Leica LTM Leica III series, Slow Speeds?

Leica M39 screw mount bodies/lenses
M

mike goldberg

The Peaceful Pacific
Local time
12:29 AM
Joined
May 28, 2006
Messages
1,148
Hi All,

Could someone tell me the advantage and disadvantage, of the front-mounted small dials for slow speeds in the Leica III series... as well as in a few FSU copies?

Thanks, mike
 
I think they are just there for historical reasons, Mike.
On the IIIf for which I cleaned them once they access a
different, mechanically separated "clock work".

Slow and fast speeds got integrated as a technological innovation.

Roland.
 
The advantage is that you get shutter speeds slower than 1/20. The disadvantage is that they aren't really that accurate, and the clockwork delay train can get gummed up.
 
To use the slow-speed dial, the top dial has to be set on 1/30 (for the III). For the IIIf red dial, it's 1/25. And to use the top dial, the slow dial has to be on 1/25 or 1/30. Overlooking this will result in not getting the hoped-for shutter speed. You might count that as a disadvantage. It's rather fiddly and time-consuming. Still, when that was all we had, we managed. It was better than not having any slow speeds!
 
If you compare where the slow speeds are placed between a IIIseries Leica and a single-dial FSU RF, there is one distinct advantage: easy readability.

With the rather small dials used in these cameras, having a second dial for the slow speeds can make speed setting easier. Just try to look at the slow range of the Zorki-4 or FED-5. It's hard on the eyes to see if the dial is really set at 1/15 or 1/60, or for that matter, if its at 1/8 or 1/4. They're so closely spaced that a loupe is sometimes needed to confirm the position where the speed setting pin dropped.

Jay
 
ZorkiKat said:
If you compare where the slow speeds are placed between a IIIseries Leica and a single-dial FSU RF, there is one distinct advantage: easy readability.

With the rather small dials used in these cameras, having a second dial for the slow speeds can make speed setting easier. Just try to look at the slow range of the Zorki-4 or FED-5. It's hard on the eyes to see if the dial is really set at 1/15 or 1/60, or for that matter, if its at 1/8 or 1/4. They're so closely spaced that a loupe is sometimes needed to confirm the position where the speed setting pin dropped.

Jay
Click to expand...

I agree with you totally.

It takes a long time for me to set the shutter speed at 1/60 and 1/125 for exactly that reason.

Samuel
 
It really saddens me that most people can't look at history from the perspective of something unfolding or happening, but can only view it by looking back. By 1932
Oscar Barnack had created a revolutionary miniature camera, but Carl Zeiss,Jena,
not to be upstaged by the microscope company, created their own monstrous 35mm miniature camera, and soon introduced a variation with slow shutter speeds. Not to be outdone, Leitz introduced a very nifty second curtain retarder to their basic and very simple but brilliant shutter design, and with a couple of other improvements the world was given the Leica III. This was in 1933, and nothing like it had been seen in such a handy interchangeable lens miniature camera before. But now 74 years on people complain about the difficulty or inconvenience of setting the shutter speeds on such a camera, and the inaccuracy of the speeds when set. None of these cameras were designed for a 74 year working life, but I can tell you that if you recurtain a 1933 Leica III and give it an appropriate CLA, it will be a very useable and accurate camera for slide film for many more years.
The Zorki 3 with two shutter dials is a fine Leica copy with a touch of Contax, but the Zorki 3M with one dial is an unreliable beast.
 
It seems to me I've read that the III series came along sort of as the last of the breed. Series I had no RF, II had the RF, and III had the slow shutter speeds. In that case, the mechanism may well have been some type of added-on part of the camera. All this happened a few years b/4 I was born.


Yes, it's true that we can only look at history from a backward-looking point of view, but in their day (at least first half of the 1930's) such an innovation probably meant more than the convenience of a single dial. I've heard it said, even on these forums, that these days the slow speeds aren't that useful, but 70-some years ago they didn't have films with ISO 400 speed and upwards.

My recollection is that the original Kodachrome had an ASA (ISO) of something like 6. In that case, those slow speeds got more use.
 
I use my IIIf a lot, so taking care of the settings on the dials is natural. I actually like the separation, as it means I can use the camera wihout glasses. The slow speeds I can use by feel!

I seldom need to go much slower than 1/25, anyway. I use the T setting for film loading.
 
dll927 said:
Yes, it's true that we can only look at history from a backward-looking point of view, but in their day (at least first half of the 1930's) such an innovation probably meant more than the convenience of a single dial. I've heard it said, even on these forums, that these days the slow speeds aren't that useful, but 70-some years ago they didn't have films with ISO 400 speed and upwards.

My recollection is that the original Kodachrome had an ASA (ISO) of something like 6. In that case, those slow speeds got more use.
Click to expand...

Once upon a time 100 speed film was sold as "ultra speed"...
 
dll927 said:
My recollection is that the original Kodachrome had an ASA (ISO) of something like 6. In that case, those slow speeds got more use.
Click to expand...


Original Kodachrome as well as Agfacolor Neu had speeds equivalent to today's ISO 10. Those were the colour films speeds when the Leica III's came along. The setting of "f/6,3 at 1/50 sec" was the almost the universal setting for bright sunlight colour exposures then.

When Kodachrome's speed was increased from 10ASA to 25 ASA in the early 1960s (way, way, way long before my parents even planned to have me :D),
some people actually did not like it. In one magazine piece from that period, it was said that some actually feared that the dense blacks, snappy hues, fine grain and resolution associated with original Kodachrome would be lost in the faster, newer Kodachrome II. Plot sounds familiar? :)

Jay
 
I have also read in an older Leica publication:
"The slow range of speeds (from 1 to 1/20th) permit a continuous range of speeds; for example, 1/6th of a second exposure can be secured by setting the dial between the 1/4 and 1/8 marks. Thus any speed can accurately be obtained in the slow range of speeds."
Click to expand...
That's an option that's probably not so needed with today's films, but it is one capability lost in the later single-dial models. (...and then regained again with digital. ;) )
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom