Leica IIIC K - share info and questions

[Mr_Flibble]

I saw this one too yesterday. I'm currently watching to see what the bidders do, though I doubt it will stay affordable for me (already invested most of my disposable income in a new toy that goes on my firearms permit this month 🙁 ) .

Would you replace the vulcanite or keep it original? I think I'd replace it if I was going to use it frequently.

 

[john neal]

ooh - at that price, it would be cheaper than finishing my project K - bet it goes over AUS$1,000 though.

 

[LeicaTom]

With that camera, I would just inject some glue under the remaining vulcanite and keep it permanently in a "long nose" case or a sturdy "half case" ~ I wouldn't bother replacing the vulcanite with a correct shell and repaint, the damage/patina is already in the paint this cameras condition is already "user" grade it will never be better condition......it is the perfect user, get it CLA'd and it's ready to take up where the last owner left off.
(I would restore/replace vulcanite only on cameras that are 85% paint or better grade)

If it goes over $1,000 US Dollars that's the sign of a desperate public 😱

Tom

 

[johannielscom]

John,

That CCR Luton vulcanite you have on yours, would it be possible to spray paint that to the correct colour (with some of the paint you obtained, where did that come from again?)

That camera will be too rich for my blood, no matter what. Haven't got a dime of disposable income now and for some time to come, but yet I was wondering...

Pretty sure this IIIc-K will go past USD 1,000 because those desperate buyers are on eBay for sure. Somebody will have it serviced, re-covered and find a wartime Elmar for it, to subsequently show it off (and hopefully shoot it)

 

[john neal]

John,

That CCR Luton vulcanite you have on yours, would it be possible to spray paint that to the correct colour (with some of the paint you obtained, where did that come from again?)
quote]

Johan,

I could spray it - in fact the original covering on that camera was grey (as far as I can determine). I may try that on this one, as a trial for the K when that's finished,

The paint came from HMG in Manchester - they made it up specially for me. It's nitrocellulose base, so spraying should be OK. I thought about using a stoving enamel, but they thought it would fill the engravings too much.

 

[LeicaTom]

John,

That CCR Luton vulcanite you have on yours, would it be possible to spray paint that to the correct colour (with some of the paint you obtained, where did that come from again?)
quote]

Johan,

I could spray it - in fact the original covering on that camera was grey (as far as I can determine). I may try that on this one, as a trial for the K when that's finished,

The paint came from HMG in Manchester - they made it up specially for me. It's nitrocellulose base, so spraying should be OK. I thought about using a stoving enamel, but they thought it would fill the engravings too much.

John,

When can you do a chip test for me? ~ I would like to see how close they got your paint.......

The Grey painted IIIC K's had the RLM paint and the postwar chrome cameras had a real dark grey (discolored) looking vulcanite a different shade than the Black, Grey over spraypainted stuff.

May/June 1945 was an impossible time for supplies at the factory and I'm surprised that the factory could even make vulcanite and chrome a few hundred cameras! 😱

Tom

 

[Jaans]

Giving a heads up to anyone who might be interested in a "real" IIIC K Grey here on evilbay......

http://cgi.ebay.com/Leica-IIIc-K-gr...990169?pt=AU_FILM_CAMERAS&hash=item1c17d61459

This camera really got used hard in the past two years (it sold originally like 2 years ago or so from a dealer on evilbay) and was in much better shape then as it is now, as I recall it had most of it's vulcanite then and less wear, this camera now looks like it was used during the Normandy landings (just kidding!)

It is an original 1945 issued camera, issued the same day as one of mine was, sadly the original Elmar lens is gone ~ I would be going after this one myself, but getting my M6 project camera is MORE IMPORTANT to me now and I can't afford both...........

I'm sad to see the camera's in such bad shape, after how nice it was 2 years ago (I used my one camera for some daily work and I always took extra care when using it) ~ though honestly this camera now has a great patina and would make the ULTIMATE "user" IIIC K Grey, these cameras in this condition are hard to find in this grade and I suppose that the price will stay down??? Who knows???
(a broken early 1960's Black Paint M3 sold the other day for over $4k, so there's no telling, even beat up and broken RARE cameras bring some $$$$).

