Leather covered Leica I

Dralowid

Michael
Local time
11:07 AM
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
3,642
Location
United Kingdom
I approach any leather covered Leica purporting to be original with some suspicion...but who knows...

As I understand it there was a leather covered Leica I that was normally covered with brown calf's leather. I've never seen one nor a good picture of an authenticated one. I have read somewhere (Laney?) that there were also a few cameras with black leather. Again never seen an example.

Fixed lens Leica Is tended to have the lens flange screwed down over the vulcanite, which was machined flat, and appropriately shimmed. The same applies to leather covered fixed lens cameras I believe.

The camera I am looking at is 28xxx. It has been converted and standardised. The O on the flange is small, which I think suggests it was an early conversion.

As with all standardised cameras the vulcanite (or in this case leather) does not now run behind the flange.

The leather itself is high quality and textured though worn in places. The fit is good even though the leather has shrunk a bit.

The camera was bought by the previous owner in the Middle East in the late '40s. It has not been recovered since.

So can anyone help me by illustrating a factory leather covered Leica I for comparison...or is there any record of serial numbers for leather covered cameras?


Michael
 
Can't help you Michael, but sure would like to see some shots of that camera you are writing about!

Sounds real nice. Makes you wonder how it ended up in the Middle East in the late fourties. Maybe Indy's father brought it with him? 😉
 
Hi Michael,

When you look at my avatar you'll see a true LEANEKALB, a Leica I covered with calf leather, in this case it is a dark purple color, like an aubergine.
Just check the Westlicht and Foto Hobby Rahn archives.

Erik.
 
Thanks everyone for your help so far.

James Lager is unable to confirm whether the leather is Leitz.

Serial number is 28,572. If anyone has the 'Hahne List' I'd be more than grateful if they could double check.

Best

Michael
 
Hi Johan,

Nope, dead end. I have also chatted with Peter at CRR but he does not have access to serial numbers. One could possibly find someone to date the glue...

So...it might, it might not. The serial number is close to some 'proved' leather covered cameras but for now I will stick (!) with that.

My wife is an ornithologist. The rule is to assume that that brown spot in the distance is something common until proved otherwise. So be it!

Michael
 
Something like this (courtesy of Westlicht auction):
713015ae0fa264055e6ea5fafa2b76d63059.jpg
 
Well, which one, if any, looks 'real' to you?

Michael

Well yours does seem to have ordinary vulcanite on its body: early vulcanite is shrinking over the years, which is clearly visible in your sample: look at the edges of the body and at the body screws. Early vulcanite i.e. the one used until about 1934 or 1935, looked almost like leather: Luton had some samples of different vulcanite used by Leitz on its website.
 
Last edited:
Hi Michael,

Most leather on LEANEKALB-Leica's I've seen was really smooth, almost without any texture. The leather on yours is not that smooth.

Erik.
 
Last edited:
Hi Erik,

The front is quite worn, the back has more texture so on your basis it may not be original.

I have the camera because it represents a very early conversion, the leather is a side issue that either adds or detracts...not really sure which. Note how the flange of the lens (which I assume is converted too) does not match the flange of the camera.

The camera came with early case and accessories plus quite a lot of contemporary Leitz literature some German, some English, which is of some interest.

Michael
 
Hi Michael,

If the lens is converted and has a dept of field ring added, it normally should have a "0" engraved near the grip.
The fact that the flange of the lens does not match the flange of the camera is quite bizarre. I've never seen that before.
The screw on the left side of the cameras top seems to be chrome.
Does the camera have the small circular metal peephole-cover on the back?
The camera got it's recent covering after the conversion, because there are no holes for the screws of the infinity spring (hockeystick) on the front of the camera.
It is a very interesting camera indeed!

Regards,

Erik.
 
Hi Michael,

If the lens is converted and has a dept of field ring added, it normally should have a "0" engraved near the grip.
The fact that the flange of the lens does not match the flange of the camera is quite bizarre. I've never seen that before.Erik.

Erik,

My dealer friend (ex LHSA VP) told me that the slightly smaller flange is indicative of a non-standardised lens having been converted to standard. I have seen a few like that, and they were all older lenses without serial nos - i.e. pre 1932, but it could just be coincidence.

I would guess that the lack of an infinity lock is also a sign that the lens may have been converted from an earlier type?
 
My dealer friend (ex LHSA VP) told me that the slightly smaller flange is indicative of a non-standardised lens having been converted to standard.

I would guess that the lack of an infinity lock is also a sign that the lens may have been converted from an earlier type?

This could all be true. It is very likely that this lens is the original one of the camera. But why the smaller flange? There must be a reason for it.

Erik.
 
Back
Top Bottom