1944 Leica IIIc K (Chromed)

[alphonse2501]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This is a 1944 Leica IIIc K with 1950 coated 5cm/2 Summitar. White "K" stamp on 2nd shutter certain. It comes with post-war brown leather case (with Summitar nose, I didn't take photo 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!

[alphonse2501]

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!

[alphonse2501]

Base plate fit the body tightly, but locker feels loose. 

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!

[alphonse2501]

The feeling of vulcanite is more rubbish than my 1945 (half race) IIIc. Actually, this texture has more grip than 1945 IIIc (and looks slightly more shinny).

 

 

 

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!

[alphonse2501]

This Summitar has serial number in 1939 batch but the delivery date from Leica Archive says delivered in 1950. It has bluish coating.

Lastly, both have faults. Aperture rings misplaced. Winding knob with whole shaft can be rattle easily. "T" in slow speeds doesn't work. 

I'm note sure is it due the ball bearing of K model, the feel of winding is more ball-ish than regular 1945 IIIc (winds smooth).

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 February 1, 2024 by alphonse2501

[willeica]

It is possible that this was originally a grey paint IIIcK which was stripped and chromed. There are some IIIcK chrome cameras, but it would be pointless to re-chrome one. It is also possible that 1950 was when there was a trip to the Leitz factory for adding coating to the lens. Was there a code indicated by the Leica Archive e.g. LOOKX was the code for a IIIc with a coated Summitar? The 'vulcanite' looks like an inferior version of the 'sharkskin' vulcanite and does not look like it was provided in Wetzlar. 

William 

[250swb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Does the chrome finish look crude as well? You can see where the old finish has been rubbed off with sandpaper, would Leica have done that if it could just as easily be chemically stripped without damage? In fact the chrome top plate, eyepiece, and shutter speed dial look like silver paint to me. So an old restoration?

[pgk]

I believe that chrome plating relies on meticulous preparation to be really good. It looks to me as though the preparation has not been perfect (between the rewind knob and strap lug, and on the edge of the bottom plate it looks like the plating is 'peeling' marginally). As 250swb says, there are also signs of plating over rather scratched supporting metal. So I would suggest that this was not done by Leitz and more likely a third party or even an earlier owner with access to chrome plating.

[jc_braconi]

Does the chrome finish look crude as well? You can see where the old finish has been rubbed off with sandpaper, would Leica have done that if it could just as easily be chemically stripped without damage? In fact the chrome top plate, eyepiece, and shutter speed dial look like silver paint to me. So an old restoration?

Not sand paper

All the metal parts seems to have been sand blasted before chroming.

[alphonse2501]

Thanks for reply. It's hard to see what has changed other than re-chromed. I think send this camera to Youxin Ye may identifies more parts of change.

Based on the finish of brass plate, do you think de-chrome and restore to war time RLM 75 Grauviolett paint possible?

Leica Archive only has date of delivery for body and lens, so I guess the customer likely be non-military. Is there have the way to find the record other than Leica Archive? 

 

Edited February 1, 2024 by alphonse2501

[alphonse2501]

Youxin Ye replies my email:
 

Quote

You better off just keeping the camera as is.  Minor mechanical problems do not hurt the camera value.  The camera was made in the late wartime, while Leica had a material problem, and some cameras were in poor mechanical conditions.  The curtains may have some deterioration, not suitable for picture taking.  But we cannot replace them since it has a K stamp there.  If you want to use, find a good post-war IIIf RD.  Keeping the original is much better than trying to refinish it.  We do not offer repaint service.  If you strip the chrome and paint into grey, you will make the camera valueless.

We can service the lens.

 

[250swb]

3 hours ago, jc_braconi said:

 

All the metal parts seems to have been sand blasted before chroming.

I don't know where you are looking but you can clearly see sanding marks below the surface of the chrome. And why sandblast which softens detail everywhere including the engravings, as does sanding eventually? These engravings are relatively sharp because the sanding has only scuffed over the surface. Removing chrome in a professional way is simply to reverse the anode and diode circuit for each level of plating from the chrome bath, back to the nickel bath, and then you get back to brass. If it was a painted finish chemical strippers could have been used. Better still any paint could have been left.

