Early Leica II

[willeica]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, Pyrogallol said:

This is the page Leitz sent me for my Leica 11, 89397, originally black but now chrome.

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!

That camera must have been the one that went to Perrot near Bern. I'll see what I can do to see the complete delivery registers for 1932 the next time that I am in Wetzlar. It would seem that there were quite a few I Mod As and I Mod Cs in the 7xxxx range, but I have not seen very many of them. The jump between February and April 1932 is quite remarkable and the cameras issued in that period could not have all been IIDs as Alan has pointed out.

William  

[tranquilo67]

On 3/26/2022 at 4:31 AM, Studienkamera said:

Did you ask Leica about the delivery date of your camera? Would you mind posting it? My Leica II #73432 was delivered on 17. February 1932. 

This is really confusing because the it was delivered before the official presentation. As William has mentioned, the delivery dates of all the earliest samples should be studied in detail.

On 3/26/2022 at 4:39 AM, Studienkamera said:

Also, in the comments to this article

https://vintage-photo.nl/leica-ii-the-jewel-of-wetzlar/

someone claims to know about the whereabouts of the fifth Leica II. But talk is cheap and a picture worth a thousand words...

Interesting. I'm specially focused on searching for earlier samples than mine and none has appeared yet. I know the sample (and the owner) of the 71208 and the 71215 was on ebay not a long time ago. The 71204 (5th sample) has not surface in any auction, group, forum, article or any other source that I'm aware of. Even more, I've seen people claiming for the "earliest known so far" with samples in the high 712xx or even 713xx. And of course, there are a lot of earlier samples (including some 71xxx) that everything points to upgrades.

By the way, I still need to understand why the first one is the 71200 and not the 71201 (if all the trusted sources are correct). To start in the 0 means that the production is always shifted +1 related to the serial number which it means a pain/headache for any production.

On 3/26/2022 at 9:28 AM, 250swb said:

Did Leica make and number the top plates in those days like they did from the M3 onwards in pre-numbered batches, and these would then be randomly taken from stock by the technicians as they built each camera?

In this case my opinion is that more than pre-allocation, we're talking about the famous original drawings lost/non-existent/non-suitable for production. That led to the return of the NY sample and could have led to preserve some samples for internal purposes and/or jumps in the delivery till the production would have become regular.

On 3/26/2022 at 10:51 AM, Studienkamera said:

OP mentions an initial batch of 25. I don't think anyone alive still knows whether serial numbers within this batch were applied randomly or in consecutive order. Probably it would be more appropriate to talk about "5th in batch" instead of "5th produced", but personally I am happy to use these phrases interchangeably. 

I must clarify that I said an "initial run" of 25. Not sure (specially with initial samples of Leica II) that the production was fully organized in batches. As stated by Jerzy, mine shows clearly that they were using available parts, more than parts specially built for the model D (as they did later on in regular production). The delivery date is, of course, interesting but anyway I'm still supporting the statement that it's "the 8th Leica II ever built" (or the seventh depending on the 71200) as I stated in my first post .

 

On 3/26/2022 at 8:44 PM, willeica said:

My 78952 was delivered on 25th April 1932 (dealer of the delivery is the dealer in the engraving) which is before your 71556 on 9th June 1932. As I said above, the only way to solve this is to have a look at the full register all together,  which I might try to arrange for the next time that I am in Wetzlar.

William 

Fully agree with you William. The only way to clarify this is to ask for the page/pages of the initial 50 or so, and check the delivery dates as well as orders and the eventual gaps, back and forths etc. in the delivery dates. Delivery dates, in my experience, beyond the concrete date, can help to understand trends/patterns in production. Something like what I mentioned about serials in my Embassy Leica article. The sequence and frequency of the serials pointed to a business even before Jim Lager confirmed it through the order numbers.

I'm looking forward meeting you in Buxton for the TLS AGM and I'll try my best to be in Dublin next October. I've never been in Ireland (and what is even more important, my wife has never been there so hopefully she can be convinced about that ).

Best wishes,

Augusto

Edited March 29, 2022 by tranquilo67

[Advertisement]

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

[Studienkamera]

14 minutes ago, tranquilo67 said:

This is really confusing because the it was delivered before the official presentation. As William has mentioned, the delivery dates of all the earliest samples should be studied in detail.

Agreed. Given that none of us has full access to the delivery records that would enable such a detailed study, posting known delivery dates on a forum like this, seems like a step in the right direction to collectively gain some additional insight.

[Pyrogallol]

You could always ask what records they have of camera 71200 ?

[willeica]

7 hours ago, tranquilo67 said:

This is really confusing because the it was delivered before the official presentation. As William has mentioned, the delivery dates of all the earliest samples should be studied in detail.

Interesting. I'm specially focused on searching for earlier samples than mine and none has appeared yet. I know the sample (and the owner) of the 71208 and the 71215 was on ebay not a long time ago. The 71204 (5th sample) has not surface in any auction, group, forum, article or any other source that I'm aware of. Even more, I've seen people claiming for the "earliest known so far" with samples in the high 712xx or even 713xx. And of course, there are a lot of earlier samples (including some 71xxx) that everything points to upgrades.

By the way, I still need to understand why the first one is the 71200 and not the 71201 (if all the trusted sources are correct). To start in the 0 means that the production is always shifted +1 related to the serial number which it means a pain/headache for any production.

In this case my opinion is that more than pre-allocation, we're talking about the famous original drawings lost/non-existent/non-suitable for production. That led to the return of the NY sample and could have led to preserve some samples for internal purposes and/or jumps in the delivery till the production would have become regular.

I must clarify that I said an "initial run" of 25. Not sure (specially with initial samples of Leica II) that the production was fully organized in batches. As stated by Jerzy, mine shows clearly that they were using available parts, more than parts specially built for the model D (as they did later on in regular production). The delivery date is, of course, interesting but anyway I'm still supporting the statement that it's "the 8th Leica II ever built" (or the seventh depending on the 71200) as I stated in my first post .

 

Fully agree with you William. The only way to clarify this is to ask for the page/pages of the initial 50 or so, and check the delivery dates as well as orders and the eventual gaps, back and forths etc. in the delivery dates. Delivery dates, in my experience, beyond the concrete date, can help to understand trends/patterns in production. Something like what I mentioned about serials in my Embassy Leica article. The sequence and frequency of the serials pointed to a business even before Jim Lager confirmed it through the order numbers.

I'm looking forward meeting you in Buxton for the TLS AGM and I'll try my best to be in Dublin next October. I've never been in Ireland (and what is even more important, my wife has never been there so hopefully she can be convinced about that ).

Best wishes,

Augusto

I look forward to seeing you next week, Augusto, and, maybe, again in Dublin next October. I will email you those slides in a few minutes.

As regards Leica delivery registers, I will see what I can do to view the 1932 lists. The issue with something that is so old is that often they have to be interpreted as the people who originally prepared them are no longer with us. The '00' or '01' issue is fascinating. For what its worth, I don't think that any of my Leicas has a serial number which ends with a zero, but I suppose I should check this.

William  

[Giuliobigazzi]

Here is 72401. Delivered on 14.11.1931, I have heard of no earlier. There are design differences so probably pre production/prototype. If earlier serial II’s were originally assigned to Ic’s this would explain why such an early example bears a slightly higher serial than expected. Camera is a Leih-Kamera Ia, so this delivery date would apply to the top plate only. Still unclear why or how these two parts came together.

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!

[romanus53]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

no D.R.P. at this time?

[Giuliobigazzi]

Yes it’s one of the unusual things of this top plate. Also different viewfinder window. 72400 and 72401 are the same 

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!

[UliWer]

On 3/27/2022 at 1:51 AM, alan mcfall said:

71246 is listed in Band I as originally a Model IA, so it could be a later upgrade to Model II (D). As to when they were actually fabricated and shipped, I have never asked Wetzlar for the dates in the records. Would be interesting to open up the cameras and see if any Ia or Ic parts were modified for use, as noted by Jerzy.  71246 also, appears to be an "export" camera as Germany is engraved in the shoe, perhaps earlier than expected to start exporting a new D model? Another point that it may have been converted.

The "Tagebuch für Leica-Änderungen, Leica Montage I" ("Diary of changements of the Leica", which lists all novelties in the camera production from 1928 to 1945 and was published as Vidom Spezial 10/2010 by the German Leica Historica Socielty) has an entry about your camera:

The entry No. 17, which follows the entry for the serial number 71200 that "Since August 1931 a new camera with automatic coupling of the lens with the rangefinder was produced. Model II." says:

"71225 - 71249 These numbers were delivered to England without coupling." (my own translations).

So if your model has the normal coupled rangefinder, it is certainly an "upgrade". The reason why some early examples of the  Leica II were produced without coupling remains obscure. The diary's entry also says that "at the same time the extendable knob for rewinding the film was introduced for the coupled cameras". So it seems that your No. 71246 originally had no coupling and no extendable rewind knob. 

I added an reproduction of the the original entries in handwriting and of the transliteration in print:

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!

 

[willeica]

13 hours ago, UliWer said:

The "Tagebuch für Leica-Änderungen, Leica Montage I" ("Diary of changements of the Leica", which lists all novelties in the camera production from 1928 to 1945 and was published as Vidom Spezial 10/2010 by the German Leica Historica Socielty) has an entry about your camera:

The entry No. 17, which follows the entry for the serial number 71200 that "Since August 1931 a new camera with automatic coupling of the lens with the rangefinder was produced. Model II." says:

"71225 - 71249 These numbers were delivered to England without coupling." (my own translations).

So if your model has the normal coupled rangefinder, it is certainly an "upgrade". The reason why some early examples of the  Leica II were produced without coupling remains obscure. The diary's entry also says that "at the same time the extendable knob for rewinding the film was introduced for the coupled cameras". So it seems that your No. 71246 originally had no coupling and no extendable rewind knob. 

I added an reproduction of the the original entries in handwriting and of the transliteration in print:

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!

 

Thanks for this. I looked at the Delivery Register Books for 1931 and 1932 briefly when I was in Wetlzar in June. I was looking for evidence of overlap between the I Model C and the II Model D in 1932, but I could not find any in the brief time that I was there. From about January 1932 the production mainly consisted of II Model Ds and all were marked with 'Lyk' for LYKUP (Elmar) and LYKHEK (Hektor). I think it would be important to photograph the register for 1931 around 72401 to get a fuller picture of how the camera was described. As an example of what I am saying this is a crop of the page for 78952 which I own and which carries the engraving 'Pollock 50 Grafton Street Dublin'. This confirms that the camera was sent to Pollock via the London Leitz set up which would have been correct at that time. It also confirms that the 78000 series started before May 1932, this one being delivered on 25th April 1932. The 'Lyk' with 'feet' is written in here. I'm not sure what the 'OK' means but it may relate to the serial number being slightly out of alignment which Jim Lager tells me was not uncommon at that time.

I will be in Wetzlar next year in June (for the auction) or October (Leica Society International) or both and I can copy the page for 72401, but if anyone is there before then , or even this week for the Oskar Barnack Awards, they might ask to see the delivery register book for 1931. The 1932 book confirms that the II Model D was an immediate and spectacular sales success.

William 

[romanus53]

Maybe ok means ohne Kupplung but I cannot imagine a Leica II without rangefinder-coupling anyhow. 

[Pyrogallol]

There would be no sense in building a model 11 and then leaving the rangefinder uncoupled. Does it just mean that that serial number was a 1c  in a batch of model 11’s?

Edited October 20, 2022 by Pyrogallol

[willeica]

12 hours ago, romanus53 said:

Maybe ok means ohne Kupplung but I cannot imagine a Leica II without rangefinder-coupling anyhow. 

My camera No 78952, which is marked OK, has a working rangefinder.

William 

[Giuliobigazzi]

Are the archive books sorted by year? As in there’s a 1931 book and A 1932 book?

[willeica]

1 hour ago, Giuliobigazzi said:

Are the archive books sorted by year? As in there’s a 1931 book and A 1932 book?

Yes, there is a 1931 book and a 1932 book.  I looked at them last June, but did not have much time, other than just to check some specific cameras. I should be in Wetzlar, once or twice next year, June or October or both. If anyone is going over before then, let me know and I will ask the people concerned to organise access.

William 

 

[Giuliobigazzi]

Re 71225-249, in the hahne list these are listed as model A deliveries, apart from 71237 which is a model C, in any case without rangefinders. Maybe they send them with spare tops and parts to see if conversions could be done successfully away from the factory. This would explain the different engraving font.

[Giuliobigazzi]

Batch 71225-249 was delivered on 21.1.32, very early, considering 71200-224 were delivered on 11.4.32. Perhaps to allow time for London to do the conversion?

[Jemke]

Hello all, I’m a long time reader on this forum and find this topic amazingly helpful. A month ago I acquired a II camera with serial number of 72453. Leica confirmed this camera left the factory on January 30th 1932. Leica did not sent a picture of the ledgers unfortunately.

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!

[derleicaman]

On 10/20/2022 at 5:09 PM, willeica said:

My camera No 78952, which is marked OK, has a working rangefinder.

William 

Hello William,

 

Catching up on some older topics here. I don't think OK means OK in the terms we are used to it. OK or Okay, came into common use post-War in Germany. I am almost certain it was not use as we think of it in the 30's.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[willeica]

8 hours ago, derleicaman said:

Hello William,

 

Catching up on some older topics here. I don't think OK means OK in the terms we are used to it. OK or Okay, came into common use post-War in Germany. I am almost certain it was not use as we think of it in the 30's.

Thanks, Bill. I'll ask Tim what it means when I am in Wetzlar in about 4 weeks from now.

William