pico Posted November 23, 2015 Share #1 Posted November 23, 2015 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) Let's call this a hypothetical issue, lest I embarrass myself. ... Sorry my post was snipped. Will try later. Back! So let us look at an early, serial number correct black Leica M2 or M3 which has been repainted my Leica using their current technology enamel. You know, the deep black finish. We all know the original finish was weak, highly likely to wear away. So is a repainted original M3 or M2 too improved so that is devalued? (There are no pristine originals of these models.) Thanks in advance for forum wisdom. Edited November 23, 2015 by pico Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 23, 2015 Posted November 23, 2015 Hi pico, Take a look here Restoration by Leica reduces valuation?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Manoleica Posted November 24, 2015 Share #2 Posted November 24, 2015 The value of the restoration surely depends on what a perspective purchaser is prepared to pay.. For me as long as the camera is in good working condition I would not do a cosmetic restore...L Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
iphoenix Posted November 24, 2015 Share #3 Posted November 24, 2015 To me, if the repainted Leica is accompanied by the receipt from Leitz/Leica (the maker, not an agent or branch) proving the work done to that camera; I would put the camera's value between that of the unchanged body and that of the body plus the cost of the change. For clarity, if the body in its' original state is worth $1000 and the cost of repainting by Leica is $500; I'd say the value would be around $1250. Others more recently involved in camera sales may differ. Regards, David Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted November 24, 2015 Share #4 Posted November 24, 2015 I'd say that the above answer by David is valid, but for the two examples made by Pico the convenience of a repaint, even if done and certified by Leica, is anyway questionable : M3 and M2 in black paint are SO rare and valued that a "certified originality" (which Leica can assess) is much more important than a "certified repaint"... , I mean, an original item with worn paint imho is valued no less that an original item with a Leica repaint made today (things could be different in case of a documented factory repaint made 30/40 years ago) Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted November 24, 2015 Share #5 Posted November 24, 2015 Do Leica even offer 'repainting' services? If we are talking about a collectible Leica, a rare black paint model, I would expect that the value would be adversely affected by any restoration. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
willeica Posted November 24, 2015 Share #6 Posted November 24, 2015 The answer is one my late father often gave us as children and is 'it all depends'. In the collector market for rare Leicas, whether it is a black paint M3 or M2 or an early version of the 1 Model A, 'original condition' is the the 'holy grail'. Serious collectors will pay big money at auction for an item that is in 'original condition' which means that the camera has not been altered in any way, including repainting. For the Ms this can include rare models that are heavily 'brassed'. Some people even prefer an item in that condition. Any repainting or other alteration which in the user market would indicate a 'better' camera ( such as a 1 Model A upgraded to Standard or II in the various Leica upgrade programs in the 1930s) will actually reduce value in the collector market. In the collector market, which often means an auction, the 'correct price' is the price it will take to acquire the item. In general, alterations including painting, by Leica will not damage the value as much as alterations by others, whether professional or amateur. Good working order is also a criterion in the collector market but it is more important in the user market where acquirers often wish to avoid the cost of a CLA. In the user market, users will often wish to have a 'better looking camera' and, at that point, the criteria set out by David might become important. I would say, however, that it is not the cost of the inputs that count but what the item will fetch in the user market. Be wary about having a chrome M model painted in black or any other colour, if you think you might be selling the camera at a future stage, as the additional sale price you might get might be less than the cost of the painting. A look at ebay, dealers' sites and Collectiblend to determine the existing value of your camera in its unpainted condition would be a good start. Not a simple picture then. As my father said 'it all depends'. William Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted November 24, 2015 Share #7 Posted November 24, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) So is a repainted original M3 or M2 too improved so that is devalued? (There are no pristine originals of these models.) Thanks in advance for forum wisdom. There are some but the price are very high, after that, in between collectors, an original condition always have more value than a repainted one. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkCambridgeshire Posted November 24, 2015 Share #8 Posted November 24, 2015 Originality counts with collectable cameras especially if it has interesting provenance e.g. if a black enamelled M Leica the former property of a well known photojournalist was repainted and thus lost all of its wabi, then unlikely many serious collectors would want it - partly because of the potential difficulty in reselling. The wabi adds character and you need to handle such a camera to appreciate its beauty. Peter Grisaffi (CRR Luton) once showed me a well worn original black painted Leica M3 with plenty of brass showing which he had received for servicing - the camera's brass 'spoke' volumes as did its resultant tactility dunk 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted November 24, 2015 Author Share #9 Posted November 24, 2015 dunk: if a black enamelled M Leica the former property of a well known photojournalist was repainted and thus lost all of its wabi, A perfect use of wabi. Thank you, thank you. The consensus among all who responded is very helpful, and makes a lot of sense. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 24, 2015 Share #10 Posted November 24, 2015 pico, on 24 Nov 2015 - 15:37, said: A perfect use of wabi. Thank you, thank you. The consensus among all who responded is very helpful, and makes a lot of sense. Shouldn't it be sabi, then? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted November 24, 2015 Author Share #11 Posted November 24, 2015 (edited) Shouldn't it be sabi, then? You might be right. I'm so thoroughly Western and ignorant. For this M2, there is no wear, no patina, no evidence of human handling. The paint is correct in all details, for example the red dots on rewind knob and the red 35 on the film counter. Finally, the gloss is a tiny bit flatter than my 1968/9 black enamel M4, but certainly not as lusterless as the black chrome finish. I hope to find a period-correct 50mm for it to be like 1959, old times again. OMG! I'm becoming a collector? I'd better drop it or something soon. . Edited November 24, 2015 by pico Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted November 24, 2015 Share #12 Posted November 24, 2015 (edited) Anyway... has been THIS ONE (http://www.westlicht-auction.com/index.php?id=4&L=1 #64) repainted ? Has in case been repainted at Wetzlar ? Or has it NEVER been repainted ? The buyer has thought of the last, apparently... Edited November 24, 2015 by luigi bertolotti Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted November 24, 2015 Share #13 Posted November 24, 2015 it NEVER been repainted ? The buyer has thought of the last, apparently... For sure Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted November 24, 2015 Author Share #14 Posted November 24, 2015 Given how fragile the early black enamel was I doubt #64 is original, and mine probably is not either. I am not that lucky. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.