Jump to content

TAMARKIN 2017


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The motive in my case is not profit, but simply to own something interesting or beautiful or having some other characteristic. I find that is also the case with most other collectors, of whatever kind, that I know.  Profit is not the only motivation in this world. After I had written an article some years ago about participating in on line camera auctions, a friend who is major well known collector of cameras asked me whether I would like to write an article about the best way for a spouse or other relative to dispose of an inherited camera collection. I could not bring myself to do this as it is very difficult to look into the minds of relatives of deceased persons and what their mindset might be about inherited collections. A camera dealer (of modern cameras only) in Dublin occasionally contacts me when he receives such a collection with a view to finding out if I am interested in any of the items and what value he should put on the items. In many cases when I examine items, they are in need of at least a CLA or even more work, the cost of which has to be factored in.

 

As for item 217 which is generating some heat here, my only interest is in seeing the outcome, as I would not be a bidder for this item. An auction, if properly run, and this one will be such, is a pure market place which will determine what value collectors will put on any item. Let the market decide etc.

 

William

Most interesting, William.

As far as I am concerned - I am now 83 and, thanks God, do not need a fundamental CLA...yet - I thought about the fate of my Fontenelle collection when I was 75, and finally decided to part of it to avoid any problem with my succession. It was a little heartbreaking, but this Forum was definitely a big help and I still spend much time in my detailed archives (by the way, one day I will have to offer the remains of my Leica library and the hundreds photos I made to a real amateur).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I totally agree with William that it is up to the market, e.g. individual bidders, to decide upon the value of item 217. Whereas many people on this forum might find paying 500.000 $ for a camera a bit decadent, the majority of people on this planet might find the same about anyone paying 5.000 $ or even 500 $ for a used camera. There will be no objective scale with regard to this matter.

 

However, to me item 217 raises a much more interesting question that will concern any collector at one point in time, namely that of authenticity. This question definitely is raised by Alan's recollections and photographs (see post #14) and Luigi's pertinent observation (see post #16).

 

According to common sense, there seem to be only three possibilities:

 

  1. Tamarkin 217 and post #16 refer to the same camera. Then, it will have the most unusual service history, to say the least, and it will definitely not be "untouched for 50 years".
  2. Tamarkin 217 and post #16 refer to different cameras. Then, either
    • a. bluntly put, one of them is a fake or
    • b. Leica assigned undeclared and undocumented duplicate serial numbers to cameras in a prestigious limited series, a fact being overlooked for the last decades (which seems rather far-fetched).

One of the reasons I will refrain from collecting extremely rare and prestigious specimen (Tamarkin 217 honestly would be out of my range anyway) is, that the incentive for falsification, naturally, increases with the possible gain involved.

 

Since Tamarkin is a well respected auction house, I do not by any means wish to insinuate that they are part of or even have knowledge whatsoever of any potential abnormalities in the camera's pedigree. I am just puzzled by this riddle.

 

Mathias

Edited by schattenundlicht
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

----

 

According to common sense, there seem to be only three possibilities:

 

  1. Tamarkin 217 and post #16 refer to the same camera. Then, it will have the most unusual service history, to say the least, and it will definitely not be "untouched for 50 years".
  2. Tamarkin 217 and post #16 refer to different cameras. Then, either
    • a. bluntly put, one of them is a fake or
    • b. Leica assigned undeclared and undocumented duplicate serial numbers to cameras in a prestigious limited series, a fact being overlooked for the last decades (which seems rather far-fetched).

One of the reasons I will refrain from collecting extremely rare and prestigious specimen (Tamarkin 217 honestly would be out of my range anyway) is, that the incentive for falsification, naturally, increases with the possible gain involved.

 

Since Tamarkin is a well respecte can they givd auction house, I do not by any means wish to insinuate that they are part of or even have knowledge whatsoever of any potential abnormalities in the camera's pedigree. I am just puzzled by this riddle.

 

Mathias

Very good resume Mathias, and, being a person who tends to trust people, I tend towards 1)... anyway, my feeling is that it would be simply FOOLISH to bid around the proposed value without making preventive queries to the seller... you pointed well to the straight declaration "untouched for 50 years"... the paint looks in SUPERB conditions... can they support their declaration with some solid evidence ? We are speaking not of 1K.-2K dollars...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I have some doubts about the chances of trying...