I have no connection whatsoever to the seller, I post this only as a favor to anyone here who might be in the market for a camera that I can see personally is a original 1945 US Army issued camera.

Tom

Tom,

I was wondering if you knew why some of these IIIc-K's were separated from their original Elmar lens and some maintained their 'relationship/pairing' with their original lens?

I had another look at Westlichts auction past results. What I noticed at Westlicht was that the grey K cameras with the K on the shutter sold close to those grey cameras that had their shutter replaced but came with the original lens.

Meaning the K shutter is just as highly prized in monetary termas as is the original lens. Is that what you have found with your research with these cameras?

Also, those K cameras with military markings like Luftwaffen, Heer etc are even more expensive!

I too have been monitoring that camera on my watch list that you posted above on ebay. It is a shame that the vulcanite is missing at the front, but I guess if it was intact then it would no doubt be worth a lot more money, even though it doesn't have the original lens? (Hence more in the collector bracket in finance terms). Also, in terms of numbers, how many K cameras were issued on the same day as this camera and yours?

Thanks again for your insight,
Jaans

 

[Jaans]

I saw this one too yesterday. I'm currently watching to see what the bidders do, though I doubt it will stay affordable for me (already invested most of my disposable income in a new toy that goes on my firearms permit this month 🙁 ) .

Would you replace the vulcanite or keep it original? I think I'd replace it if I was going to use it frequently.

Mr Fibble,

It seems that a few of us are watching this camera on rangefinder forum^^

I have also been wondering what I would do if I won this camera? Would it be best to leave it in its original state or would replacing the vulcanite be the best option. Tom's idea of using a half-case and glue sounds like a practical solution, as the integrity of the camera remains intact!

But, if anyone has done this, I'm wondering if it would be more expensive to replace the vulcanite, or would doing that decrease the value of the camera in the long run?

If anyone has information about this, then I would enjoy reading about your experiences as it does remain a potential project of mine.

Cheers

 

[LeicaTom]

Tom,

I was wondering if you knew why some of these IIIc-K's were separated from their original Elmar lens and some maintained their 'relationship/pairing' with their original lens?

I had another look at Westlichts auction past results. What I noticed at Westlicht was that the grey K cameras with the K on the shutter sold close to those grey cameras that had their shutter replaced but came with the original lens.

Meaning the K shutter is just as highly prized in monetary termas as is the original lens. Is that what you have found with your research with these cameras?

Also, those K cameras with military markings like Luftwaffen, Heer etc are even more expensive!

I too have been monitoring that camera on my watch list that you posted above on ebay. It is a shame that the vulcanite is missing at the front, but I guess if it was intact then it would no doubt be worth a lot more money, even though it doesn't have the original lens? (Hence more in the collector bracket in finance terms). Also, in terms of numbers, how many K cameras were issued on the same day as this camera and yours?

Thanks again for your insight,
Jaans

Many cameras were separated from their original lenses because they were either lost of destroyed in wartime (pre 1945 cameras) , but on the most part they were parted because of GREED, most dealers NEVER sell a camera with it's original issued lens together, they always part them out to get that extra $300 out of a deal.......pathetic in my opinion, but that's life in the camera business. 😛 ~ sacrifice history for money, happens all the time, I'm very lucky to have (three) IIIC K Grey's that are all matching numbers and that have rich *personal* histories to back up their collectibility.

Final price and collectibility have to do with condition and rarity, the better the shape the higher the price, also supply and demand............speaking of history, unfortunately anything engraved with the WW2 German Nazi-era military markings seems to be bringing the big bucks at the moment.
(I myself DON'T collect WW2 era Grey IIIC K's, the 43' I own has a 9th Armored Division/Black Star Agency-Life Magazine connection, that's why I own it, don't prefer the German Military stuff, if I find something it's SOLD right away to finance more 1945 issued US Army gear.)

Jaans, in replacing the vulcanite and painting, it can be very expensive, just getting the correct vulcaite from a postwar donor camera and painting it properly is a real chore itself
(I have two 45 cameras I need to restore this way, I just don't have the $500+ now to invest in getting them both right now) ~ with them BOTH done the value of them will go up by $500 to $800 more than what it was to begin with, it's just very few people even know or bother restoring these cameras correctly and many that have been touched up were done by un-professional people and that work shows.....

The best advice I give to the new owner of #391017 K will be to inject glue under the vulcanite that's left and put it in a half case, with a fresh restored vulcanite and the amount of body paint left with the worked patina WON'T MATCH and the camera would LOOK restored, in my personal opinion you only restore cameras vulcanite if the paint is in 85% or better condition.

Tom

 

[Jaans]

Many cameras were separated from their original lenses because they were either lost of destroyed in wartime (pre 1945 cameras) , but on the most part they were parted because of GREED, most dealers NEVER sell a camera with it's original issued lens together, they always part them out to get that extra $300 out of a deal.......pathetic in my opinion, but that's life in the camera business. 😛 ~ sacrifice history for money, happens all the time, I'm very lucky to have (three) IIIC K Grey's that are all matching numbers and that have rich *personal* histories to back up their collectibility.

Final price and collectibility have to do with condition and rarity, the better the shape the higher the price, also supply and demand............speaking of history, unfortunately anything engraved with the WW2 German Nazi-era military markings seems to be bringing the big bucks at the moment.
(I myself DON'T collect WW2 era Grey IIIC K's, the 43' I own has a 9th Armored Division/Black Star Agency-Life Magazine connection, that's why I own it, don't prefer the German Military stuff, if I find something it's SOLD right away to finance more 1945 issued US Army gear.)

Jaans, in replacing the vulcanite and painting, it can be very expensive, just getting the correct vulcaite from a postwar donor camera and painting it properly is a real chore itself
(I have two 45 cameras I need to restore this way, I just don't have the $500+ now to invest in getting them both right now) ~ with them BOTH done the value of them will go up by $500 to $800 more than what it was to begin with, it's just very few people even know or bother restoring these cameras correctly and many that have been touched up were done by un-professional people and that work shows.....

The best advice I give to the new owner of #391017 K will be to inject glue under the vulcanite that's left and put it in a half case, with a fresh restored vulcanite and the amount of body paint left with the worked patina WON'T MATCH and the camera would LOOK restored, in my personal opinion you only restore cameras vulcanite if the paint is in 85% or better condition.

Tom

Thanks Tom for that sage advice. The more I think about the logistics of restoring a camera of that vintage, the more difficult and convoluted the logistics. And like you said, trying to find a donor body etc could turn into an expensive excercise. Also, it sounds like a highly technical process with fewer and fewer people able to manage the resoration.

So, following your advice, it would make sense to either use the glue and half-case, or alternatively hope my paypacket increases and I can purchase a very good condition K in the future.

I guess it is no surprise that the military marked cameras seem to predominate from Europe - their country of origin, as opposed to the IIIC-K cameras that were issued for the US forces. Those cameras with military markings do seem to fetch almost ridiculous prices and are probably best left in the hands of collectors.

I may place a bid on this current K camera on ebay, just depending on how much the bids go to in the final few hours. Hopefully it doesn't hit $1000 as some have suggested.

thanks again.

 

[john neal]

John,

When can you do a chip test for me? ~ I would like to see how close they got your paint.......

Tom

Tom,

Sorry for the delayed reply - I'm not getting all my updates from the forum.

I would have said over the holiday, but the temperature over here has gone down to about -6 deg C, so definitely not the right conditions for spraying cellulose!

Once the weather improves is the best answer I can give at the moment, sorry. I will be interested to see what you think of the colour too 🙂

 

[kpas]

With that camera, I would just inject some glue under the remaining vulcanite and keep it permanently in a "long nose" case or a sturdy "half case" ~ I wouldn't bother replacing the vulcanite with a correct shell and repaint, the damage/patina is already in the paint this cameras condition is already "user" grade it will never be better condition......it is the perfect user, get it CLA'd and it's ready to take up where the last owner left off.
(I would restore/replace vulcanite only on cameras that are 85% paint or better grade)

If it goes over $1,000 US Dollars that's the sign of a desperate public 😱

Tom

Why would you bother getting this one which is already at $460 AUD as a user when the normal IIIc in far better "user" condition can be had for less?

I don't see the logic?

This one clearly needs a CLA, and it will never look "pretty" unless you take off the original vulcanite and get it recovered, at which point it won't be original.

Any way you look at it, I think this particular camera will just end up an expensive collectors item.

If you want to buy one for "using", the normal IIIc will take just as good photos??

 

[Mr_Flibble]

Because it is a IIIc-K! That's why 😉


Besides, I already use a 'Stepper' IIIc.

 

[kpas]

Because it is a IIIc-K! That's why 😉


Besides, I already use a 'Stepper' IIIc.

But in terms of the shutter, it is unlikely that you would get any advantage out of this camera over a normal IIIc?

Wouldn't a $150 "bargain" IIIc + CLA be a better choice for someone wanting to use it as a camera?

Surely the only people bidding for it are people who want to collect K's ?

 

[LeicaTom]

I agree that a $150/$200 "Sharkskin" era bad chrome IIIC would make a more "practical" working camera...........BUT, some of us have used "K" shuttered cameras on a regular basis in everyday photography and have never looked back.

I have 3 cameras that are true museum quality pieces and they only get "cycled" now and then, but two my IIIC K's are STILL being used full-time loaded with film and shot under almost all conditions.

The "K" shuttered cameras are like Frank Sinatra singing Cole Porter's "Night & Day" - butter smooth film transport, much more quiet than the normal IIIC shutters and the overall compact feeling you get with all the other LTM cameras is still there too...........and if it freezes like the North Pole the camera will STILL work 🙂

I have own one of Leica's ultimate conversions - a de-millitarized IIIC K that's been de-painted and chromed at the factory and "Sharkskin" added, the camera is a dream to work with, the only other LTM cameras that get close to the feeing l and performance of these cameras are the late 1956 IIIG shuttered Leica IIIFRDST's and the IIIG itself and they too feel different, if anything they are bulkier......(the IIIG)

Really it's all a matter of taste, I do what I do with Leica IIIC K's concerning the HISTORY and preserving rare examples of the US Army cameras in a story of Leica history that is about almost forgotten.

Tom

PS: That camera currently at aution is honestly a prime canidate for a "user" it's collectible status is still there, but it will NEVER be outside of "user" grade again, so why doesn't someone just carry on and use the hell outta it, like the last owner did 😀

 

[Jaans]

But in terms of the shutter, it is unlikely that you would get any advantage out of this camera over a normal IIIc?

Wouldn't a $150 "bargain" IIIc + CLA be a better choice for someone wanting to use it as a camera?

Surely the only people bidding for it are people who want to collect K's ?

Interesting question. I think Tom who owns these rare cameras has explained their case well.

I guess this train of thought can extend to rare black paint M2/M3/M4's - they all take pictures in the same manner as the standard chrome Ms, but there is another level of desirability about owning one - due to the aesthetics of the paint and potential brassing. Perhaps ownership also infers status to the user - they are part of a more exclusive 'club' (I use this term loosely) than those who use just a regular silver chrome M.

Some cameras like the K that were limited in production appeal to collectors but they also seem to garner interest from regular shooters. This could also be attributed to the high interest in manufactured items that were made especially for the rigours of war. Their has been much evidence that they were made to stand more extreme conditions than regular IIICs. However, the chances that the regular user in a real world situation will find himself needing these more durable parts will always be open for debate and comes back to your original point.

A more expensive example could be with the original MP with the double stroke and the recent MP with a single stroke. Collectors will always pay more for the original version because they were manufatured in limited numbers. One could argue that the current MP is faster to advance the shutter (open for debate) and perhaps works just as well as a reconditioned original (open for debate), but it isn't matching the price of the original and probably never will.

Anyway, a good discussion!

 

[kpas]

I can understand the DS and SS being a significant advantage (speed of shutter advance) but the thing I would worry about is not being able to easily find someone to work on this particular shutter (given it is rarer then the normal one).

I see Tom has had success with Youxin and his K shutters in the past so maybe the CLA is a no brainer.

But then I still come back to the $450AUD it is currently going for (plus potentially another $200 on top of that for CLA, plus whatever the auction ends up going for).

Potentially $1000 for what would otherwise be done quite well by $300

On top of that, I just don't think I would shoot as confidently with a camera that is otherwise a collectors item. I would want to leave it at home where it is safe!

 

[LeicaTom]

I can understand the DS and SS being a significant advantage (speed of shutter advance) but the thing I would worry about is not being able to easily find someone to work on this particular shutter (given it is rarer then the normal one).

I see Tom has had success with Youxin and his K shutters in the past so maybe the CLA is a no brainer.

But then I still come back to the $450AUD it is currently going for (plus potentially another $200 on top of that for CLA, plus whatever the auction ends up going for).

Potentially $1000 for what would otherwise be done quite well by $300

On top of that, I just don't think I would shoot as confidently with a camera that is otherwise a collectors item. I would want to leave it at home where it is safe!

I think that camera is a real good "starter" camera for someone who want to work with a piece of history, the CLA is no problem and using a camera with an old "K" shutter curtain is not a big deal, you just keep the curtain out of direct sun just like any other LTM camera.

That camera would work well for someone who's doing a WW2 COMBAT PHOTOGRAPHER impression - though in real life very very few IIIC K Grey's were used by USASC Photographers BEFORE May 7th 1945, after that it was a different story.......and paying $1,000 to get this camera including CLA is at about limit price, if it does go over $1,000 US just in the auction well, then it's for sure going to a China Cabinet camera collector and it will spend the rest of it's days collecting dust.

I hope someone from here gets up the nerve and the cash$$$$ and wins this thing and uses it.....I'd have thown $800 at it by now, but I'm working on getting myself something else special for Christmas this year 😀

Tom

 

[Mr_Flibble]

Yep, it would've been for handy for my post-VE-Day 165th SPC photographer impression. I've just bought a Colt M1911A1 to add to my US Photographer/Tanker/MP re-enactment impressions....If I had known about this auction before hand though, I would've gone for the camera instead.

Oh well, maybe another 'user' will pop up in the near future 🙁


kpas, regarding leaving expensive kit home where it is safe. people go out with their 5 grand plus digital SLRs. If the camera had been collector's grade that might be a little different (like a red curtain 'stepper' IIIc that's in my display cabinet), but I'm not afraid to carry or use a user-grade camera like this one.
Heck, my Willys MB gets to do 1500 miles a year too. 😉

 

[Jaans]

I think that camera is a real good "starter" camera for someone who want to work with a piece of history, the CLA is no problem and using a camera with an old "K" shutter curtain is not a big deal, you just keep the curtain out of direct sun just like any other LTM camera.

That camera would work well for someone who's doing a WW2 COMBAT PHOTOGRAPHER impression - though in real life very very few IIIC K Grey's were used by USASC Photographers BEFORE May 7th 1945, after that it was a different story.......and paying $1,000 to get this camera including CLA is at about limit price, if it does go over $1,000 US just in the auction well, then it's for sure going to a China Cabinet camera collector and it will spend the rest of it's days collecting dust.

I hope someone from here gets up the nerve and the cash$$$$ and wins this thing and uses it.....I'd have thown $800 at it by now, but I'm working on getting myself something else special for Christmas this year 😀

Tom

I just lost my nerve. That camera is rapidly moving out of my 'user' budget - it has just pipped $960 with some hours to go. Perhaps the collector element has muscled in on the auction?