"Going retro with the Leica 0-Serie" OR "The Leica 0, Photos in 16 Easy Steps"

[robert_parker]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

....perhaps I do have a genuinely useful comment - my own experience is that with just a little practice, the camera does not operate significantly more slowly than most non-autofocus and unmetered cameras - they key points for me were to remember to cover the lens and to remember to wind on to the red dot and then pause,  to allow the setting of the shutter speed if necessary; another option is to wind to the red dot after an exposure, so that you are ready to set speed for the next one but that generally isn't too important.

The toughest part for me was and continues to be setting aperture quickly using big fingers, as the control lever is nearly flush with the lens surround (as with most Leica designs of the time and later, such as the 3,5 Elmar) however the VALOO adapter fits nicely on mine, so this becomes easy and allows me to use the FISON hood too, which doesn't do any harm.

In practice it's quick to understand the shutter speeds and that the aperture values are in 'old money' and convert, although the equation of 1mm = 1 ms explained above and earlier in the thread saves a lot of brain cells. 🧐👍

The skills which do seem to be heightened when using the camera are the judgement of distances, framing and exposure, plus an overarching consideration of what you want in / from a picture, which for me isn't that bad a thing.

Edited November 14, 2020 by robert_parker

[Susie]

3 hours ago, robert_parker said:

It certainly means someone had the clever idea of setting the shutter blind to move at 36metres per second...

Or 1ms to travel across the frame width of 36mm...

[Advertisement]

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

[Susie]

Thinking about this overnight (!) I think we are on the right track - but the 36m/s seems far too fast.  I think we should start by discarding the manual suggestion that the numbers equal the slit width which I am more and more convinced is a red herring.

The shutter sounds to have the same traveling speed as on the M series (which I accept as a slightly unsound start to a hypothesis, but read on). On the M models  the electronic flash sync speed is 1/50s (20ms). This is the fastest exposure at which the whole gate is totally open, i.e. before the second curtain starts to close before the first is fully open, effectively narrowing the slit. Therefore I suggest that a 1/50s shutter speed has to correspond to a slit width of 36mm which would give a curtain traveling speed of 1.8m/s.  If the sync speed was 1/60s the curtains would have to travel at 2.16m/s, so I think it safe to say the curtains could be traveling at about 1.5m/s.

Of course, if I am correct the all this proves is that the writer of the instructions thought that quoting the shutter speed in milliseconds was too obscure and decided to make something else up!

 

 

Edited November 15, 2020 by Susie

[robert_parker]

The test could be to measure the shutter curtain gap at a given setting - I suppose that is feasible and the fact the shutter isn't capped might help as it's just possible you'd get the correct measurement during rewind but the design of the camera makes this more difficult as we can't remove the lens or easily access the film plane - I wonder if Leica have some test bench figures from when the camera was produced... 📸🧐⏳

[robert_parker]

13 hours ago, Susie said:

Thinking about this overnight (!) I think we are on the right track - but the 36m/s seems far too fast.  I think we should start by discarding the manual suggestion that the numbers equal the slit width which I am more and more convinced is a red herring.

The shutter sounds to have the same traveling speed as on the M series (which I accept as a slightly unsound start to a hypothesis, but read on). On the M models  the electronic flash sync speed is 1/50s (20ms). This is the fastest exposure at which the whole gate is totally open, i.e. before the second curtain starts to close before the first is fully open, effectively narrowing the slit. Therefore I suggest that a 1/50s shutter speed has to correspond to a slit width of 36mm which would give a curtain traveling speed of 1.8m/s.  If the sync speed was 1/60s the curtains would have to travel at 2.16m/s, so I think it safe to say the curtains could be traveling at about 1.5m/s.

Of course, if I am correct the all this proves is that the writer of the instructions thought that quoting the shutter speed in milliseconds was too obscure and decided to make something else up!

I think you're right in saying that the figures don't look sound if the shutter function was defined by the curtain gap in mm - they indeed look very fast for the technology of the time.  Maybe if rather than using the Leica M shutter as a model for the hypothesis, we use the Leica 111f, which was the earliest camera to offer electronic flash synchronisation and shares design similarities to the 'O' Serie, then the Red Dial models synchronised electronic flash at 1/50s which is the same as the later M models; the earlier 111f Black Dial models synchronised electronic flash at 1/30s, which would indicate they had a running speed of 1,08 m/s which seems much more realistic if we take things back to 1914-17 - also the shutter is then running close to 1m/s, which has a certain logic to it if we dare consider the perspective of the designer.  

They key assumption in the hypothesis for those reading this is that the shutter must be fully open at 36mm to accommodate an electronic flash burst so that the synchronisation speed then allows us to calculate the speed of movement of the shutter curtain; I'd agree with you that this seems evident and is the limit we're looking for.  It's worth noting on the 111f models that the delay (which allows for bulb flash which has a longer duration and allows synchronisation of up to 1/1000s) is set to '0' when using electronic flash, so what you see is what you get in terms of timings. 

Edited November 15, 2020 by robert_parker

[robert_parker]

1 hour ago, robert_parker said:

I think you're right in saying that the figures don't look sound if the shutter function was defined by the curtain gap in mm - they indeed look very fast for the technology of the time.  Maybe if rather than using the Leica M shutter as a model for the hypothesis, we use the Leica 111f, which was the earliest camera to offer electronic flash synchronisation and shares design similarities to the 'O' Serie, then the Red Dial models synchronised electronic flash at 1/50s which is the same as the later M models; the earlier 111f Black Dial models synchronised electronic flash at 1/30s, which would indicate they had a running speed of 1,08 m/s which seems much more realistic if we take things back to 1914-17 - also the shutter is then running close to 1m/s, which has a certain logic to it if we dare consider the perspective of the designer.  

They key assumption in the hypothesis for those reading this is that the shutter must be fully open at 36mm to accommodate an electronic flash burst so that the synchronisation speed then allows us to calculate the speed of movement of the shutter curtain; I'd agree with you that this seems evident and is the limit we're looking for.  It's worth noting on the 111f models that the delay (which allows for bulb flash which has a longer duration and allows synchronisation of up to 1/1000s) is set to '0' when using electronic flash, so what you see is what you get in terms of timings. 

...also as Susie rightly says, a shutter curtain speed of between 1-2 m/s is realistic (1m/s is 3,6km/h which is about walking pace); if you follow what it says in the manual, the shutter curtain needs to be moving at about 36m/s, which is 129,6 km/h or close to 80 miles per hour, which for 1914-17 technology would be well fast... 📸💨😲

[Susie]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi Robert,

When I bought my first Leica in the 1980s (lllfRD) it came with a handbook and also the Leica Pocket Book.  In the latter, Kisselbach states that the Red Dial models (flash sync at 1/50s without a delay, lowest speed on dial is 1/25s with flash sync set at 20 with a delay) "have shutters with a faster traverse" than the Black Dial cameras (sync 1/30s).  As the 0 series does not have flash sync we cannot really do the same caluculations, but  the lowest speed is 1/20s (same as my Leica ll and lll) which would give the shutter running speed of 0.72m/s.This sounds an akward number to pluck out of the air when desiging the camera, until it is thought of from the other way round - traverse the gate in 50ms, a nice round number!

Susie

[robert_parker]

8 hours ago, Susie said:

Hi Robert,

When I bought my first Leica in the 1980s (lllfRD) it came with a handbook and also the Leica Pocket Book.  In the latter, Kisselbach states that the Red Dial models (flash sync at 1/50s without a delay, lowest speed on dial is 1/25s with flash sync set at 20 with a delay) "have shutters with a faster traverse" than the Black Dial cameras (sync 1/30s).  As the 0 series does not have flash sync we cannot really do the same caluculations, but  the lowest speed is 1/20s (same as my Leica ll and lll) which would give the shutter running speed of 0.72m/s.This sounds an akward number to pluck out of the air when desiging the camera, until it is thought of from the other way round - traverse the gate in 50ms, a nice round number!

Susie

I was talking to an engineer who is a member of this forum (who shall remain nameless as he's not on this thread but he wins a lot of competitions 😉) who reckoned that higher speeds could be credible with the technology of the time and that 18m/s would be the minimum necessary for the 'O' Serie manual to be correct (about 40mph); like you I think that the lower speeds are much more credible for the time and the concept of what is basically a speed dial being calibrated in ms makes much mores sense - I wonder who we can ask at Leica ... ??

[robert_parker]

I've reached out to see if we can get some info. 📬😉👍

[Susie]

I have had a look through Ulf Richter's book and have found a few references.  Apparently the original camera had a fixed slit width of 40mm, the exposure being varied by the tension of the spring, but this does give a starting point that looks hopeful (p 45 and p111).  On page 86 we see that the 1923 series had shutters which had a variable slit width and constant spring tension, and  "was also the basis of the replicas... of 2000..)  

And then I thought of looking in my copy of Leica World dealing with the 0 Series.  Here it states "The smallest slit width of 2 mm produces an exposure time of 1/500 second.  At the longest exposure time of 1/20 second the space.. is 50 mm.. wide"  If I am correct this gives a curtain speed of 1 m/s.

Oh dear, have we been chasing our tails, and is the correlation between slit width and exposure time in milliseconds a function of the curtain speed of 1 m/s?  Also this would tie in with the comment made on 5/8/24 by Schafer that on the new cameras the exposure times were no longer indicated in terms of slit width but as fractions of a second.

 

 

Edited November 17, 2020 by Susie

[luigi bertolotti]

That's correct : on the 0 series "speed" numbers did represent (with approximation) the preset slit between curtains , and it's easy math to conlude that with curtain speed in the range of 1m/s the top exposure speed is around 1/500. The problem in the 0 series was that estimate precise exposure times was neither easy nor trustable because the mechanism was made so that there was an ACCELERATION of curtains along the frame... slit width was a trustable number, and they engraved them, while times were "vague" . In the model I the problem of acceleration was eliminated : the drum for curtains was engineered differently, with a larger diameter, so that when the 2nd curtain starts to move, 1st curtain has already terminated its acceleration and moves at constant-nominal speed; so, from that moment, they could make a dial with speeds instead of slits (very much clearer info... 😉) I have never been interested in having a 0 replica.. so I can't say if the shutter mechanism is "0 series" or "I series"... but someone certainly does know.

 

 

Edited November 17, 2020 by luigi bertolotti

[wlaidlaw]

I find the wire frame finder as used on the first series of the Null replicas completely useless. For my eyesight, where I have single vision cataract replacement lenses, the image is in focus at a distance of slightly longer than arms' length and wearing reading glasses does not help. I therefore use a Leitz SBOOI 50mm bright line finder, which makes using the null far easier. I might at some point get my SBOOI painted gloss black to match the camera. The second series of Null replicas has a reverse Galilean finder, similar to the model 1 Leicas and although better than the wire frame finder, is still nothing like as good as a SBOOI. 

My personal POV is that as Leica had already departed from the original in using a coated lens, it would have been sensible to use a self capping shutter as well. Would make the camera more pleasurable and quicker to use

Wilson

[robert_parker]

Luigi and Wilson

Thank you both for your input and advice - that resolves the conundrum nicely !!

It's also nice to think as mentioned in #45 that there is also a certain engineering 'beauty' to the design, in that the shutter had a running speed of (about) 1ms and 2mm gave 2milliseconds or 1/500s exposure - it all just hangs together so well and probably gives the feel of the Leica design ethos going into the future and why the later cameras were so prized.

Wilson thank you for recommending ULF Richter's book, which makes interesting reading.

I'm going out to take some photos with mine now - there is a lot of fun to be had (as long as I remember not to try to remove the image card this time...😎📸👀....).

Edited November 17, 2020 by robert_parker

[robert_parker]

Here's one I made earlier, in Copenhagen....☺️ 

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!

[robert_parker]

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!

[christoph_d]

On 11/17/2020 at 1:27 PM, wlaidlaw said:

I find the wire frame finder as used on the first series of the Null replicas completely useless. For my eyesight, where I have single vision cataract replacement lenses, the image is in focus at a distance of slightly longer than arms' length and wearing reading glasses does not help. I therefore use a Leitz SBOOI 50mm bright line finder, which makes using the null far easier. I might at some point get my SBOOI painted gloss black to match the camera. The second series of Null replicas has a reverse Galilean finder, similar to the model 1 Leicas and although better than the wire frame finder, is still nothing like as good as a SBOOI. 

My personal POV is that as Leica had already departed from the original in using a coated lens, it would have been sensible to use a self capping shutter as well. Would make the camera more pleasurable and quicker to use

Wilson

To me the wire frame finder feels as good as useless too. The only thing that is sure is that, in all likelihood, bordering on certainty, a faint outline of a perceived composition may be visible in it. But that, to me, is part of the charm of this camera too. Where would be the sense of achievement, without obstacles? (For me at least, removing the image card does not count as obstacle 😁)

Rgds

Christoph