Incidentally, I just re-discovered a photo taken 36 (thirty-six!) years ago on the occasion of a Stan's visit to me in Belgium.

 

attachicon.gifStan Tamarkin, mars 1981 - a.jpg

Hey Pecole... you are the one at.. let me guess... RIGHT ?

 

(guess based only on the presumption that we Europeans do recognize an "American face" B) ... but I can be wrong...)

Edited by luigi bertolotti
Link to post
Share on other sites

I totally agree with William that it is up to the market, e.g. individual bidders, to decide upon the value of item 217. Whereas many people on this forum might find paying 500.000 $ for a camera a bit decadent, the majority of people on this planet might find the same about anyone paying 5.000 $ or even 500 $ for a used camera. There will be no objective scale with regard to this matter.

 

However, to me item 217 raises a much more interesting question that will concern any collector at one point in time, namely that of authenticity. This question definitely is raised by Alan's recollections and photographs (see post #14) and Luigi's pertinent observation (see post #16).

 

According to common sense, there seem to be only three possibilities:

 

  1. Tamarkin 217 and post #16 refer to the same camera. Then, it will have the most unusual service history, to say the least, and it will definitely not be "untouched for 50 years".
  2. Tamarkin 217 and post #16 refer to different cameras. Then, either
    • a. bluntly put, one of them is a fake or
    • b. Leica assigned undeclared and undocumented duplicate serial numbers to cameras in a prestigious limited series, a fact being overlooked for the last decades (which seems rather far-fetched).

One of the reasons I will refrain from collecting extremely rare and prestigious specimen (Tamarkin 217 honestly would be out of my range anyway) is, that the incentive for falsification, naturally, increases with the possible gain involved.

 

Since Tamarkin is a well respected auction house, I do not by any means wish to insinuate that they are part of or even have knowledge whatsoever of any potential abnormalities in the camera's pedigree. I am just puzzled by this riddle.

 

Mathias

 

It is almost impossible to deal with an issue like this in an online forum. If anyone is interested they should insist on seeing the camera. Also there are experts out there whose opinion can be sought about such matters. If you are going to spend the type of money being spoken about here such advice would be absolutely essential, unless the bidder is already an expert. Some European auction houses provide such expertise and very often a certificate provided by an expert. Such practices are common in art auctions.

 

William

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This item #217 a black MP-50 is interesting, especially now that some anomally or riddle is apparent.  As such a large investment is at stake for any bidder (not me!), I should be clear about what I know or don't know.

Attached is a close up of MP-50 and a newer style, chrome, low mounted, non-triangular strap lug is clearly present. An examination of other black  MP cameras or at least their documented photos shows:

 

MP-63  black triangular early lugs

MP-68  black triangular early lugs

MP-115 chrome, round late

MP-140 black triangular early

MP-147 black triangular early

 

All chrome MP's also have originally early lugs.

So it seems very probable that all black MP's were originally fitted with early "dog-ear" or triangular lugs.  MP-115 and MP-166 are stated to have been serviced to replace their early lugs with late ones.  See Classic Camera magazine #6.

Was this camera (MP-50) returned for reconditioning and given the round late lugs and the beautiful paint finish?  Then later on, realizing the value of correctness, the camera was changed back to the old style lugs. 

 

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!

 

The next photo shows an exotic collection of sixteen M cameras. I did not physically handle the collection but obtained just these photos.  Which I have framed and placed in  my Leica "room". This was 30 years ago or more.

We have:

Prototype  0010

M3 1129943

M3 1134077

MP-50 black

 

MP-354 chrome

M1 952247

M2 930765

M2 1162446

 

M2M 1164036

M2R 1248797

M4Mot 1267476

M4M 1206744

 

MdA 1379084

KE7A

M5 1356128

M4-2  1468059

 

 

A magnificent group, But any modifications or changes to them over the years, I cannot say.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hey Pecole... you are the one at.. let me guess... RIGHT ?

 

(guess based only on the presumption that we Europeans do recognize an "American face" B) ... but I can be wrong...)

