Question about OLD Leica gear

[WillP]

My grandpa bought two Leicas waaaaaaaaaaay back in the day, he paid $150 for the M3 back about 50 or 60 years ago.

Took some pictures when I was there on Saturday, he had two bodies, two lenses, a weird looking flash, a few filters, a range finder, and a few adapter rings. Unfortunately one of the cameras has a broken wind spring, but the other one still works.

One of the lenses looks to be a 50mm f/1.5, and the other is a 90mm f/4.

Can someone tell me more about these? Maybe where he could get them fixed and a little history behind them? Here's a link to the pictures, excuse the blurriness, I was using available light with my canon 5D and 1600 iso..

Leica Photo Gallery by Will Patterson at pbase.com

We both thank you very much!

[ChadHahn]

You have a Leica M3 and a IIIf. Both are worth fixing and are popular cameras. It looks like you have the IMARECT (sp?) finder which isn't the most popular finder but still nice to have for the IIIf. The flash is only really good to complete the collection and isn't worth too much.

The Summarit is a pretty popular lens. I had one with my first M3 and didn't like it because it had no contrast. I seem to be in the minority in my opinion. The Elmar 90 is screw mount to fit on the IIIf with the finder. You can get an adapter to use the lens on the M3. I don't have much experience with this lens, but I think it's pretty good. I can't tell if the glass is foggy on you lenses or just dirty.

The box the M3 is in is probably worth a bit of money. In fact any boxes you have you should keep.

I'm not sure who to send it to. Some one will probably chime in but Sherry Krauter and DAG are both highly thought of.

Keep 'em alive

Chad

[wildlightphoto]

I'm not sure the thread-mount camera is a IIIf. Shouldn't the f have a flash sync control under the SS dial? According to Stephen Gandy's serial number list at http://cameraquest.com/ltmnum.htm this was originally built in 1936 as a IIIa.

[giordano]

Originally Posted by wildlightphoto

I'm not sure the thread-mount camera is a IIIf. Shouldn't the f have a flash sync control under the SS dial? According to Stephen Gandy's serial number list at Leica Screw Mount Serial #'s Sorted by Number this was originally built in 1936 as a IIIa.

It looks like a IIIa to me (1/1000 shutter speed should rule out III, and the separate viewfinder and rangefinder eyepieces rule out IIIb, c and f). And the M3 looks like an early one (long strap lugs, no frame preview lever and probably a wind lever that requires two short strokes).

[WillP]

Thanks for all the info everybody! I'm going to let my grandpa know, and I'll also tell her where he can send them to have them worked on. He apparently was going to send it into Leica in Germany but he didn't want to send it overseas. I know he wants to start using them again. Keep the input coming!

[luigi bertolotti]

Giordano is right, the older is a IIIa: is rather a common item, that can work very well and is the last of the "old screw mount bodies" (not die cast structure, but folded sheet metal).
The M3 is much more interesting for is a very early item of the FIRST production batch dated 1954, with all the details that this means (shutter with "old" scale, red slot in the rewind knob, no frame selector... and surely double-stroke arm lever and glass film pressure plate) : it is a piece of significant interest for collectors as all the 70x.xxx numbered items; its box is also a very valuable add-on: btw, camera+box could fetch a good amount of $ (surely >1K) if you wish to sell it.

Two details looking at your pics... the M3 shows the screw-to-bayonet adapter quoted by Chad (correctly, it's for a 90 mm lens, as you have one); also, in all the pics the M3 seems to HAVE NOT its baseplate... I hope it is somewhere... camera cannot work without, the replacement can be found, but it's a pity if it would be missing.

The Summarit 50 1,5 (at the time, a prestigious lens) seems to have glass someway hazy, in the pic you posted: this isn't strange for this lens, which is of delicate glass; inspect it carefully: if it is really "dirty" but not badly scratched, there are labs that can repolish it : can worth the cost for if clean it's still an enjoyable lens (I have one, very clean, and use it sometimes even on my digital M8...). The Elmar 90 f4 is a very common lens (it had lot of variants, but almost all are rather common on the marketplace) : respect to Summarit, if its glass is hazed/dirty/scratched, doesn't worth a repolishing : easy to verify well, for the optic (a very compact 4 element group) can be unscrewed from the focusing tube: try to do it, even if at first can seem hard to unscrew: it was a standard facility to mount the lens unit on macro/reflex devices (the Visoflexes) so there is no problem to unscrew-screw on again it.

And keep in mind : it's all LOVELY gear !!!

[WillP]

Yea, the M3 is the one with the broken arm lever, and that's what he wanted to get fixed. Very interesting that it is such a special version!

[cbretteville]

Beautiful! The 90mm is from 1952 and the 50mm from 1953.

- C

[WillP]

Originally Posted by luigi bertolotti

Giordano is right, the older is a IIIa: is rather a common item, that can work very well and is the last of the "old screw mount bodies" (not die cast structure, but folded sheet metal).
The M3 is much more interesting for is a very early item of the FIRST production batch dated 1954, with all the details that this means (shutter with "old" scale, red slot in the rewind knob, no frame selector... and surely double-stroke arm lever and glass film pressure plate) : it is a piece of significant interest for collectors as all the 70x.xxx numbered items; its box is also a very valuable add-on: btw, camera+box could fetch a good amount of $ (surely >1K) if you wish to sell it.

Two details looking at your pics... the M3 shows the screw-to-bayonet adapter quoted by Chad (correctly, it's for a 90 mm lens, as you have one); also, in all the pics the M3 seems to HAVE NOT its baseplate... I hope it is somewhere... camera cannot work without, the replacement can be found, but it's a pity if it would be missing.

