leica II and III

A

atelier7

Well-known
Local time
9:46 AM
Joined
Jan 28, 2005
Messages
246
hi, what are your opinions on the following 2 cameras- in terms of what you think about the model and the price? very tempting...

Leica II D eboy item number: 7535214813

Leica IIIA with Summnar 7535217624
 
I have not viewed the auctions, but the only significant difference between the II and IIIa is that the II will only have shutter speeds of 1/20th or faster up to 1/500. The IIIa, will have shutter speeds (split between two dials) from 1 sec. to 1/500 sec. All of the early FSU Leica clones (bottom loaders) are copies of the Leica II.
 
Tempting, indeed! The main difference is the available range of exposure times: 1/1000 to 1 sec for the IIIa (however reliable today) and 1/500 to 1/20 for the II. The II has no strap lugs. That said I think the black/nickel II is the most beautiful Leica screw mount camera. I can't comment on current prices. However, in June 1935 a black II with an Elmar 3.5/5cm had a list price of 240,-- RM (Reichsmark that is) while a silver IIIa with a Summar 2.0/5cm was 387,-- RM. Not kidding. Now it should be easy for you to derive current market prices :)
 
Sorry for the redundant info. Did not see phototone's posting earlier. It is however a 1/1000 for the IIIa, which was the camera's new feature over the III.
 
On a camera of that age most of the higher shutter speeds are unreliable any way.
I use a Leica III but I have owned IIIA,s since the Sixties and certainly the Elmar 5cm is a better lens than the summitar which is a little soft I think Leitz went for the large aperture on that lens at the expense of definition
 
Peter L said:
On a camera of that age most of the higher shutter speeds are unreliable any way.
I use a Leica III but I have owned IIIA,s since the Sixties and certainly the Elmar 5cm is a better lens than the summitar which is a little soft I think Leitz went for the large aperture on that lens at the expense of definition
Click to expand...
The Summitar is a nice, fairly high definition lens, a substantial improvement over the Summar. Are you sure you're not thinking about the Summar?
 
Maybe the most 'turn heads' and 'that's very cool' camera I have, well the Rolleiflex does about the same... but a day out with my black paint and nickel parts Leica III is what the Leica was all about; compact, quiet, beautifully made and beautiful to look at. Makes you realize how BIG the M-series is. The uncoated 'white glass' Elmar is still a good performing lens, and after 70+ years the camera itself is still tight and going strong - and its a hand-full of fun.
 
i'm still tempted... arrrrgh! if i get the II, what's a decent lens to go with it and how much can i expect to spend? an elmer? how much will that cost?
 
atelier7 said:
its still there with no bids... so how does the summar fare? what are the criticisms of it?
Click to expand...
It has the reputation of not being very sharp. I know some of the RFF people have Summars. Maybe if you ask about it in a separate thread you could get some better informed opinions.
 
atelier7 said:
i'm still tempted... arrrrgh! if i get the II, what's a decent lens to go with it and how much can i expect to spend? an elmer? how much will that cost?
Click to expand...
The main thing that bothers me about the II is no lugs for a strap. Maybe something could be rigged up. An Elmar 50/3.5 would go nicely with it. You might be able to find a fairly nice one for $250-$350. Watch out for fungus and haze.
 
richard_l said:
The main thing that bothers me about the II is no lugs for a strap. Maybe something could be rigged up. An Elmar 50/3.5 would go nicely with it. You might be able to find a fairly nice one for $250-$350. Watch out for fungus and haze.
Click to expand...

There's always a wrist strap. I have a wrist strap which screws into the tripod mount which works fine on my II.

Scott
 
IMO, the IIIa is - by far - the better buy for the following reasons:

It has slow speeds plus a higher top speed of 1/1000.

It has a lens which, while not the best by a long shot, will serve until you can purchase another. You may be surprised and decide the Summar suits your style.

Chrome wears better than black enamel even if it's not as "cool" looking.

The IIIa has been recently CLA'd which means it should be in better operating condition.

Now, having said all that, here's what I'd do. I'd email the seller and inquire about the rangefinder accuracy and contrast. I'd ask about the condition of the shutter curtains and if all speeds work as they should. I'd ask if he knows of any faults that don't show in the pictures or haven't been disclosed. Finally, I'd ask if he'll guarantee that the camera is functional and as described.

If you're satisfied with the answers then by all means become the proud owner of a Leica IIIa. :)

Walker
 
The IIIa seems like the better deal for a camera to use for the reason mentioned above. One other plus is the rangefinder magnifier that started with the III model, makes focusing very easy.

The Summar has a reputation of being one of the Leitz Companies lesser lenses. Personally I had and used one for awhile and found it just fine. Very interesting wide open and can be quite beautiful, stopped down and with the proper hood it is as good as any of the uncoated lens of the time.

That said, what's your hurry? There are lots of older LTM cameras out there and if you want a black paint camera, or this or that lens, you need to look some more maybe? I like my Leica III as I mentioned, but if I wanted a LTM to really use it would be a 50s IIIf which there are also good deals on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom