lincoln_m Posted April 6, 2011 Share #1 Posted April 6, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) It had to be done! Leica's very first 35mm camera. 1914 Such a beauty. The closest to a working replica was actually the d-lux 3 MP digital compact. Ur-Leica - Camerapedia Leica D-Lux: Digital Photography Review But the Ur didn't have a viewfinder much like the X1 now. Anyone have pics of Ur-Leicas ? Real or replicas. Regards, Lincoln Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 6, 2011 Posted April 6, 2011 Hi lincoln_m, Take a look here I love Ur-Leica. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
wattsy Posted April 7, 2011 Share #2 Posted April 7, 2011 It had to be done! Leica's very first 35mm camera. 1914 Such a beauty Strange you think that. I've always thought these early Ur-Leica cameras look rather crude and not unlike something an old school plumber might have in his bag. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lincoln_m Posted April 7, 2011 Author Share #3 Posted April 7, 2011 When everyone was using 8x10 plate cameras with ground glass screens and dark cloths Leica came out with a fast pocketable camera that used movie film stock with multiple exposures. The Leica enabled personal photography for the public instead of needing to hire a photographer. You could take the camera with you and take the shots you wanted. Quite revolutionary for 1913-14. That is what I see when I look at the Ur-Leica, nowadays it is called disruptive technology. A camera the public can own and use as they want. A 2Kg digital SLR & F4 zoom lens costing £6K just doesn't excite me unless I was a jobbing photographer. They are too heavy bulky and expensive for travelling or walking in the hills. So the tech, the idea, and the compact design make it a beauty. I suppose it is strictly a concept camera if only 3 were made (maybe like the M9 titan !) but the Leica changed everything in photography for the masses making cameras and photography open to many more people. i hope others can see this beauty. Regards, Lincoln Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidStone Posted April 8, 2011 Share #4 Posted April 8, 2011 When everyone was using 8x10 plate cameras with ground glass screens and dark cloths Leica came out with a fast pocketable camera that used movie film stock with multiple exposures. The Leica enabled personal photography for the public instead of needing to hire a photographer. You could take the camera with you and take the shots you wanted. Quite revolutionary for 1913-14. Regards, Lincoln While not wanting to diminish the achievement of Leitz, this is of course historically inaccurate. Small pocketable cameras were in common use by the time the first Leica went on sale in the early 1920s. The first Kodak appeared in 1888, the Vest Pocket Kodak in 1912. The first Leica did not suddenly replace 10x8 inch glass plates. But it did offer a high-quality, although expensive, alternative to the portable cameras that were then popular. David Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NZDavid Posted April 8, 2011 Share #5 Posted April 8, 2011 I think the achievement of the very first Leica wasn't so much photography for the masses (Kodak had already done that) as a quality compact system for the discerning photographer, and the invention -- or widespread adoption -- of photojournalism as a communications tool. Then, as now, quality mattered. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted April 8, 2011 Share #6 Posted April 8, 2011 Leica weren't the first to think of using 35mm film for still images either. But they did invent the 'full frame' format which became the standard. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest nafpie Posted April 8, 2011 Share #7 Posted April 8, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) But they did invent the 'full frame' format which became the standard. Yes. And even in the age of digital photography its still THE standard. Stefan Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted April 8, 2011 Share #8 Posted April 8, 2011 (edited) I think the achievement of the very first Leica wasn't so much photography for the masses (Kodak had already done that) as a quality compact system for the discerning photographer, and the invention -- or widespread adoption -- of photojournalism as a communications tool. Then, as now, quality mattered. Quality is a bell-curve thing in public media. Look to the cell-phone camera and iPhotojournalism in so-called online journalism. The public lives on the top of the curve where the market harvests. Newspaper photographers were still fighting 'that miniature toy camera' up to the sixties. So many preferred things like the Rollei, Omega (fast advancing RF MF), and some still used the venerable 4x5 rangefinder. When I think of old arguments on this forum, I only have to recall that thirty-year war, and having been berated by these chaps for using an inferior Leica or Nikon that required *gasp* enlarging to produce a an image readable at arm's length. (Ech - like post-processing, eh?) Edited April 8, 2011 by pico 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xmas Posted April 8, 2011 Share #9 Posted April 8, 2011 Hi The U photo I saw shows an enormous open frame finder clipped into shoe. The O and O replica smaller more discrete frame and post... The O replcas make interesting shooters. Noel Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xmas Posted April 8, 2011 Share #10 Posted April 8, 2011 I think the achievement of the very first Leica wasn't so much photography for the masses (Kodak had already done that) as a quality compact system for the discerning photographer, and the invention -- or widespread adoption -- of photojournalism as a communications tool. Then, as now, quality mattered. The PJ went to 35mm for immediacy, not quality the Ilford HP2 that L Vining used during WWII did not provide quality and the screen printing of the WWII papers did not need it. Picture post might have shown grain on a spread... Digital is burying 35mm, because it is even more immediate. Eugene Smith used to pawn his kit between jobs, M Angelo's brushes were just pig hair. Noel The reason 24x36 is the standard is that Kodak would only mount that, e.g. Nikons other attempts died a death. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomasis7 Posted April 8, 2011 Share #11 Posted April 8, 2011 (edited) I would love own an O repllica anybody knows where to find such camera at around 700€/1000$ or slightly above? in ebay some sell for 2000$ from HK it was sad that i missed 1000$ price from popflash.com .. darn Edited April 8, 2011 by tomasis7 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lincoln_m Posted April 8, 2011 Author Share #12 Posted April 8, 2011 More pics of Ur-Leica that I love, as nobody else is playing ball, but preferring to down play Leitz's achievements. Perhaps I should have posted this on the Historical & Collectors part for a warmer welcome for the Ur-Leica? File:Ur Leica.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Now for the earlier Kodak brownie, you guys were rating over No 3A Folding Brownie Model A | Flickr - Photo Sharing! And Kodak's improvements after 22 years, the box brownie in the 1930's Kodak Beau Brownie No 2A | Flickr - Photo Sharing! Leica 1932 now File:EL Standard.JPG - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia I hope you can see the vast improvements in the usability of the Ur-Leica when compared with the Kodak of 5 years earlier and current (1913-15). The Kodak looks like a slightly shrunk field camera. The Leica is all new tech. It is good that Kodak stayed with film ( their competence ) to be put in Leicas then and now (M9 sensor) Look at this gorgeous replica. All you need is a 50mm viewfinder in the accessory shoe and you can hardly tell the difference from the Leica Standard or even the III, so Leitz was way ahead in conceptual design, that's my hypothesis and why I love Ur-Leica File:Ur-Leica IMG 0259.JPG - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia OK the original big viewfinder was not so good but Leica made up for it over the years with high quality lenses. I think they are trying to do this again with the S2 medium format quality in a 35mm DSLR body. The S2 lenses are higher res than Hassy lenses according to their spec sheets. Compact quality for both body and lenses. That is why I became a Leica user/owner. Lincoln Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted April 9, 2011 Share #13 Posted April 9, 2011 as nobody else is playing ball, but preferring to down play Leitz's achievements. Perhaps I should have posted this on the Historical & Collectors part for a warmer welcome for the Ur-Leica? I don't think anybody is "preferring to play down Leitz's achievements". The Leica enabled personal photography for the public instead of needing to hire a photographer. I think this is simply factually incorrect. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted April 9, 2011 Share #14 Posted April 9, 2011 I would love own an O repllica anybody knows where to find such camera at around 700€/1000$ or slightly above? in ebay some sell for 2000$ from HK The 0-series replica* is indeed a lovely thing. I didn't realise they were hard to obtain nowadays - I'm sure I've seen one or two for sale recently at around the £650 mark. *I'm not sure describing it as a replica does the camera full justice. Being manufactured to the same specification (even slightly improved if you consider the lens) by the same company that created the original version, I prefer to view the 0 more as a limited production run re-issue of an old camera model. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted April 9, 2011 Share #15 Posted April 9, 2011 Look at this gorgeous replica. All you need is a 50mm viewfinder in the accessory shoe and you can hardly tell the difference from the Leica Standard or even the III, so Leitz was way ahead in conceptual design, that's my hypothesis and why I love Ur-Leica A well known UK dealer currently has two of the Leica-made Ur-Leica replica dummy cameras available for £450. Might make a nice paperweight? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ron (Netherlands) Posted April 9, 2011 Share #16 Posted April 9, 2011 (edited) It had to be done! Leica's very first 35mm camera. 1914 Such a beauty. The closest to a working replica was actually the d-lux 3 MP digital compact.Ur-Leica - Camerapedia Leica D-Lux: Digital Photography Review But the Ur didn't have a viewfinder much like the X1 now. Anyone have pics of Ur-Leicas ? Real or replicas. Regards, Lincoln must disagree: a D-Lux doesn't resemble the Ur-Leica at all. Further contrary to your statement: Leica didn't make camera's for a mass public as Kodak did, Leica's f.i. were not ´easy´ to handle at all and price-wise: a big public couldn't afford these technical cameras. What puzzles me is why your are making these statements? Btw the replicas (dummies) are not working cameras, and therefore indeed like wattsy says: a nice paperweight. Edited April 9, 2011 by Ron (Netherlands) Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomasis7 Posted April 9, 2011 Share #17 Posted April 9, 2011 The 0-series replica* is indeed a lovely thing. I didn't realise they were hard to obtain nowadays - I'm sure I've seen one or two for sale recently at around the £650 mark. *I'm not sure describing it as a replica does the camera full justice. Being manufactured to the same specification (even slightly improved if you consider the lens) by the same company that created the original version, I prefer to view the 0 more as a limited production run re-issue of an old camera model. I agree about "replica" description. I still think about the new O as original where have you seen them two for the price? Ironically, I will need prepare sell digital camera (rd1) to be replaced by "ancient" haha Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ambro51 Posted March 16, 2018 Share #18 Posted March 16, 2018 To ressurect an ancient thread....when the UR Leica “Dummy”,built by Leitz is skillfully modified and reworked using Leica internals (and carefully handmade parts by an expert, and uses a Leitz 42 mikro-Summar lens.....and can take excellent photographs....Does it “then” become a “real” Leica in every sense of the word. If we were to ask Oskar Himself.....What would HE say? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
willeica Posted March 16, 2018 Share #19 Posted March 16, 2018 To ressurect an ancient thread....when the UR Leica “Dummy”,built by Leitz is skillfully modified and reworked using Leica internals (and carefully handmade parts by an expert, and uses a Leitz 42 mikro-Summar lens.....and can take excellent photographs....Does it “then” become a “real” Leica in every sense of the word. If we were to ask Oskar Himself.....What would HE say? This is very straightforward. The camera is a replica of a Leica made over a 100 years ago. If the replica was made by Leica, then it is a Leica, whether it is a dummy or working category. If it was made by another company then it is a Leica copy, which is a well known collecting category. Interestingly, Westlicht Auction, which is controlled by Leica, puts Ur and 0 Series replicas made by any manufacturer into the same category as LTM Leicas in its catalogue, while maintaining a separate catalogue group for Leica copies. For clarity, though, the Ur or 0 Series replicas should always be referred to as replicas given the vast difference in value, availability, history and provenance between them and the real thing. All true Leica collectors would see the common sense and logic in that. William Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted March 16, 2018 Share #20 Posted March 16, 2018 To ressurect an ancient thread....when the UR Leica “Dummy”,built by Leitz is skillfully modified and reworked using Leica internals (and carefully handmade parts by an expert, and uses a Leitz 42 mikro-Summar lens.....and can take excellent photographs....Does it “then” become a “real” Leica in every sense of the word. If we were to ask Oskar Himself.....What would HE say? My gut feeling is that it doesn’t become a “‘real’ Leica“. Partly because the conversion, however skilfully carried out, is being done by a third party and partly because of the original intent of the dummy UR. Not that either matters. 1 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.