Dez
Bodger Extraordinaire
I have a very nice old Leica II, from the very first production batch in 1932.

It has a design point I have not seen in any other old Barnack. The focusing cam follower roller is quite narrow, and spaced farther from the edge of the lensmount than in other cameras. It appears that the arm mounting the arm is thicker than in later cameras, causing the position of the roller. I also have a 90mm Elmar from 1937, and it has an extremely narrow focusing ridge, even skinnier than on later models. As a result, the edge of the focusing ridge gets between the cam follower and the edge of the mount when this lens is on the camera, resulting, of course, in huge RF error.
The cam follower arm is quite thick, but it is not bent- it looks like it is supposed to be that way. I can replace the arm, or I can cut it down a bit so the cam follower is in the right place, but I am not eager to do so, as it appears that this is actually the way the camera was built.
Does anyone have some insight to this odd incompatibility?
Cheers,
Dez

It has a design point I have not seen in any other old Barnack. The focusing cam follower roller is quite narrow, and spaced farther from the edge of the lensmount than in other cameras. It appears that the arm mounting the arm is thicker than in later cameras, causing the position of the roller. I also have a 90mm Elmar from 1937, and it has an extremely narrow focusing ridge, even skinnier than on later models. As a result, the edge of the focusing ridge gets between the cam follower and the edge of the mount when this lens is on the camera, resulting, of course, in huge RF error.
The cam follower arm is quite thick, but it is not bent- it looks like it is supposed to be that way. I can replace the arm, or I can cut it down a bit so the cam follower is in the right place, but I am not eager to do so, as it appears that this is actually the way the camera was built.
Does anyone have some insight to this odd incompatibility?
Cheers,
Dez