Questions re: this Leica and discrepancies that I see.

[TallHoss]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello All,

I would like to reach out to this community for advice re; a camera that came into my shop recently. 

I shoot for an online auction house in Pueblo, CO. USA. I was very happy to see this camera come into the shop for auction. Normally, others would research items for auction, but I took this lot myself. Now I am confused, more so than I would have anticipated. While there is a wealth of information about all things Leica, online, I have too many questions about this specific camera to feel comfortable claiming it as a specific model, or even an original Leica.

The SN on the top is barely legible (first red flag), and the number, 37015, puts it into the production queue as a Leica Model 1 (Second red flag). When I started researching this camera, I did not know of the various Russian knock-offs out there and I am wondering if this is, in fact one of those. There are other issues that I will address in additional postings on this thread. Any help this community could give me, to certain the true identity of this camera, would be appreciated.

 

It seems that I have reached the maximum number of posts today with this entry, so I will try to add some extra info.

You can see on the sides that there are lugs for attachment of a camera strap, but I do not see those appear on Leica camera until Model 3. The lens is marked as a, "Leitz Elmar f=5cm 1:3,5", however, it does not have a SN. In my research, I have seen reference to some lenses leaving the factory without SN's, so this confuses me. When I take of the lens, I see a round lever associated with the RF system, and an "O" at the 12 O'Clock position of the lens attachment housing. These elements would seem to me to indicate original Leica manufacture, but the presence of the camera strap points concerns me. There is a flared protective sleeve around the shutter release, which does not seem standard, but I am wondering if that is an after-market addition. The shutter release button itself also does not seem standard.

The base plate is nickel and does not match the rest of the camera, but there is a diagram on the inside, written in German, that describes the film threading procedure. 

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!

Edited December 18, 2022 by TallHoss
Adding information.

[willeica]

I have a I Model A with strap holders which were there from the beginning as part of a special set. That set would have been earlier than this camera. I have about 7 other I Model As which don’t have strap lugs. I also have about the same number of II Model Ds and only one of them has strap lugs which would have been added after initial production. The lenses on I Model As had no serial numbers and when the cameras were ‘upgraded’ the same lens was used with no SN. Can you provide another photo showing the lens front without a cap and also the lens fully extended? One other feature I note here is the low profile wind knob which would have predated the SN 37015. Final point, does the auction house for whom you work have any people who are knowledgeable about early Leicas who might examine the camera? 
 

William 

[Anbaric]

Looks like there's a step down from the top of the rangefinder cover to the front viewfinder surround, as there should be. Accessory shoe looks OK. It's not that unusual to to find earlier Leicas with strap lugs fitted, but it would be very unusual to find a Soviet camera with them added (and a faker wouldn't bother). I assume the collar around the shutter release doesn't rotate when you turn the film advance knob, as it would on a Soviet copy?

Rick Oleson's guide to Leica vs fake:

http://rick_oleson.tripod.com/index-213.html

You might also want to post a picture of the mechanism with the bottom plate off, and another from the front with the lens off.

[nf3996]

To me, that looks like a Leica I (Model A) later upgraded to a II (Model D) - the chrome strap lugs could have been added at the time of the upgrade. The chrome baseplate may also date from the time of the upgrade, or the original may have been lost and what you have is of a later date. The bit of the lens that I can see appears to be chrome, not nickel, so that might also be of a later date than the body. I can't offer an explanation for the lack of a serial number on a chrome 5cm Elmar lens, but the odd shutter release surround might also have been added by an owner in place of the original at some point in the camera's life.

Alan

[TallHoss]

16 hours ago, willeica said:

I have a I Model A with strap holders which were there from the beginning as part of a special set. That set would have been earlier than this camera. I have about 7 other I Model As which don’t have strap lugs. I also have about the same number of II Model Ds and only one of them has strap lugs which would have been added after initial production. The lenses on I Model As had no serial numbers and when the cameras were ‘upgraded’ the same lens was used with no SN. Can you provide another photo showing the lens front without a cap and also the lens fully extended? One other feature I note here is the low profile wind knob which would have predated the SN 37015. Final point, does the auction house for whom you work have any people who are knowledgeable about early Leicas who might examine the camera? 
 

William 

William,

Thank you for your reply, especially regarding the issue of the strap lugs. I have seen only one picture of a Model I, or Model II, with lugs. I have also read that some of the lenses that didn't have SN's were ones re-fitted from the original, during the upgrade process, but I am not able to distinguish that myself. My original thought was that this camera has perhaps one that had been given an upgrade, but the presence of the lugs really concerned me. As to the more knowledgeable people at my firm who might examine this camera, I am it. I have looked for someone in Colorado who might have the necessary knowledge, but have not found anyone, to date. Your help is greatly appreciated.

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!

[TallHoss]

11 hours ago, Anbaric said:

Looks like there's a step down from the top of the rangefinder cover to the front viewfinder surround, as there should be. Accessory shoe looks OK. It's not that unusual to to find earlier Leicas with strap lugs fitted, but it would be very unusual to find a Soviet camera with them added (and a faker wouldn't bother). I assume the collar around the shutter release doesn't rotate when you turn the film advance knob, as it would on a Soviet copy?

Rick Oleson's guide to Leica vs fake:

http://rick_oleson.tripod.com/index-213.html

You might also want to post a picture of the mechanism with the bottom plate off, and another from the front with the lens off.

Anbaric, 

Thank you for your reply. As to the collar around the shutter release, yes, it does rotate when the film advance knob is turned. In fact, the shutter release knob rotates when the film advance knob is turned. I am attaching two shots of the lens, removed from the body.

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!

[TallHoss]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

49 minutes ago, nf3996 said:

To me, that looks like a Leica I (Model A) later upgraded to a II (Model D) - the chrome strap lugs could have been added at the time of the upgrade. The chrome baseplate may also date from the time of the upgrade, or the original may have been lost and what you have is of a later date. The bit of the lens that I can see appears to be chrome, not nickel, so that might also be of a later date than the body. I can't offer an explanation for the lack of a serial number on a chrome 5cm Elmar lens, but the odd shutter release surround might also have been added by an owner in place of the original at some point in the camera's life.

Alan

Alan,

Thank you for your response. I have recently posted photos of the lens, removed from the body, if that helps. I will attach photos of the bottom plate attached and unattached for you, and the others, to see. Ultimately, I would like to be able to state that this is, or is not a real Leica. Since the auction is online, I am very interested in accuracy, since most customers will not be able to personally inspect this camera prior to sale. For the purposes of the auction, we can sell a real or a fake, but for me, I would really rather this be a genuine Leica.

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!

[TallHoss]

11 hours ago, Anbaric said:

Looks like there's a step down from the top of the rangefinder cover to the front viewfinder surround, as there should be. Accessory shoe looks OK. It's not that unusual to to find earlier Leicas with strap lugs fitted, but it would be very unusual to find a Soviet camera with them added (and a faker wouldn't bother). I assume the collar around the shutter release doesn't rotate when you turn the film advance knob, as it would on a Soviet copy?

Rick Oleson's guide to Leica vs fake:

http://rick_oleson.tripod.com/index-213.html

You might also want to post a picture of the mechanism with the bottom plate off, and another from the front with the lens off.

Also, the collar surrounding the shutter release is removable.

[willeica]

3 hours ago, TallHoss said:

William,

Thank you for your reply, especially regarding the issue of the strap lugs. I have seen only one picture of a Model I, or Model II, with lugs. I have also read that some of the lenses that didn't have SN's were ones re-fitted from the original, during the upgrade process, but I am not able to distinguish that myself. My original thought was that this camera has perhaps one that had been given an upgrade, but the presence of the lugs really concerned me. As to the more knowledgeable people at my firm who might examine this camera, I am it. I have looked for someone in Colorado who might have the necessary knowledge, but have not found anyone, to date. Your help is greatly appreciated.

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 camera seems to be genuine and is a I Model A converted to a II Model D. It is, however, a sum of many parts. It has the genuine round rangefinder cam found on the II Model D. The wind knob is a lower profile model from a I A . The lens is a later chrome model, but does not seem to have a serial number. This should normally be on the black ring surrounding the lens elements. The base is from a later chrome camera and the shutter surround is not from Leitz. It is generic, possibly of Soviet origin.

The compatibility of Leica parts means that there are a lot of cameras like this around. Properly serviced it would make a nice user camera. Collectors usually look for ‘original condition’, but all collectors have some items of mixed origin.

William 

[wizard]

The top cover has likely been repainted, as evidenced by the scratched away paint in the region of the various engravings. But don't worry, someone did a similar job on the #105 Leica, and it still sold for something like 14 million Euros.

[250swb]

9 minutes ago, wizard said:

The top cover has likely been repainted, as evidenced by the scratched away paint in the region of the various engravings. But don't worry, someone did a similar job on the #105 Leica, and it still sold for something like 14 million Euros.

As I understood it the engraving used to be done after the top was painted, which means it leaves an unsealed edge of paint that can be chipped after the white infill has fallen out. I could be wrong though.

[wizard]

vor 15 Minuten schrieb 250swb:

As I understood it the engraving used to be done after the top was painted, which means it leaves an unsealed edge of paint that can be chipped after the white infill has fallen out. I could be wrong though.

This depends on the particular model. With the early black paint Leicas, as the one shown here, there never was any white infill to begin with. But trust me, this is still not how even an early Leica would have left the factory (I have seen quite a few of those over the years). And that's not just paint having chipped off through use, this is the cause of some deliberate action to render the engravings more visible again after a repaint.

[TallHoss]

Thank you all very much! I am much more confident in my decision to call this camera a genuine Leica. To be honest, I tend to carry it around with me at work, just to hold it. I doubt that I will be successful in bidding for this camera, but I will have the first bid in, once the auction is published.

Normally, I don't write the descriptions for the items we auction. I will write the description for this camera, and I will post it here, no doubt using many of the insights that all of you have given me.

 

Again, thank you all very much.

 

Best Regards,

Darin

[jerzy]

as all others mentioned this is genuine Leica however not in original condition anymore. And parts built into the camera indicate either multiple rebuilt/repair or conversion not done in Wetzlar. There are some parts from original IA from 1930 like top plate, shutter frame (but not shutter itself), possibly rewind knob, rewind lever and  accessory shoe. Shutter like the one in this camera has been used in production cameras between May 1933 (introduction of III) and mid 1935.  Btw - the speed dial is well from III. There are as well other parts that were used until 1936. But top cover with non-stepped viewer window frame was used only after January 1937. Chrome plated bottom plate could have been replaced anytime after 1933. Unnumbered Elmar  may originate from original IA (therefore no SN) and received 7 oclock chrome plated mount anytime after 1933. So a bit confusing, but still genuine Leica.
And commenting flackig off black paint - this is not necessarily indication for repaint, I have seen many early black paint with deffective paint and they were not repainted.  As 250swb wrote covers were firstly black painted and then engraved revealing bare brass. This was later on filled with bismut alloy (woods metal or similar). It was like this until approx 1939, afterwards engravings were deeper and were filled  with white paint. 
We all have seen old black paint cameras with almost pristine black paint but as well similar old or younger cameras with damaged paint. I do not know exactely what is the dependance, but usually black paint with damages is thinner that on intact cameras and degradation starts around the lettering. And this could indicate to a sort of chemical reaction between black paint components and alloy.

[TallHoss]

Thank you, Jerzy, More good information!

 

[TallHoss]

Hello to all of you who have helped me research this camera. Here is the link to the auction featuring the camera, along with the shots being used to promote the camera. If any of you see a glaring omission in the description, don't hesitate to mention what it is, I am looking to provide the most accurate description possible.

 

Again, thanks to all of you who have offered your knowledge and experience.

 

Best,

Darin

https://345auction.hibid.com/lot/142182246/1930-leica-model-1-rebuilt-to-model-ii-d/?q=&ref=catalog

[romualdo]

On 12/20/2022 at 5:02 AM, jerzy said:

And commenting flackig off black paint - this is not necessarily indication for repaint, I have seen many early black paint with deffective paint and they were not repainted.  As 250swb wrote covers were firstly black painted and then engraved revealing bare brass. This was later on filled with bismut alloy (woods metal or similar). It was like this until approx 1939, afterwards engravings were deeper and were filled  with white paint. 

Jerzy, many thanks for your detailed & comprehensive analysis

Am I correct in saying that white paint was not used (in the top cover post engraving process) till 1939 in black Leicas? (initially nothing but bare brass then later bismuth alloy)

https://www.belmontmetals.com/product-category/bismuth-alloys/

That then explains why many of the 30s black paint Leicas have much duller inscriptions (as my 1933 Leica III BP shows) - I always thought it was just faded white paint.

If they're bright white then they must be repaints?

Edited January 7, 2023 by romualdo