I've been seriously thinking of picking up one of those Russian K-3
cameras. At around $200 for a new camera kit its a hard price to
ignore plus being able to use Pentax lenses is a handy feature as I have
an old Pentax and have an old friend who has a pretty large Pentax lense
collection.
Yes I know the Bolex is a much better camera (apart from the
dark eyepiece). And the Bolex has the advantage of being pretty
easy to sell and holds its value. (I think that used K-3s sold on
ebay from the US only get around $75-100 or about half of what a
new k-3 gets).
My question is whether the K-3 lense provides a good image? Is the
48fps speed stable? And is the film scratching problem the camera is notorious for is fixable or overstated? Some posts say you just need to remove the autoload mechanism others say it needs a full shop service and polishing.
K-3 owners please share your experiences, thank you!
John
your opinion on the K-3 16mm camera
Moderator: Andreas Wideroe
Unfortunatly the two k3 I have had in my possession never got as far as exposing film.
I bought the package on ebay and the first ones winder didnt work. i was sent a new one and the lens rattled.
So at that point i realized why they cost as much as they do and got my money back.
I have heard good things but not enough. There claim to success is a always spike lee was seen with one on some movie set. but thats the only positve point Ive heard.
I bought the package on ebay and the first ones winder didnt work. i was sent a new one and the lens rattled.
So at that point i realized why they cost as much as they do and got my money back.
I have heard good things but not enough. There claim to success is a always spike lee was seen with one on some movie set. but thats the only positve point Ive heard.
Hi John.
K3 queries comes up frequently. Please use the forum search feature!
The stock K3 lens can deliver some great images although it is prone to flare. Using a lens hood and filters can help. A 100% fully working K3 is a joy. If you take the plunge you should consider picking one up cheap on eBay, shooting test footage and then taking it from there. If film is scratch free you're a lucky man!
48fps? I shot a lot of footage at ~24fps and ~36fps and it was rock solid. Can't vouch for the accuracy of the motor but this applies to any spring driven camera.
-----
Yemi
K3 queries comes up frequently. Please use the forum search feature!
The stock K3 lens can deliver some great images although it is prone to flare. Using a lens hood and filters can help. A 100% fully working K3 is a joy. If you take the plunge you should consider picking one up cheap on eBay, shooting test footage and then taking it from there. If film is scratch free you're a lucky man!
48fps? I shot a lot of footage at ~24fps and ~36fps and it was rock solid. Can't vouch for the accuracy of the motor but this applies to any spring driven camera.
-----
Yemi
Mine works just fine. I've had no problems with it exept from threading film in the beginning. I can't figure out how to do it manually. It's just impossible. No scratches or anything though. But I guess it's like everyone says. Some get junk and some get a rock solid work horse. You just have to buy one and pray. I wouldn't spend any more than $150-200 on it though. Then I'd get the bolex instead. But then i would want the motor from NCS products, and if I'm spending that much I might as well save up some more and get the ikonoskop. :?
I am the proud owner of a K3 and I would like to say that I have not regretted my decision to purchase this camera. Then again, I have only put two films through it - both of these films however, came out perfectly exposed, scratch free and rock solid steady. No complaints here. So far, I have only exposed the camera at 24 fps. The included lens is a good quality one that should satisfy the general user. I wouldn't call it outstanding but it's very good. I don't know about this issue with flare - I have used this camera and lens out in the snow and I didnt have any problems with flare. Even if you are not entirely satisfied with the main lens, you can always use a Pentax or a Zeiss lens instead and enjoy some of the best optics in existence. Plus that Peleng 8mm wide lens is a reputable lens too from what I have heard.
Back to the problem of scratching and jamming, I have heard that when these cameras were made at the factory, not all of them were calibrated. I have also heard from another source that the ones built later benefited from a greater standard of production than the earlier ones. I believe that you should look out for the ones that say the name 'Krasnogorsk' in English - this is an indication that it is one of the later ones. The earlier cameras had the name written in Russian. But please, I am only going on what a particular website claimed, so I cannot say that you should act soley on this advice. All I can say is that with my experiences, I was lucky to get hold of a K3 that works extremely well and I have not had any film scratching or jamming. Plus it's in mint condition too - just about brand new looking.
My advice about the built in lightmeter is not to use it. I tested it against the light meter in my Canon 35mm SLR and the results were inconsistent. The K3's light meter was a little bit erratic at best. So I use my Canon's light meter and I have always got accurate exposures that way.
Overall, the K3 is a very solidly built, robust camera with a bright, user-friendly viewfinder, large versatile range of running speeds and thanks to the M42 lens mount, a huge selection of complimentary lenses. Though I must say that buying off Ebay is a little bit risky as this will not enable you to test the camera (run a spare film through it) prior to purchasing. However, the fact that they are so inexpensive anyway may not matter as much in that regard. Remember, there are good K3s out there and there are bad K3s. All you have to do is pick up a good one.
I leave the final decision to you.
Back to the problem of scratching and jamming, I have heard that when these cameras were made at the factory, not all of them were calibrated. I have also heard from another source that the ones built later benefited from a greater standard of production than the earlier ones. I believe that you should look out for the ones that say the name 'Krasnogorsk' in English - this is an indication that it is one of the later ones. The earlier cameras had the name written in Russian. But please, I am only going on what a particular website claimed, so I cannot say that you should act soley on this advice. All I can say is that with my experiences, I was lucky to get hold of a K3 that works extremely well and I have not had any film scratching or jamming. Plus it's in mint condition too - just about brand new looking.
My advice about the built in lightmeter is not to use it. I tested it against the light meter in my Canon 35mm SLR and the results were inconsistent. The K3's light meter was a little bit erratic at best. So I use my Canon's light meter and I have always got accurate exposures that way.
Overall, the K3 is a very solidly built, robust camera with a bright, user-friendly viewfinder, large versatile range of running speeds and thanks to the M42 lens mount, a huge selection of complimentary lenses. Though I must say that buying off Ebay is a little bit risky as this will not enable you to test the camera (run a spare film through it) prior to purchasing. However, the fact that they are so inexpensive anyway may not matter as much in that regard. Remember, there are good K3s out there and there are bad K3s. All you have to do is pick up a good one.
I leave the final decision to you.
....And the meter on my baby works flawlessly. I've got the Sekonic Super Zoom Master L-608 cine, wich cost 6 times what I paid for my K3, and I really don't need it unless I get the Ikonoskop one of these days. My K3 is also one of the old ones that says Krasnogorsk in Russian. I also have the 8mm Peleng lens, wich is a must(wide angle that is), but I haven't processed any of the film I've shot with it yet. I think the Peleng lenses are like the K3 too. Some are perfect and some are crap. Mine is kind of in between. The aparture ring is really wierd on these lenses. But if it gives me nice images, I'll be a happy little boy. We'll see.
-
Old Uncle Barry
- Posts: 645
- Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 11:23 am
- Location: Midlands,UK
- Contact:
Can only confirm what others have found,but in my case mine is excellent.Like its little brother the Quartz Super8,if you ignore the auto exposure meter and use a seperate meter,the results really are excellent.
It is a trifle cumbersome with its massive lens but with Pentax lenses it does of course become managable.
Go for it,results on K40 even with an 85b filter in place (expensive item that!) will stun you!
It is a trifle cumbersome with its massive lens but with Pentax lenses it does of course become managable.
Go for it,results on K40 even with an 85b filter in place (expensive item that!) will stun you!
-
Old Uncle Barry
- Posts: 645
- Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 11:23 am
- Location: Midlands,UK
- Contact:
Filmbuff:Just a wind up camera you say,well yes but so is the BolexH16 and look at the reputation that still has!
As for the K3,do not underestimate its capability.It will hold its own in many filmic situations.The Russian Space Agency still used them up until about five years ago then they discovered something called digital video.I have no idea what that is though............................!!!! :roll:
As for the K3,do not underestimate its capability.It will hold its own in many filmic situations.The Russian Space Agency still used them up until about five years ago then they discovered something called digital video.I have no idea what that is though............................!!!! :roll: