Leica LTM Leica Screw Mount Conversions - Show Yours

Leica M39 screw mount bodies/lenses
I thought first that the key in the bottomplate was chrome, but now I see it is nickel. Thus all nickel. A beauty! The engraving is perfect! Congratulations.


Early conversion, around 1936, because D.R.P. is between Leica and Ernst Leitz. On earlier cameras D.R.P. is under Wetzlar.



Erik.
 
Erik van Straten said:
I thought first that the key in the bottomplate was chrome, but now I see it is nickel. Thus all nickel. A beauty! The engraving is perfect! Congratulations.


Early conversion, around 1936, because D.R.P. is between Leica and Ernst Leitz. On earlier cameras D.R.P. is under Wetzlar.



Erik.
Click to expand...


Thanks. I saw the difference in the location of the D.R.P. but didn't know how that fit into the time frame. Interesting that it was converted after only a couple of years.

I'll take better shots after I get it.

Thanks,

Shawn
 
It is nickel! In great shape, shutters look excellent, fires fine, viewfinder and rangefinder are good and the glass on the Elmar looks excellent.

46783579515_bb7ff82434_b.jpg


46783578165_61e508a53d_b.jpg


47699759591_78119a7e3d_b.jpg


Wearing a black paint Konica and a nickel/black vidom.

Shawn
 
Yes, a beauty.
Strange fact is that the strap lugs are chrome.


The brownish vulcanite is normal for the III. When you keep the camera in the dark for some time, the vulcanite gets darker.


The Elmar looks nice too. The "blooming" on the lens (the "oil on water" shine) is a good sign. This is a kind of natural coating.

Erik.
 
Thanks for the tip on the vulcanite.

I'm trying to date the lens. No serial number (confirmed with a microscope) which I saw means pre-1933. Based on the flange width and the 0 near the infinity lock on the front it is a standardized lens which means is is 1931 or later. I also read that the change from 11 o'clock to 7 o'clock for the infinity lock happened in 1932. If all that is accurate the lens should be a 1932 model which matches the camera.

There is also a small 1 under the infinity lock. I think that had something to do with actual focal length?

Thanks,

Shawn
 
48595238806_44999dfebf_c.jpg


48595238036_ea97dafe03_c.jpg


48595375737_2e584d747f_c.jpg


48595374007_5690df992d_c.jpg


A bit of an odd one. The serial number puts it in the first batch of chrome IIIs in 1933. When it was converted to a IIIasyn it ended up with a mixture of nickel and chrome. The advance, rewind, low speed and bottom plate latch are nickel. The high speed shutter dial, shutter release, rewind latch and strap lugs are chrome. A little hard to tell but I think the stud for the bottom plate is nickel and the one on the other side (???) is chrome.

Will need to find a suitable lens for it.

Shawn
 
That ones clean! I have a similar IIIaSync post war conversion from an early Standard. Only knob that was replaced was the shutter speed, obviously chrome, they left the rest original nickel. Just realized I have never posted a pic of mine! Will have to share later...
 
Interesting, I wonder if the shutter mechanism was swapped out on mine? The release button and collar and rewind latch are not nickel.

Shawn
 
shawn said:
Thanks for the tip on the vulcanite.

I'm trying to date the lens. No serial number (confirmed with a microscope) which I saw means pre-1933. Based on the flange width and the 0 near the infinity lock on the front it is a standardized lens which means is is 1931 or later. I also read that the change from 11 o'clock to 7 o'clock for the infinity lock happened in 1932. If all that is accurate the lens should be a 1932 model which matches the camera.

There is also a small 1 under the infinity lock. I think that had something to do with actual focal length?

Thanks,

Shawn
Click to expand...

Shawn,

For what it's worth, I have a 1932 Leica II, with a 5 cm nickel Elmar, 11 o'clock Infinity lock, serial # 99xxx (stamped in bezel around front element).

I've tried this lens on both my 1933 III Barnacks, and the 11 o'clock Infinity lock lever fouls on the slow-speeds knob before reaching its lock.

(I guess that's why they revised the lock position... 🙄 )

Beautiful camera you have there !

LF
 
MaZo said:
My newly acquired converted Barnacks.

I liked the fact that they are rather uncommon postwar conversions: chrome IIIa to IIIa syn and wartime IIIc to IIIf. Both lenses are coated, which I liked too.
Click to expand...

I used to have a Leica 111a syn too and liked it very much. It was a cool conversion (especially liked the look of the collar ring around the shutter button pedestal which was taken from the 111f). The lens on mine, a 50mm Elmar with a serial number dating from 1936 was coated too. The only thing I liked less about the 111a was that I found its shutter to be quite loud and "clattery" when fired. I am not sure if this is endemic to the 111a or if there was something wrong with mine but a friend had a 111c for example, and it was very quiet and sedate when fired - almost like and M camera. Never the less a small and nice to handle camera overall.
 
peterm1 said:
The only thing I liked less about the 111a was that I found its shutter to be quite loud and "clattery" when fired. I am not sure if this is endemic to the 111a or if there was something wrong with mine but a friend had a 111c for example, and it was very quiet and sedate when fired - almost like and M camera. Never the less a small and nice to handle camera overall.
Click to expand...

IIRC the IIIf was the first LSM Leica to have redesigned shutter mechanism, so previous versions should've sounded pretty much the same. Non CLA'd cameras would be noisier though.
 
New part to the family. Leica I from 1928 converted to II. Based on my limited knowledge, it is an early one (‘32?). It has features like closure pin at the back and even the inside plate, old style lavatory seat, nickel hardware and DRP at the old location.

It even has 2 screws where the hockeystick Was sitting, did not see this on other conversions yet.

The Elmar is unnumbered but has some colour on it, I’m not sure if this is coating applied at one point or if this is considered as lens bloom.

Any guess on conversion year?

https://flic.kr/p/2j7d2b1
https://flic.kr/p/2j7d2a4
 
charjohncarter said:
Too bad there isn't a adapter for LTM to Pentax K, Canon lenses, Nikon lenses or others. A 21-20-28 would be easy to hyperfocal length focus at f8.

I did this with an extension tube and a LTM to M42 but it isn't quite the correct registry.

Untitled by John Carter, on Flickr
Click to expand...

This is more of a "hack" (and you need to crop), but I just saw this article on Kosmo Photo:
https://kosmofoto.com/2020/05/hacking-a-half-frame-lens-for-wide-angle-rangefinder-photography/
 
There's a very interesting "Model II" on ebay; item no. 324180489833

It looks like a II but no serial no on the lens and so I looked at the back and there was a plug. So an early one converted, perhaps...


Regards, David
 
Looked it up, 96002 started life as a II in 1932.

It has the later top housing (ie not lavatory bowl) and no 'kick' in the frame round the viewfinder window.

Altogether rather a nice camera.
 
The lack of a serial number on the lens is what got to me most. Trouble is, it could still be a bitsa; I nearly said a Bassett's as in liquorice Allsorts but realised no one would understand...


Regards, David
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom