This was a common factory conversion, the 0 on the lens mount indicates that it has been standardised - probably with shims under the mount (be careful if you ever take it off).
The small plug was designed to allow an external focus checking tool to be fitted by a technician to confirm focus - this lasted up to around 1932 and is a hang-over from the non-interchangeable lens bodies. Some pressure plates are entirely round and can be rotated so that the hole in the plate does not coincide with the hole in the body (just to make sure there are no light leaks), some are round, but secured by two lugs and a "pip" on the body shell so they don't rotate.
Value is really what someone will pay for it. If it is definitely not vulcanite, it is just possibly one of the few bodies that were released with calf leather. That might increase value by a small amount, but will be mitigated by overall condition. If it really is calf leather, cameraleather do a very nice replacement in calf, but it will not have the patina of age.
I have a 5-digit model II that really could do with replacement vulcanite - I'm not going to bother until the last piece falls off, then I will consider the CRR vulcanite replacement vs cameraleather calf - the cost at CRR is probably 5x the leather, and will not improve operation one bit. I missed out on a 3-digit A to II conversion last year, with very average vulcanite, that went for a relative song in a Manchester dealer's evilbay auction. He had been asking £2,000 in the shop, but it sold for nearer £500 at auction (depressed market, or what?).
There may be a basic decision to make here - are you a fondler or a user?
Thanks so much for both of the thoughtful responses. My few user cameras have grown to a collection of sorts, and I can blame my friend Igor who helped push me over the edge on this one. It was not my fault it followed me home. ;-)
I was surprised that they kept the hole in the pressure plate, even in six digit Standards, they must have had a backlog of parts. I cannot see what they did with the screw holes from the Inf. lock mounted on the body, but the covering shows no signs, perhaps a few blanking screws?
The numbers are hard to read, but perhaps an artifact of my arms getting shorter syndrome, but I could make them all out. I may try to post a photo, but am headed out of town for a week.
Seems odd the converted standard has the worse condition covering, the paint on the camera shows less than expected wear, really just edge brassing, but the covering looks like leather to me, and is loose in sheets with perhaps 50% metal showing, so perhaps original condition applies less here. Perhaps it was recovered on a Monday in the 30's. You can see the pattern of the hand applied glue. ;-)
As to actual value, I am not as concerned as I might seem in the post, as I rarely sell at this time, but would not like to screw up something more rare than usable. If this plays out to be as you say, it might be reasonable to recover it with period appropriate material. Its appearance certainly played a roll in the price I paid, and I even appealed to lower it further, but the condition of the metal, lens, and the shutter led the owner to just shrug his shoulders.
As to fondling my cameras, we are getting a bit personal here? ;-)
I occasionally take out a standard or Model 1, loaded with XP2, and do prefer, if practical, that the cameras function as intended, and on the right occasion I look to see that uncoated lens glow in the prints. On the Soviet side of the collection, I generally just look at them, I think they were built by Lucas.
Truth is, I normally grab a modern RF, but the old timers take up little space in the case and look good on the seat of the MG.
If you get to Cleethorpes, you can have the best fish and chips and perhaps run in to my friend John, I think he is out polishing the prime meridian on some days. ;-) He has significant framed collections of cigarette cards, plus mining lamps, and transits. I am afraid to try and spell theodolite?
Sorry you missed your three digit, ebay is a bit like Vegas, but with the strong pound you might be looking in our direction, I see a RT fare of $175 offered from London/NY. ;-)
Regards, John
