Jump to content

Fontenelle archives 50 : "Belgian" fakes : Elmar 9 cm and Hektor 13,5 cm


Pecole

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

When expanding my Fontenelle Collection in the late 1970s, I was told a curious story by a Brussels Leica dealer. His father, who had started the business, had had some problems in 1948-49 following the appearance on the Belgian market of Leitz lenses of unknown origin, readily available despite the very long delays - 3 to 5 months - imposed by Wetzlar. A rapid investigation confirmed that the lenses were sold from Antwerp, and at prices above the ones listed by the importer. Indeed, some professionals were prepared to pay a premium for immediate delivery. What was also soon discovered, was that the new owners were quite disappointed with the performances of their new toys, and the possibility to finally have a close look to the "things" revealed the truth : fakes. Very well made fakes.

I learned one more thing : these fakes were 9 cm Elmars and 13,5 cm Hektors. As from then, I started to look more closely at any of these common lenses offered in small ads, flea markets or second hand shops. And within a year or so, I had had the opportunity to find three of them : one Elmar 9 cm and two Hektors 13,5 cm.

The Elmar is about 7 to 8 mm longer than its genuine counterpart, the focusing mount being longer and displaying thinner knurling. Like the fake Hektor, it is black painted, what makes sense when one knows how difficult, costly and scarce was the chromium process immediately after the war.

The fake Hektor 13,5 cm has more specific characteristics .The lens head does not unscrew, but the front lens unscrews to give direct access to the iris Further, the diaphragm actuating ring is what larger, and lower located. More visible, the cam actuating the camera's rangefinder coupling is simply an extension of the internal tube, against the individual, screwed to the lens barrel piece of the genuine Leitz lens. As a consequence, the six apparent screws of the original lens' barrel are lacking on the fake. Other highly visible differences, the depth-of-field scale engravings and the fact that the focusing mount has three apparent fastening screws. And to finish with, the tripod bush is somewhat coarse.

Look now at the illustrations hereunder for details :

1 - The two "Antwerp" fakes, Hektor 13,5 and Elmar 9 cm

2 - Comparison between the fakes (at left) and the genuine Leitz lenses

3 - The 9cm Elmar nº 520000, at left, is the last of the 516001-520000 batch manufactured in Wetzlar in 1939. The remarkably good engraving of the fake nº 653265 at right, mimics a 1948 Leitz serial.

4 - The heads of the genuine (left) and the fake 9cm Elmar

5 - A close examination of the fake engraving (right) confirms its quality

6 - The focusing mount of the fake lens is what longer, ans its knurling is thinner than on the original

7 - The two fake Hektors 13,5 cm display very close serial numbering . 598134 and 598147

8 - The depth-of-field scale engraving of the fake 13,5 cm Hektor (at left) definitely differs from the genuine lens' one, and the lack of the cam' s fastening screws is well apparent

9 - The fake lens' rangefinder coupling cam (left) has nothing to do with the original piece manufactured by Leitz

10 - The tripod bushes show some differences, the original Leitz one being on the right.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

  • Like 13
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for posting this very interesting story : when we speak of fakes, it's always to refer to Russia or neighbors, but I suppose that those have a different origin... it would be nice to know the story behind them... it has been reported that in the complex, tragic, difficult days of WWII end, in the (almost undamaged) factory of Wetzlar there had been some steals of materials, and surely some people who moved from in "uncontrolled" ways... I wonder if those well done fakes can be put in relation with what happened in that period.

Edited by luigi bertolotti
Link to post
Share on other sites

Great work! See also this strange Hektor, really well made, also coupled, but with a lot of strange features (see pictures), another unknow fish ?

 

LEICA HEKTOR 13,5cm 135mm f/4.5 LENS hekror 135mm Lens su eBay.it Lenses, Lenses Filters, Cameras Photo

 

 

Cheers.

 

Many thanks, Sabears. Very interesting indeed. It does not look much strange, except for two points : 4 screws securing the rangefinder coupling cam instead of 6, and the triangle index of the depth-of-field scale which is totally different of what Leitz has ever engraved. But my guess is that it is a Wetzlar product (1939), probably "refreshed" at some stage by an independant technician.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for posting this very interesting story : when we speak of fakes, it's always to refer to Russia or neighbors, but I suppose that those have a different origin... it would be nice to know the story behind them... it has been reported that in the complex, tragic, difficult days of WWII end, in the (almost undamaged) factory of Wetzlar there had been some steals of materials, and surely some people who moved from in "uncontrolled" ways... I wonder if those well done fakes can be put in relation with what happened in that period.

