Nicca / Tower LTM Nicca 3-S

Nicca / Tower M39 screw mount bodies
x-ray said:
What's your impression of the Nicca vs a Leica LTM?
Click to expand...

I got both and I give preference to the Leica.

The Nicca is not bad, it is just not a Leica.

The Japanese copied well and constructed well, but I doubt that they fully understood the subtle "complicated" simplicity of the Barnack mechanism.
 
I've had several Leica LTM's but don't have one at the moment. I've considered getting another and been tempted by the Nicca and Canons.
 
I had one for a short period of time. Kind of regret selling it. I was a beautiful camera. I might get another one eventually.
 
Had a Nicca Type 5 with bottom loading and swinging back. Very well made. It came as a rear cap to a Nikkor 5cm 2.0 I bought :D
 
xayraa33 said:
I got both and I give preference to the Leica.

The Nicca is not bad, it is just not a Leica.

The Japanese copied well and constructed well, but I doubt that they fully understood the subtle "complicated" simplicity of the Barnack mechanism.
Click to expand...

I've had many of the Barnack type rangefinders. As in almost all of them. The Nicca is the best, followed by the Canon, and then followed by a Leica.

The Leica's only bragging rights are they invented the design. The Japanese took the design, improved it vastly in many, many ways, and manufactured them with as good a quality, or better, than the Germans. Thinking a Leica is better than a Nicca is, well, falling for some kind of patriotic fervor. A Nicca or a Canon will typically work as found. A Leica almost never will. It's precise, but fragile.
 
goamules said:
I've had many of the Barnack type rangefinders. As in almost all of them. The Nicca is the best, followed by the Canon, and then followed by a Leica.

The Leica's only bragging rights are they invented the design. The Japanese took the design, improved it vastly in many, many ways, and manufactured them with as good a quality, or better, than the Germans. Thinking a Leica is better than a Nicca is, well, falling for some kind of patriotic fervor. A Nicca or a Canon will typically work as found. A Leica almost never will. It's precise, but fragile.
Click to expand...

I have Leicas, Nicca/Tower and bottomloader Canons and FSU Barnack copies.

I have worked on all of them and find Leica to be superior.

I also worked on plenty of Nicca/Tower Barnacks and Canons that were not working as found.

Since I am Canadian, I don't know about the patriotic fervour thing, even if Leitz had a small factory in the forests of Midland Ontario.

There are a lot of nuances on the original Barnack mechanism that passes off as sheer simplicity, but in fact is very ingeniously thought out that went over the heads of the ones copying the design, which is what the Japanese and everyone else did.

I fully stand by my original comment.
 
xayraa33 said:
I have Leicas, Nicca/Tower and bottomloader Canons and FSU Barnack copies.

<snip>...........

There are a lot of nuances on the original Barnack mechanism that passes off as sheer simplicity, but in fact is very ingeniously thought out that went over the heads of the ones copying the design, which is what the Japanese and everyone else did.

I fully stand by my original comment.
Click to expand...

I'm interested in the differences and what makes the Leica better since I plan on one day owning a Leica.
 
John E Earley said:
I'm interested in the differences and what makes the Leica better since I plan on one day owning a Leica.
Click to expand...

On the LTM Leica (especially up to the lllb), the design is more holistic, with plenty of places for finessing and adjusting,(more so from the lllc onwards) which seems bad from a manufacturing point of view, but we are dealing with camera bodies that are 60 plus years old and will need servicing and adjustments, which is a nice thing to have.

The metallurgy of some of the parts appear to be of poorer quality on some of the copies, not all mind you as they did improve on subsequent models.

I give a nod to the Japanese on the improvements made to the later models of Barnack inspired cameras, like hinged backs that is on the Tanacks and the later rare Nicca type 5 with its swing door back ( A camera which I own that was not working when bought BTW) .

But It was too little and too late, as camera design had moved on since the intro of the Leica M3 and the Japanese were moving away from the Barnack design.

