Leica copy of a copy - beware!

[je2a3]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZalaurahasitQQhtZ-1

Check out the Shanghai II and Leotax, they look like an early Fed and Zorki. Either the seller [in the USA] is unaware or something is fishy.....

I've seen similar cameras vaguely represented as "a Leica copy of a copy...." engraved with collectible Japanese brands such as Nicca and etc. Aside from funky repaint jobs, it is sad that these early Leica II copies are seeing such fate.

Just thought I'd share what I saw....

title edit: thought this is more appropriate, my apologies....

Joseph

 

[kiev4a]

The wording is done very carefully so the seller can't be pinned down on whether it s a copy of a Leica or a copy of a Leotax. The seller knows exactly what he or she is selling.

 

[doubs43]

The give-away that it's an FSU camera body is the cresent-shaped rangefinder coupling that can be clearly seen in the picture of the body with the lens removed. The Japanese copies of the Leica (Leotax, Nicca etc.) were quality cameras and AFAIK used the same circular coupling as the genuine Leica. Why the Soviets used that cresent coupling is one of life's unanswered questions to me. The Leitz coupling makes far more sense but was probably more expensive.

Walker

 

[jlw]

The Japanese copies of the Leica (Leotax, Nicca etc.) were quality cameras and AFAIK used the same circular coupling as the genuine Leica. Why the Soviets used that cresent coupling is one of life's unanswered questions to me. The Leitz coupling makes far more sense but was probably more expensive.

The DROUG also has a roller-tipped coupling lever, just like a Leica's (it even has an eccentric center screw for setting infinity focus.) It's the only former Soviet LTM camera I've seen that has one. So SOMEONE in the FSU was thinking about this!

I'll be posting more about my new old DROUG as soon as I get some time to write up some notes to go with my pictures... but I promise I won't hijack another thread to write about it... ;-)

 

[kiev4a]

The give-away that it's an FSU camera body is the cresent-shaped rangefinder coupling that can be clearly seen in the picture of the body with the lens removed. The Japanese copies of the Leica (Leotax, Nicca etc.) were quality cameras and AFAIK used the same circular coupling as the genuine Leica. Why the Soviets used that cresent coupling is one of life's unanswered questions to me. The Leitz coupling makes far more sense but was probably more expensive.

Walker

I think "more expensive" is the key phrase here. Also, the Ruskie copies can almost always be spotted because of the types of collars around the shutter release--except for the early FEDs and a few Zorkies that had the Leica stye button with no collar.

 

[je2a3]

Except for the earliest Feds until the 1a which are collectibles in their own right,
another tell tale sign of a Russian fake is the viewfinder front window is always flush to the top of the RF cover whereas in all Leicas and Japanese copies it was slighly recessed.

 

[Nickfed]

Very interesting picture. Isee the profile around the accessory shoe is different too. But what really intrigues me is that FED never got the engraving sorted out for the rewind lever. It now seems that it is in the right place but the problem was that it wasn't fine enough and they couldn't fit it all in the space available.
They had three bites at the top deck cover and and always covered part of the "B".

 

[brians]

I love that soft glow blur he gives it so you can't meticulously examine it.