Pix of Leica I Model A Anastigmat recently acquired

[Guest Ron (Netherlands)]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thank you Doug for your encouraging reply. It has probably only been sitting on a shelf for the last few years as it is showing ample WABI. I do have provenance which I prefer not to publish here. I think that others are being totally and unnecessarily pedantic if they will only accept its authenticity if it displays every original part eg the A-R lever and the original mushroom release as distinct from the possible replacement A-R lever and the possible replacement dimple release. Am bound to say also I have heard stories last week about a similar camera being sent for service/repair to a well known Leica "shop" in UK and on return the camera had lost its original mushroom release and a dimple version had been substituted. But such a 'shop" cannot attempt to replace the shutter crate ... and in this camera I am very sure the shutter crate ... and the lens ... are original. And I know for a fact that internal S/N on my camera was checked in 1995 to make sure it agreed with the top plate S/N.

 

At the end of the day there will be more documented evidence which I feel sure will disprove some of the doubts raised herein.

 

And it is a functioning camera as will be proved when I put a film through it.

 

Cheers

 

dunk

 

I think we as users but especially collectors will have to accept that almost non of these old - first Leica's are 100% original. That being said, to some and probably yourself, it is interesting to find out how much of the camera is original, the camera as it was when it was first on the market (not later fitted/refurbished by Leitz and/or others). Sometimes these cameras are put on the market with the explicite notion that only e.g. 50% is original; but still being valuable - which is all appreciated. If one is in for these kind of quests, all critics should be welcomed as they may reveal in the end how much of the species is still original - despite it is 100% genuine. And even if it turns out to be only partly original, you would still have an interesting and valuable camera.

[dkCambridgeshire]

I think we as users but especially collectors will have to accept that almost non of these old - first Leica's are 100% original. That being said, to some and probably yourself, it is interesting to find out how much of the camera is original, the camera as it was when it was first on the market (not later fitted/refurbished by Leitz and/or others). Sometimes these cameras are put on the market with the explicite notion that only e.g. 50% is original; but still being valuable - which is all appreciated. If one is in for these kind of quests, all critics should be welcomed as they may reveal in the end how much of the species is still original - despite it is 100% genuine. And even if it turns out to be only partly original, you would still have an interesting and valuable camera.

 

Thanks Ron and I agree with you. Furthermore I have checked illustrations in G Rogliatti's book "Leica The First 60 years " tonight where on page 37 there is a photograph of a Leica I model A "Anastigmat" ... with a replaced A-R lever.

 

As mentioned previously, these cameras were often serviced during their very long lives and it seems reasonable to assume that e.g. Leitz would have replaced a worn all black A-R lever with a then current production type. And the same would apply to other parts.

 

Cheers

 

dunk

[Advertisement]

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

[gyoung]

As a general observation on originality, I offer my experience, I have two 5cm Elmar lenses, screwthread, the 3.5 lens came with the III I inherited, when it was all overhauled the lens was discovered to have partial separation of the rear cemented pair of elements. These could have been separated and recemented but the repairer prefers to do this in batches so for speed the rear pair was replaced by another which was in stock of matching curvatures, etc. etc. so lens elements are only 50% original to serial number.

The other lens is a post war 2.8, this had clouding of the rear of the front element caused, I understand, by the lubricant used on the diaphragm blades (moral, always leave your 2.8/50 Elmar at maximum aperture!), cure for this was to replace the whole front unit of the lens, which comes with a different serial number, so lens is now apparently older than it was when it went into the repairer!

None of this matters to me, both lenses now give good results whereas before they were unusable, but beware of relying on numbers with older stuff!

 

Gerry

[elkinon]

Just a few quick shots from the workbench, to illustrate a few things that I am talking of. One of the pics. showing the way how to create an "Anastigmat". These guys in Russia ore elsewhere have plenty of time and can do everything, including ratchet wind on, speed dial, patina etc.

 

Ottmar

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!

[Erik van Straten]

I am proud being backed by a specialist as Ottmar Michaely. I've suggested Dunk to send the camera to Ottmar to have some research done. I am sorry, but I stay to my first thought the camera is a fake.

