huntjump
Well-known
I have very much enjoyed reading this thread. The mystery continues...
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
Shouldn't the "Leica" engraving be a script?
Phil Forrest
Phil Forrest
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
It's a FED, but it must be a real early one. Serial number tells it.
And, it was made in the early days when there was an effort put into re-creating a Leica II.
Only two days ago I serviced my Leica II and to do so removed the accessory shoe. My first 1,000-batch Leica II from 1932 has the exact same hole under the accessory shoe. There is the end of a spring sticking into the circular thing and you can reach that through the hole without having to pop the top plate. I suppose they expected that this spring could need tweaking and wanted easy access. Later when tweaking proved unnessessary, the hole was omitted.
The FED viewfinder tunnels are soldered, like in your camera. The Leica ones are threaded on.
That is a really special amalgam of the two cameras. From this one, some people might even find support for the idea that the early FED and the Leica II were constructed in a 'joint venture'.
That, or maybe Ernst Leitz has ever published something on his idea for the RF before putting it into production? Or, the idea is Russian and was adapted by Leitz?
And, it was made in the early days when there was an effort put into re-creating a Leica II.
Only two days ago I serviced my Leica II and to do so removed the accessory shoe. My first 1,000-batch Leica II from 1932 has the exact same hole under the accessory shoe. There is the end of a spring sticking into the circular thing and you can reach that through the hole without having to pop the top plate. I suppose they expected that this spring could need tweaking and wanted easy access. Later when tweaking proved unnessessary, the hole was omitted.
The FED viewfinder tunnels are soldered, like in your camera. The Leica ones are threaded on.
That is a really special amalgam of the two cameras. From this one, some people might even find support for the idea that the early FED and the Leica II were constructed in a 'joint venture'.
That, or maybe Ernst Leitz has ever published something on his idea for the RF before putting it into production? Or, the idea is Russian and was adapted by Leitz?
Last edited:
Membedeep
Member
In my Fed that I compared this camera with, both tunnels - RF and viewfinder are together, in an independent piece, not connected in any way with the RF.
The top cover looks like an early FED, but it isn't. Try compare it to any other Fed 1 that didn't had the accesory shoe. First Feds were hand crafted and you can really see that...
I haven't seen other Fed with a serial number in that place. Maybe there are. Yes, the top plate, because of the B marking, it seems to be russian in its origins...
About the RF housing. Yes, Leica engravings are script style. So that's why most people would say that this one is fake. But this is why I say is not:
Comparing the letters to those from a IIIf, try to see the details.
- the R and A letters have their own Leica signature (a special curve in the A and the right leg from the R doesn't go from the intersection with the left leg, like in an ordinary R)
- the T and E letters are also similar.
The top cover looks like an early FED, but it isn't. Try compare it to any other Fed 1 that didn't had the accesory shoe. First Feds were hand crafted and you can really see that...
I haven't seen other Fed with a serial number in that place. Maybe there are. Yes, the top plate, because of the B marking, it seems to be russian in its origins...
About the RF housing. Yes, Leica engravings are script style. So that's why most people would say that this one is fake. But this is why I say is not:
Comparing the letters to those from a IIIf, try to see the details.
- the R and A letters have their own Leica signature (a special curve in the A and the right leg from the R doesn't go from the intersection with the left leg, like in an ordinary R)
- the T and E letters are also similar.
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
warning.
/Begin highly speculative mode
'When the labour commune FED was looking for new assignments, they choose products from foreign manufacturers that they duplicated, in order to gain a contract to produce these products.
FED succeeded with Black & Decker (as the story goes, B&D drills were made in Kharkov for several years), but failed with Leitz. The Leica-II copies have since found their way to collectors and the internet.
When Leitz showed no interest, the commune decided to continue production for inland markets and changed the name of the camera.'
/End highly speculative mode
/Begin highly speculative mode
'When the labour commune FED was looking for new assignments, they choose products from foreign manufacturers that they duplicated, in order to gain a contract to produce these products.
FED succeeded with Black & Decker (as the story goes, B&D drills were made in Kharkov for several years), but failed with Leitz. The Leica-II copies have since found their way to collectors and the internet.
When Leitz showed no interest, the commune decided to continue production for inland markets and changed the name of the camera.'
/End highly speculative mode
Penny Lane
Hopelessly Citrophile
The engraving appears to be in DIN (Deutsches Institut für Normung) lettering, for which there are many, many engraving templates out and about. Early thirties Leitz lettering, contemporary to the 'round' RF housing type, differed slightly from DIN lettering (notably: capital E with raised middle bar, capital D with slightly slanted curve instead of straight). They may well have switched to straight DIN along the line, I don't know (anyone???)
As for the RF assembly: I have the exact same type in my FED-1d. Now to the RF housing: it doesn't seem to be original for the top plate, or at least there's been a later style ('squared') RF housing on this top plate for a long time (see wear marks), that would've completely obscured the number on the top plate.
Lastly: is the rear screw of the shutter crate to top plate just that short, or is it missing?
Derk
As for the RF assembly: I have the exact same type in my FED-1d. Now to the RF housing: it doesn't seem to be original for the top plate, or at least there's been a later style ('squared') RF housing on this top plate for a long time (see wear marks), that would've completely obscured the number on the top plate.
Lastly: is the rear screw of the shutter crate to top plate just that short, or is it missing?
Derk
sabears
Member
There are lots of these faked FED, many variants in engravings, little parts, etc.
from here: http://www.fedka.com/Useful_info/Commune_by_Fricke/commune_A.htm
...
While under the administration of the NKVD, the Dzerzhinsky Commune did something which is perhaps unique in the annals of camera history; it copied the Leica in name as well as form. The FED was already a physical copy of the Leica, but some of the cameras were also engraved with the familiar 'Leica' trademark, and some f3·5 lenses were engraved 'Leitz Elmar'. Whatever the motivation, this strange practice persisted over several years, during which an apparently sizeable number of cameras was made. Beyond any shortcomings in workmanship, the give-away features of these cameras was the distinctive FED viewfinder window. The earliest known 'counterfeit Leica' was manufactured in 1936, while the most common year seems to be 1938...
see, for example:
http://www.ussrphoto.com/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1887
http://www.ussrphoto.com/Wiki/default.asp?WikiCatID=77&ParentID=1&ContentID=1121&Item=Fed-Leica+%28from+a+1d+or+1e%29.
http://www.ussrphoto.com/wiki/default.asp?WikiCatID=77&ParentID=1&ContentID=1127 (look at the little photos for some variants in engravings)
http://www.dvdtechcameras.com/collect/fed/1/1.htm (see photos)
cheers.
from here: http://www.fedka.com/Useful_info/Commune_by_Fricke/commune_A.htm
...
While under the administration of the NKVD, the Dzerzhinsky Commune did something which is perhaps unique in the annals of camera history; it copied the Leica in name as well as form. The FED was already a physical copy of the Leica, but some of the cameras were also engraved with the familiar 'Leica' trademark, and some f3·5 lenses were engraved 'Leitz Elmar'. Whatever the motivation, this strange practice persisted over several years, during which an apparently sizeable number of cameras was made. Beyond any shortcomings in workmanship, the give-away features of these cameras was the distinctive FED viewfinder window. The earliest known 'counterfeit Leica' was manufactured in 1936, while the most common year seems to be 1938...
see, for example:
http://www.ussrphoto.com/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1887
http://www.ussrphoto.com/Wiki/default.asp?WikiCatID=77&ParentID=1&ContentID=1121&Item=Fed-Leica+%28from+a+1d+or+1e%29.
http://www.ussrphoto.com/wiki/default.asp?WikiCatID=77&ParentID=1&ContentID=1127 (look at the little photos for some variants in engravings)
http://www.dvdtechcameras.com/collect/fed/1/1.htm (see photos)
cheers.
Last edited:
Dralowid
Michael
See the shape of the moulding around the shutter dial. this is a Fed I. It is different
Michael
Membedeep
Member
Yes, it looks similar, but not identical... Is it brass chromed in the Fed?
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Another thing that tells me that the camera was likely constructed from parts obtained from multiple sources: the diameter for the shutter dial allows for a Leica II old-style 15mm dial, while there's a 13.5mm dial fitted. Which is seated too high.
There's too much room under the shutter dial for either a FED or a Leica, neither company would have their camera's leave the building with the shutter dial fitted like that...
But the top plate is strange, those curves are only found on a Leica II, none of the FED's listed here have it... (scroll down for the piece on engravings, shows all top plate curvings as well).
Any chance on going back to where you got it and inquire?
There's too much room under the shutter dial for either a FED or a Leica, neither company would have their camera's leave the building with the shutter dial fitted like that...
But the top plate is strange, those curves are only found on a Leica II, none of the FED's listed here have it... (scroll down for the piece on engravings, shows all top plate curvings as well).
Any chance on going back to where you got it and inquire?
Filzkoeter
stray animal
Hi guys (wow my first post in this forum )
Looks like an interesting combination from different cameras.
What I can identify:
-the top part of the body looks like it's a Zorki 1 (c-type) one.
1) The position of the front screw in the middle is more to the left then in earlier models. You can see the difference in both posts before mine.
2) There are only two screws at the back, all FED1s and early Zorki1s had 3.
3) My Zorki 1(c) also has got a 4-digit serial under the top plate
-the shutter speed disk looks like a pre-war FED one (not sure is post-war FED also had this design)
-the shutter crate also looks like a pre-war FED one (it's made out of two parts, not like the later solid ones)
-Miko
)Looks like an interesting combination from different cameras.
What I can identify:
-the top part of the body looks like it's a Zorki 1 (c-type) one.
1) The position of the front screw in the middle is more to the left then in earlier models. You can see the difference in both posts before mine.
2) There are only two screws at the back, all FED1s and early Zorki1s had 3.
3) My Zorki 1(c) also has got a 4-digit serial under the top plate
-the shutter speed disk looks like a pre-war FED one (not sure is post-war FED also had this design)
-the shutter crate also looks like a pre-war FED one (it's made out of two parts, not like the later solid ones)
-Miko
Last edited:
Membedeep
Member
Not really...
But except the RF housing, that identical ones are only on Leicas and not on any other copies or fakes, there are other things. The roller cam from the RF that is just like the one in my Leica III, the body that is defintely one of a Leica II or III.
Why would anyone mount all this on a top plate of a Zorki 1? The mechanics also look to be... not russian. But the top plate is russian for sure.
My biggest mistery is that of the engravings on the top plate.
I would say that this camera was hand-made by someone that used to work in the Leitz factory. It had some spare parts, but also acces to the engraving device. Or maybe some russians played with german parts and mixed those together with Zorki ones...
I don't care anymore
The camera sits next to some Robot Start, Contax, NKVD's and several Leicas. And it fits very well! I just got another Leica member, a IIIf RD with the 2.8/50 Elmar.
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
I'm still thinking it's a Bitsa.
The main problem is that we know what Leicas look like as the factory drawings still exists but our knowledge of FED, Zorki etc is based (well, in my case) on what we've bought over the years and so could be wrong. I've only two FED/Zorkis in the collection that have a known history based on speaking to the owner's families etc and have my doubts about one of them.
Going back to why it's a Bitsa; there were long periods war-time and post war when parts for all the makes mentioned where impossible or difficult to get and, later on, not all dealers were 100% honest. And the honest one might have told the owner that "foreign" parts were used but it changed hands and was forgotten...
Regards, David
PS "Bitsa" is a contraction of "bits of this and that", for reasons that escape me the liaison makes "of" sound like"a" and the rest gets dropped; as in the expression "as daft as a brush" or rhyming slang (example saying "butcher's" for "look") to improve the joke or exclude people who are not in the know.
I'm still thinking it's a Bitsa.
The main problem is that we know what Leicas look like as the factory drawings still exists but our knowledge of FED, Zorki etc is based (well, in my case) on what we've bought over the years and so could be wrong. I've only two FED/Zorkis in the collection that have a known history based on speaking to the owner's families etc and have my doubts about one of them.
Going back to why it's a Bitsa; there were long periods war-time and post war when parts for all the makes mentioned where impossible or difficult to get and, later on, not all dealers were 100% honest. And the honest one might have told the owner that "foreign" parts were used but it changed hands and was forgotten...
Regards, David
PS "Bitsa" is a contraction of "bits of this and that", for reasons that escape me the liaison makes "of" sound like"a" and the rest gets dropped; as in the expression "as daft as a brush" or rhyming slang (example saying "butcher's" for "look") to improve the joke or exclude people who are not in the know.
Eugen Mezei
Well-known
Yes, I decided to play with the snake skin, I admit. That's because I had it instead of the vulcanite, that is so hard to find in here. But it looks funny like this on the shelf and I have no intention to sell it. Probably it doesn't even worth more than I paid for it - 100 Euros
And that is why you try to sell it on an other site for 500 EUR stating it is an original Leica. After every part of it was found to be exactly not a Leica.