Asterisk Leica

[tranquilo67]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi all,

While answering William in other thread I've realized that I haven't shared with you my other recent acquisition (yes, I know I should stop with screw mount cameras but I couldn't resist on this one).

It's a Leica III chromed serial 97905*. It's my first camera with asterisk so I've done the usual research about this and in general the asterisk Leica's.

This one started its life as a 1933 black-niquel Leica II (it's in a batch of those and it's too early for a chrome body). So being currently a chromed III is at least interesting and a quite non-coherent camera, as is generally accepted that during upgrades the black remained black and the chromed remained chromed. Based on my experience, the chrome is original (no rechromed) because of the filling of the engravings are as usual and the depth of those engravings seems the correct one.

Even more, the camed A/R lever and the non-stepped viewfinder window place it 1937 or later and of course, it has no "lavatory" type of rangefinder housing, so the upgraded is discarded from my point of view. Even more, an upgrade would have the same serial with no asterisk at all.

The asterisk is usually accepted as either duplicated number (in this case, this option is discarded due to the much later body than the original serial number) or replacement of cameras damaged beyond repair. But if so, shouldn't it be the same model/finish? If it was going to be replaced by a completely different camera, why not just use a brand new number?

To finish the interesting aspects, it has a camed speed dial type "A" for VACU sync. That speed dial was used, up to my knowledge, till 1937 so if we combine this with the viewfinder window, it points to a 1937 body. Jerzy has well noted that the diopter lever is coherent with that estimated date but the lens (serial number 673802 is from 1948) is either non-associated to the body or we're talking about a later camera.

Once more, more questions than answers. The only clear aspect is that, given all the peculiarities of the camera, the asterisk seems authentic and not just engraved later on a regular body with regular serial.

As always, any comment, suggestion or correction is absolutely welcome.

Best wishes,

Augusto

PS: I this case I also have pending the check with Leica archives as well as get internally inspected by an expert (Jerzy). Current bets are in favor of having the same internal number but we'll see

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!

 

[tranquilo67]

Interesting!! 121 visits and no comments. I'm going to beat a record 😄

[Advertisement]

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

[Pyrogallol]

My comment - from the picture it looks like “bright chrome” ?

Could this be the earliest * camera ? Does anyone know an earlier one?

Edited December 2, 2021 by Pyrogallol

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello Augusto,

Nice camera.

I think that the engraving "Germany" on the top plate began after World War II. Around 1946 perhaps.

Best Regards,

Michael

[romanus53]

really nice camera and interesting find, bright chrome is hard to get "photographed" but can be identified if in hands; I think these bodies have rounder tops for the viewfinder like the black ones compared to later chromed models. I've always thought the VACUU is post-WW2.

[luigi bertolotti]

5 hours ago, Michael Geschlecht said:

 

I think that the engraving "Germany" on the top plate began after World War II. Around 1946 perhaps.

 

Michael

Me too think that this "Germany" engraving is probably very significant about timing : an original rework made postwar; hipotesis : a very worn II sent for tentative overhaul/upgrade, which resulted impossible/not worth, and the customer got this camera, assembled out of line (*) with the original s/n + asterisk to indicate that, even if probably delivered with warranty, this was not a standard manufactured item.

Nice item 😎... a good an intersting find for a passionate of Barnacks

(*) assembly made in the repair department, with some spares too, maybe... if so, I wouldn't be surprised that Leica , today, can't say anything about the history of this item : keeping track of pruduction is one thing, keeping track of repairs all another one.

Edited December 3, 2021 by luigi bertolotti

[romanus53]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Aggree to "Germany" on top, export models had that on the bottom, but even if the top-plate was changed the original s/n was engraved without any additions. And sometimes black ones were upgraded/repaired to chrome ones https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/314514-conversions-upgrades-modiefied-ones/?tab=comments#comment-4068191 #3

[willeica]

4 hours ago, romanus53 said:

really nice camera and interesting find, bright chrome is hard to get "photographed" but can be identified if in hands; I think these bodies have rounder tops for the viewfinder like the black ones compared to later chromed models. I've always thought the VACUU is post-WW2.

