Anyone know anything about this Leica

Tom A said:
That is an authentic Leica 1 - converted to a II with the coupled rangefinder. The threaded ring around the release is correct - the early Leica cable releases would have a matching thread ( and in some cases a "claw" that held it in place. Nice shape too for something that is 80 + years old.
The 35f3.5 Summaron is a later lens - postwar and coated.
Hope you will start using it extensively too.
Click to expand...

+1


HuubL said:
I agree with Tom, John and Michael, it's a original Leica II, but according to the number it's not a converted I. Upon close inspection the lens looks like it is numbered. Should be, as it's a 7 o'clock type. I guess it's an original set from 1932 and still in pretty good cosmetic shape. The release and surround are not original. No big deal though.
Click to expand...

+1


buzzardkid said:
That is a true Leica II from 1932, first production run: the Leica II series started with 71200 and the first production run ended with serial 101000.

Engravings, paint sheen and vulcanite fitted all are dead give-aways of this camera being genuine.

To those that mistook it for a Russian fake: this camera has nickel trimming that is nicely even and of high quality. Why would any Russian camera be de-chromed (usually crudely down to the brass) and subsequently re-plated in nickel? Also: the engravings on a Leica were filled with white Woods Metal, which over time wore out leaving the adjacent paint afflicted. The engravings on old, pre-war black-paint Leica's as a result have a very specific look, like this camera has. These characteristics can be faked but not so that it would also be profitable.

As said, the shutter release threads on and as such can be replaced. And, the VF window is the correct one, the Russian camera's have the flat square front that reaches up to the top plate. As said above, the one Russian model (early FED) that had the same VF window is so rare, it's likely worth more than a Leica.


Question to the OP: if the lens is numbered (small number engravings on the front brass ring, right around the lens element), what is the number? The lens usually is earlier in production date than the body, often approx. one year. If camera and lens are approx. a year apart, this may increase the chance of it being an original combo. No effect on usability etc but it's a nice extra to this lovely camera and lens kit.

Mine is similar and I love it!
Click to expand...

+1


I had a lot of FED's, Zorki's and Barnack Leica's in my hands and without having this Leica in my hands I can already state that it is genuine from these pictures as the above fellowmembers have done...
Just some advice: before making serious photo's, take a test roll to check whether the shuttercurtains are light tight and the shutter is operating correct....
 
buzzardkid said:
That is a true Leica II from 1932, first production run: the Leica II series started with 71200 and the first production run ended with serial 101000.
Click to expand...

Johan,

I beleive there is some question as to whether all these were actually produced in 1932 - largely based on the production figures for previous & subsequent years. It is felt that a good proportion were actually completed in 1933 alongside the III - something that can often be seen where parts have been shared between the types in 1933.

I don't know for sure if that's true, but there is some sort of logic there somewhere....
 
I also think this is a genuine converted Leica 1/2 camera. Note the contour of the rangefinder housing. There is a smooth curve all around the radius under the shutter dial, rather than the interrupted curve used in later model II's and subsequent Leicas and (as far as I know) all FSU copies. This is the "lavatory" design beloved by our Brit colleagues.

I have never seen anything like that shutter release collar, though. Tom, could you say a bit more about this early accessory? It does appear in the original photo that this bit may be chrome whereas all the other plated parts are nickel, so in that case, it could be a later repair.

Cheers,
Dez
 
I used to be in the watch business and had to do this kind of authentication thing for high-end vintage timepieces. I'm enjoying reading this thread, but I am incredibly happy that no one wants my opinion on this sort of stuff anymore.

With one model in particular (Rolex Princes from the 1920-30's), the "refurbishments" (repainted dials, etc.) were of such good quality and nearly impossible to detect that no one was willing to provide an opinion and some of those watches became as valuable and accepted by collectors as the unmolested originals. Another model (Daytonas from the 60's) was messed with so consistently that we had to dismantle them to look at one particular screw in movement to see whether the watch started life as the same model it was when it came to us (reassembled from pieces of several authentic watches in a combination that was more valuable).

I was invited to last year to join an e-commerce start up in the watch authentication business. I turned down the offer. I think the company is struggling. To quote Cream, "I'm so glad, I'm so glad, so glad, I'm glad..." I'm not opining on authenticity and that I didn't make the move. A good headache for someone else to enjoy.
 
Dez said:
I also think this is a genuine converted Leica 1/2 camera. Note the contour of the rangefinder housing. There is a smooth curve all around the radius under the shutter dial, rather than the interrupted curve used in later model II's and subsequent Leicas and (as far as I know) all FSU copies. This is the "lavatory" design beloved by our Brit colleagues.
Click to expand...

Not converted at all, and it definitely left the factory as a Leica II. As John said before, it may have been completed in 1933 since the initial batch of Leica II's was unusually large, but the Leica production book lists the batch of serial numbers from 71200 to 101000 as issued at February 1st 1932. No Leica I camera's were made alongside according to the Leica production book. Next batch of Leica II's just has '1933' as date issued, but was only 1600 camera's.

Dez said:
I have never seen anything like that shutter release collar, though. Tom, could you say a bit more about this early accessory? It does appear in the original photo that this bit may be chrome whereas all the other plated parts are nickel, so in that case, it could be a later repair.

Cheers,
Dez
Click to expand...

On this matter, you'd best ask Micheal (Dralowid) or Erik van Straten. They are the top dogs when it comes to dating and determining early screw mount Leica's and their accessories.

Seems it's not a repair but a later accessory, maybe off-brand. It simply threads into place over the release button, utilizing the threaded collar around the button once the button shroud is taken off. It would allow to use a standard cable release on this camera, instead of the more expensive Leica-dedicated one.
 
Re the serial number. Mea culpa- I should have checked the number before commenting. This is from the first batch of 30K Leica II's starting in 1932.

Nice camera, with an interesting accessory.

Cheers,
Dez
 
I really do not understand why people like Tom A can accept this thing as an original Leica II.

1. There are no screwmount Leicas with a hole in their release buttons.
2. What is that crazy thing that surrounds the release button?
3. The placing of the serial number is way too low.
4. I've never seen a Leica II with a rangefinder housing with an angle at the right side that is not exactly 90 degrees with the front side.
5. The "sides" of the arrow in the rewind button are way too large.
6. The tip of the rewind lever is on the right side of the raised index point, but on original Leica II's it is on the left side.
7. The engraved "R" for positioning the rewind lever is partially covered by the rangefinder housing. On original Leicas II this "R" is totally free, and placed about 3mm higher.

I'll stop now, but I can give more evidence that this is for 100% a fake.

Erik.
 
Check it yourself.

Erik.
3768415369_2db1b35c8a_b.jpg
 
Hi Eric, the threaded shutter release button is what I based my opinion of fake on. But then the others are saying that there is a shutter release accessory screwed on. I'm not sure how they could tell that from the pictures provided.
 
Erik van Straten said:
... No accessories that you mention exists.

Erik.
Click to expand...

xayraa33 said:
Such accessories did and still do exist.
Click to expand...

I am in no way qualified to comment on the issues being discussed, but two shutter release accessories for the screw-mount Leica are illustrated in my copy of The Leica - a history illustrating every model and accessory, by Paul-Henry van Hoesbroeck, published by Sothebys, 1983. Page 139, illustration 90h, described as Two smooth releases .... The accessories illustrated are not a perfect match to the shutter release illustrated in the first post.
 
ChrisN said:
I am in no way qualified to comment on the issues being discussed, but two shutter release accessories for the screw-mount Leica are illustrated in my copy of The Leica - a history illustrating every model and accessory, by Paul-Henry van Hoesbroeck, published by Sothebys, 1983. Page 139, illustration 90h, described as Two smooth releases .... The accessories illustrated are not a perfect match to the shutter release illustrated in the first post.
Click to expand...

