Old/new Leica ?

[LDBennett]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

About 30 years ago I bought a black Barnak Leica just as a display piece. It was  in no way pristine with brassing, a small visible dent in the top plate, and a slow shutter. I adjusted the curtain tension and I pulled the top plate off, de-dented it and noticed a serial number, different than the top plate, partially scratched out and hidden by the top plate. Unfortunately I lost the record of that scratched out different serial number. The top plate serial number is 59932 which is for a Leica I (Luxus??). But this camera has a slow shutter speed dial, strap lugs, a top plate rangefinder. My guess is that it is a Model III based on my brief investigation. 

My question is:

Is this an attempt to make a more modern Leica III into a more valuable earlier Model I?

Is this a combination of two cameras to get to one operational one?

Is this an update maybe done by Leica in the day?

Why is the body serial number scratched out?

Can any of these questions ever be answered?

This camera will never be sold in my life time as it is part of a larger collection of cameras I either owned in my younger years or ones I lusted after. I am just curious what a real Leica collector might know about this????

LDBennett

[jerzy]

59932 belongs to IC, why do you think it could have been Luxus?

Is this an attempt to make a more modern Leica III into a more valuable earlier Model I?
Cases of back-conversions (not done by Leica) are known but I do not think it is a case with your camera

Is this a combination of two cameras to get to one operational one? - no, I do not think so
Is this an update maybe done by Leica in the day? Usually Leica was carefull enough to scratch correct serial number under the top cover, but people do make mistakes. You may check with Leica archive what are the records on 59932

Why is the body serial number scratched out? originally serial number was engraved on top plate on the place which is covered by rangfefinder unti with II and III. Therefore usual practice during conversions was to scratch the serial number under top cover, between the lunettes of viewer and rangefinder (omn the photo below rangefinder unit is removed)

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]

This may well just be a modification of a I Model C to a III. A photo of the camera would help. The idea of a I being more valuable than a III is a modern concept. If this happened in the 1930s, the III would have been regarded as the more valuable camera at that time. 
 

The scratching out may be due to something which happened in house. Jerzy would be more knowledgeable than I about this.

William 

[LDBennett]

Unfortunately it has been many decades since I had the top plate off this camera to reveal the hidden number. I photographed it at the time but I have lost the photo and made no notes that I can find. I do remember it was grossly not the same number as the top plate number. And it had been crudely scratch off. I think the hidden number was hand scratched into the area under the top plate. At my elevated age (bad eyes, and other old age maladies) I am not really able to remove the top plate to get more info. I just reviewed all the differences between the Model I and other later series and all the details seem to match the Model III (strap lugs, slow speed dial, rangefinder). It may be a conversion but someone fooled with it at some later time. Anyway I was just wondering if anyone knew something I did't know beyond the obvious. Thank you for anyone who might offer an opinion.

LDBennett

[LDBennett]

The fact that this camera has strap lugs, which the Model I never had originally, raises the question: When modifying these Model I's to Model III's was there a way to add the strap lugs? There seems to be no indication on my camera that the strap lugs were not installed at the factory originally but who knows? Anyone got a known factory modified Model I to Model III to compare?

Just top be clear I care little about the value off this camera or the originality. To me it is just an example of a Barnack Leica which I will never sell, no matter its value.

LDBennett

[pippy]

The addition of strap lugs was a regular option offered by Leitz when the 1 was being converted. Perfectly normal.

Someone here has posted a price-list with all the options listed. Perhaps a search might turn it up?

Philip.

[jerzy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 3 Stunden schrieb LDBennett:

There seems to be no indication on my camera that the strap lugs were not installed at the factory originally but who knows

some Leica IA had lugs originally, but the lugs are different than in later III and slightly lower positioned. These IAs are rare and thus very collectible. Box in which camera has been shipped from the factory has a special stamp "Oesenkamera" which means camera with 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!

Leica policy during conversions /upgrades was to bring up the camera to the status of productions cameras from the time of conversions. Therefore converions to III done in 1933 is different that done later, especially in the 50-ties. Very often, especially during the later conversion almost all components of the camera were renewed, user received new camera with its original serial number. Photo below shows conversion from II to IIIa done mid 50-ties

If you post few photos of your camera (top view, fron view and bottom view with bottom cover taken off) I will be able to tell you a bit more about your conversion

[Pyrogallol]

4 hours ago, pippy said:

The addition of strap lugs was a regular option offered by Leitz when the 1 was being converted. Perfectly normal.

