Last Barnack model?

[Guest JoanMarianne]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have read that purists and experts regard the IIIf Red-Dial model as the last of the true Barnack Leicas. I hope I am not committing Leica-blasphemy but I think the Black-Dial might be a more appropriate contender for the title; chiefly because it does not have the self-timer, which might be considered an incongruous addition to a design which had already achieved a jewel-like perfection. I may be wrong, of course and there may be Black-Dial models that do have a self-timer as well, but my point is that the B-D types without the self-timer look the most attractive.

 

I am new to the Forum, so excuse me if this has been aired earlier and, of course, if there are Red-Dial versions without a self-timer, in which case that might be regarded as the last Barnack?

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Xmas]

Hi Joan

 

I not worry about collectors overmuch,

 

- some people cannot abide the self timer mechanism under their pinkys

- I believe earlier cameras had self timers fitted at the factory

 

Don't worry the collectors will explain all the latter to a interested audience.

 

Noel

[Guest Ron (Netherlands)]

I have read that purists and experts regard the IIIf Red-Dial model as the last of the true Barnack Leicas. I hope I am not committing Leica-blasphemy but I think the Black-Dial might be a more appropriate contender for the title; chiefly because it does not have the self-timer, which might be considered an incongruous addition to a design which had already achieved a jewel-like perfection. I may be wrong, of course and there may be Black-Dial models that do have a self-timer as well, but my point is that the B-D types without the self-timer look the most attractive.

 

I am new to the Forum, so excuse me if this has been aired earlier and, of course, if there are Red-Dial versions without a self-timer, in which case that might be regarded as the last Barnack?

 

Indeed the IIIf RD came with and without a selftimer. For collectors however I suppose the BD is more attractive, since there were less produced than the RD. If you ask me I would suppose the IIIg was the last barnack.

[luigi bertolotti]

Well, strictly speaking, the last of the "Barnacks" could be the old IIIb (though introduced after Barnack's death in 1936) : IIIc and following, with their completely new die-cast body are a distinctive new design, in which probably Oskar Barnack was not involved. But is true that IIIf is the last Leica that strongly resembles original Barnack's design and dimensioning, so, being the RD with delayed mechanism its last evolution, it can logically be regarded as "the last Barnack".

The question of self timer is a bit complicated... also for the fact that it could be added later, but RDs were indeed issued initially without it (1953) and added as a standard the year after. Barnack probably never designed a Leica with selftimer (the first Leica with it was the IIId, its early serial numbers are even lower than the s/n of the first IIIc) so a IIIf RD without selftimer has undoubtly a fine "Barnack's feel"...

Personally, I think that the numbers in red add also a pleasant variation to the camera's look .... ... matter of taste, of course.

[luigi bertolotti]

Indeed the IIIf RD came with and without a selftimer. For collectors however I suppose the BD is more attractive, since there were less produced than the RD. If you ask me I would suppose the IIIg was the last barnack.[/quote]

 

Not a wrong opinion, I tend to agree... but I like more the look of IIIf...

[Guest Ron (Netherlands)]

Indeed the IIIf RD came with and without a selftimer. For collectors however I suppose the BD is more attractive, since there were less produced than the RD. If you ask me I would suppose the IIIg was the last barnack.[/quote]

 

Not a wrong opinion, I tend to agree... but I like more the look of IIIf...

 

I fully second that Luigi, I like the look of the IIIf more!

[Guest JoanMarianne]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just had another look at a IIIF BD; it is indeed a thing of beauty. I'm also looking at a 1939 IIIa, which is actually smaller than the IIIf...why did they have to get bigger?

[luigi bertolotti]

A little wider, indeed... it was a consequence of the new technology to build the inner structure, as I said in post #4: a casted body is inevitably thicker than bended steel, which was the original Barnack design for the inner structure that supports shutter, advance mechanism and body shells.