 

Thanks for your comments, Luigi. No, this time, the basic material didn't come from a Wetzlar looter : it is completely different and clearly custom-made. As for the optics, I unfortunately failed to discover their origin, but it is certainly not Leitz.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many thanks, Sabears. Very interesting indeed. It does not look much strange, except for two points : 4 screws securing the rangefinder coupling cam instead of 6, and the triangle index of the depth-of-field scale which is totally different of what Leitz has ever engraved. But my guess is that it is a Wetzlar product (1939), probably "refreshed" at some stage by an independant technician.

 

the serial number 514270 is allocated to an Elmar 3.5/50. Usualy the s/n is engraved on the large band of the lens head like illustrated under

 

 

Hektor135-1934-vue.jpg

Edited by jc_braconi
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks for your comments, Luigi. No, this time, the basic material didn't come from a Wetzlar looter : it is completely different and clearly custom-made. As for the optics, I unfortunately failed to discover their origin, but it is certainly not Leitz.

 

I thought there could have been "something original" (some semi-machined parts, some tools, some engraving mask...:confused:.. items one can take away almost in his pockets...) looking at the fine look of the collar of the Hektor... is strange to see some so precisely copied details and, in the same item, some others really roughly copied (the dof scale, the "triangle" at its base)... is the kind of work one can expect from someone who happens to have some sparse, original parts in his hands, and builds around them a fake. As you say, the glass parts, from the posted pics, seems to have been made without any original reference, design or so... the front element of the Elmar 9cm has nothing to share with the original.

Edited by luigi bertolotti
Link to post
Share on other sites

the serial number 514270 is allocated to an Elmar 3.5/50. Usualy the s/n is engraved on the large band of the lens head like illustrated under

 

 

Hektor135-1934-vue.jpg

 

Re the engraving of serial number on the Hektor 13,5 cm : usually yes, it is engraved on the "large band", but not always. Serials of the first model are engraved on the top band, and also the ones of the 5xxxxx batch (576161 as illustrated by Lager, for example).

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

I am finding this post very interesting as I have recently purchased a 1946 IIIc stepper that came with a 135mm Hector. The serial number is 745679 which should put at 1949 but it has the older design. According to the information supplied here it is one of the fakes. As stated the lens head does not unscrew but the front element does. The rangefinder coupling cam is a one piece as shown on the fake not screwed down to the housing like the genuine Leitz.

 

10711081575_2c70c94db5_z.jpg

 

10711156154_59ced95e4e_z.jpg

 

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7362/10711353963_b20312974b_z.jpg

 

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3784/10711364793_c6c4f7e1e9_z.jpg

 

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2831/10711339123_aa383d5437_z.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am finding this post very interesting as I have recently purchased a 1946 IIIc stepper that came with a 135mm Hector. The serial number is 745679 which should put at 1949 but it has the older design. According to the information supplied here it is one of the fakes. As stated the lens head does not unscrew but the front element does. The rangefinder coupling cam is a one piece as shown on the fake not screwed down to the housing like the genuine Leitz.

 

10711081575_2c70c94db5_z.jpg

 

10711156154_59ced95e4e_z.jpg

 

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7362/10711353963_b20312974b_z.jpg

 

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3784/10711364793_c6c4f7e1e9_z.jpg

 

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2831/10711339123_aa383d5437_z.jpg

 

Interesting ! as far as I can remember - now aged nearly 80, I parted from my collection some years ago - my "Belgian" 135's heads did not unscrew either, and the one piece-coupling cam is definitely the visible identifying piece. Happy you found interest in my piece of information. Leically yours.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting ! as far as I can remember - now aged nearly 80, I parted from my collection some years ago - my "Belgian" 135's heads did not unscrew either, and the one piece-coupling cam is definitely the visible identifying piece. Happy you found interest in my piece of information. Leically yours.

 

Hello! It is always a pleasure to hear news from you...:)

 

All the best!

 

P.S.: I think I will contact you

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is possible that these lenses were made by Kenko in Japan.

 

The attached advertisement is from the Japanese magazine "Camera". It is issue #11 from 1949. (A few issues of this magazine are in the US Library of Congress Asian reading room.) The ad shows a PLOOT reflex housing clone, called a Refbox, available for Leica and Contax. The lens is somewhat like a 200mm f4.5 Telyt. The ad says to send your lenses to Kenko to have them modified for use on the Refbox.

 

I have three Refbox reflex housings, but not the lens shown. The lens I have is a 13.5cm f4.5 head in a mount that looks like a ZOOAN. It resembles Leitz in all its machining details. The lens head is actually from Carl Zeiss with a 1930 serial number. The focusing mount is clearly marked as made by Kenko. The machining on all this equipment is in every way equivalent to Leitz.

 

I am out of town. When I get back in a few days, I will post some pictures of the lens head, focusing mount, and reflex housing.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Attached are pictures of the Carl Zeiss Jena lens head and the Kenko Japan focusing mount. The Kenko mount could have been made as early as 1949. The machining matches Leitz practice and is every bit as well made.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is possible that these lenses were made by Kenko in Japan.

 

The attached advertisement is from the Japanese magazine "Camera". It is issue #11 from 1949. (A few issues of this magazine are in the US Library of Congress Asian reading room.) The ad shows a PLOOT reflex housing clone, called a Refbox, available for Leica and Contax. The lens is somewhat like a 200mm f4.5 Telyt. The ad says to send your lenses to Kenko to have them modified for use on the Refbox.

 

I have three Refbox reflex housings, but not the lens shown. The lens I have is a 13.5cm f4.5 head in a mount that looks like a ZOOAN. It resembles Leitz in all its machining details. The lens head is actually from Carl Zeiss with a 1930 serial number. The focusing mount is clearly marked as made by Kenko. The machining on all this equipment is in every way equivalent to Leitz.

 

I am out of town. When I get back in a few days, I will post some pictures of the lens head, focusing mount, and reflex housing.

 

The answer to your question is definitely : no! the Elmar 90 and Hektor 135 copies were manufactured in Antwerp, Belgium.

Your information about the PLOOT-Refbox is extremely interesting and is totally new to me. It evidences the extension of the Leitz-Leica copies'world !

Interesting is the fact that the "golden era" of copies was mostly limited to the five years period following WW2, when Germany had no juridical - nor moral - mean to enforce its rights.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is my recollection that the Allis abrogated all Leitz patents after WWII. I assume all German patents were abrogated, not just Leitz. It may have been that patent records didn't survive the war and were unenforceable.

 

It was interesting to look at the Japanese camera magazine from 1949. Nikon was trying emphasize their camera model was in production by showing an ad with a table full of cameras.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...It may have been that patent records didn't survive the war and were unenforceable.

...

 

Oh, the patent records did survive the war, they are still available today, but as the saying goes, the winner takes it all (not that Japan was a winner in those days, but anyway).

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

...I assume a patent office in Berlin. By any chance are they on-line?

 

Well, the German Patent Office is in Munich since after WWII, and that is where you would find all the patent records. Most if not all of them should be available on-line, try using the German Patent Office's official website DPMA - Startseite (it also exits in English language).

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...

I happen to be brousing through the listings in this section and came upon this thread. I think that I have one of the fakes. A few months ago I went up on ebay and there was an orphan elmar 90 for sale and I bid, maybe feeling sorry for the orphan. My bid was $10 and next week I received notice that I had won. The reason I bid was also because it is exactly the same lens as the prewar elmar 90 with the earlier contental fstop scale. Did I also mention that the base was separated from the lens and needed three screws made and a few adjustments. I knew that my repair man here in Korea could fix anything!

 

When I received the lens I was pleased as the markings were very well done and focus smooth. When I compared it with the other Elmar 90s I had, I noticed that it was longer. That was strange because it indicated that the optic cell was different than the others and I never heard of this change in 1948, the date of mnanufacture related to the serial number. Then I read in the above thread the following "The Elmar is about 7 to 8 mm longer than its genuine counterpart, the focusing mount being longer and displaying thinner knurling." Hmmmmm....... Mine was identical to the fake, including the lenght, shown with one exception, the serial number of 653582. Now that is certainly close to the 653256 serial number of the fake!! I looks identical to the picture above of the fake. Also the machining is excellent but the strange thing is the depth of field scale on the barrel of the lens has no white paint and is very hard to see.

 

I wish to thank the Leica Forum as without this thread I would have never know why this lens was like no other Leitz Elmar 90!!

 

Do I like the lens now that I know that it is a fake? I like the lens even more as it is a product of the times when Leica lenses were very scarce in the contenent as Leitz was trying to build up their finances, and Germany too, by maximum export, mainly to the United States. Obviously the contential f stop scale was used as this fake was ment for the continent not export. Now I have to photograph with it and compare it to the other five real Leitz Elmar 90s and see if it is a inferior as others at the time clamed it to be!! When this is completed I will post the results. What do you bet that it has better optics than the Leitz product?

Edited by George Furst
punctuation
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just read your report, DannyBell, and am happy my "old" contribution was useful. One point intrigues me : you say "my Korean repairer HERE" : are you living in Korea, or your "Korean" is "imported"? And finally, I hope you will publish the results of your tests.

Leically yours.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...