maxspbr Posted February 15, 2009 Share #1 Posted February 15, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hello all. I bought a Leica III from 1937 (serial number 240xxx). A very fine camera! But I have two questions about this model: 1) my 35mm Elmar, serial number 140xxx, "11 o`clock", doesn`t fit in camera. The slow speeds dial blocks the lever of focus. Is this normal? The same doesn`t happen when I use the same lens with my IIIf. 2) Once I readed that the older models, from I to IIIb,every model had to be adjusted about the distance between the film and the lens flange using chins. The technician who made the CLA said that this flange is always correct. Is he correct? The camera is focusing correctly, I think. I took several photos with Hektor 135 wide open as this test. Thanks a lot! Martin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 15, 2009 Posted February 15, 2009 Hi maxspbr, Take a look here Leica III - Two questions. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
earleygallery Posted February 15, 2009 Share #2 Posted February 15, 2009 Hi, I don't know about the lens issue but I've not heard of any problems and if the lens works on the lllf then I don't understand why it won't work on your lll. As for the lens mount, it was only the Leica 1 which had a 'non standard' mount. Later model 1's had on O engraved at 12 o clock on the mount to indicate a standard mount i.e. could be used with any lens. You lll will definately have a standard mount. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
echorec Posted February 15, 2009 Share #3 Posted February 15, 2009 James is right of course, it should work fine. Could you post a picture of when the lever is blocked by the dial? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted February 15, 2009 Share #4 Posted February 15, 2009 Uhm... I am prone to think that the blocking of the focusing knob by the slow times dial probably is not so strange... IIIc/IIIf bodies are 2,7 mm longer than previous bodies... I haven't a Leica III, but looking with care pics of IIIb and IIIc, taken from front, seems to me that the minimum distance between slow speeds dial and lens flange is a bit shorter in the III: try to measure it with a caliper... after all it wouldn't be so strange, being a completely new design (die cast body internal structure, instead of curved sheet of metal). One could also speculate that the switch from 11 o'clock to 7 o'clock for the focusing knob, that happened sometimes in 1932 (I have never seen a 11 o'clock lens dated 1933) , was made in preparation of the announcement of the Leica III, which entered in 1933 - first Leica with long times knob. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted February 15, 2009 Share #5 Posted February 15, 2009 Hello, there are 2 kind of "11 o'clock" lenses , the one with infinity lock and the one whithout. with the "with one" you have the problem for releasing the infinity lock because it touch the conical part of the slow speed knob whitout releasing completely it. Of course you can release it before to tight the lens and using it under the infinity focusing. As Luigi speculates the slow speed knob beginning with the IIIc is fariest from the lens flange than the predecessing models. James, the O thread began with the second batch of the IC. 2) Once I readed that the older models, from I to IIIb,every model had to be adjusted about the distance between the film and the lens flange using chins. The technician who made the CLA said that this flange is always correct. Is he correct? The camera is focusing correctly, I think. I took several photos with Hektor 135 wide open as this test. This distance must be 28.8 mm, if your tests gave you satisfaction, what more ? Enjoy your III, it is effectively a nice camera. Black or Chrome one ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted February 15, 2009 Share #6 Posted February 15, 2009 I bow to your greater knowledge gentlemen Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted February 16, 2009 Share #7 Posted February 16, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) About the lens flange shims: All interchangeable lens Leicas before the IIIc had shutter crates that were built up from several pieces of brass, and this carried the film gate and the film positioning rails of course. But the finished part did show quite a lot of variation in dimensions, inevitably. Also, the lens flange was screwed to the body shell, not to the shutter crate! The upshot was that during assembly, the flange-to-film register had to be adjusted by inserting shims between it and the shell. This way the register was kept to 28.8mm +/- 0.01mm, so that all lenses did fit with proper register. This laborious system was developed for the 'normalised' or 'zeroed' Leica II and Standard in 1932, but the expanding production made this procedure a burden. Hence the IIIc had a die-cast shutter crate-cum-top deck which carried both the film gate and the support to which the lens flange was screwed. The correct distance was assured by precision grinding. This is the rationale for the 'apron' formed by the top plate above the lens flange: as the crate with flange and all was inserted into the body shell from above, this had to have an U-shaped cut-out to accommodate it, and the 'apron' covered the resulting gap. The old man from the Age of the Screw Thread Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted February 16, 2009 Share #8 Posted February 16, 2009 I bow to your greater knowledge gentlemen Relax James, we know what the others teached us Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted February 16, 2009 Share #9 Posted February 16, 2009 'normalised' or 'zeroed' Leica The symbol is an O for universal and not a zero. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted February 16, 2009 Share #10 Posted February 16, 2009 The symbol is an O for universal and not a zero. This seems to be a misunderstanding which is due to the fact that typewriters, and early computers, had no separate zero character, and of course to the similarity of the characters. Then, like so many other factoids, it has been blindly and trustingly copied from one 'authoritative work' to the next ... and the next ... and the next. Believe me: I spent much of my career editing encyclopedias and other reference literature! And all the books on Leica and other cameras that I have read have been full of errors, misunderstandings and plain typos. Half a century ago I trained to become a historian (though I did never take Holy Orders). It was drubbed into me that sources had to be scrutinised closely and critically, and that they varied widely in trustworthiness. Besides, what would the letter 'O' signify in this context? Zeroing a dial or a measure on the other hand is common parlance. Here it meant that variability of register was effectively zero. The old man from the Age of the Screw Thread Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted February 16, 2009 Share #11 Posted February 16, 2009 . Besides, what would the letter 'O' signify in this context? Zeroing a dial or a measure on the other hand is common parlance. Here it meant that variability of register was effectively zero. The old man from the Age of the Screw Thread When we speak about blood group, the O is for universal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wizard Posted February 16, 2009 Share #12 Posted February 16, 2009 When we speak about blood group, the O is for universal. Certainly not in every country. In Germany it would be "Blutgruppe 0". Besides, if I remember correctly, I have seen early Leicas which had the "0" stamped into the mounting flange. Can't recall that it was an "O". Regards, Andreas Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted February 16, 2009 Share #13 Posted February 16, 2009 Ehm... this question if it's an 0 (zero) or an O (letter) is really too much for me... my only advice is to look at the flanges with the "0" and verify if the font is similar to the "zero", used for instance in the s/n, or to the "O letter" used... somewhere else Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted February 16, 2009 Share #14 Posted February 16, 2009 It was meant to be a red dot but someone forgot to fill it in Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted February 16, 2009 Share #15 Posted February 16, 2009 Certainly not in every country. In Germany it would be "Blutgruppe 0". Besides, if I remember correctly, I have seen early Leicas which had the "0" stamped into the mounting flange. Can't recall that it was an "O". Regards, Andreas May be here is the answer, we use different, but similar, symbols for the same meaning : universal Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UliWer Posted February 16, 2009 Share #16 Posted February 16, 2009 The Oxford English Dictionary gives the following definition for the noun "O": "1. The figure or symbol zero, 0; nought; (hence) a cipher, a mere nothing." This is one of many definitions the OED gives for "O" and I am not sure if anybody in Wetzlar who introduced the sign on some old Leicas knew it. Perhaps he, who introduced the sign, meant what the OED defines as follows: "2. a. Any round thing, as a circle, circular spot, etc." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxspbr Posted February 17, 2009 Author Share #17 Posted February 17, 2009 Thanks a lot for all these answers! As always, not only we get answers but lean something more... This distance must be 28.8 mm, if your tests gave you satisfaction, what more ? Enjoy your III, it is effectively a nice camera. Black or Chrome one ? JC, don't understand me wrong! My curiosity is about how the camera works and why, not because I'm afraid about something. If I understand well from what Lars wrote in this topic, the technician is wrong when says the lens flange is always correct. So, maybe in this camera the chins are there. Or just the high precision is too high for the simple test I did. The camera is a chrome model, in good condition (I'm the second owner!!). And just marvelous to walk with it, specially with the Summar. Regards, Martin Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted February 17, 2009 Share #18 Posted February 17, 2009 JC, don't understand me wrong! My curiosity is about how the camera works and why, not because I'm afraid about something. If I understand well from what Lars wrote in this topic, the technician is wrong when says the lens flange is always correct. So, maybe in this camera the chins are there. Or just the high precision is too high for the simple test I did. Just to clarify, your technician is correct in that the lens mount is 'always correct' for any usual lens you wish to use with it, as the mount has been set (with shims when assembled originally) to the 'standard' correct depth. I think perhaps there is confusion with the issue that some early model 1 cameras had, to have every lens adjusted to suit the mount of the individual camera before the 0 (or O !) standard mount. Anyway enjoy using it! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
darigle Posted February 17, 2009 Share #19 Posted February 17, 2009 Interesting discussion on the o or 0. In an original booklet I have from November 1931 published in English by Leitz the paragraph on 'For the interchange of lens........' states the following "To distinguish these standardised Leica cameras of the interchangeable type from those formerly supplied, they are engraved with an "o" on the screw flange". Note its an "o" in lowercase so it may be a zero "0" but its printed as an "o". The jury is still out!.........: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted February 17, 2009 Share #20 Posted February 17, 2009 So, maybe in this camera the chins are there. Or just the high precision is too high for the simple test I did. I never seen a screw mount Leica without shims. These paper shims ensure the sealing in addition to regulating the distance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.