Right is right...of course. Your question also means that a little more than three decades change significantly a face. But it is true that my (relatively) recent "Forum identification photo" shows my face, against my profile on the 1981 one with Stan...So, you are forgiven, Luigi.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Right is right...of course. Your question also means that a little more than three decades change significantly a face. ....

 

And what about 40 years ?  let's say.. we are so many with a certain age in the forum... that could be fun to setup , in the people section.. a "40 years after" open thread... :p .. mods, consider this proposal !! ;)

 

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!

 

(in my hands... the ZORKY !!!)

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

And what about 40 years ?  let's say.. we are so many with a certain age in the forum... that could be fun to setup , in the people section.. a "40 years after" open thread... :p .. mods, consider this proposal !! ;)

 

attachicon.gifLB_77_17.jpg

 

(in my hands... the ZORKY !!!)

Good idea, Luigi. Look at "People", I started the suggested thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

William, thank you for your advice.

 

For those who might be remote, is there any preferred way to present photos of the camera in question?

No, is an acceptable answer, of course. I am simply looking for reasonable guidelines.

 

Thank you in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

William, thank you for your advice.

 

For those who might be remote, is there any preferred way to present photos of the camera in question?

No, is an acceptable answer, of course. I am simply looking for reasonable guidelines.

 

Thank you in advance.

 

If you look at Tamarkin's on-line catalogue you will see some very good photos of the camera in question. These are perfectly good in my opinion and well up to the standard of Westlicht etc. To a degree, auctions have to be a 'what you see is what you get' exercise. Auction sales are usually 'as is' but, of course, if claims are made about good working order, 100% original etc, then these can be relied upon. For very rare and valuable items, where a high value is indicated, auctioneers sometimes get evidence of provenance, as in the case of a camera used by a famous photographer, or some form of authentication by a well known expert who has examined the camera in detail. Some of these authentication features are to be seen in art sales. 

 

I hope that these points are helpful. To totally answer your question. If I could afford it, would I buy such a valuable camera without seeing it myself or having it examined on my behalf? The answer to that, in my case , would be 'no', but I cannot speak for all collectors.

 

William 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Stan was an old friend of mine, and even visited my collection in Belgium many years ago. His son has now taken over the auction, and seems to be following a good path.

Thanks anyway for giving members who do not yet know him, the opportunity to discover this splendid catalog.

I have purchased quite a few Leica items from Dan Tamarkin. It is hard to imagine purchasing things from somebody having greater integrity, and providing better customer service. This compliment extends to every member of his staff, as well.

 

Best,

 

Wayne

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have purchased quite a few Leica items from Dan Tamarkin. It is hard to imagine purchasing things from somebody having greater integrity, and providing better customer service. This compliment extends to every member of his staff, as well.

 

Best,

 

Wayne

 

I agree 100%

 

William

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have got some items  by actions from Tamarkin along the last years,
an item was wrong presented and I discovered it when I got it my hands 
after communications with him, he agreed that I return the item and he paid me back

the item value I paid + shipping back and forth and the customs fees I paid

Cannot tell more about his honesty and the way I trust in him.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I also have had positive dealings with Tamarkin auctions.  I bid on and won an item on e-bay in June several years ago.  The e-bay seller than became a dead beat and never shipped after PayPal payment.  PayPal refunded by money, approximately $2500.  The same item was then listed in the Tamarkin auction the same year.  I discussed the matter with Dan.  After the discussion we both agreed there was nothing either one of us could do because I had obtained a refund.  By the way, I bid the same amount on the Tamarkin auction as the failed e-bay purchase, and the item is now in my collection.  The seller did not benefit and could not pull the sale back from Tamarkin.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I don't know if classic Leica sales are going the same way as classic car sales over the last twelve months, with prices on a distinct downwards trend. As usual this does not apply to the very top/rare/sought after end of the market and I can see the MP reaching its estimated price but the rest of the auction.....? I think some of the estimated prices are a little optimistic, especially taking the 19.5% or 22% buyers' commissions. I have been surprised at what reasonable prices I have been able to fill in some gaps in my collection over the last 12 months e.g. a mint (looks pretty much unused) IIIg for under €500 plus various other items. I am tempted to bid for the SGOOD 85mm VF at the bottom end of the estimate. 

 

Wilson

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...