Leica LTM Leica Screw Mount Conversions - Show Yours

Leica M39 screw mount bodies/lenses
In the 50's Leica offered conversion of a III to IIIa Syn. Two questions: (1) Is the 1/1000 s shutter speed really that fast or is it still 1/500. And (2) How many of these conversions were made, (roughly), and were more done in black or in chrome? Ooops, that's actually three questions...
 
HuubL said:
questions
Click to expand...
As a rule black cameras were converted to black and chrome cameras to chrome. There are of course exceptions.
The 1/1000 was really a higher speed than the 1/500, it was usually around 1/700. Today it is hard for repairmen to make the 1/1000 faster than the 1/500; the material is really too old.
How many conversions were made, is not known. There are quite a lot of them around. At Leitz there was a special production line for them.

Erik.
 
Erik van Straten said:
The 1/1000 was really a higher speed than the 1/500, it was usually around 1/700. Today it is hard for repairmen to make the 1/1000 faster than the 1/500; the material is really too old.
Erik.
Click to expand...

To be more specific. If the camera has very worn springs, all the higher speeds are out, not only the 1/1000 sec. However most camera's, even the old ones, will work at between 1/700 and 1/1000 sec (sometimes even higher) since the speeds are dependent on the slit width in combination with the tension of both springs. So the 1/1000 sec was added by changing the shutter dials register, that is the brass dial with the round holes underneath the selector shaft. The upgraded leicas got a speed dial with one hole extra next to the hole for the 1/500 sec which made it possible to obtain a slit width of 1mm.
However there were cameras with an extra hole in their speed dial like the NKDV FED, but had a restiction built in the shutter speed selector shaft in order to prevent the use of the 1/1000 sec. So if needed these camera's could easily be built as a FED S or rebuilt as a FED S which had the 1/1000 sec speed. I'm not sure whether this was also the case with later Barnacks that eventually only got a top speed of 1/500 sec, lets say the ones being built as from the introduction of the IIIa - the first Barnack I think with a top speed of 1/1000 sec.
 
Ron (Netherlands) said:
So the 1/1000 sec was added by changing the shutter dials register, that is the brass dial with the round holes underneath the selector shaft. The upgraded leicas got a speed dial with one hole extra next to the hole for the 1/500 sec which made it possible to obtain a slit width of 1mm.
Click to expand...

This part was called "perforated setting disk" or "Lochstellscheibe". In my original Leitz parts book from 1964 it was on all models the same, I, II, III, IIIa and IIIa syn. Part number was 42 480 132.

Erik.
 
Hi all ... my first post here and the first time I've owned a Leica since I became interested in photography 40+ years ago.

After overcoming my fear of being sold a fake version I've bought the following pictured camera which I'm pretty convinced is the real thing although I had some reservations to begin with as I wasn't aware then that factory conversions took place.

From my subsequent research and serial number 81803 checking I think it is a 1932 Leica II which has been converted to a Leica IIIa with flash sync being also added at some point.

It came with a 50mm Elmar f3.5 number 264753 which was made in 1935 if my reference source is accurate.

I'd be interested to hear from you if you think my conclusions are correct and I'd also like to know if you believe the conversions add or subtract to the value of the camera. Thanks in advance.

Trevor
 

Attachments

  • Camera 1 small.jpg
    Camera 1 small.jpg
    185.4 KB · Views: 4
  • Camera 2 small.jpg
    Camera 2 small.jpg
    167.3 KB · Views: 4
trevor432990 said:
From my subsequent research and serial number 81803 checking I think it is a 1932 Leica II which has been converted to a Leica IIIa with flash sync being also added at some point.
Click to expand...

To me it looks like the real thing too. It has the earlier glossy accessory-shoe. The engraving of the word "Leica" is however quite weird. Can you make a close-up shot of that part?

Erik.
 
This engraving looks very odd to my eyes. There is no ball on the i in the word "Leica". The L of the word "Leica" is too big, as is the D.R.P. engraving.
"Ernst Leitz Wetzlar" looks more convincing.
Maybe the conversion is done by another Werkstatt. The camera itself looks genuine.

Erik.
 
trevor432990 said:
If I came to sell it in the future should I advertise it as a Leica II or Leica IIIa Syn ?

Trevor
Click to expand...

No, you should advertise it as a Leica II converted into a Leica IIIa with a third party synch added.
A bit strange is the fact that the camera is in chrome, but the original Leica II was black. Usually converted cameras kept their original color.
I have no idea of it's value.

Erik.
 
I've checked the engravings on a number of my old Barnacks and they are mostly all very similar but different from yours. The large L has a subtly different style, the staff of the "a" in Leica is too long. What Erik said, no dot on the i. The no sign seems incorrect, there should be a small lying line below a round o, the D in D.R.P. is too fat. In my camera's it is slimmer on the top than on the bottom. The middle horizontal line of the "E" in Ernst is too low, etc. The fonts are all more or less different from those of my Barnacks. I guess the engraving is not done by Leica, but the top housing looks correct though with the proper window frames and all. All in all an interesting conversion.
 
Thanks Erik and Huubl for some very interesting comments. My question about value was more general really I just wanted to know if anyone thought a converted Leica was less/more/equal in value to a non-converted model that's all?

Trevor

P.S. Huubl there is a small punched dot on a sketchy line under the 'o' already and looking at the 'E' under a magnifying glass I can see there is an impression slightly higher in the middle line but the engraver missed it so I guess that the engraver was new to the job or something so it's a bit unique I guess for the good or bad?
 

Attachments

  • Letter Small.jpg
    Letter Small.jpg
    78.6 KB · Views: 1
  • Num Small.jpg
    Num Small.jpg
    111.9 KB · Views: 1
trevor432990 said:
My question about value was more general really I just wanted to know if anyone thought a converted Leica was less/more/equal in value to a non-converted model that's all?
Click to expand...

The ones I have seen on Ebay were valued higher and sold for higher prices than the regular Barnack Leica's although near mint early Barnack Leica's (mostly the ones with nickel fittings) do fetch higher prices. Further, the Leica factory conversions done after WWII provided the camera's with a somewhat bigger topcover (they provided room for the synchronized flash). So if yours is a conversion, it might be done before that period.
 
Ron (Netherlands) said:
The ones I have seen on Ebay were valued higher and sold for higher prices than the regular Barnack Leica's although near mint early Barnack Leica's (mostly the ones with nickel fittings) do fetch higher prices. Further, the Leica factory conversions done after WWII provided the camera's with a somewhat bigger topcover (they provided room for the synchronized flash). So if yours is a conversion, it might be done before that period.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info Ron. Glad to hear conversions might be more valuable (fingers crossed) but I'm not sure if mine has nickel fittings although the film counter/rewind knob etc all look similar to the lens which definitely is nickel. Will have to try and find an old electronic flash which might work with the camera now.

Trevor
 
Here's mine. I believe according to the serial it was a 1938 Leica II that was converted to a IIIa sync. The chrome is slightly duller on the new rangefinder housing.
attachment.php

attachment.php

attachment.php

The elmar has the old sequence of numbers, the serial also lists as 1938.
I've wanted a Barnack for sometime and finally found one in my local camera store. The last one they had was over a year ago but I missed it as I was away on vacation. The camera is currently loaded with TriX that I will finish tomorrow and develop in the evening.
 

Attachments

  • DSC05045.jpg
    DSC05045.jpg
    51.9 KB · Views: 2
  • DSC05075.jpg
    DSC05075.jpg
    46 KB · Views: 2
  • DSC05084.jpg
    DSC05084.jpg
    54.9 KB · Views: 2
The Elmar is coated. I have shot a test roll to see if all was working and all is well with the camera. There is nothing of interest or worth posting on the test roll. I have another roll finished but as my tank is a two reel I will develop them both when I finish the roll tomorrow.
 
Stuart John said:
Here's mine. I believe according to the serial it was a 1938 Leica II that was converted to a IIIa sync.
The elmar has the old sequence of numbers, the serial also lists as 1938.
I've wanted a Barnack for sometime and finally found one in my local camera store. The last one they had was over a year ago but I missed it as I was away on vacation. The camera is currently loaded with TriX that I will finish tomorrow and develop in the evening.
Click to expand...

Lovely piece! The chromium ones seem even rarer than the black ones, at least I did see only very few of these!
Enjoy!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom