Leica LTM IIIc Purchasing Questions

[Punkinhed7]

I originally posted this as a reply to the stickied IIIc K thread at the top but, upon further consideration, maybe that wasn't the right place for it. If it was, please excuse the redundancy.

Hi all. I was wondering if you might be able to help me out with a little decision. I have the opportunity to purchase one of two (presumably genuine, at this point) IIIc's and after reading many many pages of posts regarding the war-time issued cameras/lenses I'm left a bit confused as to the age/provenance of one of the cameras. I know they aren't totally reliable, but all of the info I've been able to glean from SN lists on the internet suggest that one of them, sn 391718, is from 1943 (which seems fairly reasonable in combination with the Summitar 50/2, SN 578992 'from' 1941). However, it doesn't appear to be a Grey camera (at least to my eyes) and I saw in another thread a comment by Tom that there are no chrome 1943 IIIc's. In yet another thread I saw reference to the Hahne list stating that the last grey IIIc serial number (aside from the later ones for the US Army) was 390699 -- 19 before the sn of this camera. With all of that in mind -- or ignoring it completely -- what do you make of this camera? The other camera has sn 436778, is mounted with a 35/3.5 Elmar, and at least from the quick pictures I snapped appears to be in somewhat better condition cosmetically (I think the earlier one is actually cheaper because something -- I didn't have the time investigate fully -- was slightly wrong with it). Which one would you go with and why (assuming that the 39xxxx camera is not too horribly screwed up), and what do you make of the '1943' camera? Also, what would you consider a fair price for the chosen camera/lens combination (assuming working condition)? Pictures of both below:

Camera #1:

Camera #2:

Thanks in advance, I appreciate the help.

Cheers

 

[Luddite Frank]

I think Camera #1 is a legitimate Leica III-c "Stepper" ( step under the R-A lever, which has a "hooked" pointer, plus the stepped diopter lever w/ knob under the rewind knob.)

Camera #2 looks to be a post-war III-c.

Unless Camera #1 has a red shutter curtain, I don't believe it has much greater collector value than Camera #2, cosmetic and function conditions being equal between the two.

I think between the lenses, the Summitar is the better-performing lens; the Elmar 35mm wide-angle really pushes the limits of the Tessar design... they tend towards image softness and vignetting near the edges of the image. Also, if it is uncoated, it will have less contrast than a post-war coated lens.
Again, this is assuming the glass condition is similar between the two.

You should also consider which focal length better-suits your needs / collecting habit, depending on whether you are looking for shooting gear or collectibles. You will need an auxiliary finder of some sort to shoot with the 35mm lens.

For several years, my everyday film kit was a 1934 Leica III, with the full complement of Leitz lenses: 35 Elmar, 50 Summicron, 90 Elmar & 135 Hektor. I was doing a lot of "documentary photography at the performing-arts center where I worked, and due to space constraints, I usually wound-up shooting with the 35mm Elmar, which was an uncoated example from 1940. But if I were to buy another 35mm lens in LTM, it would probably be either a Summaron 35, CV 35, or Canon 35.

As for the camera body itself, check the following:

> Condition of the shutter curtains: remove the lens, and alternately wind and release the shutter, making sure both blinds "cap" (overlap) at each end of the their travel, and examine the curtain fabric - it should be smooth. Any wrinkling in the curtain material probably means that the rubberized fabric is going bad, and will cause spectacular light-leaks.

> Operation of the shutter - should run smoothly on all speeds. If it hangs-up on speeds below 1/20th, you could probably live w/o those.

> Condition of the Rangefinder optics - check to see that there is decent ( sufficient ) contrast between the the outer field and the inner RF patch... there are many Barnacks with dim / non-existent RF center-patches... there are folks who can replace the beam-splitter, but that will be an additional investment on top of your purchase price.

As for pricings, KEH presently lists (4) III-c body-only, ranging from $109 to $182... (note: the photos do are NOT the actual items for sale... 🙁 )

https://www.keh.com/232867/leica-iiic-35mm-camera-body

They have one Elmar 35 in-stock:

https://www.keh.com/232926/leica-35mm-3-5cm-f-3-5-elmar-screw-mount-lens-36

And ( 5 ) Summitars ranging from $169 to $299.

https://www.keh.com/232946/leica-50mm-5cm-f-2-summitar-collapsible-screw-mount-lens-36

KEH has the advantage of a great return policy, so this may help you justify a lower offer in your case.

As a starting point, I would suggest planning an offer of around $150 for the III-c (#2), $175-$200 for the the III-c Stepper (Camera #1), $150 for the Elmar 35, and $175, maybe $200 for the Summitar if the glass is unscratched. Or less.

The cameras look like they may have "Case grunge" on them ( fine leather / velvet crumbs ), which should brush-away (take some Q-tips along); if the brown bits are corrosion, proceed very carefully.

If the shutter curtains are crackeled and / or RF patch is unusable, figure $150 + for CLA / repairs...

Leica Tom is the resident expert on the Leica III-c stepper cameras... you might want to PM him with your questions...

 

[HuubL]

They both seem genuine Leica's, and as Frank said, the first one is a war-time stepper, while the second one is post-war. As for the lenses, the 50mm Summitar is the better lens optical quality-wise, but it's a 50. The 35mm Elmar may be an interesting option. It's nickel and from the blueish shine, it seems to be coated (which would have been done post-war). Nickel versions have some more appeal to collectors, especially as this one seems to be an early version with a long throw with mm indication and a non locking focus tab. Also, the coating would improve the optical output.

 

[Erik van Straten]

This 35mm Elmar is a very rare very early uncoupled example - there is no "0" on the dept-of-field ring, there should be also a number on it from the camera to wich it is dedicated - and it has a small diameter mounting ring. 1930, codeword LEDTF. I don't think it is coated. The value could be higher than all the other objects together, above all if the camera to wich it is dedicated - a Leica I interchangeable but not standardized, known in the US as "model C", with a corresponding number - surfaces.

Erik.

 

[Punkinhed7]

Thanks for the help guys. @Erik, I'm a little confused as to your point re: the lack of a "0" on the dof ring...do you mean the scale on the front of the lens or the other on the side of the barrel (not visible in the pictures i showed)? The reason I bring this up is that I've yet to find a picture of a 3.5cm Elmar that does, in fact, have a 0 on the front aperture scale. If I've confused your meaning, please let me know and thanks again.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Erik, I'm a little confused as to your point re: the lack of a "0" on the dof ring...

When you take a look at the DOF-scale of your lens - I must say you must look were the DOF-scale should be, because there isn't any - you'll see next to the lever a small screw. On coupled lenses next to this screw there normally is a tiny black "0" engraved to indicate that the lens can be used universally on Leicas with standardized mounts. On your lens this little "0" however isn't there.
It isn't there. This means your lens is older than the period in wich the standardization of the Leicas began, in 1931. In those early years the lenses were matched to individual cameras and carried their numbers (usually only the three last digits) on the same ring.
Do you see these three numbers on the DOF-ring of your lens?

BTW, I think your lens has no "coupling" to the rangefinder at all. Or does it work with the rangefinder of the IIIc?

See picture from Lagers' first book, in this case "107".

Erik.

 

[Luddite Frank]

So, that Elmar 35 is really more of a collectible ( along the lines of a 5 cm Hektor ) ?

 

[Dralowid]

Depends...this is really all about standardisation.

Non standardised lenses, which by definition are not r/f coupled are considerably rarer than the 'normal'. However, the real value comes when you match up these lenses with the specific camera they were originally set up for.

Obviously the chances of being able to do this is are not that great, I would also suggest that many non standardised lenses and cameras were subsequently standardised making them rarer still in their original form.

Non standardised 'sets' come up from time to time and do fetch big money.

Although a 35mm has good DOF I would suggest that an uncoupled lens on a rangefinder body is something of a mismatch. Whether the lens would actually fetch much more than the coupled variant I know not. It is an interesting and rare curiosity but this does not necessarily equate to value.

 

[Erik van Straten]

It is an interesting and rare curiosity but this does not necessarily equate to value.

