Mysterious Spy Camera, can we identify?

Another one Viktor sent me, he may have information about it, but decided not to tell me what it is in his email probably to stir up discussion, let's see what members come up with.. my guess is - some kind of Ayaks-9 variation?? The year seems right - 1949.. any thoughts?

On another thought after examining Ayaks-9 this one is too damn round and fat to be it... but the body of this one is eerily familiar, I can't put my finger on it though...

Hi Vlad,

it looks as somebody took a Robot and makes a russian camera out of it...

Ulrich

http://fotos.cconin.de

Ulrich, do you have a picture of that Robot camera you're talking about you can post here for comparison? Thanks!

Hi Vlad,

take a look at
http://www.robot-camera.de/ROBOT_Kameras/Robot_Star/robot_star.html

The site is in german, bur you can see that the Robot Star looks as yours.

Ulrich

http://fotos.cconin.de

You are absolutely correct Ulrich! This is a Soviet version of Robot! Very cool!! Thank you! I will add it to catalog as such.

Vlad

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vlad

You are absolutely correct Ulrich! This is a Soviet version of Robot! Very cool!! Thank you! I will add it to catalog as such.

---

I think that this camera is the genuine Robot that facked as a "Soviet version of Robot"... "I think"? No. I'm firmly convinced.

Zoom, I appreciate your opinion on this.. Yes this is Robot, but what in particular makes you think that this was not used by Soviet Union before Ayakses were perfected? This still makes it an MGB camera (later KGB) G. Abramov seems to mention the fact that these cameras were used in late 40s:

quote:

---

В этот же период некоторые подразделения МГБ применяли специальные немецкие фотокамеры серии ROBOT, однако высокая стоимость такой техники, сложности с ремонтом и запасными частями существенно ограничивали возможности использования этих импортных фотокамер в повседневной оперативной деятельности. (G. Abramov)

---
In the same period, some units MGB special German camera series ROBOT, but the high cost of such technology, the complexity of the repair and spare parts significantly restrict the use of the imported cameras in their daily operations.
(G. Abramov) http://www.photohistory.ru/1207248179642549.html

---

Vlad

Zoom, I think I know what makes you think that - the blatancy of Soviet symbolics on a covert camera? Is it?

Vlad

Like Zoom I am convinced of being an "authentic" Fake!
LP

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vlad

Zoom, I think I know what makes you think that - the blatancy of Soviet symbolics on a covert camera? Is it?

---

If it is a Soviet-made camera, it should have the hammer-sickle-star emblem whith a plant mark. If it is a Soviet-made camera for a secret services, it should not have the "hammer-sickle-star" emblem. If it is a rebuilded from Robot-II camera, it should not have 'Soviet like' serial number (490066 == 1949 year)...
And, in general, this place is closed by a cold shoe... ;)

Btw., what lens?

I see.. makes sense .. I have no more information about this camera (like what lens etc..) at this time beyond the pictures of it.. I am waiting for reply from Viktor about it, I will post what he says. Then I will move this camera to appropriate section in catalog..

Thanks for all your input guys!
Vlad

I also believe this is a non-authentic forgery. Even the engraving on the top looks fresh. If it were authentic the engraving would be more similar to the Soviet Army engraving seen on the KMZ photosniper. Also, I don't think that the Army would be putting markings on a camera used for undercover surveillance.
In my opinion ... definitely not authentic. Of course one side-effect of sites like Abramov's and any other historical references with information that is obscure, is that the craftsmen who make the forgeries read them and can use the information to make a forged version of a camera that has not been seen, only mentioned. Then they can point to the reference and say "and here it is!"
I think that the Soviet KGB and other agencies did of course use many foreign cameras when operating outside of the Soviet Union. I even have a circa 1925 Kodak box camera that was used by the Amtorg Trading Organization (it has the "Amtorg" metal tag affixed to it), a Soviet trade organization in New York City known for spying and intelligence activities. So, I think within the Soviet Union, unmaked cameras were used for surveillance and outside the country a foreign camera would usually be used (or possibly a completely unmarked KGB camera, such as Totchka or the miniature ring or microdot KGB cameras), in special circumstances.
But ... only my opinion.

Regards, Bill

bizarre ... vous avez dit bizarre, comme c'est йtrange ...

It looks like a robot II but there are some special elements :
- the engravings and specially the film position sign (totally not robot)
- the barrel of the double winder mechanism is not standard at all, nor is the screw on top...
- the film winder is also higher than normal
- the flash plug is not the robot standard one (robot was one of the earliest company to use modern flash plugs)
- the cover of the back has no embossing or no robot plate...
and furthermore the lens or what looks like a lens seems fixed and not on the normal robotscrewmount.

it would really be interesting to see if there is no original serial number inside

may be a special camera modified in USSR at one point, from a wartime robotII.

Stephan

Stephan,

Robots with the higher spring motor are existing, but it looks a bit different (other screw, as you said). Maybe there were 2 motor windings of a Lomo 135 stacked?
The accessorie shoe seems to be missing, there ist the hammer engraving now. The flash is not typical, you are right, normally there are two ones instead of one.
It's an interestin camera, maybe the site I have posted can tell more.

Vlad, I think you can write a mail to the site owner, maybe he knows more?!

Ulrich

http://fotos.cconin.de

hmm.. thanks for the input gentlemen, this is getting quite interesting in a sense that this is NOT an original ROBOT... wow.. I did ask Viktor for more details, still waiting for reply...

I'll try to email site owner, see what he knows.

Thanks!
Vlad.

I checked my robot bible and the base of the camera is a prewar or just postwar robot II , this model with the doublespringwinder and could be made from a military robot (though not a luftwaffe model which is totally black...). (More than 20000 robots were issued to the german military).
Still there is something bizarre with both the winder barrel, and film tensionning winder... non standard at all, and also the absence of any markings on the back



Stephan

the flash socket is of a prewar robot II, and most robot II were issued without accessory shoe (but the holes to put one on...)

Stephan

And I've emailed two of the site collectors of the Robot web site with link to this forum thread, let's see if there is anything new they can say.. maybe they can even post directly here if they read this, this would be preferable since I am gone to sunny Jamaica all next week..

So far to summarize we have the following arguments:

For authenticity (in terms that it's in fact period-accurate Soviet remade spy camera, we know it's a Robot originally):

1. The time period it was supposedly used for seems correct in terms of manufacture and possible use by USSR military
2. Very odd discrepancies in actual construction that Stephan had pointed out

Against authenticity:
1. As Zoom and Bill pointed out - if it is a spy camera it would not have these markings or if it's a military camera it should also have factory logo
2. as Bill pointed out the engraving looks too fresh (although IMHO that's not a very strong point)

Vlad

Exactly Stephan.
More, this is an 1942 Robot issue model Luftwaffe series.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zoom
If it is a rebuilded from Robot-II camera, it should not have 'Soviet like' serial number (490066 == 1949 year)...

---

Just for argument's sake I don't quite understand why shouldn't it. If the Soviets did rebuild these and used them even in some limited quantities for clandestine operations it would make sense to serialize them accordingly so they are kept track of, especially with Stephan's points that this Robot had been significantly modified...

Vlad