Every day has it's dog.

 

Erik.

[dkCambridgeshire]

Hello Ottmar and Erik, Thank you for showing the photos. I have quickly taken comparative shutter crate photos plus a couple more of the lens ... could you please give your opinion on the internal shutter crate screws

 

Furthermore, I just checked the counter wheels on both my cameras. The Anastigmat 184 does have a knife edge compared to the Elmar 7925. But the the buttons on the Anastigmat film frame counter are more "dimples" ie very small and round whereas the Elmar are cylindrical ... I will have to take some more photos in daylight.

 

This is Anastigmat No 184

 

This is Elmar No. 7925

 

Anastigmat 184 on top & Elmar 7925 below

 

And here is another of the lens

 

 

Regards

 

dunk

[dkCambridgeshire]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Here is another picture of the lens; I will try and take some in daylight later.

 

Ottmar, can you please advise if all of your film counter wheel photos are those of fakes? Or are those with tall buttons the genuine wheels?

 

I have just checked the film counter wheel buttons on both my cameras. Tbe Anastigmat has tiny round dimples and not short or tall cylindrical buttons. The Elmar has short cylindrical buttons. The edge of the Anastigmat wheel is "knife edge" . The edge of the Elmar wheel is less sharp but still sharper than in your photos.

 

Cheers

 

dunk

[Erik van Straten]

Just to compare. Here are the backs of the shuttercrates of no 201 (1) and no 305 (2). The 305 has the "newer" piece that engages the bottom lock. See Fritz Fith, Leica Handbuch (1940 version) page 75.

 

Erik.

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!

[dkCambridgeshire]

Hello Erik, The shutter crate in your 201 photo looks to be the same as in my 184 picture. I enlarged the 201 picture and rotated it to compare.

 

Cheers

 

dunk

[jpattison]

Hope to use the camera soon and see exactly what the lens is capable of. I do not expect it to perform like a modern lens but it should give an adequate result. This was the first lens Max Berek designed and was originally used in the "O" series. It is unlikely to perform as well as his subsequent Elmax and Elmar designs.

 

Hi Dunk,

according to Gunther Osterloh, in his book Advanced Photo School, The Anastigmat lens was used on the first 200 to 250 cameras, then renamed Elmax, not redesigned.

They are both five elements, with three cemented together (making a triplet).

When better quality glass became available, Max Berek recomputed the lens to a four element, with two cemented together triplet, calling it the Elmar.

 

The Anastigmat was re-named to incorporate Max and Ernst Leitz's names.

Hope this helps,

John

[dkCambridgeshire]

Hope to use the camera soon and see exactly what the lens is capable of. I do not expect it to perform like a modern lens but it should give an adequate result. This was the first lens Max Berek designed and was originally used in the "O" series. It is unlikely to perform as well as his subsequent Elmax and Elmar designs.

 

Hi Dunk,

according to Gunther Osterloh, in his book Advanced Photo School, The Anastigmat lens was used on the first 200 to 250 cameras, then renamed Elmax, not redesigned.

They are both five elements, with three cemented together (making a triplet).

When better quality glass became available, Max Berek recomputed the lens to a four element, with two cemented together triplet, calling it the Elmar.

 

The Anastigmat was re-named to incorporate Max and Ernst Leitz's names.

Hope this helps,

John

 

Hi John, Yes, and Erwin Puts also states this in his "Leica Lens Compendium" ie that the Anastigmat and Elmax lenses are the same ie both 5 element lenses. And in the close up photos of the Anastigmat lens I posted there are probably five reflections of the ring flash visible but they are a bit out of focus because the focus was on the front of the lens. If you look closely there are a group of three reflections clumped together at the back of the lens (two of which appear to overlap) and two more separate reflections at the front of the lens.

 

Cheers

 

dunk

[Guest Colt Seavers]

As an expert who had seen thousands of genuine Anastigmats, i think this Anastigmat looks original:rolleyes: This one sold for £8,160, it must be original!