Indeed, but it is absolutely a collectible. All the non-coupled lenses are.

To find the camera to wich it is dedicated will be like looking for a needle in a haystack, however.

Now we are waiting for the reaction of the OP ...

Erik.

 

[Rob-F]

Well, if I didn't already have three IIICs, I'd buy them both! From the sound of your question, it seems like you might have some concerns about authenticity, based on the serial number. But Leica serial numbers have not proven to be an infallible guide. Leica serial numbers are assigned in blocks. In this case, 391718 falls in a block that was made from 1943 to 1946. So 391718 could have been made, for instance, in 1944.

Not to worry! It's real, and it's a beautiful Leica. I'd buy it! As for something being wrong with it, that is entirely possible, even likely, for both of them. The most usual problems are defective shutter curtains, and dried-up lubricant in the shutter mechanism, easily corrected by any of several independent repair places. There can also be some issues with the rangefinder prism that are trickier. Resilvering may be required, and not everyone does that. I'd look through the viewfinder and rangefinder windows and check that everything is acceptable there. These remarks apply to both cameras.

Finally, take into consideration the comments already offered above about the lenses. I agree, the Summitar on the "stepper" is the better lens.

 

[Luddite Frank]

To add a quick afterthought to my previous, lengthy ( 🙄 ) reply,

I would go for the stepper ( condition and function being equal between the two ), as it is fairly unique amongst the cast-bodied Barnacks...

LF

 

[Punkinhed7]

Thanks for all the replies everyone. I haven't gotten a chance to go back to the store yet (~45 minutes from home), but hope to do so in the next few days. In the meanwhile I'm preparing my list of things to check on the cameras/possible issues to look out for so I can really give em a thorough testing for functionality before making a decision. From what I've read about the 'stepper' cameras I'm definitely leaning towards that body (especially since he's asking $100 less for it) but really would like to figure our what, exactly, is 'wrong' with it first -- being pretty unfamiliar with Leica's (and stretched for time) I didn't investigate much after he informed me of his reason for the pricing difference...that a 'Leica Guy' had been in and told him there was something wrong with it.

At the same time, he also has this beautiful Nikon S2 that may or may not have RF coupling issues (no movement of RF patch while focusing) -- again, not really in my element here so it may be just that the proper sequence wasn't followed while mounting the lens (?). Going to check it out again when I head back but other than that it's a gem: pretty much spotless inside and out, good glass, accurate (sounding, relative) speeds, original case, 50/2 lens and original caps. Ah, decisions decisions 🙁

 

[Luddite Frank]

Couple of thoughts regarding the Nikon:

> check the curtains - they can get crackly and perforated.

> RF function: really does not have anything to do with how the lens is mounted ( or which lens is mounted: internal bayonet [50mm only] or external bayonet). The RF linkage does not "follow" a ring or tab on the lens, as with the Leica screw-mount. It might be that the RF linkage is gummy, and stuck on the Infinity position. I'm pretty sure the follower is spring-loaded, and moves as the focusing mount is racked-out from Infinity.

> Corrosion / Zeiss bumps - looks like some spots of corrosion on the front of the base-plate... make sure there's no corrosion inside, especially on the film-rails above and below the shutter gate. Are there any bumps beneath the leather on the back ?

I have a lovely S-2, as well as my Dad's Nikon S... they are wonderful cameras, and capable of great pictures...

Are you looking for shooting cameras ?

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

When all's said and done elderly cameras have faults through no one's fault but just time and so on. If it's not been returned for a check and used regularly then you should expect it and resign yourself to getting it sorted out by a proper technician. Even then it will probably be cheaper than one from a dealer that's been properly fettled and then sold with a guarantee.

As for checking it yourself, I think there are limits to what you can do, even experienced collectors get caught out and we can all tell horror stories about ones we've bought after carefully checking them.

Why not just buy one or them or all of them and agree that the seller will return say half or a quarter of the repair price? I can't think of any other way you can do it., without very deep pockets.

BTW, I'd be tempted to buy both and keep the nicest, imo, lens and body and then sell the other with an honest description...

Regards, David