+ the pics from xayraa33

Thanks to these posts...had an inkling, I've seen that soft touch accessory before...

Although higher res pics will solve disagreements, having serviced three Leica IIs in my collection + a few Fed/Zorki 1, I maintain that the camera in the OP is genuine.🙂
 
Thanks Frank

"The mission of photography is to explain man to man and each to himself. And that is the most complicated thing on earth."
Edward Steichen

- it really rang a bell when I read it.

One of the two releases illustrated appears to have a thread for a cable release and is very similar to the one shown in the first post, but the knurled collar appears to be about three times deeper, has fine vertical lines inscribed (not the cross-hatch/diamond knurled pattern) and a fine groove around the circumference about 1/4 down from the top. The release button appears to be internally threaded to receive a shutter release cable, and is recessed a few millimeters down inside the dished (or cone-shaped) collar. I can readily imagine an after-market supplier making the one pictured in the first post as a copy of this one.

The other release has a broad flat top surface and sits clear above the mounting collar.
 
I think perhaps we should ask John, the OP, whether he could supply some more pictures of some of the details Erik and others have touched on.

Strangely, I find myself in the unusual position of disagreeing with him on some but not all.

Michael
(and John, while you are at it, unscrew that shutter release accessory before you take them, I assume it comes off!!!!)
 
Erik van Straten said:
I really do not understand why people like Tom A can accept this thing as an original Leica II.

1. There are no screwmount Leicas with a hole in their release buttons.
2. What is that crazy thing that surrounds the release button?
3. The placing of the serial number is way too low.
4. I've never seen a Leica II with a rangefinder housing with an angle at the right side that is not exactly 90 degrees with the front side.
5. The "sides" of the arrow in the rewind button are way too large.
6. The tip of the rewind lever is on the right side of the raised index point, but on original Leica II's it is on the left side.
7. The engraved "R" for positioning the rewind lever is partially covered by the rangefinder housing. On original Leicas II this "R" is totally free, and placed about 3mm higher.

I'll stop now, but I can give more evidence that this is for 100% a fake.

Erik.
Click to expand...

Hi Erik,

I'd like the remaining evidence as well, although your above list is already impressive in it's length.

Re. 1. and 2. that's been addressed by other posters. 3. I'll give you that. Strange indeed and I had not noticed :bang: 4. and 7. can be caused by the simple phone camera and quick snaps. Better pictures would be in order. 5. I don't see that and 6. I don't get it.


Now, if it were cobbled up from original parts and combined to something that it isn't, those parts would still fit. The rewind-R would not be covered by the rangefinder housing if the housing and the the top plate were original Leica. Yet, I cannot believe that some parts are original and others are not, due to paint sheen. The paint looks legit. I don't know what happened with the rangefinder housing, the angled side is strange.

IIRC we've recently seen an non-factory upgraded Leica I to II in one of the other threads. It was an interesting upgrade because some things were 'off'.

I'd say that if your observations are correct, the camera may have been non-factory repaired but the evidence in favour of it being original is stronger IMHO.

To the OP's friend: in the Leica LTM forum there is thread that instructs on how to load a bottom-loading Leica, that test roll that Ron suggested is the smart thing to do. Have fun shooting it!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Malcolm M
BPM Prismeter
Replies
5
Views
411
Coldkennels
Coldkennels
raydm6
Doctor With A Camera
Replies
10
Views
742
raydm6
raydm6
C
Best Non-Leica LTM Rangefinder
Replies
12
Views
3K
wrs1145
wrs1145
S
Opinions on this IIF
2
Replies
24
Views
2K
DownUnder
D
Steinberg2010
Curious about the W-Nikkor 35mm 1.8 ltm vs the Konica 35mm f2 ltm (chrome)
Replies
0
Views
494
Steinberg2010
Steinberg2010
Back
Top Bottom