Someone here has posted a price-list with all the options listed. Perhaps a search might turn it up?

Philip.

Summer 1935 price list.

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, jerzy said:

some Leica IA had lugs originally, but the lugs are different than in later III and slightly lower positioned. These IAs are rare and thus very collectible. Box in which camera has been shipped from the factory has a special stamp "Oesenkamera" which means camera with 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!

Leica policy during conversions /upgrades was to bring up the camera to the status of productions cameras from the time of conversions. Therefore converions to III done in 1933 is different that done later, especially in the 50-ties. Very often, especially during the later conversion almost all components of the camera were renewed, user received new camera with its original serial number. Photo below shows conversion from II to IIIa done mid 50-ties

If you post few photos of your camera (top view, fron view and bottom view with bottom cover taken off) I will be able to tell you a bit more about your conversion

I have one of those I Model As with the lower strap lugs. It came as part of a kit with an ETRIN case, two FILCA cassettes and a FODIS/FODUA rangefinder. I have shown the lower position of the strap lugs here on the forum before. Those lugs would have been added before the camera left the factory for the first time in 1929. 

I agree that conversions /upgrades would have been aimed at bringing cameras and lenses up to the latest spec. Collecting habits in recent times mean that value was taken off, not initially, but in much more recent times. Examples would include any upgrade of I Model As, particularly early ones, and changes to Summars from rigid models to collapsible items. This happens in many other collecting areas where original condition is valued.

William 

[LDBennett]

So, to review, every aspect of my conversion is normal externally. I would not care one way or the other about all of this except for the different serial number scratched into the camera body under and hidden by the top plate. Add to that is the fact that some effort was expended attempting to scratch out over that hidden serial number. That really does not sound like anything Leica would do in a conversion. My first thought is that it was done post the conversion when a damaged top plate was replace, that came off another camera (59932 camera).

I really appreciate all posters above who explained this as best as they could base on my sketchy description. Thank you!! I am disappointed that I can not find the pictures I took of the hidden serial number some 35+ years ago. Unfortunately I am not physically able to tear into the camera to remove the top plate to reveal the hidden different serial number. So the mystery continues about what the original camera really was (???). But no matter, as the camera looks great in the display case along with many other great cameras.

To add information, I bought this at a WPCA bi-annual Camera Show in Pasadena California some 35+ years ago. It was in only fair condition with a small dent in the top plate. To remove the dent I removed the top plate and discover the hidden different serial number on the camera body. Except for my Leicaflex SL, I have no other Leicas.  They, in general, are outside my camera budget! At the time I was a member of WPCA  for about 10 years , quiting when it fell apart and I moved out of Orange County. I miss those in-person camera shows. EBAY is not the same and a bit of a gamble (I have used it recently and had a couple of disappointing purchases and a several rewarding purchases). Thanks again for all the help.

LDBennnett

[LDBennett]

7 hours ago, LDBennett said:

.......Except for my Leicaflex SL, I have no other Leicas.  They, in general, are outside my camera budget!......

OPP's.....I forgot I also have a Leica IIIF Red Dial (body only).

Also further investigation revealed to me that it is no later that a III because the top of the camera is divided into two pieces. The flat right side and the pushed up cover over the rangefinder. My much earlier removal was only of the rangefinder cover top. I don't remember if the hidden serial number was freehand scratching or an original engraving (it was 35+ years ago). You know, curiosity killed the cat!

LDBennett

[derleicaman]

Again, as Jerzy suggested, pictures of the camera would go a long way in helping you with this. Please provide pictures of the top, front and bottom with the bottom cover removed would help immensely.

[250swb]

Hidden serial numbers, evasion, and mysteries that pile on top of mysteries, well nobody died yet but I think we need Miss Marple.

[pippy]

On 1/20/2023 at 11:16 PM, LDBennett said:

.....I forgot I also have a Leica IIIF Red Dial (body only).....