The RF semi reflecting mirror seems superior in quality in the Japanese Leica copies, as opposed to the post war Barnack Leicas and it is even superior on the FSU copies.

In actual use I find the separate RF/Vf finders better than the combined finder on the Canon bottom-loaders, but that could be just my preference, as I even find the improved model bottom-loader Canon finder squinty.
 
So all you've said in favor of Leicas is they are:
Holistic
Finesse
Subtle
Imply the "metals are better"
Indicate they "understanding simplicity better"

Um....right. And your last post just said the Japanese features, innovation, metallurgy (even or better), and the RF mirror, were better than Leica. Yeah, I'd agree, and more, but I like to talk about tangible, concrete things. Not "feels better" or "they just....KNEW MORE!" Every Leica I've had has needed a CLA including shutter curtains on most. None of my Niccas, Canons, or Tanack needed....ANYTHING. Most people that own Canons will tell you they seldom need a CLA. Again, a Leica will every 5 to 10 years.

To John, I encourage you to get a Leica in comparable condition to your Nicca 3. Then you can be the judge. That's what I did. I chose the Japanese Barnacks and sold most of my Leicas.
 
That is my point of view groamles, you are free to like Niccas better than LTM Leicas all day long.

I have owned many LTM Leicas, Japanese Leica clones and bottom-loader Canons and have worked on them too.

I own many bottomloader Canons too, check my avatar, that is an "improved" model Canon IIF2, I prefer my Leica lllf RD to it, that is my choice as it suits my eye-sight better and how I work better, your choice may be different than mine and that is OK.
 
That's true, we each can like the things we like. But when someone asks a subjective question like "which is better", we should give subjective answers like "....to me, I like XYZ better."
 
I am a user, not a fixer, so this is not the perspective of a repair tech.

I have one Tower Type 3 (a Nicca 3 built for Sears) and I also own a half dozen Leica Barnacks from various years.

From my simple user perspective the Tower Type 3 is smoother to use, quieter, and much easier to focus than all my Barnacks with the exceptions of my IIIg and Standard.

In my humble opinion the IIIg is the best of the bunch. But, since it is almost as big as the M3 it is obvious that the Tower Type 3 is much easier to pack around.

The only problem I experienced with my Tower was tearing a curtain with a collapsed Elmar 50/3.5. This was likely only my camera buy I no longer use collapsed lenses with it.

But, if I could only have one Barnack camera I would probably keep the Standard. That is a very sweet little camera, particularly with a 35 mounted where focusing is not a worry. If I can find a 25mm lens at a decent price, I will buy it.
 
goamules said:
That's true, we each can like the things we like. But when someone asks a subjective question like "which is better", we should give subjective answers like "....to me, I like XYZ better."
Click to expand...

I like the simplicity of the LTM Leicas, the later hinged back Japanese Leica clones, as clever as they are, plus the convenience of easy film loading do nothing for me, others see them as a big boon.

I never had a problem loading film in the original bottom-loader design and I been using them since the 1970s. Same for lever film wind, the knob wind is my preference and I do own a minty lever wind Tower 46 (Nicca5L) with a lovely 5cm Nikkor f1.4 lens.

Even the lauded and fancy Leica lllg does not do it for me, as it was the only Leica that I got rid of and replaced it with a more bare bones IIIc 40 years ago.

These are my choices, yours will be different than mine and you are very welcome and entitled to them.
 
David Murphy said:
Every Nicca I've seen is an exceptionally well crafted camera.
Click to expand...

The Leotax was even better than the Nicca, except for the last Leotax G model, which most were assembled by various contractors and not the Leotax factory, as they went bankrupt.
 
Never have handled a Leotax, but of all the clones that I've owned and seen, the Nicca stands out. Although they are not infallible, it depends on how well they've been cared for (or abused.)

Currently own a type 3, made in occupied Japan. It required service but is as good as new.

FWIW, the coverings on the Niccas are superior to brittle Leica vulcanite in terms of longevity in poor conditions (high temp attics, garages, etc.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom