Jump to content

Leica III Black Paint - original or repaint


Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, luigi bertolotti said:

Yes... me too pointed on this in #2... it's an "exaggeration shift" by the seller... he also says "ex-demo"... which in strict terms is also very questionable for a camera of 1934 or so... unless one means "demo" in the sense of a display item for a shop of antiquites.... 😉 ; but provided that other statements are true (expecially the DAG CLA) it can be excused...

To explain further, my thoughts are that the dealers description might - in their terms - mean reconditioned/repainted etc.... Worth asking the question.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, earleygallery said:

I would question the 'NOS' description. That may give up further information.

New Old Stock should refer to new, as in not previously sold or used, items that are not longer current. For example, if a dealer had an unsold boxed unused M6 at the back of a cupboard, that would be NOS (as someone here bought a while ago).

It is using modern verbiage for something which did not exist in 1933. You see a lot of that on this Forum, James. In order to be able to interpret the past you have to understand it. Based on what I have seen there was a certain amount of stocking in the 1930s, but a lot of the time the order went into Wetzlar after the customer had ordered. Based on what Jerzy has said and the Hahne list I would be fairly happy that this was a black paint model since the beginning. Getting confirmation from Wetzlar based on records or code name would be the 'icing on the cake'.

William

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd go for buying it based on what you know/believe, and actual the condition of the camera. Follow up afterwards on establishing its long history/ provenance. After all, when you boil it down, isn't it really just a case of money vs enjoyment?

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, earleygallery said:

To explain further, my thoughts are that the dealers description might - in their terms - mean reconditioned/repainted etc.... Worth asking the question.

this is the response I got from the dealer

"This is purchased by our consignee client (a long-time Leica friend of mine) in 2010 in France from a Leica shop who had it on display as a demo unit."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the response I just got back from Leica - So, it was originally chrome according to them - thanks again William for the contact details

Dear Stephen Platt,

 

Thank you for your request.

The camera with the serial number 120546 should be a Leica III in Chrome.

If you have further question do not hesitate to contact us again.

Mit freundlichen Gruessen / kind regards

Thomas Schmidt

Leica Camera AG
Customer Care – Support
Am Leitz Park 5 / D-35 578 Wetzlar / Germany
www.leica-camera.com / info@leica-camera.com  
Telephone +49(0)6441-2080-111 / Fax +49(0)6441-2080-339

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Perhaps an additional question would have been 'are there any records of it being converted to black by Leica?' 

Looking at the photos again a question that comes to mind is do the scratches on the baseplate go through to brass, or is it chrome underneath the paint? It doesn't look like it's chrome under the scratch on the toplate under the eyepiece, but the baseplate scratches appear brighter.

Edited by 250swb
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, romualdo said:

Here's the response I just got back from Leica - So, it was originally chrome according to them - thanks again William for the contact details

Dear Stephen Platt,

 

Thank you for your request.

The camera with the serial number 120546 should be a Leica III in Chrome.

If you have further question do not hesitate to contact us again.

Mit freundlichen Gruessen / kind regards

Thomas Schmidt

Leica Camera AG
Customer Care – Support
Am Leitz Park 5 / D-35 578 Wetzlar / Germany
www.leica-camera.com / info@leica-camera.com  
Telephone +49(0)6441-2080-111 / Fax +49(0)6441-2080-339

Thanks Stephen. I would like to hear what Jerzy thinks of this as it seems to contradict the Hahne list.

William

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

You will always find inaccuracies about our dear Leicas and there will always be experts whom I will call artists to offer 
a particular Leica on special requests.

 

For exemple this Leica IIIC chrome 1949.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, willeica said:

Thanks Stephen. I would like to hear what Jerzy thinks of this as it seems to contradict the Hahne list.

William

That's a hard case , indeed... Wetzlar, traditionally, is considered the "final source" about info on specific items, but Hahne list is also regared as e seriously documented source.. and they are in full contradiction about this topic; imho, the answer from Leica, in this case, looks to me a bit too quick... and from a department ("customer care") which typically is in charge of other tasks... 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, luigi bertolotti said:

That's a hard case , indeed... Wetzlar, traditionally, is considered the "final source" about info on specific items, but Hahne list is also regared as e seriously documented source.. and they are in full contradiction about this topic; imho, the answer from Leica, in this case, looks to me a bit too quick... and from a department ("customer care") which typically is in charge of other tasks... 

I would suspect that what Hahne had included his own expertise. I wonder if the code words I gave before are on the record?

William

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, luigi bertolotti said:

That's a hard case , indeed... Wetzlar, traditionally, is considered the "final source" about info on specific items, but Hahne list is also regared as e seriously documented source.. and they are in full contradiction about this topic; imho, the answer from Leica, in this case, looks to me a bit too quick... and from a department ("customer care") which typically is in charge of other tasks... 

That's the feeling I get too

Also, i've sent another email to Leica enquiring about the possible code plus whether they have any information on a repaint job (by Leica)

Edited by romualdo
Link to post
Share on other sites

well, I am still convinced that Hahgne list is correct and this camera was black paint. Few year ago they digitized delivery records and some of repair books, this is why the replies come so quick. Usually when inquiring specific serial number you will get the date when camera left the factory, and if available, as well dates of repairs/conversions done by Leitz. But not what has been repaired/converted.
As mentioned before - the parts which are on the camera were never chromed, so if the the camera was really chromed when produced then top/bottom cover and top plate , eye viewer lever must have been replaced (not  only black painted) and all chromed knobs eitrher replaced ar renickeled. Not impossible but very unprobably.

Link to post
Share on other sites

more information from Leica (sent them a second email)

Dear Mr. Platt,

the possibility exists that this camera has been rebuilt or repainted. In our old repair / maintenance books nothing is noted about this serial.Such conversions were also carried out by other external workshops at this time.

According to the serial number, it is a Leica III chrome from 1933.

Chrome versions had same codeword with „ chrome“ added.

 LYDRO (1933-1934) Leica III in black , body only

 LYMAR  Leica III in black with 5 cm / 3.5 Elmar.

 Mit freundlichen Gruessen / kind regards 
Peter Brieger 
Leica Camera AG 
Customer Care                                                   

Produkt Support
Am Leitz-Park 5 / D-35578 Wetzlar

www.leica-camera.com / peter.brieger@leica-camera.com

Telephone 06441-2080111

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Hi,

Once more, and based in my experience, I have to agree with Jerzy and, from my point of view the more reliable source is Hahne list. Here is my Standard serial 147575 that appears in most of the lists as chromed except in Band I, that appears as black. Band I is not error free but quite close to it.

So I support the original black even when, of course, it's not NOS but very good condition.

Best wishes and stay safe,

Augusto

PS: Yes, I know the Elmar 35 is not standard but he's waiting for the right body to surface :)

 

Hahne:

Edited by tranquilo67
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/31/2021 at 1:48 PM, earleygallery said:

I would question the 'NOS' description. That may give up further information.

New Old Stock should refer to new, as in not previously sold or used, items that are not longer current. For example, if a dealer had an unsold boxed unused M6 at the back of a cupboard, that would be NOS (as someone here bought a while ago).

Yes, those were quite common a while back. I bought one around 2010.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My black paint Leica III (s/n 116111) also shows all the signs of being black from birth and the Hahne list confirms this. But several other lists in books and on the internet state that it should be chrome. There is a thread about this as below; I'm inclined to believe the Hahne list on mine and yours.

Alan

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 months later...

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.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
×
  • Create New...