M1!? Please explain.

Yeah, its an M1 with the M3 finder. Interesting how that would save weight (as per story in the description), but probably rather rare. Difficult to imagine why one would have bought an M1 and then had the finder retrofitted...
 
Yeah, I've never heard of an M1. Oh well.

But after reading some, it's an M2 without a rangefinder. And it had 35 and 50mm framelines. So I guess this guy had the M1 outfitted with an M3 .92x viewfinder and framelines for 50mm, 90mm and 135mm. Not sure what good that is without a rangefinder. Other than to save an ounce or two.
 
Last edited:
swoop said:
Yeah, I've never heard of an M1. Oh well.

But after reading some, it's an M2 without a rangefinder. And it had 35 and 50mm framelines. So I guess this guy had the M1 outfitted with an M3 .92x viewfinder and framelines for 50mm, 90mm and 135mm. Not sure what good that is without a rangefinder. Other than to save an ounce or two.
Click to expand...

My thoughts too, but why then open up the rangefinder window? Its blanked off on the M1. The top plate seems to be M1. It could otherwise be a reasonable kit, an M4-2 winder thrown in.
 
swoop said:
...Not sure what good that is without a rangefinder. Other than to save an ounce or two.
Click to expand...

The auction model has a rangefinder. The metal piece that normally cover the rangefinder patch window on a M1 is removed and the description talks about patch alignment. It is basically a M2 w. M3 finder and motor capability. The talk about light weight doesnt make sense.
 
Lflex said:
The auction model has a rangefinder. The metal piece that normally cover the rangefinder patch window on a M1 is removed and the description talks about patch alignment. It is basically a M2 w. M3 finder and motor capability. The talk about light weight doesnt make sense.
Click to expand...

You are right, he does in fact state that the "rangrfinder double image is well defined and properly aligned". Where any weight has been saved is a mystery.
 
Ezzie said:
Where any weight has been saved is a mystery.
Click to expand...

You're right, the more so as it's got that bloody great heavy winder on the bottom. The point is, it's not really an M1. To borrow an old motorcycling term, it's a 'bitza': bitza this, bitza that. It's quite easy to mix-and-match bits from different Leicas -- a friend once built an M2-3-4, with bits from all of them -- so my view is that this is worth money only to a user who wants this particular mix of features.

The original purpose of the M1 was (1) for use on Visoflexes, copy stands, microscopes, etc. and (2) as a knockabout camera for the German armed forces. Omitting the rangefinder obviously made it a lot cheaper than an M2 when it was new. I've handled two or three but it's a camera of interest more to collectors than to users.

Cheers,

R.
 
Hi,

They were also used for meter photography. meaning the thing was fitted with a frame that was pressed in place to hold the camera in front of rack of meters and then the picture used to avoid disputes, provide a record (as the meters moved on seconds after taking) and so that the clerk could sit down and do the figure work.

Usually one lens on them and RF coupling not needed as it the same fixed focus was needed all the time.

Regards, David
 
David Hughes said:
Hi,

They were also used for meter photography. meaning the thing was fitted with a frame that was pressed in place to hold the camera in front of rack of meters and then the picture used to avoid disputes, provide a record (as the meters moved on seconds after taking) and so that the clerk could sit down and do the figure work.

Usually one lens on them and RF coupling not needed as it the same fixed focus was needed all the time.

Regards, David
Click to expand...
Dear David,

True, but most meter cameras of which I am aware (Leica Post models) were specifically modified, often with funny front-plates (not the standard lens mount) and quite often with unusual formats such as 24x27mm.

Cheers,

R.
 
Roger Hicks said:
Dear David,

True, but most meter cameras of which I am aware (Leica Post models) were specifically modified, often with funny front-plates (not the standard lens mount) and quite often with unusual formats such as 24x27mm.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

Yes, the DBP (Deutsche Bundesposte) used them and there was a British version that I saw in the 60's being used. It was a long time ago and all my poor old brain can remember is that the letters from Bonn were stamped "Noted for the Correctness of the Copy" which isn't much help is it? It's also vaguely linked to some fraud...

Regards, David
 
David Hughes said:
Hi,

They were also used for meter photography. meaning the thing was fitted with a frame that was pressed in place to hold the camera in front of rack of meters
Click to expand...

Yep, that may have been its most frequent application - the German Post built their entire telephone billing around microfilming the meter racks with rangefinderless Leicas.
 
sevo said:
Yep, that may have been its most frequent application - the German Post built their entire telephone billing around microfilming the meter racks with rangefinderless Leicas.
Click to expand...

Thanks, that's what I was thinking of and the British GPO version.

I was wondering last night what happened to all those cameras when the system went digital. Perhaps someone bought them all up and converted them to something more useful?

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

Similar threads

B
Yashinons 45 1.7 and other leicaM converted lenses, rf coupled, for sale on ebay
Replies
2
Views
1K
c.poulton
c.poulton
FPjohn
Exposure guide
Replies
0
Views
903
FPjohn
FPjohn
J
Leica MP US $205,676.60
2 3
Replies
41
Views
8K
ricnak
R
sanmich
If I where a rich man...
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
Andrea Taurisano
A
BobYIL
Something to really drool about..
Replies
1
Views
826
johannielscom
johannielscom
Back
Top Bottom