Jump to content

legit? summilux 75mm without serial number?


lycanthrope84

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi,

 

I've recently just came across a leica summilux 75mm f/1.4 version 1 (made in canada) lens without a serial number (I've checked all over the lens, it's not anywhere) .

please see the attached images.

My question is, is it legit? Are there some leica m lens that's made without printing the serial numbers on it? Or is it a fake (or do fakes even exist)?

 

Thanks!

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Ornello
Hi,

 

I've recently just came across a leica summilux 75mm f/1.4 version 1 (made in canada) lens without a serial number (I've checked all over the lens, it's not anywhere) .

please see the attached images.

My question is, is it legit? Are there some leica m lens that's made without printing the serial numbers on it? Or is it a fake (or do fakes even exist)?

 

Thanks!

 

Could be a prototype.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Omello: Prototype substance, I'm liking it!

 

Pico: Thanks for your image, I checked on mine again to made sure, but nope, it's not there! I've just started shooting with it for a week and it's awesome! I will notify you first when if I'm gonna sell in the future :)

 

Kirk: That's interesting! As long as it's an actual leica lens, I could care less about the serial no.!

 

one of the very first two portraits I've shot of:

my barista (day)

my bartender (night)

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

We used to hear of 'lunch box Leicas' that left the factory without serial numbers. Perhaps this also happened with a lens?

 

Kirk

 

Oh, that's not good. You mean it was stolen before numbered? That's going to complicate insurance, and does it mean you can't send it back to Leica for maintenance?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Ornello
We used to hear of 'lunch box Leicas' that left the factory without serial numbers. Perhaps this also happened with a lens?

 

Kirk

 

Hmmmm...unauthorised assembly of rejected parts?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The position of s/n at side is normal for lenses of that timeframe (around '75-'80), me too have 2 or 3 like this (not the Lux 75)... I thought that they put it there when they decided to engrave on the front ring "LEITZ LENS MADE IN CANADA" - full capital, plus name, focal and aperture... onto a 35 / 28 / 50 (*) simply there wasn't enough space for the s/n... :cool:

 

Imho... they simply FORGOT to engrave the s/n... Canadian factory wasn't exactly in full shape, those years... :rolleyes: Anyway, it would be interesting to have it dismantled (in a well skilled lab, of course) to look at components... dunno if they "scratched" something in the inner surfaces (numbers / codes) as they did in Wetzlar... but is worth to try..

 

So, at least, is an interesting oddity - a plus for collector's value.

 

(*) And 90 too, when little...

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Luigi,

thanks for your input (new knowledge absorbed)!

 

I feel like I'm on a roller-coaster ride whenever I find out possible good/bad explanations to it.

 

However, I do like the "interesting oddity" and will have the lens remain intact for now, don't know if I trust the labs/leica shops where I am.

 

I've attached another picture I've shot tonight with my sony Nex 5n with a hawk helicoid adapter and the 75mm summilux. Please let me know if anything looks wrong (besides my poor photography/focusing skills).

 

Thanks again for all the input so far :)

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

If it had been a reject, it wouldn't have reached this stage of assembly. And you can't cobble together a lens of this specification out of spare parts.

 

I think serial number engraving is the last step. And clearly, from your results, there's nothing wrong with the lens.

 

I'd write Leica and ask, if I were you. If you do that, do be sure to tell us what they say! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did Elcan change the area of SN inscription during the production of version 1?

 

If this was the case, it might have happened, that on this specific lens a damaged aperture control ring (with SN inscription) has been exchanged during a repair with a later spare part, that didn't have the inscription.

Link to post
Share on other sites

.

 

I think serial number engraving is the last step. And clearly, from your results, there's nothing wrong with the lens.

 

 

I have a hard time believing that serial number engraving is the last step. The chance to introduce small metal particles into the lens and elements would seem to suggest that parts are engraved in sequence and assembled at a later stage.

 

I tend to agree that this is probably a QA screwup from Leitz Canada. Enjoy your lens and it's somewhat unorthodox providence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if Leica could help, at least confirm the possibility of a prototype, might be nice to get a bit of provenance if you ever decide to sell.

 

I have seen the Asian market ask lots for prototypes, one of Mandlers best could be a nice little investment :cool:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did Elcan change the area of SN inscription during the production of version 1?

 

If this was the case, it might have happened, that on this specific lens a damaged aperture control ring (with SN inscription) has been exchanged during a repair with a later spare part, that didn't have the inscription.

 

I think that all V1 Summilux had the s/n at side... the hipotesis of a repair with a unnumbered ring is very reasonable: Ontario factory did make many spares (many of them reached the market after factory's selling to Hughes) : imho , more probable than the prototype's hipotesis : usually, they have some other detail that reveal their status (and, often, do bear numbers in the 0000xxx range.. also Elcan used to do like this)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...