sabears Posted July 13, 2013 Share #1 Posted July 13, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Ebay n.151079791768 This is the fifth time I see, with minor differences, one of these lenses: copy of Thambar lens, with a lot of differences from the original. However the real story is, AFAIK, unknown. The first I saw was in early '80, coming from the east Europe. Serial n. from 1xx.xxx to 5xx.xxx. Some friends here know more:confused:? ...Pecole where are you ( I remember your considerations regarding faked Hektor 13,5cm...)? cheers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 13, 2013 Posted July 13, 2013 Hi sabears, Take a look here Thambarenko,Thambarosky or Thambarovich?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Pecole Posted July 14, 2013 Share #2 Posted July 14, 2013 Ebay n.151079791768 This is the fifth time I see, with minor differences, one of these lenses: copy of Thambar lens, with a lot of differences from the original. However the real story is, AFAIK, unknown. The first I saw was in early '80, coming from the east Europe. Serial n. from 1xx.xxx to 5xx.xxx. Some friends here know more:confused:? ...Pecole where are you ( I remember your considerations regarding faked Hektor 13,5cm...)? cheers. Here am I, dear, but never saw a Thambarovich. Have you got a pix? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted July 14, 2013 Share #3 Posted July 14, 2013 James Lager (Volume II - lenses) does report, with a pair of pictures, a roughly made "Thambar f 2,8" (notice, not f 2,2) with s/n 273753... saying that it is believed to be of Russian origin... but no further details are given. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabears Posted July 14, 2013 Author Share #4 Posted July 14, 2013 Here am I, dear, but never saw a Thambarovich. Have you got a pix? Hallo Pecole, nice to hear from you!... ...Thambarovich... is a way of saying...if you look item n. 151079791768 on Ebay you see a specimen of faked Thambar, I remember you told the story of faked Hektors after WWII, I'm guessing if they have a similar origin or not... best greetings Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted July 14, 2013 Share #5 Posted July 14, 2013 The ebay item is interesting.... it has so many wrong details (starting from the front engraving) that clearly wasn't made for collectors... maybe dates to the times in which Russians sold gear to East Germany, where people probably had some old Leicas but hadn't more access to the original literature... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pecole Posted July 15, 2013 Share #6 Posted July 15, 2013 James Lager (Volume II - lenses) does report, with a pair of pictures, a roughly made "Thambar f 2,8" (notice, not f 2,2) with s/n 273753... saying that it is believed to be of Russian origin... but no further details are given. Thanks, Luigi. I had forgotten (Alzheimer ?) this Lager reference. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pecole Posted July 15, 2013 Share #7 Posted July 15, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hallo Pecole, nice to hear from you!... ...Thambarovich... is a way of saying...if you look item n. 151079791768 on Ebay you see a specimen of faked Thambar, I remember you told the story of faked Hektors after WWII, I'm guessing if they have a similar origin or not... best greetings Good to renew contact indeed ! No, the origin is certainly not the same: the post-war faked 9cm Elmars and 13.5cm Hektors came from Antwerp, and there was definitely not a market for faked Thambars in Belgium. I believe the tentative explanation by Luigi above is quite plausible and even convincing. Cordially. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabears Posted July 15, 2013 Author Share #8 Posted July 15, 2013 Thank you for the response, I believe there is still much to discover. The engravings suggest that the lenses were for the western market. The work done was not cheap also because were not used parts from other items: it is not easy to imagine an investment for an estimated small volume of production. Again: there are many variations that suggest different manufacturers/artisans involved in the falsification. Indeed I've not found two identical faked Thambar. I wonder if anyone soon or later will find a more detailed explanation. Best greetings. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabears Posted July 17, 2013 Author Share #9 Posted July 17, 2013 Leitz Thambar 2,2/9cm , Leica M39 Gewinde | eBay ...believe it or not... Euro 1343+shipping for a faked Thambar!!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted July 17, 2013 Share #10 Posted July 17, 2013 If this kind of sales continue to appear time to time, it is for the reason that someone, at the end, DOES buy... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 18, 2013 Share #11 Posted July 18, 2013 There is a sucker born every minute... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted July 18, 2013 Share #12 Posted July 18, 2013 There is a sucker born every minute... In Italy we say "suckers' mother is always pregnant"... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabears Posted July 18, 2013 Author Share #13 Posted July 18, 2013 It's a shame: in the price of the faked Thambar a faked cap and a faked hood are not included:D Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pecole Posted July 19, 2013 Share #14 Posted July 19, 2013 It's a shame: in the price of the faked Thambar a faked cap and a faked hood are not included:D Not a bad idea ! certainly easier and cheaper to manufacture fake caps and hoods, and some - like Thambar's - are reaching quite interesting prices. Thanks, Sabears, I may start a new business (but at seventy-nine plus, I have to hurry...).D Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted July 19, 2013 Share #15 Posted July 19, 2013 It's a shame: in the price of the faked Thambar a faked cap and a faked hood are not included:D Actually, it's a faked shame. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoelH Posted September 9, 2013 Share #16 Posted September 9, 2013 I have one of these lenses; I purchased it many years ago and it is certainly much earlier than the more recent "eBay-era" vintage of Russian / Eastern European deliberate fake Leicas. However, I do not claim that it isn't a "fake Thambar", rather that I believe it was produced at a time before Leica collecting was very popular. In other words, assuming that it is of non-Leitz origin (probably), it was intended to mislead Leica camera customers a long time ago, rather than to mislead rare-Leica-lens collectors. As in, the number of "Leica" engraved Fed-fakes has exploded since the 1980s, but they did exist for decades prior. I haven't had it out for a long time; as I remember it has a strange over-engraving of f/2.2 over an original f/2.8 mark. Not something subtle that would have misled anyone - it really seemed more like a modification. I spent some effort trying to figure this out. Not knowing of any other examples at the time, the possibilities seemed to be 1) Non-Leitz deliberate fake put out as a "factory" production based on some other-brand lens (like Fed-Leicas), 2) Non-Leitz one-off deliberate fake by an individual (since dis-proven because of other examples appearing), 3) Some kind of Leitz prototype experimental effort (exciting idea but not likely). The fact that it strongly resembles Leitz barrel design was intriguing; the fact that the engraving workmanship seemed somewhat poor and obviously over-engraved was inconclusive in my opinion - it is not true that all Leitz prototypes were machinists' works of art, especially in the 1930s and '40s. However, my best, uncertain guess was option 1). I went looking for a Russian or other non-Leitz lens that had its particular shape and size of lens barrel, and I didn't find one at the time. I thought that I could put all doubts to rest if I could identify it as a known-design lens that had simply had its engraving modified. This was pre-internet and I had access only to some books and catalogs in my own library. Also, as I remember, the focal length did seem to be about right, and the front element and aperture opening did seem larger than f/2.8 for the focal length - but truthfully I don't know where my notes on this are; I'd have to go repeat all of this research again. I did take it to work and get an X-ray made, on an industrial machine that we used to X-ray wire-bonded integrated circuits for inspection. The resulting X-ray cross-section was dim, but clear enough that I couldn't match it up to any lens design in various books. Regarding the "sucker" comment - sorry but I don't think the eBay buyer was necessarily a sucker at all. This may have been some kind of counterfeit, but it is unusual. The auction had 72 bids; I don't believe for a minute that all bidders thought it was a genuine production Thambar. (I was not a bidder; I had no idea this auction even existed until I saw this message thread). Whatever these lenses are, they are certainly interesting and a conversation item for Leica SM aficionados. Perhaps someday, someone will identify the matching other-brand lens that looks just like this. That would solve most of the mystery, though not all. Or, perhaps someone will find Max Berek's long-lost notes on the factory's various experiments with the Thambar lens design, showing this prototype version and noting that examples of it were given only to Oskar Barnack, Ernst Leitz II, Heinrich Hoffmann, Eva Braun, Leni Riefenstahl and Henri-Cartier-Bresson for secret evaluation. Take that, you sucker-critics! BTW, I also was lucky enough to find (what Mr. Lager told me is) the earliest known S/N of a real Thambar, prior to normal production, and earlier than the "earliest" one he had in his books. That one, although very finely made and in very good condition, does have an error associated with the shifted aperture scale engraving - it was understandably tricky to get that right and to be understood by the engraving technician. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted September 9, 2013 Share #17 Posted September 9, 2013 Joel, your post is very exciting for collectors : can you post some pictures of the two items you have ? I think mostly of the early production Thambar and its "odd" scale... I remember that Lager said that some variations in the double scaling of the Thambar do exist... and the final one was set after experience with the lens grew : does your item fall in this category of "early double scaling" or is a n engraving error ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabears Posted September 9, 2013 Author Share #18 Posted September 9, 2013 Thank you to share Joel, I add this may be you know it: Copy of Leica Thambar 9cm f/2.8 Black E7RBLAC best regards. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaques Posted September 10, 2013 Share #19 Posted September 10, 2013 Joel: can you post any images taken with the fake Thambar? Does it have the unique Thambar glow? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.