembly of the camera.
He asked to explain what you want to see, how to get to it, and what’s the sense in seeing this or that part.

Another thins we are cautious about is that the camera had never been disassembled. Since the camera is to be for sale we are wondering if disassembly would affect the price.

---

It would be good to take a look on a newer productional camera to know the exact location of those 2 screws ON THE FRONTSIDE.

Lurii,

Lenny's instructions sound good. I would add: (1) You don't want to make any marks on the screw heads. So, you must use the correct size screwdriver. Not too small, but one that fits perfectly. Also you can use a bit of tissue or thin cloth to put on the screwdriver so as not scratch the screws. (2) Make sure to photograph everything from all angles and as close as possible once you have the pieces apart.

Also, do not jump to conclusions. If this is a prototype or pre-series that is close to the production cameras, it may be possible that the screws have been moved to the front already. That is why photos will be very important. Try to get close-up photos showing the exact location of these screws, for comparison, as Lenny has said. Also, take photos of everything on all sides of the camera. Good luck, and if you are careful and slow it won't hurt the value of the camera to do this.

Regards, Bill