 

Kidding, I´m happy for not having this problem, I´d trust Ottmar´s insider knowledge. He was employee of Leitz/Leica and had MANY high end collector´s items on his workbench.

What would be so wrong if this camera is NOT 100% genuine? Enjoy taking pictures, it´s a real bargain!

[Erik van Straten]

Hello Erik, The shutter crate in your 201 photo looks to be the same as in my 184 picture. I enlarged the 201 picture and rotated it to compare.

 

Cheers

 

dunk

 

Hello Dunk,

 

Yes, you have a point I think. Now just go to the best Leica-repairer in Britain (I suggest CRR) and have them dismantle the lens.

 

Erik.

[dkCambridgeshire]

Hello Dunk,

 

Yes, you have a point I think. Now just go to the best Leica-repairer in Britain (I suggest CRR) and have them dismantle the lens.

 

Erik.

 

 

Hi Erik,

 

The first priority for me when I received the camera was to arrange a service for it because I wished to use it and compare results from it with my "O" replica which has the 'same' lens. I have no idea when the Anastigmat was last serviced and it would be nice to know that its lubricant is ok and not dried up. So I approached CRR two weeks ago and spoke to Peter Grisafi and we had a chat about it and he told me how busy he is. He is so busy that he cannot give me a date when he will be able to examine it and service it but has suggested I ring him again at the end of January. So it looks as if I have to wait until at least February until the camera and lens can be examined ... maybe later. I could approach Malcolm Taylor but I know he is just as busy - I asked him recently about a lens repair and I think he quoted me a 2 month wait. I do have faith in this camera even though Ottmar has expressed his doubts. The shutter crate looks fine to me. The film counter looks fine also ie it has the 40 and the 0 numerals and the edge is "sharp". But the tiny buttons on the film counter are smaller than any I have seen illustrated and they are not cylindrical ie they are tiny and dome shaped. The wind on knob is the correct size. The shutter speed increments are ok and the knob is the right size. It is very possible that the mushroom release has been replaced and the AR lever has been replaced but that could have been done by Leitz over 80 years ago. The S/N is applied and not engraved and in the examples I have seen illustrated the spacing between the "No" and the NNN numerals is subject to variation.

 

I have to acknowledge everything Ottmar has said about the camera but he also said he "could be wrong" . And there is no evidence to my eyes that the lens engraving has been faked. Twice I have been on the verge of returning the camera to the dealer and the dealer is happy to take it back if I have doubts about it - partly because he has faith in it and knows the history of it. There is more documentary evidence about the camera's authenticity which I cannot post on this forum because it is confidential and it would reveal names who might wish not to be identified here. I acknowledge the camera's lens does have different engraving to other illustrated examples.

 

I guess the jury will have to stay out on this one until the camera can be professionally examined in the New Year.

 

I will post some more close up pictures of it as soon as my cold light illuminator is back from service.

 

Regards

 

dunk

[Rona!d]

Dunk, this might well be the long lost personal camera of Oskar with which he took the shot of Otmars ancestor (you can see on Leica´s Webpage)

 

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!

 

 

 

There is more documentary evidence about the camera's authenticity which I cannot post on this forum because it is confidential and it would reveal names who might wish not to be identified here. I acknowledge the camera's lens does have different engraving to other illustrated examples.

[Guest Bernd Banken]

looks a little bit artificial his eye......

[dkCambridgeshire]

Dunk, this might well be the long lost personal camera of Oskar with which he took the shot of Otmars ancestor (you can see on Leica´s Webpage)

 

Ronald, the documentary evidence I have relates to the camera's whereabouts and history in the mid 1990s.

 

I have seen Oskar Barnack's photographs on the website ... to the best of my knowledge they were taken with Oskar Barnack's "O" series camera.

 

 

 

Cheers

 

dunk

[Rona!d]

Dunk, it´s always good to know the history of the gear you collect. Great!

[dkCambridgeshire]

And good to know you have a sense of humour Ronald

 

Cheers

 

dunk

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Rona!d]

I fear Casper Michaeli is a russian fake, because Otmar´s last name ends with an "y" and not an "i":D