Leica III Compared to FED 1g Questions

[Glen851]

Hey everyone, I have a FED 1g that was overhauled complete with new shutter curtains, etc. The camera, to me operates nicely, the advance is smooth, the shutter works crisply and sounds great. In all, I'm very happy with it.
My GAS has me thinking about a Leica III body and using a couple of my FSU lenses with it.
Questions are :
1- Is the Leica (presuming it is good operating condition) noticeably smoother mechanically and in functionality than a FED 1 or Zorki ?
2- Are there any concerns regarding FSU lenses on a Leica III body?
3- Any other comments?

Thanks, Glen

 

[xayraa33]

Leica III Compared to FED 1g, you could get a Leica III in crappy condition and you will be not as happy with it as your smooth fully functioning FED 1g.

But usually a well kept Barnack Leica is leaps better than any FSU camera in smoothness and reliability and quality in the long haul.

As far as FSU lenses compatibility with a Leica camera, there is a lot of "yes" and "no' and "maybe" there, so it depends on a lot of factors.

 

[wolves3012]

First off, a FSU camera was mass-produced and cheap and a Leica was neither of those (relatively speaking). That being so, you should expect that a Leica was made to a better standard. Also, Leicas tend to be looked after and FSUs do not (obviously that's a sweeping generalisation).

I have several Zorki 1 and FED 1 cameras and only one Leica, a IIIC. The Leica is certainly a little smoother in operation, it does just feel of higher quality with better cut gears and so on. That said, the gap is not huge and they all do their job just fine. This is based on my limited samples, it won't be universally true.

Most FSU lenses should work equally well on a Leica. There are some with potential problems, like the Jupiter 3 and Jupiter 9, which are not confined to being problematic with a Leica, specificially. Pre-war FED lenses were not made to standard lens-register spec and the mount threads may also be different - best avoided. I have used some Industar collapsibles and Jupiter 8, 11 and 12 on my IIIC without issues.

Overall, it's fair to say that a well-serviced and not abused FED or Zorki 1 isn't far short of a Leica II/III. The main point being about serviced and not abused or neglected, which really applies to either FSU or Leica.

 

[Glen851]

Thanks guys.
Are there any recommendations/cautions regarding the Leica II or III series of cameras?

 

[xayraa33]

Thanks guys.
Are there any recommendations/cautions regarding the Leica II or III series of cameras?

Both specific models II or III are great Leicas, if you want to go super minimalist and no hassle of slow shutter speeds, the II is the way to go, but generally they sell for more money and are usually a bit older and can be in black paint, which will up the price.
The II does not have the 1.5x magnification in the RF and no diopter adjustment on the RF. Some folks like the direct normal view 1:1 RF magnification or lack of it in this case.

If you mean II as the IIc or IIf, these are stronger modular built models (some say easier to repair too) than the pure crate built Oskar Barnack designs like the I, II , lll, llla and lllb but these later models are as feature packed as the IIIc and IIIf, they just lack the slow shutter speeds, these are not as common as the IIIc and IIIf and may sell for more money now.

I found the RF mirror on pre war Leica models held up better than on the post war models but YMMV, as these are nearing 90 years in age and usually it should be replaced by now for optimum performance, along with a pro CLA if you intend to regularly use these cameras.

 

[rfaspen]

My IIIa is my favourite Barnack. Everyone will have their own favourite model....
I see lots of IIIf and c bodies for sale these days, some even priced correctly.

 

[goamules]

Thanks guys.
Are there any recommendations/cautions regarding the Leica II or III series of cameras?

Very open ended question. You are a new member, have you read through the years (decades) of posts here, on the dozens of sub topics implied in your question?

 

[Dralowid]

Very open ended question. You are a new member, have you read through the years (decades) of posts here, on the dozens of sub topics implied in your question?

Every response will have a different viewpoint or at least answer.

Mine? Condition is all.

 

[davidnewtonguitars]

If you can wait until a good III, a thru c, is available on the classifieds here, stated to be in excellent running condition, you will be well served. The f is a different beast because of the flash gear added. As stated above, the model II is minimalist, like a Zorki or Fed 1.

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

You can't give more than a generalised answer to this age old question. I've had more or less all the cameras mentioned and - I hope - handle them all the same. From time to time they need a general check up and so on and then off we go again and another starts to feel off and goes away for a check.

At the moment the Leica II feels fine to handle but I know the shutter is not running smoothly. The FED I last handled will go next but the Zorki feels fine as does an older ('36) FED. I hope this shows the problem.

I've also a Leica standard I think was abandoned when the war ended and a better one was liberated. The standard had lubrication problems, a rusty screw inside and badly needed a complete service but talking to the technician I was told it hadn't been used very much as it was "as new" apart from the oils, greases and the screw.

And I've a IIIc waiting for film to go through it after a repair and a '39 FED being repaired.

In a nutshell, you are buying second-hand and a II or III will be about 80 years old. So you have to accept that it is just pot luck what you get. You'll know after the first film or two...

Afterthoughts (edited, in other words); I've just looked at your list of cameras and I think it is too late as the bug has bitten you and you will end up with one of eveything and two of some of them. So what does it matter where you start? OTOH, the Leica II is a classic, simple and straight forward and very little to go wrong compared with others.


