IIIc

[subman60]

Is there any reason to pick one year over another. I've been offered a 1946 and a 1949 by 2 different sellers. Both are in about the same cosmetic shape and seem to be mechanically also. The lenses are different the older has a period elmar 50/3,5 the newer a 50/2. Oh the price is different the 1949 is $125.00 cheaper.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Purely because things were more settled by 1949 (and parts were therefore probably more reliable) I'd lean towards the newer camera. The faster lens is handy too: which one is it? What sort of state are the lenses in? Summars are notorious for "cleaning marks".

Cheers,

R.

 

[Brian Legge]

Ignoring the bodies, 5cm/3.5 elmars generally sell for $150-250 (with red scales going for $300). A clean Summitar is often in the $250-350 range and a clean ltm Summicron $300-450.

Don't get me wrong here - I like my ltm cameras compact so Elmars are great - but from a 'value for money' standpoint, I'd be nervous about spending $125 more on the camera with the less expensive lens unless it was a great deal.

Edit: Good catch on the Summar. I was assuming a later lens based on the year.

 

[Pioneer]

I think that the biggest issue of concern between the two bodies may be that the older one could be more likely to peel.

As for the lens. Obviously the 50/2 is likely worth a little more. But I love the old Elmar lenses and own 5 of them (with bodies to match) so I think you can guess where my vote lies.

 

[Mr_Flibble]

Some early post-war IIIc cameras suffered from some bad chrome (1946-47ish?). If it has the step under the rewind-toggle it's the war-time design and/or war-time parts.
The 1949 one will have an 'improved' shutter over the war-time model.

Personally I think design- and reliability-wise they're both great cameras. And I don't think I'd pick one of the other on grounds of their age.

 

[subman60]

It is a summar lens 50mm f2.

 

[subman60]

The 49 I can pick up for $325 the 45-46 for $450 ( it also has an everready case that the other doesn't).

 

[Brian Legge]

Definitely check the Summar or scratches. Clean ones are rare and pictures taken with it have very unique looks.

$450 seems a little on the high side a IIIc and Elmar unless they are both in great condition or have been serviced/CLA'd recently. If they haven't been, I'd expect to spend up to $250 more for service.

Unserviced cameras kits like this in ebay condition (ie who knows until it shows up at your door) have been selling for anywhere between $200-400.

 

[pete hogan]

Lens choice may not be that important. Consider that with 50mm lenses and any Barnack, it's useful to have both an f/2 and also the excellent Elmar collapsible in different situations. So use the one the camera comes with and look to add the other one when you like.

 

[goamules]

For those prices, you would do best to pick the absolutely best working camera. No pinholes or wrinkled shutter curtains, no tight or gummy wind or rewind. A very good sounding shutter for all speeds, including B and 1 second. I would also ask if you can return it after shooting 1 roll of film, if there are ANY problems.

You see, if you buy a $450 Leica and need ANY work done, you are adding at least $100 more dollars. You end up with about a $500 camera, that you could only sell for $325.

 

[Dralowid]

Condition, condition, condition...it is all that really matters.

 

[subman60]

I think the 1949 has been sold. The owner has not returned my phone calls today. Kind of makes my mind up for me.

 

[Scrambler]

I think the 1949 has been sold. The owner has not returned my phone calls today. Kind of makes my mind up for me.

I would have leaned that way, but be aware that you are still paying a premium. I'd like to see maybe $100 off that price. But if in really good condition and not requiring any work, could be worth it.

Everyready cases are worth maybe $25 ... or not. They increase moisture content and that isn't a good thing.

 

[BillBingham2]

I think the 1949 has been sold. The owner has not returned my phone calls today. Kind of makes my mind up for me.

What's the rush, there are lots of them out there. Some in better condition, some in worse.

 

[subman60]

True but Leicas don't come up often close by and it's nice to have the chance to look them over before exchanging cash for camera. The 1946 is prices a little high and I will probably hold off and see if he will come down. It is in very nice shape. I may just take my cash and look for a new lens for my M3.

 

[colyn]

I've owned 3 1946 versions and each one had issues. I currently have 2 1949 and a 1948 version which work fine..

In 1946 most workers were new so they were not familiar with the process and had to train on the job.

I still have a 1946 version with an engraving error. Instead of Germany it is engraved Gern..

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

1946 ones could be a bit iffy with poor chrome plating but the lens might just be coated. It depends on the date of the lens, because mix and match is a well known Leica game. F'instance the Summar ought to be paired with a mid 30's model II or III body...

Having said that I'd go for a later IIIc and a coated Summitar f/2 that can be a real pleasure to use.

Regards, David

 

[gilgsn]

Humm... My IIIc is a 1946 model and it is absolutely flawless aesthetically and in functionality... I have a 1949 Summitar on it; great combination.

Gil.

 

[Pioneer]

Humm... My IIIc is a 1946 model and it is absolutely flawless aesthetically and in functionality... I have a 1949 Summitar on it; great combination.

Gil.

Love those IIIc cameras. My 47 is flaking chrome so many places it looks like a sick fish. But that shutter purrs like a kitten, the film transport is perfectly accurate every time and the rangefinder is beautifully clear and focuses my little Elmar like it was adjusted just for it. Who needs chrome anyway??

 

[subman60]

The 1949 is still available. Was just offered to me at a significant price drop. Guess I'll probably go for it. It wasn't on the regular internet sites. I just came across it by luck.