The Summarit 50 1,5 (at the time, a prestigious lens) seems to have glass someway hazy, in the pic you posted: this isn't strange for this lens, which is of delicate glass; inspect it carefully: if it is really "dirty" but not badly scratched, there are labs that can repolish it : can worth the cost for if clean it's still an enjoyable lens (I have one, very clean, and use it sometimes even on my digital M8...). The Elmar 90 f4 is a very common lens (it had lot of variants, but almost all are rather common on the marketplace) : respect to Summarit, if its glass is hazed/dirty/scratched, doesn't worth a repolishing : easy to verify well, for the optic (a very compact 4 element group) can be unscrewed from the focusing tube: try to do it, even if at first can seem hard to unscrew: it was a standard facility to mount the lens unit on macro/reflex devices (the Visoflexes) so there is no problem to unscrew-screw on again it.

And keep in mind : it's all LOVELY gear !!!

Thanks for the extra information! And yes, sorry, the base plate is with the camera, it's just not in the picture, he had taken it off and was showing me bits of the insides. And yes, he had attached the screw-mount adapter to the front of it and had put on the 90mm to show me.

[Irishimage]

Originally Posted by WillP

Yea, the M3 is the one with the broken arm lever, and that's what he wanted to get fixed. Very interesting that it is such a special version!

Hi Will,

To replace the film wind on lever pressure spring is an easy fix and if thats all thats wrong with it then it shouldn't cost you too much to have it repaired.

I also have a very early version,in fact very close in number to your's 708xxx which i'm presently restoring ,it has as mentioned by Luigi, the double wind on lever,glass pressure plate,with B-1-2-5-10-25-50-100-250-500-1000 speed setting dial.

RF-VF on mine was very dim and out of alignment when i bought it,but now i have it as clear as crystal.

Body wise a little worn but mechanically its almost as good as new, so if your's has never been abused its more the likely a camera very much worth restoring, not only for it's value but as a wonderful user camera.

Best of luck with it.

Noel

[leitz_not_leica]

Has anyone else noticed that the aperture rings on the lenses are in the opposite direction?

[nealf]

No one has mentioned the flash. It is the standard Leica flash of the 1950's and is designed to use a variety of flash bulbs. With the adapter, which appears to be in place, it will use either the press #5 & #25 (depending or whether GE or Sylvania) or the #6 or #26 FP bulbs. Either type puts out an impressive amount of light and although no longer manufactured can still be found occasionally in older camera shops or flea markets. With the adapter removed the flash uses either #40 or #22 Edison based bulbs. #22 bulbs are about the size of a 100watt light bulb and it puts out an incredible amount of light and heat, ( I once singed off the eyebrows of a colliegue at a distance of about 5 feet with one). I believe that #22's are still made by one company in Ireland. The one fly in the ointment to using the flash may be the battery, it takes a 22.5 volt battery which I don't think is made any longer, but you might find one that is still good.

BTW the small light bulb that is in it is just to test the circuit.

[luigi bertolotti]

Originally Posted by leitz_not_leica

Has anyone else noticed that the aperture rings on the lenses are in the opposite direction?

...they seem standard to me... the Elmar 90 changed direction back and forth in the years... but the posted item is consistent with its age.

Summarit_50.jpg

90 "old"
Elmar_90_Black.jpg

90 "middle aged"
Elmar_90_A36.jpg

90 "young"
Elmar_90_E39.jpg

I'm very proud of my 7 Elmars 90, all different one from the other...

[Canfred]

I think all that was needed has been said, just one more comment not related but still here it is.
Those are quite amazing shots taken at ISO 1600 and a zoom lens as well.
Manfred

[luigi bertolotti]

Originally Posted by Canfred

I think all that was needed has been said, just one more comment not related but still here it is.
Those are quite amazing shots taken at ISO 1600 and a zoom lens as well.
Manfred

...ehm... don't let us go too much on these details... ... I like my M8 and admit that sometimes I prefer to IGNORE where some pics come from...

[Peter Enkel]

I have just purchased a Colapsable Leitz Elmar 50ml 2.8 ser. 2188xxx which I hope to use with my newly acqired M6.
I am not familiar with this type of lens or it's performance. Comments on the latter would be appreciated.
There is a black, recessed dot on the lens barrel. What is the purpose of this dot and am I correct in assuming that the lens is suited for use with the M6. I purchased the lens just prior to locating a Summicron-M 1:2/50 E30 ser: 3997xxx. How do these two lens types compare?
I suspect that I should I have waited longer?!!
Your help will be appreciated.
Peter.

[earleygallery]

Peter - might be better if you make a new thread for your question.

Is it the older version or the 'new' one? (which has just been discontinued). There are a couple of threads running on various Elmar lenses, but either is fine for your M6. The newer one will be sharper and more contrasty. I have one of the older versions and it is also a very fine lens, ever so slightly soft at 2.8 but stopped down to 5.6/8 its very sharp.

[Peter Enkel]

Originally Posted by earleygallery

Peter - might be better if you make a new thread for your question.

Is it the older version or the 'new' one? (which has just been discontinued). There are a couple of threads running on various Elmar lenses, but either is fine for your M6. The newer one will be sharper and more contrasty. I have one of the older versions and it is also a very fine lens, ever so slightly soft at 2.8 but stopped down to 5.6/8 its very sharp.

Thank you James. I searched for and located a more appropriate thread and found it to be very informative.
Best wishes, Peter