Regards, David

PS To my odd way of thinking it makes more sense to put a Leica lens on a good old USSR body but that's just for taking pictures. There's a lot more comes into it but mostly it seems to me to be curiosity driving us.

 

[Glen851]

Thanks, David. It's true, I've been bitten by the vintage camera bug. It started a short time ago, with feelings of nostalgia for my first SLRs from the early 70s. Then progressed to those SLRs I couldn't afford then, but lusted after!
Now, it's these cool rangefinders which were not practical or available for me to use then, but so much fun to play with now.
Heaven help me, but I'm struggling with the temptation to play with the medium format camera I used, and lusted for back in the '70s and '80s!

 

[pippy]

...Are there any recommendations/cautions regarding the Leica II or III series of cameras?

Late to this thread...


One thing which I, personally, feel is a BIG advantage of the Leica III over either a II or any Fed I / Zorki I is that the III Leicas had strap-lugs. Doesn't make any difference if the camera is going to become part of a collection but IMO makes the thing far more attractive as a 'user'.


Philip.

 

[CharlesDAMorgan]

Just remember they are old. My Leica III shutter advance stopped working this week, film winds on but the shutter doesn't. As David Hughes said above, you can't generalise at this age - mine was from a top London dealer and had been serviced only a year before.

 

[Glen851]

Yes, Philip, I have considered the addition of strap lugs being a nice advantage. Also, the fact that these are ALL old machines and repairs are to be expected, the cost of such repairs is a point not to be ignored, especially since I plan to use the cameras.

 

[tbhv55]

Late to this thread...


One thing which I, personally, feel is a BIG advantage of the Leica III over either a II or any Fed I / Zorki I is that the III Leicas had strap-lugs. Doesn't make any difference if the camera is going to become part of a collection but IMO makes the thing far more attractive as a 'user'.


Philip.

Philip, that's more or less correct - although some early FEDs did have lugs.

I can't remember which was the last model to have the lugs, but my FED 2a has them. 🙂

 

[Ko.Fe.]

IIIf. If you want best, ever made LTM.

FED is nothing but FSU. Will works for some time and crap out. During WWII FED and before or after were ditched for Leica.
And Leica refused to take FED for service then germans brought them from WWII.

None of the Leica service person will touch FED with ten feet pole.

 

[David Murphy]

The best Leica made LTM camera (and arguably the most mechanically refined M39 camera ever) was the IIIg IMO. It has a look and feel that just exudes quality and excellence -- reminiscent of the very early Leica M3's.

The IIIf, as noted above, is certainly a contender for over-the-top excellence as well. The IIIf's are often well-worn little beasts for very good reasons, while the (few) IIIg's I've seen have been lightly used (if at all). I expect the IIIg was not adopted in its era so much by pros - perhaps it was too pricey or bypassed in favor of its famous contemporary the operationally superior M2/M3 by those needing a rangefinder. That is good for us now though!

Even the straight III is excellent - a hand made 1930's gem.

I am also partial to the II series, e.g. the IIf. They are wonderful and super reliable so long as you can forgo slow speeds. All early Leica's are in a class beyond anything made in the FSU.

 

[tunalegs]

Here's the truth: a smoother film advance will not make your photos better.

I have a Leica IIIf, a Zorki 4, and a (knob-wind) Fed 3. I rarely use the Leica. It doesn't take better pictures than the other two - but it has a worse viewfinder. It is fun to shoot a roll through it sometimes, but I actually haven't picked it up once this year.

For me, the quality of the viewfinder is more important than the smoothness of the film advance. I want to compose photographs more than I want to wind film smoothly. The III series cameras make nice conversation pieces, but they're really just novelties so far as actual picture taking is concerned. And for what it's worth, that Fed 3's knob wind is near as makes no difference, just as smooth as the IIIf's.

 

[David Murphy]

Here's the truth: a smoother film advance will not make your photos better.

I have a Leica IIIf, a Zorki 4, and a (knob-wind) Fed 3. I rarely use the Leica. It doesn't take better pictures than the other two - but it has a worse viewfinder. It is fun to shoot a roll through it sometimes, but I actually haven't picked it up once this year.

For me, the quality of the viewfinder is more important than the smoothness of the film advance. I want to compose photographs more than I want to wind film smoothly. The III series cameras make nice conversation pieces, but they're really just novelties so far as actual picture taking is concerned. And for what it's worth, that Fed 3's knob wind is near as makes no difference, just as smooth as the IIIf's.

Maybe, but a reliable camera can make you a better photographer, or at least one that can help you make properly exposed and undamaged images.

I agree mostly about finders, and the IIIg finder beats most, it not all, the LTM competition (in that era) for 50mm frame lines - hands down. Owning and using good quality external finders with most of the vintage cameras we are discussing is recommended if use is frequent.

 

[CharlesDAMorgan]

My serviced and bought from top London dealer Leica III is sitting on the shelf with shutter advance fubar and problems with shutter speeds above 100.

My Zorki 4 just keeps working.

I paid £55 for it with a good Jupiter 8 lens. I will have to pay c£150 and wait 6 months to get my Leica III CLA'd by a reputable firm.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy playing around with fine bits of German camera engineering, but I think much of that is derived from the history rather than the camera per se.