Yes the VACU is post war. I have a 'cammed' dial on a 1935 IIIa, but the dial is postwar. I have not been able to get it to work with a VACU yet. Another piece of work in progress for me.

The camera which Augusto has shown is very nice, particularly to see a chrome III with an early SN , even if it is from a II Model D. The toilet seat disappeared on the II around the same time that the III was introduced. My own guess is that this was a new top plate as the diopter control for the rangefinder window is also there. As for bright chrome, it is hard to tell from photographs and it would depend upon when the camera was altered as the bright chrome was only around for a short period. As for recognising bright chrome, you have to have seen one to know one. The photo below is as close as I have got to capturing what they look like. 'In the flesh' they look quite different to the normal satin chrome which remained on LTM cameras until the IIIg and continued on in the M line. 

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 asterisk was for repeats of the same SN and not for conversion. This should be mentioned in Augusto's queries for the folks in Wetzlar. 

William

[romanus53]

My humble effort to compare bright vs regular chrome, note the sharper edges on the later one around the speed dial

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]

2 hours ago, romanus53 said:

My humble effort to compare bright vs regular chrome, note the sharper edges on the later one around the speed dial

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!

Nice try. As I said, you really have to have seen one to know one. They are quite different to the normal satin chrome and most collectors do not know what you are talking about, unless they have already seen one. I have never figured out why Leica dropped the bright chrome so quickly. It was by far the best wearing surface ever put on Leica cameras. In the recent Wetzlar Camera Auction, several bright chrome models sold for substantial sums.

William

 

[tranquilo67]

Thank you very much to all of you!!!

15 hours ago, Pyrogallol said:

My comment - from the picture it looks like “bright chrome” ?

Could this be the earliest * camera ? Does anyone know an earlier one?

Hi,

That was exactly my first thought. Later on, looking in detail the non-lavatory shape of the rangefinder housing AFAIK points to a later model. The chrome is standard non-bright (but very good condition and I'm a poor product photographer ).

Once more, thank you and best wishes

8 hours ago, Michael Geschlecht said:

Hello Augusto,

Nice camera.

I think that the engraving "Germany" on the top plate began after World War II. Around 1946 perhaps.

Best Regards,

Michael

Hi Michael!!

Thank you very much!! Those are exactly the interesting points!!! I will investigate that option. The strange point would be that, if the supposedly destroyed camera was going to be replaced, why not either by the same model or by the latest model in that moment? (IIIc). A plain III seems a bit strange.

Thank you very much!!

6 hours ago, romanus53 said:

really nice camera and interesting find, bright chrome is hard to get "photographed" but can be identified if in hands; I think these bodies have rounder tops for the viewfinder like the black ones compared to later chromed models. I've always thought the VACUU is post-WW2.

Hi!!

I have seen a couple of bright chrome and, to me, this is the standard (brushed?) chrome. Regarding the VACU I've taken the reference a page that someone (I think it was Alan?) posted in this forum some time ago (attached the picture). This is an A type.

Thank you very much for your comments and best wishes

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!

2 hours ago, luigi bertolotti said:

Me too think that this "Germany" engraving is probably very significant about timing : an original rework made postwar; hipotesis : a very worn II sent for tentative overhaul/upgrade, which resulted impossible/not worth, and the customer got this camera, assembled out of line (*) with the original s/n + asterisk to indicate that, even if probably delivered with warranty, this was not a standard manufactured item.

Nice item 😎... a good an intersting find for a passionate of Barnacks

(*) assembly made in the repair department, with some spares too, maybe... if so, I wouldn't be surprised that Leica , today, can't say anything about the history of this item : keeping track of pruduction is one thing, keeping track of repairs all another one.

Thank you very much Luigi. Yes, that's what I thought: mmmm interesting!!

That's mainly my guess. A black II sent for repair but not possible and replaced and the owner could have taken advantage of that replacement for going to an upper model III. Strange that they didn't use the new serial but, in my opinion, that's the option with less assumptions and that makes somehow more sense.

I will ask not only for the standard delivery information of the original serial but also I'll try to get some service information. May be there's something in the service books

Once more thank you very much!!!

 

 

2 hours ago, romanus53 said:

Aggree to "Germany" on top, export models had that on the bottom, but even if the top-plate was changed the original s/n was engraved without any additions. And sometimes black ones were upgraded/repaired to chrome ones https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/314514-conversions-upgrades-modiefied-ones/?tab=comments#comment-4068191 #3

Thank you very much!! I'll have a look at the thread you mentioned.

2 hours ago, willeica said:

Yes the VACU is post war. I have a 'cammed' dial on a 1935 IIIa, but the dial is postwar. I have not been able to get it to work with a VACU yet. Another piece of work in progress for me.

The camera which Augusto has shown is very nice, particularly to see a chrome III with an early SN , even if it is from a II Model D. The toilet seat disappeared on the II around the same time that the III was introduced. My own guess is that this was a new top plate as the diopter control for the rangefinder window is also there. As for bright chrome, it is hard to tell from photographs and it would depend upon when the camera was altered as the bright chrome was only around for a short period. As for recognising bright chrome, you have to have seen one to know one. The photo below is as close as I have got to capturing what they look like. 'In the flesh' they look quite different to the normal satin chrome which remained on LTM cameras until the IIIg and continued on in the M line. 

The asterisk was for repeats of the same SN and not for conversion. This should be mentioned in Augusto's queries for the folks in Wetzlar. 

William

Thank you very much!! And agree (as always). The bright chrome finish is nearly impossible to photograph even when in person it can be clearly identified (looks like a kind of artificial? less refined? versus the regular finish). In this case the finish is the later standard one. Regarding the asterisk, I will try to get from them to check the service books but you know that they're not always complete.

I'll keep you all posted about Leica's answer.

Best wishes

1 hour ago, romanus53 said:

My humble effort to compare bright vs regular chrome, note the sharper edges on the later one around the speed dial

Yes. It's extremely difficult to catch that with a picture.

Thank you!!!

[luigi bertolotti]

12 minutes ago, tranquilo67 said:

 

Strange that they didn't use the new serial but, in my opinion, that's the option with less assumptions and that makes somehow more sense.

Well... by chance in my professional life I have seen other examples of similar behavior by manufacturers (not longtime ago, in the agri mechanical sector...where you also have standard items that can have a very long lifecycle, even passing through different owners) ... it's all about a serious approach to the task of "manufacturer guarantees to be able to maintain any item he has built". To elaborate :

- Suppose they had engraved onto a new serial taken from the current batches, (but probably, in that year, there was not even a "current batch" of Leica III... but let's suppose it would be) 

- One day, years later, they receive for maintenance camera xxx.xxx : they say "OK, it was batch xx of year yy... bodies were made THIS way (docs in house)

- They disassembly the camera ---> it results not made THIS way... confusion, loss of time, and in the case that, for commercial policy, a standard CLA on a standard item has a standard price... there is a problem

- But if the camera is clearly identified thanks to a not standard s/n, they know from the start they must work differently... they can understand and (probably) reconstruct the story behind... and, for instance, warn the customer or dealer that "this is a non standard maintenance task... quotation follows" (or "maintenance to be carried on time&materials basis")

 

 

 

[willeica]

2 hours ago, tranquilo67 said:

looks like a kind of artificial? less refined? versus the regular finish

It actually looks more perfect or 'polished' to my eyes than the standard satin finish. When chrome first appeared, chrome cameras were considered to be more desirable. They were also more expensive than the black models, which is the opposite to the situation with collectors' items today.

Let us know how you get on with Wetzlar, Augusto. I suspect that the camera was modified a long time after it was originally made. The viewing window frame is another pointer. 

In this photo below, the camera on the left is a bright chrome III, but it is difficult in this photo to tell this finish apart from the satin chrome on the IIIb in the middle and the IIIa on the right. The IIIa which has a higher SN than the IIIb has the newer type of window frame.

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 is part of the mystery of Leicas, there us always something to note. And if we had nothing to note we would have nothing to discuss here.

Best of luck with your enquiries, Augusto.

William

[wizard]

Am 1.12.2021 um 13:07 schrieb tranquilo67:

If it was going to be replaced by a completely different camera, why not just use a brand new number?

Well, but why not use the old number again? Maybe the customer wanted to retain the original number? I am sure Leitz would have complied with such a request, and added the asterisk instead.

[jerzy]

AFAIK Leitz  policy was to avoid 2 or more cameras with the same serial number  (Augusto  - with exception of your 357220🙂). Therefore, when repair workshop ordered a part carrying serial number, they had to send to Wetzlar the "old" part which was then partially destroyed (old serial number was either drilled or heavily scratched) and sent back together with replacement part. Whenever a camera was sent for conversion or siginificant repauir Leitz retained the original serial, eventhough sometimes customer received brand new camera. This was practiced because of import tax, I believe.
But this does not explain the asterisk (ot "a" on pre-30-ties cameras and lenses). I suppose that this was a case when camera was evidently lost or stolen and customer had a sort of official  confirmation for this. As it could not have been completly excluded that the original camera will be found at some time in the future Leitz used asterisk to mark a duplicate.

As we discussed earlier with Augusto it is not completly clear.

[romanus53]

Just one more try to catch that bright chrome, setting the light has huge impact

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!

all four show the early lavatory-seat, left is bright to my eyes and has a smoother surface, the third from left looks fresh, the fourth normal used, one can see the sharper edges around the speed dial on the two ones right.

PS I also enjoy the discussion on archive, museum, library, collection and the preservation of cultural heritage

 

Edited December 3, 2021 by romanus53

[tranquilo67]

4 hours ago, luigi bertolotti said:

Well... by chance in my professional life I have seen other examples of similar behavior by manufacturers (not longtime ago, in the agri mechanical sector...where you also have standard items that can have a very long lifecycle, even passing through different owners) ... it's all about a serious approach to the task of "manufacturer guarantees to be able to maintain any item he has built". To elaborate :

- Suppose they had engraved onto a new serial taken from the current batches, (but probably, in that year, there was not even a "current batch" of Leica III... but let's suppose it would be) 

- One day, years later, they receive for maintenance camera xxx.xxx : they say "OK, it was batch xx of year yy... bodies were made THIS way (docs in house)

- They disassembly the camera ---> it results not made THIS way... confusion, loss of time, and in the case that, for commercial policy, a standard CLA on a standard item has a standard price... there is a problem

- But if the camera is clearly identified thanks to a not standard s/n, they know from the start they must work differently... they can understand and (probably) reconstruct the story behind... and, for instance, warn the customer or dealer that "this is a non standard maintenance task... quotation follows" (or "maintenance to be carried on time&materials basis")

 

 

 

Hi Luigi,

Agree!! It looks like quite a Germanic way of proceeding and keeping both, what it was originally and, at the same time, that it's currently a different thing.

Best wishes,

Augusto

[willeica]

3 hours ago, tranquilo67 said:

Hi Luigi,

Agree!! It looks like quite a Germanic way of proceeding and keeping both, what it was originally and, at the same time, that it's currently a different thing.

Best wishes,

Augusto

It was the one thing that Leica always did. They maintained the original SN on a new top plate and never issued a new number for the 'converted model'. I have several examples in my collection. In this case, Jerzy has explained that if the original top plate was not available, then Leica may have added the asterisk at the conversion stage. If this was not the case, the asterisk was on the original camera. They are the two possibilities. You won't find the answer to this in the service record, but if there is an original delivery with an asterisk in it, then you have your answer. Likewise, if there is none with an asterisk, you can then assume the other option holds in this case. 

William

[UliWer]

On 12/1/2021 at 1:07 PM, tranquilo67 said:

The asterisk is usually accepted as either duplicated number (in this case, this option is discarded due to the much later body than the original serial number)

The explanation which would convince me was that the original II already had the asterix. This camera was upgraded to a III after the war in the way Jerzy described in#15. As the original already had an asterix the upgraded item must have the asterix as well. 

So you have an upgraded asterix-Leica - which should be a real rarity.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[willeica]

34 minutes ago, UliWer said:

The explanation which would convince me was that the original II already had the asterix. This camera was upgraded to a III after the war in the way Jerzy described in#15. As the original already had an asterix the upgraded item must have the asterix as well. 

So you have an upgraded asterix-Leica - which should be a real rarity.

That looks like the situation, but Augusto should check it out with the Leica Archives. The original delivery should give the answer. 

William