Leica III with 7 digit serial number

[archive59]

The first Leica I used was a II, no. 23010. It was an upgrade of an earlier camera. This and Mortimer Street during WW2 are believable explanations. Hard to tell without seeing/handling the camera.

Afterthought: The Russians made "bitzas" too. Even when the cameras were still (reasonably) current.

Second afterthought: It was not unknown for Leica factory staff to "win" parts, especially rejects (a badly engraved shutter speed dial, maybe? And a very old body? And bits that had been replaced during upgrades/rebuilds?). Perhaps this was made by someone who couldn't "win" quite enough parts... Such "winning" had to be clandestine...

Cheers,

R.

When I used to work for a well known British company in the aerospace industry (I think I may have given away the name there) I knew of people who "won" aircraft parts. Who knows what they managed to build in their shed.
Back to the camera. It certainly 'feels' more like my other Leica than my FSU cameras. Your suggestion is certainly a possibility. I can see me having to take the top off to make any more progress. 🙂

 

[David Hughes]

Equally, it could be a genuine repair when parts etc were hard to come by or else done unofficially for a friend by a factory worker using rejects.

Regards, David

 

[David Hughes]

Another afterthought...very early Feds had collimation holes and all sorts of other very Leicalike features. However I doubt anyone would have tried to put slow speeds in one. These days they are very expensive.

That US flash sync looks post war.

Hi,

In this thread:-

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2630475&posted=1#post2630475

at post 1212 there's a picture of a Zorki 3 with a slow shutter speed dial on the front.

Regards, David

 

[johannielscom]

Hi,

In this thread:-

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2630475&posted=1#post2630475

at post 1212 there's a picture of a Zorki 3 with a slow shutter speed dial on the front.

Regards, David

Zorki-3 (PM1290) from 1955 by Johannes Hromadka, on Flickr
Can't be based on a Zorki 3.

The strap lugs are positioned differently and there is that big smooth edge on the Zorki body shell that are not present on the OP's screen shots. Plus, the bottom plate is radically different and the the body shape looks close enough to a Leica but it's not a match. No way a Leica bottom plate can be used on a Zorki 3 body.

In general, old FED type 1's are needed to get anywhere near a credible Leica replica.

'Replicas' from Zorki, or later FED models greatly rely on people not knowing what an actual Leica looks like.

I'd show some pictures but my website has been hacked. I have reason to believe it was done by Russian hackers, oddly enough

 

[sevo]

Can't be based on a Zorki 3.

I have never encountered a USSR Leica III fake with a working slow speed escapement, even though I've run into some with dummy knobs. This looks very much as if the Zorki-3 slow speed mechanism can't be transplanted into the earlier models - at least some fakers will obviously have tried.

 

[Dralowid]

Functioning slow speeds and a collimating hole suggest there is a fair chunk of Leica in there somewhere and one that at some time has been upgraded to III. The OP may be tempted to remove the top housing which will expose the serial number.

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

Pre-war FEDs had the hole in the pressure plate long after the registration was standardised* and, as for the slow speed dial, I was merely suggesting a source for non-Leica parts. I figure every little bit of the puzzle helps us solve the mystery.

IMO, in these days of the internet, anything goes (on) seems to be the repairers' motto.

Regards, David

* Probably using up old parts where it will not matter or show...

 

[archive59]

Apologies for the poor quality of picture, but it does seem I can get something uploaded now, so more to follow.

 

[archive59]

Another few

 

[archive59]

More of the same

 

[archive59]

FED top plates all seem to curve around the viewfinder surround to the left of the accessory shoe, whereas Leica are a sharp vertical where the shoe sits. That edge is vertical on this camera, and the front viewfinder window surround is also consistent with a Leica.
The speed dial is definitely odd. The lens mount has no zero mark on it but has been on the camera from before it was recovered because the glue has overspilled on to it. The Elmar was also a recipient of some of that glue on the edge! The recovering was done before the sync work by the looks of it to me.

Mark

 

[johannielscom]

The innards are Leica, per the rangefinder cam which is a wheel and not a triangle or a shovel shape. Also, the slow gears need to be Leica to match a Leica, the Zorki 3 slow gear won't fit.

At this point I'd say it's a Mortimer street conversion, where maybe the top plate was replaced and re-engraved with the trailing zero to signal it was a replacement.

But my guess is as good as anyones.

Nice camera and I'd get it if I were you, as long as the price isn't miles beyond a 'normal' Leica that is.

 

[archive59]

The innards are Leica, per the rangefinder cam which is a wheel and not a triangle or a shovel shape. Also, the slow gears need to be Leica to match a Leica, the Zorki 3 slow gear won't fit.

At this point I'd say it's a Mortimer street conversion, where maybe the top plate was replaced and re-engraved with the trailing zero to signal it was a replacement.

But my guess is as good as anyones.

Nice camera and I'd get it if I were you, as long as the price isn't miles beyond a 'normal' Leica that is.

Thanks for the reply. Yes, I think that the history of this camera is, as you say, anyone's guess!
I was just searching online for tutorials for removing the top plate, and something struck me, there is no hole on the rewind side for the diopter retaining screw. Another mystery I can only guess at the answer to.

I did in fact buy this camera, and I am glad I did. Even if it had turned out to be a complete mess of an FSU fake I was fairly sure there were enough 'parts' I could salvage and the Elmar certainly looked genuine from the start. Now I have it in my possession I am going to get some film in it and use it as it is. All for 90USD for both body and lens, so somewhat less than a 'normal' Leica.

Mark

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

Strap lugs and a hole in the back are odd too. Lugs came in with the III, didn't they? And the hole in the back wasn't needed from 31 or so.

So we now have an early one going by the shell and the hole in the back but a later one going by the lugs. Or was it an experimental back or a factory worker's unofficial modification?

Now I wonder what the Leitz versions of war time mongrels were and if the extra zero meant that.

Regards, David

PS I was wondering, above, about the slow speed dial not the innards. And that was before I'd seen the recent photo's.

 

[johannielscom]

USD 90, that's a fair price even if it turns out to be nothing more than a nice conversation piece. Well done, I say.

You could have Youxin Ye look it over, he can probably tell you some interesting details once it has a clean bill of health.

 

[Mr_Flibble]

And if it turns out to actually takes pictures, even better. 🙂

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

Would it mean anything if the serial number was 1524xxC ?

Just a thought as I can't see much detail in the photo but wondered and letters after numbers are the Leitz way of naming or labelling things...

Regards, David

 

[sevo]

Hi,

Would it mean anything if the serial number was 1524xxC ?

Not that I am aware of. Leitz sometimes marked replacement plates or custom modifications with an asterisk, but there was no official rule to letter-mark them. In any case, given the number of other departures from standards that camera probably was fixed by someone without a service handbook, or in a situation where he was more occupied with getting it back to work than back to standard...

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

Yes, I'd figured that once all the bits had been put together and it worked, whoever did it was happy but we do like to get to the bottom of things here...

Regards, David

 

[Schuter]

Nice and interesting find...
Not two months ago I was searching the internet for information regarding exactly that sync mechanism. I have a iiic that had that same plate and dual pc sockets. I searched all over and found nothing. The sync worked fine with my studio flashes, but the plate itself was skewed and the sockets protruded sharply and annoyed me. I removed the mechanism, de-soldered the contacts, plugged the 3 holes in the body and re-covered it with a fresh skin. The camera seems to operate more smoothly now. It wasn't a difficult task at all--easier than I anticipated. I'm not suggesting that you should do the same, but if you decide to at some point, I'd be happy to share what worked for me.