Or are you being ironic? 🙂

Edited February 1, 2024 by 250swb

[alan mcfall]

I think there is a good probabality this camera was originally chrome plated as it left the factory.  I have recorded approximately 150 camera serials in the range of 391001-392000, the majority are in chrome finish. Only two continous strings of grey cameras exist in this series of 1000 cameras, the first 70 or 80 are grey and are from 1943.   The W. H. cameras are from 391423-391699 and they are also grey and typically 1943.  But they remaing cameras are contained within two long continous strings of serials.  That would be 391081 up to 391423 when the W.H. cameras started. Also,  the  cameras, 391700-391999 are chrome. These two strings of chrome cameras are frequetly dated 1945, approximately 2 years later than the reqular grey finish cameras. Also, many are listed as sales to US Army, so it seems these chrome lots in the 391xxx listings are later on when chrome may have been avaliable.

In the first string, these are the cameras I have seen as chrome without a single grey discovered.  I have cameras 391209 and 391319 and they are both original chrome. Also, all the chrome cameras in this string have the K on the shutter, but only a couple have it on the top.

81
94
96
102
103
112
137
138
140
151
155
158
166
173
175
179
189
190
191
209
238
245
249
259
267
284
310
319
330
345

 

The latter string of chrome cameras in the 391xxx listings are all chrome from 391700 to the 392000. and the ones I have seen are:

700
706
719
736
736
741
765
775
785
795
805
828
850
862
868
882
883
897
927
962

Only one has the K and 2 have grey leatherette, all seem to be dated in Oct. 1945. I have cameras 391700, 391706,391736 and 391850, all chrome. My 391700 is  the first serial after the W. H. cameras and though chrome is has grey leather.

There may be minor exceptions as often happens with Leica. But my assesment is that the grey cameras ended earlier in the war, 1943/44 and in 1945 leitz went back and picked up unused serials prceding and post the W. H. cameras and these were made in 1945 in chrome. If someone has more details, it would help clarify.

Now, why would 391175 be somewhat crudlely rechromed? Maybe leitz has records, but the quality of the rechrome suggests otherwise. Perhaps the camera was badly defaced and the owner had a third party do their best to restore it. But, 391175 is clearly in a consistant string of chrome manufactured cameras.  The K  shutter mark is likely also original, but the K on top is inconsistant. Agan, perhaps added later, or a one-off. 

 

Edited February 2, 2024 by alan mcfall
typo

[jc_braconi]

On 2/1/2024 at 10:50 PM, 250swb said:

I don't know where you are looking but you can clearly see sanding marks below the surface of the chrome. And why sandblast which softens detail everywhere including the engravings, as does sanding eventually? These engravings are relatively sharp because the sanding has only scuffed over the surface. Removing chrome in a professional way is simply to reverse the anode and diode circuit for each level of plating from the chrome bath, back to the nickel bath, and then you get back to brass. If it was a painted finish chemical strippers could have been used. Better still any paint could have been left.

Or are you being ironic? 🙂

I used fine sand with an air pistol, using various pressure to get some metal pieces mat, as they were shiny or to remove tool marks and it is clearly visible on this picture also some white paint remains in the arrow

[FPangrazi]

From my personal experience I can confirm what Alan Mcfall reported.
I add to your list the following serial numbers 391122 - 148 - 152 - 174 - 195 - 234 - 244 -271 - 306 - 325 - 415 - 416.
On most of these "chrome" ones the letter "K" is only engraved on the curtain and not together with the serial number.
The 319122 - 152 - 174 - 155 - 190 - 306 were delivered to US Army between 7th and 24th July 1945.
From the factory records the serial numbers 391251 - 391254 are in chrome finish, delivered to the Lutfwaffen on 6/3/1944 delivery 9911

[sabears]

On 2/2/2024 at 4:06 AM, alan mcfall said:

I think there is a good probabality this camera was originally chrome plated as it left the factory.  I have recorded approximately 150 camera serials in the range of 391001-392000, the majority are in chrome finish. Only two continous strings of grey cameras exist in this series of 1000 cameras, the first 70 or 80 are grey and are from 1943.   The W. H. cameras are from 391423-391699 and they are also grey and typically 1943.  But they remaing cameras are contained within two long continous strings of serials.  That would be 391081 up to 391423 when the W.H. cameras started. Also,  the  cameras, 391700-391999 are chrome. These two strings of chrome cameras are frequetly dated 1945, approximately 2 years later than the reqular grey finish cameras. Also, many are listed as sales to US Army, so it seems these chrome lots in the 391xxx listings are later on when chrome may have been avaliable.

In the first string, these are the cameras I have seen as chrome without a single grey discovered.  I have cameras 391209 and 391319 and they are both original chrome. Also, all the chrome cameras in this string have the K on the shutter, but only a couple have it on the top.

81
94
96
102
103
112
137
138
140
151
155
158
166
173
175
179
189
190
191
209
238
245
249
259
267
284
310
319
330
345

 

The latter string of chrome cameras in the 391xxx listings are all chrome from 391700 to the 392000. and the ones I have seen are:

700
706
719
736
736
741
765
775
785
795
805
828
850
862
868
882
883
897
927
962

Only one has the K and 2 have grey leatherette, all seem to be dated in Oct. 1945. I have cameras 391700, 391706,391736 and 391850, all chrome. My 391700 is  the first serial after the W. H. cameras and though chrome is has grey leather.

There may be minor exceptions as often happens with Leica. But my assesment is that the grey cameras ended earlier in the war, 1943/44 and in 1945 leitz went back and picked up unused serials prceding and post the W. H. cameras and these were made in 1945 in chrome. If someone has more details, it would help clarify.

Now, why would 391175 be somewhat crudlely rechromed? Maybe leitz has records, but the quality of the rechrome suggests otherwise. Perhaps the camera was badly defaced and the owner had a third party do their best to restore it. But, 391175 is clearly in a consistant string of chrome manufactured cameras.  The K  shutter mark is likely also original, but the K on top is inconsistant. Agan, perhaps added later, or a one-off. 

 

Beware! We are talking of 390xxx and NOT of 391xxx .

[250swb]

4 hours ago, jc_braconi said:

I used fine sand with an air pistol, using various pressure to get some metal pieces mat, as they were shiny or to remove tool marks and it is clearly visible on this picture also some white paint remains in the arrow

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!

A very ambiguous post, are you saying you did this restoration? If so I guess you should have more information about the original camera finish? Personally I don't think that looks like white paint left in the engraving but areas where the new black infill hasn't taken.

Edited February 3, 2024 by 250swb

[alphonse2501]

Sorry, I realized my title causes misleading. I should use chromed not "re-chromed".

Leica Archive notes my 390 serial number delivered in July 1944. Mine another stepper IIIc (3920**) was delivered in August 1945 to Amerika Armee.

I can guess this K body may delivered to civilian customer later removed gray painting and chrome plating by third party. I think I can send to Ye or DAG can verify the actual condition of the camera.

And the engraving ink looks just loses from engraves.

[alan mcfall]

3 hours ago, sabears said:

Beware! We are talking of 390xxx and NOT of 391xxx .

 

Thanks,my mistake, I got the serial  wrong. Anyway, this camera, 390175K would have been grey paint originally, as others have stated here. The nearest I have seen are 390153K (2/14/1944) and 390179K and they are also both grey.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[jc_braconi]

18 hours ago, 250swb said:

A very ambiguous post, are you saying you did this restoration? If so I guess you should have more information about the original camera finish? Personally I don't think that looks like white paint left in the engraving but areas where the new black infill hasn't taken.

NO I did not do the job 

I just says that I know this kind of work ie sandlasting