Black Leica ii questions

[johannielscom]

Question, is there a good book on the conversions, that covers possible conversions over time etc?

 

[Roger Hicks]

Question, is there a good book on the conversions, that covers possible conversions over time etc?

Not really, because "conversion" is a very flexible term, and Leitz would do almost anything if you could afford it. That's before you start on "bitzas" such as the famous Mortimer Street Specials cobbled together by the English branch of Leitz, mostly during the war, or by repairers. All you can do is spot archaic features such as small-pin baseplates on seemingly later cameras. Some conversions that were not officially done may have been done anyway, at the factory. I can't remember the details -- it was 30 or 40 years ago -- but a friend had a Luftwaffe IIIc that had been converted to a IIIf and was no longer grey: only the overspray from the previous paint job gave it away. Well, that and the serial number.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Dralowid]

Roger's post about a book on conversions explains its absence succinctly. I would add that it would also spoil the fun!

For prewar cameras assume that anything from a I can be converted up to IIIa.

(I have never seen I or II to IIIb with combined eyepieces).

After that the body size changes and you get IIIC to IIIf post war etc.

In the 'conversions' thread there is a price list for post war factory 'standard conversions'. It is a start.

All that and everything in between.

 

[David Hughes]

And then there's people selling on ebay to add to the fun...

And, of course, the poor old FED and Zorki messed up for ebay cameras.

Regards, David

 

[Erik van Straten]

There is no book because there is no system at all. All cameras are different. That is the fun. The other participants in the discussion said about the same.

Today there is the á la carte business. And all those digital variants. What a mess.

Now look at this: https://www.ebay.com/itm/Leitz-Leic...694904?hash=item4d7a524978:g:5z0AAOSwJZlbc-Rg

(I have no connection to the seller.)

Erik.

 

[presspass]

Every now and then I see an ad for a III converted to a IIIf. How was this done, considering the different sizes of the two cameras? Was the III serial number put on a new IIIF shell or did Leitz actually manage to squeeze the IIIf flash synch into a III shell?

 

[Dralowid]

Every now and then I see an ad for a III converted to a IIIf. How was this done, considering the different sizes of the two cameras? Was the III serial number put on a new IIIF shell or did Leitz actually manage to squeeze the IIIf flash synch into a III shell?

It is simply a question of mis-naming. A III that has been synchronised in the same manner as a IIIf is called a IIIa syn to be precise, as per factory records.

If the eyepieces are close together then it started life as the larger IIIc.

Have a look at the conversions thread, lots of interesting stuff.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Personally I hate those conversions with an added synchronisation on the pre-IIIc cameras. The shutter is often obstructed by it. It looks ugly too.

Erik.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Around 40 years ago a really interesting camera turned up in London: a thorougly ratty 2 conversion with a hideous synch hole on top. A friend-of-a-friend bought it in a camera store for £30, as far as I recall, because (unlike the seller) he noticed the serial number: 136.

Cheers,

R.

 

[David Hughes]

Talking of war time recycling, I saw an appeal in a war time magazine for film spools and backing papers as the makers were running out of them...


Regards, David