On 1/22/2023 at 8:26 AM, 250swb said:

...nobody died yet but I think we need Miss Marple...

Were the OP to take his IIIf Red Dial into his book-lined study would we have 'The Body in the Library'?...

Philip.

[LDBennett]

For those of you who wanted pictures I was able to grab a few. The sticker on the bottom of the camera is really wishful thinking from 1999. I have no idea what it is worth and frankly don't care as it will be passed onto family when I am gone.

LDBennett

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!

[LDBennett]

Just noticed that my original claim of serial number 59932 is in error. The pictures clearly show that it is 54432. Sorry about that! My bad ever degrading eyesight often confuses a 4 for a 9 in smaller types.

LDBennett

[jerzy]

54432 was  I model C from 1931, with interchangeable lens. Conversion to III must have happened past May 1933 but before March 1936. Having a photo of the bottom of the camera with bottom cover off could possibly narrow this time gap.
Elmar lens had originally 11 oclock mount without infinity lock. Lens has been converted as well, possibly at the same time, and received 7 oclock mount (and was standarized if originates from 54432). Mechanical build up of optical cell and engravings on the front ring indicate that they could be from original lens. 

Camera and lens were non-standartized, lens must have been carrying last 3 digits of camera serial number, they were engeaved on DOF (Depth of Field) scale. Very often, during conversions of lenses Leica left original DOF ring and just engraved small "0" nearby focusing knob. Is there and 3 digit number (besides aperture numbers) engraved on DOF?

[LDBennett]

Jerzy:

There is a "0" under the infinity lock lever and no other numbers engraved anywhere else (except, of course, the depth of field indexes).

Again I have to point out that the frame of the camera under the top cover had a serial number that was NOT the 54432 number and had scratch marks through it in a poor attempt to hide this different serial number. The last time I saw this was 35+ years ago and I have no record of the number, nor can I remember if it looked like a factory engraving or just a hand scribed number. I have no recollection as to whether the hidden number was greater or less than 54432. 

Correct me if I am wrong but I understand that the real 54432 could easily have been converted to a model III in the day. Could the camera body less the top cover have been a real Modle III? I don't know why that would be the case and sounds not very intuitive, but possible. The scratched out number makes no sense to me unless two cameras were made into one. Darn, I wish I could find the hidden serial number noted somewhere. I suppose a technician doing the conversion could have scratched the wrong number in the camera frame and just scratched it out. Maybe during the conversion the real 54432 got lost and they just substitued a different  body and made the conversion top plate to be 54432??

I am not able at this time to add more pictures but could you tell me what to look for under the bottom cover that will help you with this mystery?

LDBennett

[jerzy]

There is a "0" under the infinity lock lever and no other numbers engraved anywhere else (except, of course, the depth of field indexes)

"0" under infinity lock lever means the real focal length, zero means 50,5mm. This focal length is typical for early Elmars. Left photo belows shows an example of the position where this number was engraved. Middle photo shows another "0" - this means that lens has been standartized. This shall be as well of your lens as the similar "0" is on the lens flange (at 12 oclock) on the camera. Right photo shows an example of lens that was originally non-standrad (and belonged to the camera with serial number "XX438".

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!

Again I have to point out that the frame of the camera under the top cover had a serial number that was NOT the 54432 number and had scratch marks through it in a poor
Scratching the number under the top cover was typical procedure applied at Leica for approx 99% of conversions from IA and IC to II and III. Here is an example of such scratching, camera number is 33232. 

The scratched out number makes no sense to me unless two cameras were made into one.   as mentioned above scratching was typical procedure and does not neccessarily means that two camera have been "married".

Photo of the bottom of the camera could possibly help in determining when conversion has been performed but will not help in clkaryfing the mystery of another serial number under the top cover

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[LDBennett]

jerzy:

Thank you for all the information. Before posting these two inquiries, I had zero knowledge of the conversion process. Thanks for updating me. It makes no difference to me when the camera was converted but only why there were two different serial numbers. I think the evidence has run out and it will have to remain a mystery for now. Only readers of this post will know of the inconsistency in serialization if the camera is ever sold (not in my lifetime!). I am convinced it is not a forgery and a real Barnack model with a checked past hidden from view for now.

LDBennett