[Grytpype]

Thanks, both.

From what you say, vyshemirsky, I think it is unlikely I would be able to do a valid test in the way I suggested. I must admit I did think of binning the camera, but it would be very useful for parts, and in fact I'm even thinking it could be repairable. Amazingly the shutter seems quite clean and almost works! It cocks and releases, though the second curtain needs a little help to run. I'm a sucker for a lost cause, and in fact the previous Kiev I rebuilt was severely fungusy - but nothing like as bad as this one.

It is alleged that thymol kills spores, but as I said, there are many now who doubt its effectiveness, or even suggest it can encourage some types of mould. I always use vinegar for killing fungus on lenses, and on any other parts where I can wash it off easily, but of course problems arise when dealing with a complete camera, because you can't treat it until it is completely stripped.

Like you, Steve, I generally tend to the school of thought that says fungus spores are everywhere, and it is how you keep the gear that counts. I live in rather damp premises, so most of my kit is kept dehumidified at about RH 30 to 40%. Anything I buy with fungus I normally put in an airtight box dehumidified below 10% RH until I have time to deal with it, but Kievs and Contax are tricky because of that leather strip holding the curtains together, which would be irreversably weakened by excessive dryness - really anything below 50%.

It's an interesting thought that the fungus in the body is likely to be a different breed to the optical fungus in the viewfinder. I've often wondered if the fungus that attacks lenses is a specific type or types. Mainly thanks to eBay, I deal with fungus on a fairly regular basis - it's just the shear quantity that bothers me here, but if the body fungus is actually not a threat to optics, then the dismantling process would be no more dangerous than many others I've done.

Fixed that Agimatic yet, Steve?

Steve.