Your reviews of russian cameras are really helpful. I feel that the cold war mentality created a myth among american photographers about the bad quality of russian cameras. So it's quite common to see people underrating these cameras without any empirical grounding. It's just loose opinions. I think your videos contribute to correct that.
It's true, they are under rated. They don't have the finesse of a Leica, that's for sure, but they're very capable machines that have stood the test of time. I can't help liking them!
I just bought my first Fed 2, paid $40.00 + $30.00 shipping from Russia and appreciate your excellent review, once my camera arrives I will be out first weekend to shoot some black and white film and one color for comparison.
According to Russian Wikipedia, Your FED is the latest, 3-rd version of FED-2, produced 1958-1969 when GOST(gosudarstvenny standart-country standard, actually it was interpreted as "international standard" ) changed exposure timing from 1/25, 1/50, 1/100, 1/200 ,1/500 to 1/30, 1/60, 1/125, 1/250, 1/500 and B.Timing mechanism added. Also winder head in ver. 1and 2 are more Leica style, EDITING: Industar 61 in ver. 3 was also introdused ,among with Industar 26M. Again,according to Russian Wikipedia :) there was a fourth version of FED-2 packed in Fed-3 body, marked ФЭД-2Л/FED-2L with a trigger style winder(1969-1970) , reduced size of rangefinder window, because exposure compensation mechanism was added.
Thanks for an informative review. A few notes from an amateur who used FED2 for more than two decades. FED2 was my first and only camera for many years. My father bought it in 1957 with Industar-26M lens. Later, circa 1963, he replaced the old lens by Industar-61. I still have negatives from both of these and can compare the quality after I scanned them using a high-resolution scanner. The difference in quality is especially noticeable when a fine-grain film was used, such as Agfa Isopan F. Industar 26 is a lousy lens for anything other than portrait photography -- and why would anyone use 35-mm film for this anyways? Even according to the official specs, it had low resolution in the center field, but at the edge, it really sucked. I remember the number 14 lines/mm, but do not recall if it referred to the edge or center. On the other hand, I-61 is amazingly sharp. I did not know it back at the time, since my enlarger lens was of poor quality (Industar-50U), but with the scanner you can see minute details in the background. The reason for this difference in quality is reportedly that I-61 used rare-earth (Lanthanum) doped glass in one of the components, which allowed to increase the refractive index and thus use less lens curvature (Russian Wiki). That led to smaller amounts of aberrations. I also heard that, at least in some later modifications, I-61 used an aspherical lens. Another advantage of I-61 was more sophisticated optical coating. I would use I-61 again, but not I-26. One more thing. In order to replace a lens in a range-finder camera (in the USSR), the procedure required a so-called "justirovka" (adjustment) that was done by a camera shop by adding or removing thin washers to the camera mount. You couldn't simply buy another lens, even of the same model, and screw it in and start shooting. One more note. Regarding the strap. All cameras, including FED2, were sold in nice leather holsters with straps, but the real good feature of those was that you did not have to remove the camera when taking pictures. You simply opened the front of the holster, and the camera was still secure in it, supported by the strap. No need for a separate strap for the naked camera! I used it on many trips, in the mountains and on the water, did not have a single accident...
Interesting, I understood that after about 1945 all Russian cameras and lenses were made to the 28.8mm flange distance, so there shouldn't really be any need for adjustment. I could be wrong though! The I 61 is a very nice lens - it's the one I learned photography with, and I still use it today!
@@zenography7923 Frankly, I don't know the details of this adjustment. As I see now, there are two conditions to be satisfied here: a) The infinity lens setting must yield a sharp image of remote objects; and b) for the rest of distance settings, the range finder must provide the sharpest image when it indicates alignment. The first condition can be met by ensuring the correct flange distance for this particular lens, and the second one by properly adjusting the arm of the range finder. Basically, two adjustments, one of the lens itself and the second one of the range finder. And now I wonder how this thing worked when I added a second lens to the camera, with a different focal length (a Jupiter-9/85mm)?
This leaves only two possibilities: Either the lenses are accurate within design tolerances, and only the camera possibly needs an adjustment; or that the adjustment is done on each individual lens and not on the camera.
Why would one use the 35-mm film in a studio setting? The only reason, or so to speak, raison d'être, for the 35-mm camera, was its small size and its being light and handy. Great for outdoors and adventure, at the expense of providing only marginal quality due to the graininess of the film, especially in indoor settings. All professional portrait photographers used large- or medium film formats with great success. @@SS-jt9ex
They really are great little cameras, and very nicely made too. They lack the polish and finish of the Barnack Leicas, but not by much, and offer a very similar shooting experience. Thanks for tuning in!
I had a Leica lllg with flash synch, which I was told was the first one to be so equipped. I also had a poorly made Russian Leica but these Feds seem to be of much better quality. Informative video, thanks.
I always enjoy your videos. Last year I bought a FED4 and today I received a FED2. It seems in very good shape but the film spool is missing. I will just swap the spool between the 4 and 2 until I can get my hands on a second spool.
@@zenography7923 It turns out to be a fantastic camera. I had to set the spring tension on the shutter and it was a bit of a nightmare, but one of the Industars turned out to be a great lens and the camera itself is a joy to shoot with. Out of the Soviet LTM lenses, which one do you think is a good next step? I know you've said a lot about the Jupiter-2, but I also find the Industar 61 L/D appealing and it's usually a fair bit cheaper.
Again, a wonderful video. I do have two or three of these former Soviet Union machines. No Leica (yet). I will need to review my holdings to find out which FED I have before I search the net for a 2. I really enjoy seeing your photo samples. I learn a great deal by studying images taken by other photographers, particularly on film.
I had a Leica 111c. I have a Zorki 4K now. I like it on the shelf for display as I mostly use 6x6 now. Seagull 4bi and a Kiev 6c with a 90mm 2.8 lens. A nice big negative in the darkroom. Waist level viewing is ideal for composing arty photos I find
I have noted that loading my FED 2 with film.....that at least on my copy I tighten the key on the film cassette side first then the spool side... I noticed you do that too Nigel........
Zenography I want to buy a wide angle lens for my FED. Could you please tell me what are the choices available? I think I have heard about a Jupiter 12?.... There's any other options? Thanks in advance.
There are other vintage options from Leica, Reid, Canon, even Nikon, as well as some very recent lenses from Voigtlander. I guess it depends on budget - while these are likely to be expensive the Jupiter 12 is not, and has good optical quality too. Hope that helps!
All these "improvements" on Soviet cameras and optics are falling prey to poor precision and quality control. Being born in the USSR, I've used FEDs a lot when I was young and knew how inconsistent and unreliable those products were. After emigration to the West, I was using old Leicas for a while, and the difference in feel and performance is tremendous. It's like comparing Mercedes to Lada...
Great review and as a result I just won an ebay auction for the same Fed 2 example, fingers crossed its going to work as expected . I really like the look of these cameras and I love the idea of all mechanical cameras
Well done on bagging the Fed! These are lovely little machines, nice to use and nicely made too. Mechanical cameras are fascinating because they're so simple, and you have to know photography to use them; very different to the modern digital marvels which, although wonderful in their own way, can be over complicated. Many thanks for watching.
@@zenography7923 Thanks for the reply, unfortunately the FED that I bought turned out to be faulty so I sent it back, back to the hunt for a good copy. In your opinion which rangefinder from the soviet era is the closet in feel and use to a Leica IIIf
@@hayderassam Oh, that's a shame, still, plenty more cameras out there. As for which is closest to the IIIf, well, the Fed 1 and Zorki 1, being direct copies of the Leica II, are much the same in use and feel to the screwmount Leicas, although they don't have slow speeds, with the early Fed 1 being the best of these in terms of quality (in my experience). The early Zorki 4 from 57-59 is very nice indeed, a real quality machine, as is the Zorki 3 in all its guises, although the slow speed mechanism on the first Z3 often needs cleaning to maintain reliability. This is a simple enough job, as you'll see from my video on the subject. The Z3 is better looking, though more expensive, than Z4. Both Z3 and 4 have a big, bright, combined viewfinder/rangefinder, and I think one of these might be the camera you're looking for! Hope that helps.
@@zenography7923 Thank you very much for the helpful advice , I shall enjoy the search for a suitable Zorki as I really like the idea of a well crafted mechanical camera to use , much more fun that just point and shoot :)
Great comparison.I have a nice Kiev 4 on its way but i am falling in love with the Fed 2 .Is this a later model than the one with collapsible Elmar type lens
I've noticed that the FED 2 has one film guide rail, when usually there are two? In general, there is just something about simplicity that I find very appealing, perhaps it's that the basic science involved is understandable and that these cameras are potentially repairable? Enjoy your uploads Zenography!
Hi James, there are two guide rails on my camera, but there were many variations across the production cycle. Odd though, I would have thought that two rails were the minimum requirement... Simplicity is beautiful, and it's part of what makes these cameras appealing to me. And as Henry Ford said, what you don't fit don't go wrong!
By 'film guides' I don't mean the chrome/silver looking ones, but the outer guides which guide the edges of the film. Of course, there could be variations in production, I'll need to look out for that. Thanks Zenography!
I think the Fed 1's a bit more stylish, but it's a little more difficult to use with its separate windows for viewfinder and rangefinder, whereas in the Fed 2, they're combined. Other than that they're broadly similar. Oh, and the Fed 2 tends to be cheaper too!
I wonder what the viewfinder is like on a FED 2? I'm familiar with the Zorki 4 series- no frame lines, but I know that what I see is more-or-less what I get from my experience. Parallax is not really an issue, just make some framing shift towards 4 O'Clock for closer work. Thanks for the uploads.
Zorki viewfinders (except the Zorki 1) are bigger and brighter than the Feds, and the Fed 2 is no exception. It's quite small and not as bright, but the rangefinder patch is very clear. As for parallax, I just frame the shot a little higher if I'm close to the subject, when shooting Russian cameras or Barnack Leicas. Who needs framelines! Having said that though, I think the Fed 5c did have these, although they're only a rough guide, as I don't think they move to compensate for differences in camera to subject distance. Thanks for watching!
I will be looking for a good FED 2 after Christmas 2021 Nigel.... If it is a good all round one tidy clean. CLA'd with any luck...everything works okay good lens included..... You would want the popular Cyrillic logo up front.... then this might seem fussy but maybe the old style shutter speeds with delayed action gear up front too.... Depends how the year of manufacture is important to match these requirements.... Very nice salute to the Leica ii but not exactly matching what was happening in 1955 onwards.... Comments please folks.... Thank you..
Great video - thanks. I really like your measured delivery and the level of technical info is just right for me as a relative newcomer to film photography (well, I used to use a Kodak Instamatic as a kid). I have a Fed 2 arriving soon and am very much looking forward to using it. I wonder if these old rangefinders are addicitive? I keep looking at the 3 and 4s too.... . By the way, do you know of a decent place where I could get an old Fed 1 repaired? I have an issue with film jammed in shutter :(. Precisely the sort of thing I hope to avoid with the Fed 2 which has the advantage of the removable back, as you rightly point out!
Hi there, yes, they are addictive! I have far too many and have often thought of going into rehab, but the next thought is always 'just one more won't hurt'! As for Feds 3 and 4, the early 3 is quite a handsome beast, better than the later, squarer type in my opinion. The Fed 4, the camera I learned photography on, although its lines ain't the best, is still a favourite. The built in meter makes it very practical too. As for repair, it depends where you are of course. I usually repair my own cameras if I can (though I'm by no means an expert), and the lower body of your Fed comes off easily enough if you want to have a (careful) go. As long as the shutter isn't torn it should be a fairly easy job. Can't recommend a specific repairer, but a google search should yield results, and there's a good list of repairers here: www.35mmc.com/17/07/2016/specialist-film-camera-repair-modification-companies/ Thanks for watching!
I have the FED4. I like however find it a bit chunky! I am now tempted to add the FED 2 in the bag! I have tried a few Zorki's but all came with problems so I stuck with the FED!
The Fed 4 is indeed a bit chunky, but it's a very capable camera and a very cheap way into rangefinder photography - it must be the cheapest of all the FSU rangefinders. I agree - the Feds usually feel that bit nicer than the Zorkis, although any Zorki made before about 1957 has a very nice quality feel, far more so than the later ones.
While the Fed 2 has a longer rangefinder base, it is debatable as to its having an advantage over the original Fed - or for that matter, the Barnack Leica. The incorporation of a rangefinder patch in the middle of the viewfinder image is of course significantly better than the "Leica shuffle", as long as you use the standard lens, but the rangefinder image has to be significantly reduced, compared to it being enlarged in a separate rangefinder mechanism, which could reduce accuracy. One of the frustrating things about these earlier cameras is that the viewfinder eyepiece can be really tiny, requiring the eye to be placed very close to it to see the entire viewfinder image, which was of course a headache for spectacle wearers. It seems that Barnack, Kuppenbender, etc, were quite young and with good eyesight when designing these cameras. On the other hand, I use Cosina-built Voigtländers nowadays, they play well with my bespectacled eyes.
I've never tried a Cosina Voigtlander, though I've heard very good things about them, some great lenses too. And you're right, Fed viewfinders are notoriously small and dark - bigger than the Barnack Leicas though! Thanks for watching.
@@zenography7923 That is why the M3 was such a revelation: Leica finally offered a viewfinder that was head and shoulder above others, with a large eyepiece diameter, built-in rangefinder image, and bright framelines brought up by the lens fitted. The Nikon SP viewfinder arguably as good, but that might be something that induced the rapid development of the single-lens reflex cameras afterwards.
I too like the Fed 2 very much; it's simple, clean and small with a very accurate rangefinder. I think, though, that my favourite Russian RF is the Zorki 3; I like it for its styling, and I like the separate slow speed dial on the early models, although I do have a soft spot for the not too good looking Fed 4 - it has a light meter built in, and it's the camera I learned photography on. Thanks for watching.
@@zenography7923 I do have a zorki 3c - it is a very good looking camera, resembles the Fed 4 quite a bit. The Fed 3 is a nice looking camera as well- I never got a Fed 4 because most all I have seen lack the camera strap lugs (I do like to strap them on and take them on outings)
This is intriguing, I haven't heard of the Leica IV, it sounds interesting. As far as I know the Fed 2 was an all Russian development of the original Leica design, though I may be wrong...
No, the Leica IV design I've seen was already heading vaguely in the direction of the Leica M. It looked like some of the 50's Canon rangefinders in a way.
The FED-2 looks great to me. Leica is a great thing to copy. Prices in these cameras have gone up quite a bit, does $80 US sounds reasonable with 50mm?
It's not bad, a little bit steep perhaps, you'd want one in spot-on condition for that price I think... I don't know what the supply is like in the US though, it may be there aren't that many around, so prices might be higher than in the UK?
1. The FEDs were made in Ukraine not Russia. Calling it a Soviet camera is proper. 2. The first Industar-61s were all silver. They were quickly replaced by the silver and black which are the ones you show on the 3, 4s and 5s. This lens is commonly called the Panda. Finally the all black model was the last in the line. The FED-3s also came with the Industar-26 to save money. 3. All FED 3s, 4s and 5s came with the rapid advance handle.
I acquired my Fed 2 around 20 years ago. At that time I was not familiar with Fed cameras, nor what to expect. It produces very nice photos using the Industar 26 lens and, except for removing the bottom of the camera for loading film rather than using a hinged door like in my other 35mm film cameras, its operation is largely conventional. I am not familiar with the Leica 2 and ask other viewers if the vintage Leicas require film to be loaded in a similar "remove the bottom" manner? Construction of old Japanese rangefinders (like from Canon and Minolta) seem just slightly more sophisticated looking and feeling. However, the Fed 2 remains a capable piece of photo equipment.
@@zenography7923 Thanks for your answer! I've never used a "bottom loader" other than my Fed 2. Knowing that about the old Leicas it is even more clear what the people at Fed were thinking in the design.
@@zenography7923 I found swivel lugs that attach to the tripod mount. They work great. Highly recommend them. www.ebay.com/itm/Movo-NSA-1-Swivel-Tripod-Mount-Neck-Strap-Connector-for-DSLR-Cameras-Camcorders/382142098726?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2060353.m2749.l2649
I received the earlier version of the FED 3 a couple of days ago, and it does have lugs. Think it’s better looking than the later version too. Odd that for quite a major change in design they kept the same version number.
I would think all mechanical cameras would have this to a greater or lesser extent; much reduced though if the camera is never stored in the wound on position.
Possible faults could be: 1. Film not correctly tensioned/positioned before closing back 2. Resistance or drag in the winding mechanism placing too much load on the film. 3. Mis-alignment of the transport mechanism in the camera itself. In my experience, 1. is the most likely, although without seeing your camera, it's difficult to say. Hope that helps!
@@zenography7923 From my observations with a used film after I posted it looks like the take-up spool is slipping every time I wind on. The sprockets advance the film which then just furls lazily round said spool, with no tension in it whatsoever.
@@TheGodsrighthandman I have a FED2 also and compared mine. Assuming the film is correctly threaded on the spool sleeve tooth, but is coming loose and piling up, maybe the spool is not turning on the spindle it rides on. The sprocket teeth and take-up spindle are geared to turn at the same time. The brass spindle is split to be spring loaded for tension. With no film loaded and the back off, I can hold the take up reel and the spindle turns underneath with some resistance. If your spindle freely turns with no resistance then I suspect the brass spindle springs or leaves might be bent in and not providing enough tension to turn the take up spool. If so, the film would coil up loosely instead of winding on the spool until it couldn't jam in more. That would create nowhere for the film to go and enough tension for the sprocket teeth to tear the film guide holes. Test if your spindle spins too easily or if it has enough tension to turn with the spindle it rides on.
@@francisco5434 That sounds plausible as it goes. I did try that and the take up reel offers no resistance at all. I did try bending out the leaves but then the reel jammed solid and I was loathe to take it further. I also think the cogs either end of the sprocket drive are not quite in alignment - only by .75/1mm - with each other which, to my mind, will create an unequal pull and exacerbate the problem.
@@TheGodsrighthandman You might try a bit of gaffer's tape to take up some slack. Other than that, all I can offer is that I made a note at some time: Oleg at Vintage Camera. Try looking him up. Good luck.
I've been aware that I have to turn the rewind to help the film canister 'snap' in - makes for an easier film travel at the beginning ... at least I think so. ;o) Slow speeds of 1/15 and slower is rarely used by most photographers - it's no loss really. I quite fancy a FED 2.
It's always best to take up the slack, to make sure everything's engaged and in place. The Fed 2 is a lovely camera which has really impressed me; like you I don't find the lack of slow speeds a hindrance - if I'm shooting in low light I think a digital camera is a much better tool. Thanks for watching!
I think yours must be an earlier version - the self timer was added later. I do love the coloured versions of the Fed 2 - why didn't other manufacturers do the same?
I have noted that some FED 2 s have a place name and CCCP stamped on top plate near shutter button... Since Ukraine don't like being called Russian... CCCP used in Russia 1922 - 1991 on sputnik rockets and so forth from photos and videos... perhaps these ones really made in Russia Since FED 2 only made from 1955-1971.....,cheers...
Your reviews of russian cameras are really helpful. I feel that the cold war mentality created a myth among american photographers about the bad quality of russian cameras. So it's quite common to see people underrating these cameras without any empirical grounding. It's just loose opinions. I think your videos contribute to correct that.
It's true, they are under rated. They don't have the finesse of a Leica, that's for sure, but they're very capable machines that have stood the test of time. I can't help liking them!
I agree that the Fed2 is the most handsome of the three Feds that were shown.
the fed 2 are underated!
the russians made some amazing cameras!
thanks for sharing this with us!
loved watching this!
Thank you, glad you enjoyed it!
Russians? never made NUTHING in the camera field, Ukrainians did sloppy imitations of 1930 German cameras. How retro is that?
@@hpg2u kokhol porvalsya azazazaza
Early fed 2 with a smaller advance nob and without self-timer looks prettier
I agree, have a roll of film in my "new" Fed 2 now. What a pleasure to use. Mine is the late version you mentioned w/o strap lugs.
Glad you're enjoying the Fed, thanks for watching!
I just bought my first Fed 2, paid $40.00 + $30.00 shipping from Russia and appreciate your excellent review, once my camera arrives I will be out first weekend to shoot some black and white film and one color for comparison.
Enjoy the Fed - a lovely little machine!
According to Russian Wikipedia, Your FED is the latest, 3-rd version of FED-2, produced 1958-1969 when GOST(gosudarstvenny standart-country standard, actually it was interpreted as "international standard" ) changed exposure timing from 1/25, 1/50, 1/100, 1/200 ,1/500 to 1/30, 1/60, 1/125, 1/250, 1/500 and B.Timing mechanism added. Also winder head in ver. 1and 2 are more Leica style, EDITING: Industar 61 in ver. 3 was also introdused ,among with Industar 26M.
Again,according to Russian Wikipedia :) there was a fourth version of FED-2 packed in Fed-3 body, marked ФЭД-2Л/FED-2L with a trigger style winder(1969-1970) , reduced size of rangefinder window, because exposure compensation mechanism was added.
I just meter for the shadows and light. Usually one to two stops difference, then I pocket the meter, unless the lighting in the day changes.
Thanks for an informative review. A few notes from an amateur who used FED2 for more than two decades. FED2 was my first and only camera for many years. My father bought it in 1957 with Industar-26M lens. Later, circa 1963, he replaced the old lens by Industar-61. I still have negatives from both of these and can compare the quality after I scanned them using a high-resolution scanner. The difference in quality is especially noticeable when a fine-grain film was used, such as Agfa Isopan F. Industar 26 is a lousy lens for anything other than portrait photography -- and why would anyone use 35-mm film for this anyways? Even according to the official specs, it had low resolution in the center field, but at the edge, it really sucked. I remember the number 14 lines/mm, but do not recall if it referred to the edge or center. On the other hand, I-61 is amazingly sharp. I did not know it back at the time, since my enlarger lens was of poor quality (Industar-50U), but with the scanner you can see minute details in the background. The reason for this difference in quality is reportedly that I-61 used rare-earth (Lanthanum) doped glass in one of the components, which allowed to increase the refractive index and thus use less lens curvature (Russian Wiki). That led to smaller amounts of aberrations. I also heard that, at least in some later modifications, I-61 used an aspherical lens. Another advantage of I-61 was more sophisticated optical coating. I would use I-61 again, but not I-26.
One more thing. In order to replace a lens in a range-finder camera (in the USSR), the procedure required a so-called "justirovka" (adjustment) that was done by a camera shop by adding or removing thin washers to the camera mount. You couldn't simply buy another lens, even of the same model, and screw it in and start shooting.
One more note. Regarding the strap. All cameras, including FED2, were sold in nice leather holsters with straps, but the real good feature of those was that you did not have to remove the camera when taking pictures. You simply opened the front of the holster, and the camera was still secure in it, supported by the strap. No need for a separate strap for the naked camera! I used it on many trips, in the mountains and on the water, did not have a single accident...
Interesting, I understood that after about 1945 all Russian cameras and lenses were made to the 28.8mm flange distance, so there shouldn't really be any need for adjustment. I could be wrong though!
The I 61 is a very nice lens - it's the one I learned photography with, and I still use it today!
@@zenography7923 Frankly, I don't know the details of this adjustment. As I see now, there are two conditions to be satisfied here: a) The infinity lens setting must yield a sharp image of remote objects; and b) for the rest of distance settings, the range finder must provide the sharpest image when it indicates alignment. The first condition can be met by ensuring the correct flange distance for this particular lens, and the second one by properly adjusting the arm of the range finder. Basically, two adjustments, one of the lens itself and the second one of the range finder.
And now I wonder how this thing worked when I added a second lens to the camera, with a different focal length (a Jupiter-9/85mm)?
This leaves only two possibilities: Either the lenses are accurate within design tolerances, and only the camera possibly needs an adjustment; or that the adjustment is done on each individual lens and not on the camera.
Why would one use the 35-mm film in a studio setting? The only reason, or so to speak, raison d'être, for the 35-mm camera, was its small size and its being light and handy. Great for outdoors and adventure, at the expense of providing only marginal quality due to the graininess of the film, especially in indoor settings. All professional portrait photographers used large- or medium film formats with great success. @@SS-jt9ex
I love the Fed's! Awesome engineering! Crackin cameras too :-)
They really are great little cameras, and very nicely made too. They lack the polish and finish of the Barnack Leicas, but not by much, and offer a very similar shooting experience. Thanks for tuning in!
A lovely discourse. Great to see you back inside the Zen studio after your recent travels 😀
Many thanks, glad you enjoyed it!
Nice review, the Leica IIIF was the first to be fitted with a flash facility and so was the IIIG, last Barnack Leica.
Thanks, glad you enjoyed it. I'd love to try a iiiG, but my goodness they're expensive! Ah well, maybe someday... Thanks for watching!
I'm fortunate enough to have quite a few Leicas but my IIIG is away having a CLA at the moment.
I own a FED2 and I am very very satisfied with it, for me its the best looking fed´s there is, and, one of the best looking cameras one can get.
The Fed 2 is a lovely little camera, no doubt about it!
I had a Leica lllg with flash synch, which I was told was the first one to be so equipped. I also had a poorly made Russian Leica but these Feds seem to be of much better quality. Informative video, thanks.
I always enjoy your videos. Last year I bought a FED4 and today I received a FED2. It seems in very good shape but the film spool is missing. I will just swap the spool between the 4 and 2 until I can get my hands on a second spool.
I just ordered one from Russia for 43 bucks. It has two Industar 26M and some Industar enlarger lens with it, plus a case. I'm so excited.
Thanks for watching, hope you're enjoying the Feds!
@@zenography7923 It turns out to be a fantastic camera. I had to set the spring tension on the shutter and it was a bit of a nightmare, but one of the Industars turned out to be a great lens and the camera itself is a joy to shoot with. Out of the Soviet LTM lenses, which one do you think is a good next step? I know you've said a lot about the Jupiter-2, but I also find the Industar 61 L/D appealing and it's usually a fair bit cheaper.
Great review!! What adapter did you use for the Industar 26mm for your Sony a7? Thank you!
Спасибо за эти обзоры, для меня они всегда небольшая утончённая вечеринка)
Again, a wonderful video. I do have two or three of these former Soviet Union machines. No Leica (yet). I will need to review my holdings to find out which FED I have before I search the net for a 2. I really enjoy seeing your photo samples. I learn a great deal by studying images taken by other photographers, particularly on film.
Many thanks, glad you're enjoying the videos!
This is a grate camera and I get this Fed 2 with Induster 26m 52mm f2.8 lens at $4 last sunday. Love it.
Four dollars? Wow, you did well! Hope you're enjoying the Fed, and thanks for watching!
Nice review.
I have both Fed 2 and Fed 4 and love them both
The Feds are nice machines, and always seemed to me a bit better finished than the Zorkis. Thanks for tuning in!
I had a Leica 111c.
I have a Zorki 4K now. I like it on the shelf for display as I mostly use 6x6 now. Seagull 4bi and a Kiev 6c with a 90mm 2.8 lens.
A nice big negative in the darkroom.
Waist level viewing is ideal for composing arty photos I find
Mmmm, medium format... Nice!
I have noted that loading my FED 2 with film.....that at least on my copy I tighten the key on the film cassette side first then the spool side... I noticed you do that too Nigel........
What would you suggest re light leaks on a FED 2....apart from using black pvc tape in the appropriate places pls...
What is knurled knob on top of film winder Nigel pls??
Zenography I want to buy a wide angle lens for my FED. Could you please tell me what are the choices available? I think I have heard about a Jupiter 12?.... There's any other options? Thanks in advance.
There are other vintage options from Leica, Reid, Canon, even Nikon, as well as some very recent lenses from Voigtlander. I guess it depends on budget - while these are likely to be expensive the Jupiter 12 is not, and has good optical quality too. Hope that helps!
All these "improvements" on Soviet cameras and optics are falling prey to poor precision and quality control. Being born in the USSR, I've used FEDs a lot when I was young and knew how inconsistent and unreliable those products were. After emigration to the West, I was using old Leicas for a while, and the difference in feel and performance is tremendous. It's like comparing Mercedes to Lada...
Great review and as a result I just won an ebay auction for the same Fed 2 example, fingers crossed its going to work as expected . I really like the look of these cameras and I love the idea of all mechanical cameras
Well done on bagging the Fed! These are lovely little machines, nice to use and nicely made too. Mechanical cameras are fascinating because they're so simple, and you have to know photography to use them; very different to the modern digital marvels which, although wonderful in their own way, can be over complicated. Many thanks for watching.
@@zenography7923 Thanks for the reply, unfortunately the FED that I bought turned out to be faulty so I sent it back, back to the hunt for a good copy. In your opinion which rangefinder from the soviet era is the closet in feel and use to a Leica IIIf
@@hayderassam Oh, that's a shame, still, plenty more cameras out there. As for which is closest to the IIIf, well, the Fed 1 and Zorki 1, being direct copies of the Leica II, are much the same in use and feel to the screwmount Leicas, although they don't have slow speeds, with the early Fed 1 being the best of these in terms of quality (in my experience). The early Zorki 4 from 57-59 is very nice indeed, a real quality machine, as is the Zorki 3 in all its guises, although the slow speed mechanism on the first Z3 often needs cleaning to maintain reliability. This is a simple enough job, as you'll see from my video on the subject. The Z3 is better looking, though more expensive, than Z4. Both Z3 and 4 have a big, bright, combined viewfinder/rangefinder, and I think one of these might be the camera you're looking for! Hope that helps.
@@zenography7923 Thank you very much for the helpful advice , I shall enjoy the search for a suitable Zorki as I really like the idea of a well crafted mechanical camera to use , much more fun that just point and shoot :)
Hey! Is it possible to take pictures during the night? Only with some urban lightings?
Yes, it's possible, but you'll need to use a very long shutter speed, so keep the camera on a tripod to stop blurring.
Great comparison.I have a nice Kiev 4 on its way but i am falling in love with the Fed 2 .Is this a later model than the one with collapsible Elmar type lens
Yes, I think it is. I suppose only zorkiy 1 and fed 1 got the collapsible one.
I've noticed that the FED 2 has one film guide rail, when usually there are two?
In general, there is just something about simplicity that I find very appealing, perhaps it's that the basic science involved is understandable and that these cameras are potentially repairable?
Enjoy your uploads Zenography!
Hi James, there are two guide rails on my camera, but there were many variations across the production cycle. Odd though, I would have thought that two rails were the minimum requirement... Simplicity is beautiful, and it's part of what makes these cameras appealing to me. And as Henry Ford said, what you don't fit don't go wrong!
By 'film guides' I don't mean the chrome/silver looking ones, but the outer guides which guide the edges of the film. Of course, there could be variations in production, I'll need to look out for that. Thanks Zenography!
great video! i was wondering what do you recommend, i want to buy a fed 1 or 2 but not sure which one should i buy?
I think the Fed 1's a bit more stylish, but it's a little more difficult to use with its separate windows for viewfinder and rangefinder, whereas in the Fed 2, they're combined. Other than that they're broadly similar. Oh, and the Fed 2 tends to be cheaper too!
I wonder what the viewfinder is like on a FED 2? I'm familiar with the Zorki 4 series- no frame lines, but I know that what I see is more-or-less what I get from my experience. Parallax is not really an issue, just make some framing shift towards 4 O'Clock for closer work. Thanks for the uploads.
Zorki viewfinders (except the Zorki 1) are bigger and brighter than the Feds, and the Fed 2 is no exception. It's quite small and not as bright, but the rangefinder patch is very clear. As for parallax, I just frame the shot a little higher if I'm close to the subject, when shooting Russian cameras or Barnack Leicas. Who needs framelines! Having said that though, I think the Fed 5c did have these, although they're only a rough guide, as I don't think they move to compensate for differences in camera to subject distance. Thanks for watching!
I will be looking for a good FED 2 after Christmas 2021 Nigel....
If it is a good all round one tidy clean. CLA'd with any luck...everything works okay good lens included.....
You would want the popular Cyrillic logo up front....
then this might seem fussy but maybe the old style shutter speeds with delayed action gear up front too....
Depends how the year of manufacture is important to match these requirements.... Very nice salute to the Leica ii but not exactly matching what was happening in 1955 onwards....
Comments please folks....
Thank you..
Great video - thanks. I really like your measured delivery and the level of technical info is just right for me as a relative newcomer to film photography (well, I used to use a Kodak Instamatic as a kid). I have a Fed 2 arriving soon and am very much looking forward to using it. I wonder if these old rangefinders are addicitive? I keep looking at the 3 and 4s too.... .
By the way, do you know of a decent place where I could get an old Fed 1 repaired? I have an issue with film jammed in shutter :(. Precisely the sort of thing I hope to avoid with the Fed 2 which has the advantage of the removable back, as you rightly point out!
Hi there, yes, they are addictive! I have far too many and have often thought of going into rehab, but the next thought is always 'just one more won't hurt'! As for Feds 3 and 4, the early 3 is quite a handsome beast, better than the later, squarer type in my opinion. The Fed 4, the camera I learned photography on, although its lines ain't the best, is still a favourite. The built in meter makes it very practical too. As for repair, it depends where you are of course. I usually repair my own cameras if I can (though I'm by no means an expert), and the lower body of your Fed comes off easily enough if you want to have a (careful) go. As long as the shutter isn't torn it should be a fairly easy job. Can't recommend a specific repairer, but a google search should yield results, and there's a good list of repairers here: www.35mmc.com/17/07/2016/specialist-film-camera-repair-modification-companies/
Thanks for watching!
@@zenography7923 Thanks - that's very helpful. I'll give it a careful try. I look forward to your next video :).
Very nice review. Well done.
Many thanks, glad you enjoyed it!
I have the FED4. I like however find it a bit chunky! I am now tempted to add the FED 2 in the bag! I have tried a few Zorki's but all came with problems so I stuck with the FED!
The Fed 4 is indeed a bit chunky, but it's a very capable camera and a very cheap way into rangefinder photography - it must be the cheapest of all the FSU rangefinders. I agree - the Feds usually feel that bit nicer than the Zorkis, although any Zorki made before about 1957 has a very nice quality feel, far more so than the later ones.
@@zenography7923 what do you think is a better option, a Zorki 5 or FED2? Both with collapsible lens.
I assume the collapsible are different. I think one is a 22 and the other is 10 model.
While the Fed 2 has a longer rangefinder base, it is debatable as to its having an advantage over the original Fed - or for that matter, the Barnack Leica. The incorporation of a rangefinder patch in the middle of the viewfinder image is of course significantly better than the "Leica shuffle", as long as you use the standard lens, but the rangefinder image has to be significantly reduced, compared to it being enlarged in a separate rangefinder mechanism, which could reduce accuracy. One of the frustrating things about these earlier cameras is that the viewfinder eyepiece can be really tiny, requiring the eye to be placed very close to it to see the entire viewfinder image, which was of course a headache for spectacle wearers. It seems that Barnack, Kuppenbender, etc, were quite young and with good eyesight when designing these cameras. On the other hand, I use Cosina-built Voigtländers nowadays, they play well with my bespectacled eyes.
I've never tried a Cosina Voigtlander, though I've heard very good things about them, some great lenses too. And you're right, Fed viewfinders are notoriously small and dark - bigger than the Barnack Leicas though! Thanks for watching.
@@zenography7923 That is why the M3 was such a revelation: Leica finally offered a viewfinder that was head and shoulder above others, with a large eyepiece diameter, built-in rangefinder image, and bright framelines brought up by the lens fitted. The Nikon SP viewfinder arguably as good, but that might be something that induced the rapid development of the single-lens reflex cameras afterwards.
the fed 2 is my favorite of my rangefinders (so far) and the best looking as well
I too like the Fed 2 very much; it's simple, clean and small with a very accurate rangefinder. I think, though, that my favourite Russian RF is the Zorki 3; I like it for its styling, and I like the separate slow speed dial on the early models, although I do have a soft spot for the not too good looking Fed 4 - it has a light meter built in, and it's the camera I learned photography on. Thanks for watching.
@@zenography7923 I do have a zorki 3c - it is a very good looking camera, resembles the Fed 4 quite a bit. The Fed 3 is a nice looking camera as well- I never got a Fed 4 because most all I have seen lack the camera strap lugs (I do like to strap them on and take them on outings)
@@johnwest7228 The 3c is a very nice machine, made before the Zorki line was cheapened and made less nicely. Enjoy!
Is the Fed 2 is the copy of the Propose model of the Leica IV that was presented in the 1930's? I have the Fed2 in Green Color.
This is intriguing, I haven't heard of the Leica IV, it sounds interesting. As far as I know the Fed 2 was an all Russian development of the original Leica design, though I may be wrong...
No, the Leica IV design I've seen was already heading vaguely in the direction of the Leica M. It looked like some of the 50's Canon rangefinders in a way.
The FED-2 looks great to me. Leica is a great thing to copy. Prices in these cameras have gone up quite a bit, does $80 US sounds reasonable with 50mm?
It's not bad, a little bit steep perhaps, you'd want one in spot-on condition for that price I think... I don't know what the supply is like in the US though, it may be there aren't that many around, so prices might be higher than in the UK?
I just got a refurbished one for €60 in Bulgaria. Sounds about right.
1. The FEDs were made in Ukraine not Russia. Calling it a Soviet camera is proper. 2. The first Industar-61s were all silver. They were quickly replaced by the silver and black which are the ones you show on the 3, 4s and 5s. This lens is commonly called the Panda. Finally the all black model was the last in the line. The FED-3s also came with the Industar-26 to save money. 3. All FED 3s, 4s and 5s came with the rapid advance handle.
Thanks for the info!
Seems to be quite a few variations between 1955 and 1970. In the FED 2
I acquired my Fed 2 around 20 years ago. At that time I was not familiar with Fed cameras, nor what to expect. It produces very nice photos using the Industar 26 lens and, except for removing the bottom of the camera for loading film rather than using a hinged door like in my other 35mm film cameras, its operation is largely conventional. I am not familiar with the Leica 2 and ask other viewers if the vintage Leicas require film to be loaded in a similar "remove the bottom" manner? Construction of old Japanese rangefinders (like from Canon and Minolta) seem just slightly more sophisticated looking and feeling. However, the Fed 2 remains a capable piece of photo equipment.
All the older Leicas are bottom loaders; as you've probably found, they're not too bad to load, with a little practice...
@@zenography7923 Thanks for your answer! I've never used a "bottom loader" other than my Fed 2. Knowing that about the old Leicas it is even more clear what the people at Fed were thinking in the design.
Does it come wth a charger?
If my Fed-3 had lugs it would be the perfect range finder camera.
A Fed case with the top removed to make a half case might be a solution?
@@zenography7923 I found swivel lugs that attach to the tripod mount. They work great. Highly recommend them. www.ebay.com/itm/Movo-NSA-1-Swivel-Tripod-Mount-Neck-Strap-Connector-for-DSLR-Cameras-Camcorders/382142098726?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&_trksid=p2060353.m2749.l2649
I received the earlier version of the FED 3 a couple of days ago, and it does have lugs. Think it’s better looking than the later version too. Odd that for quite a major change in design they kept the same version number.
does Feds have same issues as Zorki with shutter speed and losing tension ?
I would think all mechanical cameras would have this to a greater or lesser extent; much reduced though if the camera is never stored in the wound on position.
So i got a hold of my granpas old Fed 2 and some 20 year old film from my mothers fridge. Let's see if i can get any pictures out of them.
@Vishnu Arvind I sure can, i get my photos developed around next week. I'll come back to tell how they turn out.
My bet is that both will work fine!
My FED 2 keeps ripping my film after 7-10 frames have been shot. Any Advice please.
Possible faults could be: 1. Film not correctly tensioned/positioned before closing back
2. Resistance or drag in the winding mechanism placing too much load on the film.
3. Mis-alignment of the transport mechanism in the camera itself.
In my experience, 1. is the most likely, although without seeing your camera, it's difficult to say. Hope that helps!
@@zenography7923 From my observations with a used film after I posted it looks like the take-up spool is slipping every time I wind on. The sprockets advance the film which then just furls lazily round said spool, with no tension in it whatsoever.
@@TheGodsrighthandman I have a FED2 also and compared mine. Assuming the film is correctly threaded on the spool sleeve tooth, but is coming loose and piling up, maybe the spool is not turning on the spindle it rides on. The sprocket teeth and take-up spindle are geared to turn at the same time. The brass spindle is split to be spring loaded for tension. With no film loaded and the back off, I can hold the take up reel and the spindle turns underneath with some resistance. If your spindle freely turns with no resistance then I suspect the brass spindle springs or leaves might be bent in and not providing enough tension to turn the take up spool. If so, the film would coil up loosely instead of winding on the spool until it couldn't jam in more. That would create nowhere for the film to go and enough tension for the sprocket teeth to tear the film guide holes. Test if your spindle spins too easily or if it has enough tension to turn with the spindle it rides on.
@@francisco5434 That sounds plausible as it goes. I did try that and the take up reel offers no resistance at all. I did try bending out the leaves but then the reel jammed solid and I was loathe to take it further.
I also think the cogs either end of the sprocket drive are not quite in alignment - only by .75/1mm - with each other which, to my mind, will create an unequal pull and exacerbate the problem.
@@TheGodsrighthandman You might try a bit of gaffer's tape to take up some slack. Other than that, all I can offer is that I made a note at some time: Oleg at Vintage Camera. Try looking him up. Good luck.
I've been aware that I have to turn the rewind to help the film canister 'snap' in - makes for an easier film travel at the beginning ... at least I think so. ;o) Slow speeds of 1/15 and slower is rarely used by most photographers - it's no loss really. I quite fancy a FED 2.
It's always best to take up the slack, to make sure everything's engaged and in place. The Fed 2 is a lovely camera which has really impressed me; like you I don't find the lack of slow speeds a hindrance - if I'm shooting in low light I think a digital camera is a much better tool. Thanks for watching!
The FED 2 was the last pretty FED, I don’t like the tall cameras at all.
Hello from Russia, our camera f2 is very nice 💓💓💓📸📸📸💯💯💯
Agreed, the Fed 2 is very nice indeed!
I enjoyed this video.
great video, thanks
Glad you enjoyed it, thanks for tuning in again.
I inherited the same фед 2you showed in your video , exept the timer is broken (the lever is missing)
The Fed 2 is a very nice camera indeed! Hope you're enjoying yours.
Zenography thank you. Do you know how you can fix it ?
The animation was a bit of fun.
I am very pro the FED 2....I have 2 or 3 free exposure meters on my camera phone and these are very good....
The Fed 2 is one of the nicest of the Russian rangefinders, it's very stylish, has a long base rangefinder, and it's really cheap too!
The rangefinder patch on a Fed 1 & Zorki 1 is 100% better than a Barnack's.
my FED 3 has strap lugs but no film lever wind
It's hard to keep track of the seemingly infinite varieties of soviet cameras! Enjoy your Fed, and thanks for watching.
Wooo hoo! I love mine
I have a FED 5. The longer shutterspeeds are not to be trusted. And if you are wearing glasses, be aware of the wfinder.
Speeds on many mechanical cameras had fairly broad tolerances even when new, and there's probably a bit more required now!
That viewfinder ruined my glasses! Still thinking of a way to defang it.
I am watching this video, with my Green Skinned FED -2, but mine doesn't not have the self timer.
I think yours must be an earlier version - the self timer was added later. I do love the coloured versions of the Fed 2 - why didn't other manufacturers do the same?
Not all FED-2 have selftimers.
Thanks for the correction George!
I have noted that some FED 2 s have a place name and CCCP stamped on top plate near shutter button...
Since Ukraine don't like being called Russian...
CCCP used in Russia 1922 - 1991 on sputnik rockets and so forth from photos and videos... perhaps these ones really made in Russia
Since FED 2 only made from 1955-1971.....,cheers...
That's an interesting point - I've only had one Fed 2 so I'm not sure of the details with these - thanks for pointing it out!
I have a FED 2 without a self timer lol
No selfies for you then!
The FED 2 is not a copy of any Leica. The FED one is a copy of the Leica 2
Not a copy it's true, but certainly derived from the Leica design.