Fakes, Copies, and the Real Deal

U

Unregistered

Guest
I just visited ebay and saw some Russian copys of Leicas actually being listed as copies. Al Kaplan, at the PN forum suggested (and I agree) that Leica should be making these. Didn't I read that someone in this forum had a IIIf made through the "a la carte" service? There's money to be made in copies of old cameras. Why shouldn't Leica be making the money instead of the Russians.
 
I doubt there's a great market for a revived run of III-series bodies: after all, Leica isn't doing well selling the improved version. If they were available for the price the Russians want, people would buy: but how much fine German craftsmanship do you think you'd get for that price?
 
You can get very close to a "new" Barnack Leica by buying a clean, used LTM body and having one of the experts like DAG or John Maddox give it a complete overhaul and curtain replacement.

There seem to be plenty of IIIf's available - the combined cost of purchase of the body and overhaul would be about $400 ($300 without new curtains). The result wouldn't be a copy of anything but a real Leica made in Wetzlar.
 
Gentlemen,

I would agree with you logic except for one thing, the PRICES being paid for fakes that are being sold as the "real-deal". Leica could make real-deal copies and sell them for much less than prices being paid for some of the fakes, make money in the process, and the collectors wouldn't end up being embarrassed finding out they had purchased FED's.

Leica wouldn't have to do "runs" of the cameras, just build them to special order - "a la carte". If a camera collector wanted an example of a particular rare Leica model for a collection they could just order it from Leica. They would be assured of getting what coin collectors are so fond of - an uncirculated, MINT CONDITION, example. They would certainly pay Leica a high price for a custom camera, but not the exorbitant prices currently being paid for some Leica rarities.

If I were in Leica's financial condition I would be looking for any way possible to keep my people employed and making money.

I think its a good idea...
 
zeos 386sx said:
I would agree with you logic except for one thing, the PRICES being paid for fakes that are being sold as the "real-deal".
Click to expand...

The fakes are going for US$3500? That's about what Leica would want for one, unfortunately.
 
Interesting that Unregistered users here and newly created users on Photo.net pose these questions. Why is that?
 
I posted the question this morning. I was just in too big a hurry to sign-in.

I recently saw a Leica used by the Italian army for reconaissance in WW II. If I remember correctly the price was over $100,000.

There were questions about its authenticity from people that included an expert on the Italian air force. I have no idea if it was real or a fake.

Could Leica make a reproduction for less than $100,000 and make money doing it? My bet is that yes, they could.
 
zeos 386sx said:
I posted the question this morning. I was just in too big a hurry to sign-in.

I recently saw a Leica used by the Italian army for reconaissance in WW II. If I remember correctly the price was over $100,000.

There were questions about its authenticity from people that included an expert on the Italian air force. I have no idea if it was real or a fake.

Could Leica make a reproduction for less than $100,000 and make money doing it? My bet is that yes, they could.
Click to expand...

If you put it like that, I guess yes Leica could do it cheaper. :)
 
zeos 386sx said:
I posted the question this morning. I was just in too big a hurry to sign-in.

I recently saw a Leica used by the Italian army for reconaissance in WW II. If I remember correctly the price was over $100,000.

There were questions about its authenticity from people that included an expert on the Italian air force. I have no idea if it was real or a fake.

Could Leica make a reproduction for less than $100,000 and make money doing it? My bet is that yes, they could.
Click to expand...

Yes, they could, it would, however, not be the real thing and worth maybe $ 3000 as a new Leica and a curiosity......
 
If Leica made me an M3 "a la carte" I would defy anyone to say it wasn't the "real thing" - It would be a Leica M3. The same thing could be done and said for any camera that Leica has ever made including the old and very rare examples. If Leica chooses to reproduce one of its old cameras it is the "real thing" no matter how long it has been since the camera was last in general production.

The problem is that criminals have appropriated the name "Leica" to sell people fakes - often at higher prices than it would cost to have cameras legitimately reproduced by Leica. Leica and its customers get shafted while the criminals walk away with the money. By offering legitimate reproductions of its cameras - all of them, including those now considered rarities - Leica would protect its customers and itself and make it unprofitable for criminals to make fakes.

If Leica makes the reproduction it is the "real thing".
 
zeos 386sx said:
If Leica makes the reproduction it is the "real thing".
Click to expand...

If Leica makes a repro M3, that's one thing. If they make a repro Luftwaffe III, it's not: it wasn't made for the Luftwaffe or used by the Luftwaffe, and it isn't rare; and therefore doesn't have the cachet of the "real thing".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Come to think of it, Leica couldn't even do you a M3 copy. They could come pretty close, but paints have changed to waterbased, Vulcanite is a thing of the past, I'm pretty sure the shutter cloth is slightly different,the plastics are different, etc.etc. All important issues to the purist collector. It would be a modern M3 clone, not a M3.
 
Last edited:
Probably every aspect of an old Leica's original construction can be reproduced - it's simply be a question of how much the purchaser is willing to pay for "purity".

To call a modern "a la carte" M3 a clone is to state the obvious - every M3 made after the first one was a clone.

The idea that a camera can't be the "real thing" because it is being made for, or being used by someone other than the first purchaser is also suspect. Some of the Luftwaffe cameras were sent to the Italian airforce. Does that mean that those used by the Italian airforce don't have the same "cachet" as those used by the Luftwaffe? I don't think so...

A camera is a camera is a camera and the last I heard, Leica is in the business of making cameras.
 
As a camera user, I could't agree more,actually I personally would prefer a new camera. However collecting historic Leica's has nothing to do with using them. To a collector a modern clone (not just a clone, please quote me correctly) would be valueless. Compare it to collecting classic cars. Provenance can multiply the value, the lack of an irreplaceble part can halve it. And no, not everything can be copied. Some paints and glues for instance are illegal nowadays.
 
The only thing that keeps car collectors from buying new versions of old cars is the fact that no one still makes them.

Provenance would not be a problem - the cameras would come directly from Leica. You can't beat provenance like.

There would be no problem with irreplaceable parts because the parts would be made by Leica.

I would be surprised if any paint or glue that was used by Leica is illegal (however, I grant that is a possiblility).

"Modern clone"??? As I pointed out, every camera after the first one is a "clone" - some more "modern" than others if only by hours or days. Many production runs span years.

Leica has actually taken a limited step in the direction of this proposal with its "Oskar Barnack Edition", "a faithful new edition of a historic camera...".

<http://www.leica-camera.com/produkte/msystem/obedition/index_e.html>

Please note that Leica calls it a "new edition" of the "Leica Prototype II" - not a modern clone or reproduction. Leica has the right to do that.
 
zeos 386sx said:
The idea that a camera can't be the "real thing" because it is being made for, or being used by someone other than the first purchaser is also suspect. Some of the Luftwaffe cameras were sent to the Italian airforce. Does that mean that those used by the Italian airforce don't have the same "cachet" as those used by the Luftwaffe? I don't think so...
Click to expand...

No, it doesn't: but it sure does mean that those made tomorrow and stamped "Luftwaffe" are not at all the same thing, and don't have the same "cachet." As an example, compare the prices for a 1950s Telecaster guitar, and a faithful modern reproduction: the difference is of an order of magnitude. People pay big money because they have some attachment to the original product, whether that attachment is logical or not: perhaps it's because the original is rare, perhaps because they think craftsmanship was at a higher level then. Whatever the reason, there's a significant difference in perceived intrinsic value: and that's all that matters when the cash is hitting the table.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Granted, the deciding issue for SOME people might be an attachment to a particular segment of a product line. However, Leica could make modern editions of its older cameras for customers who simply want an example of a particular camera for a collection or whatever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom