Leica II or Leica III?

[Bruno Gracia]

Hi guys,

I will make a long trip, and wondering about carrying one of these little gems, No need for more, funcy asph. lenses or whatever, just enjoy the places and enjoy the waiting and pleasure of slow and contemplative photography.

Well I've been searching for information, and models out there. Found a III black (desirable) II in black and IIIa chrome which is the cheapest one (200GBP) vs. 300GBP for the black ones. I really want a BLACK ONE.

What are the main differences? Is the II model smaller than the III?

I should be pleased with this II and 35 summaron paired with a 50/2 or 2.8.

Thanks!

 

[Scrambler]

Hi guys, I will make a long trip, and wondering about carrying one of these little gems, No need for more, funcy asph. lenses or whatever, just enjoy the places and enjoy the waiting and pleasure of slow and contemplative photography. Well I've been searching for information, and models out there. Found a III black (desirable) II in black and IIIa chrome which is the cheapest one (200GBP) vs. 300GBP for the black ones. I really want a BLACK ONE. What are the main differences? Is the II model smaller than the III? I should be pleased with this II and 35 summaron paired with a 50/2 or 2.8. Thanks!

Bruno, what is this? You've owned, or own, a IIIF. Any of these are almost the same as that. Read any website re II vs III vs IIIa vs later Barnacks. Let us know what you decide.

 

[Bruno Gracia]

Mmmm.. I've owned just for a few days almost all of them, so can't remember! it's different story than M cameras! which I will keep for profesional use.

 

[Bruno Gracia]

For the records: all those cameras I bought, presented problems with speeds or something, that's the reason I didn't finally keep them, the only one was a IIIG but too bulky.

 

[nongfuspring]

Have they had a recent CLA? They're all nice cameras, but if you're taking it with you on a long trip I'd be concerned about reliability. Honestly if I were you I'd prefer to take an M with small/collapsible lenses.

I'm pretty sure the II and the III are exactly the same size and main differences the VF magnification and slow speeds.

 

[RichL]

The III is slightly bigger but (to me) feels much bigger. Unless you have a need for slow speeds or 1/1000 go for the II. I wouldn't swap my II with 28mm lens for anything. Sorry, the IIIc is larger, the III and IIIa are the same size except for the slow speed dial on the front.

 

[Bruno Gracia]

thanks both.

1/1000 shouldn't be a problem y hardly use this speed, mainly shot at f8. Maybe for a portrait I use wide apertures and fast speed but 1/500 and f2 not in direct light will be ok. 1/20 is equal to 1/15 I guess so... this is my limit for slow speed.

 

[Davidhel]

Well...if you want black then it's the II or the III. The II is obviously simpler having no slow speeds (and that is often one of the things that needs attention if it's been out of action for a while). The III has strap lugs, but the IIIa will get you the 1/1000 speed. All are identical in size. Truth is they are all lovely cameras!..I've got a III and a IIIa (and a IIIc!) right now..and I used to have a II...

Check out rangefinder brightness, shutter capping at high speeds and for a III/IIIa the slow speeds (especially 1/8 giving 1/20 in error) - all fixable, but at a cost....I also reckon if you look around you could probably get a better deal than the prices you have quoted....Once CLA'd these are very reliable (and lots of fun!)

Good luck and enjoy the search!

 

[ray*j*gun]

Any black Barnack will cost you a premium even if its a repaint. The III vs II is about the slow speeds which i never use but like to have anyway. From a functional standpoint the IIIc is the best value but is slightly larger than the III. The most important issue is whether the camera has been serviced by a good tech. If it hasn't been serviced for 30 or 40 years well......

 

[Bruno Gracia]

ok so... CLA'd obviously is the most important thing to take care of.

The IIIa seems to be a good compromise but man those black are gorgeus.

they are really not differences in size and weight? (II and III and IIIa).

 

[Davidhel]

I don't think you would notice any difference in weight with any of them...the IIIa would be the best value...but...If I could only keep one of mine, it would be the black III!..

I'd also always buy factoring in that it will need a CLA at some point over the next few years) or learn how to do it yourself!

 

[Bruno Gracia]

mmm.. thanks David.

Following the Erik's adivces I'm in the search of clean lenses but man, how difficult it is!

 

[john neal]

Bruno,

I have had all of them up to the IIIF in all conditions from scruffy to mint. The one I stick with, because it feels "right" in my hand? The black II. I think I would sell my black paint MP before the black II - and probably will.

Of course, you will get all sorts of opinions, you have to decide which one you would prefer. Could you visit a dealer and handle a couple before finally choosing?

 

[Richard G]

I bought a little black II with a nickel Elmar 50 in the classifieds here. Absolutely tiny. The simplicity of no slow speed dial hanging off the front appealed to me, just like the simplicity of my M2. No strap lugs also appeals. The haze on the rear of the front element poses problems in bright sun at midday, but the effect on other images is worth the bother and I am not going to touch the lens.

 

[Bruno Gracia]

at the moment I'm in London visiting my fiancée until Wednesday when I leave to Spain.

I'm going to visit some dealers!

 

[Luddite Frank]

The II, III, and III-a are all based on the same body ( built-up from brass sheets ), and are very nearly the same weight. The II might be a little lighter, due to the lack of the slow-speeds mechanism, but I can't imagine more than a few grams difference.

I have a 1932 II ( black ), and two 1933 III's ( black ). The II shows the least wear, both III's have some brassing at the edges, and have had flash syncs added at some point.

I really like the look of the black Barnack... especially with nickel-plated fittings.

My "daily user" film camera for the last six years or so has been a 1934 Leica III (chrome). It was an "ugly" cheapy from e-bay that came with a Komura 35mm f:3.5 lens, but it has been a faultless performer, having shot a couple hundred rolls of film by now.

I agree with you that the bigger challenge seems to be finding clean LTM glass...

Good luck in your quest !

Luddite Frank

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

Buy the black one because anything else will merely delay the purchase of a black one and you really want a black one, remember?

Life's too short to waste time on delaying these things...

Regards, David

 

[Pioneer]

Bruno...good luck on your trip.

If you are interested in good, clean, usable glass, Voigtlander's modern offerings are a great way to start.

If you are more interested in glass from the same time period then it becomes much more hunt and sort.

Good luck.