Leica LTM Question over the serial number of a pre-war Elmar 3.5/50.

[newst]

I am seeking information from members of this board who are certainly more knowledgeable in matters Leica than I am.

I recently purchased an early Leica Elmar 3.5/50 (1933-1934) off eBay. The seller listed it as serial number 89077. While I was waiting for it to be delivered, I decided to look up the serial number online.

It turned out that I couldn’t find a match for 89077. Every list I checked began at 100,000. My logical conclusion was that the seller had mistyped the serial. This was reinforced by the listing identifying S/N 189077 as a 1933 production Elmar.

The lens was delivered today and one of the first things I checked was the serial number. To my surprise, the serial number engraved on the aperture ring is indeed 89077.

Thus my question to the group. Is this unusual, or did Leica have a habit of leaving the first digit of the serial number off the lens itself, at least until they had actually produced 100,000 lenses?

I would appreciate any insight you are willing to share. Thank you.

 

[Erik van Straten]

AFAIK the earliest numbers on the outside of the lenses appear in 1933 @ nr.156001. Earlier lenses are numbered on the inside or not at all.

Get a copy of G.Rogliatti Leica and Leicaflex lenses (1978) or E. Puts Leica Pocketbook (1980) (first editions) if you are interested in Leica lens numbers.

Lenses with lower numbers engraved are overhauled or updated AFAIK.

Erik.

 

[newst]

AFAIK the earliest numbers on the outside of the lenses appear in 1933 @ nr.156001. Earlier lenses are numbered on the inside or not at all.

Get a copy of G.Rogliatti Leica and Leicaflex lenses (1978) or E. Puts Leica Pocketbook (1980) (first editions) if you are interested in Leica lens numbers.

Lenses with lower numbers engraved are overhauled or updated AFAIK.

Erik.

Thank you. The serial number that is on the aperture control is as finely engraved as on any other Leica lens I have seen. It may just have been serviced by Leica at some point. Still, 189077 is after the 156001 that you have identified, so why no 1 on the ring?

 

[james.liam]

Leica User Forum's listing for the 5cm ƒ/3.5 mentions earlier lenses dating from 1930, with serial number range 564-- to 892--. You may in fact have a sample from the very first year of production.

 

[Erik van Straten]

Thank you. The serial number that is on the aperture control is as finely engraved as on any other Leica lens I have seen. It may just have been serviced by Leica at some point. Still, 189077 is after the 156001 that you have identified, so why no 1 on the ring?

A different number on the lens than the serial number may be an indication (sort of a code) for the "true" focal length rather than the engraved one on the name ring.

 

[Dralowid]

Summilux.net records an Elmar 99811 as being 1926 which one has to assume was numbered post production, anyway it makes little sense in the normal scheme of things.

 

[Nitroplait]

I recently purchased an early Leica Elmar 3.5/50 (1933-1934) off eBay. The seller listed it as serial number 89077.

Is "(1933-1934)" the seller's listing or something you have concluded? If the date range comes from the seller's listing, you may ask them which source they used for dating.
A photo may help as there may be other indicators of age. Is it nickel? Does it have the regular length of an extended Elmar or is it a little shorter (often the case when old model IA elmar's were converted to the standardised mount). The Elmar's that were rebuild don't always align well with the known lists.

 

[Dralowid]

My understanding is that converted lenses have no serial numbers.

89077 corresponds to a II body made in 1932. 189077 on a lens would make it 1933. 189077 on a body much later indeed a IIIa from 1936

If you agree with the theory that lens numbers in the early '30s tracked approximately 100,000 ahead of body numbers then your thoughts about a missing '1' might lead somewhere.

I think such a theory needs to be taken with a pinch of salt, I have seen several Elmars where that serial number has been very poorly stamped by Leitz.

 

[newst]

Is "(1933-1934)" the seller's listing or something you have concluded? If the date range comes from the seller's listing, you may ask them which source they used for dating.
A photo may help as there may be other indicators of age. Is it nickel? Does it have the regular length of an extended Elmar or is it a little shorter (often the case when old model IA elmar's were converted to the standardised mount). The Elmar's that were rebuild don't always align well with the known lists.

To be honest the references I found all called out 1933. I only added 1934 because that was the date in the seller's listing.

https://reddotcamera.net/leica-lenses/serial-number/

[TABLE="border: 0"]
[TR]
[TD]187001[/TD]
[TD]190000[/TD]
[TD]Elmar[/TD]
[TD]3.5[/TD]
[TD]50[/TD]
[TD]1933[/TD]
[TD]3000[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
https://kenrockwell.com/leica/lens-serial-numbers.htm [TABLE="border: 0"]
[TR]
[TD]1933[/TD]
[TD]156 001 - 195 000[/TD]
[TD]39 384[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]


https://www.overgaard.dk/leica-serial-numbers-and-second-hand-guide-by-overgaard.html

[TABLE="border: 0"]
[TR]
[TD]156 001[/TD]
[TD]195 000[/TD]
[TD]1933[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

 

[newst]

Leica User Forum's listing for the 5cm ƒ/3.5 mentions earlier lenses dating from 1930, with serial number range 564-- to 892--. You may in fact have a sample from the very first year of production.

That would be amazing. I can't be that lucky. As there is a small amount of internal haze I will eventually be sending it to Youxin Ye for a CLA and will ask his opinion.

 

[Nitroplait]

My understanding is that converted lenses have no serial numbers.

That is the general assumption, but it is also a period where almost all rules has been proven to have exceptions.

89077 corresponds to a II body made in 1932.

And the very first batch of Leica II's that is.
And batch numbers assigned just before the very first batch of the Standard - and before the III was introduced.
That must have been a time of significant transitions and possible deviations from what we think were the rules. It doesn't make things easier that Leica routinely reworked on lenses.
If we entertain the idea that for some reason the camera and lens had the same SN from 1932, it would have been a nickel lens with an infinity stop at 11 o'clock (unless it was later modified for use on Leica III).

As noted, a photo of the lens would help a lot; what is the finish, where is infinity stop.

On the photo below: left is a nickel Elmar 5cm/3.5 that was once mounted on a Leica IA from 1929. It was rehoused after 1934 (because it has 7 o'clock infinity stop) but probably not later than 1935 because of the shape of the f on the front plate. It does not have a serial number engraved outside but the number of the camera it came from on the inside if I remember correctl .
The other lens is a standard coated Elmar 5cm/3.5 from 1954. As can be seen, the housing is longer that the older nickel one (both are fully extended and set to infinity).

 

[newst]

My understanding is that converted lenses have no serial numbers.

89077 corresponds to a II body made in 1932. 189077 on a lens would make it 1933. 189077 on a body much later indeed a IIIa from 1936

If you agree with the theory that lens numbers in the early '30s tracked approximately 100,000 ahead of body numbers then your thoughts about a missing '1' might lead somewhere.

I think such a theory needs to be taken with a pinch of salt, I have seen several Elmars where that serial number has been very poorly stamped by Leitz.

Thanks. My original, and current, working theory is that the 1 was just not stamped into the ring. The remaining numbers, although incredibly small, are perfectly formed.

 

[Nitroplait]

Leica User Forum's listing for the 5cm ƒ/3.5 mentions earlier lenses dating from 1930, with serial number range 564-- to 892--. You may in fact have a sample from the very first year of production.

It wouldn't be the very first year of production as the elmar 5cm was standard on most of the Leica IAs, but first year of lenses with serial numbers perhaps.

 

[newst]

That is the general assumption, but it is also a period where almost all rules has been proven to have exceptions.


And the very first batch of Leica II's that is.
And batch numbers assigned just before the very first batch of the Standard - and before the III was introduced.
That must have been a time of significant transitions and possible deviations from what we think were the rules. It doesn't make things easier that Leica routinely reworked on lenses.
If we entertain the idea that for some reason the camera and lens had the same SN from 1932, it would have been a nickel lens with an infinity stop at 11 o'clock (unless it was later modified for use on Leica III).

As noted, a photo of the lens would help a lot; what is the finish, where is infinity stop.

Again, thanks for helping. The mail arrived Saturday just as I was heading out to visit a friend. By the time I got back home it was getting late, and I really thought this was something people who knew Leica would just say "Hey newb, everyone knows that..."

So now, some pictures.

1933 Elmar 89077 (7) by newst54, on Flickr

1933 Elmar 89077 (6) by newst54, on Flickr

1933 Elmar 89077 (5) by newst54, on Flickr

1933 Elmar 89077 (4) by newst54, on Flickr

1933 Elmar 89077 (3) by newst54, on Flickr

1933 Elmar 89077 (2) by newst54, on Flickr

1933 Elmar 89077 (1) by newst54, on Flickr

 

[Jul]

There are extra markings on the distance scale such as those found on some later samples at some time between 1938 and 1941.

 

[newst]

There are extra markings on the distance scale such as those found on some later samples at some time between 1938 and 1941.

That's interesting, thanks. Which markings are you referring to?

 

[Nitroplait]

Very nice looking lens. I'm sure you will have a lot of joy from that.

I think we can out-rule it is from 1930. It would have been 11 o'clock infinity stop and nickel. To my eyes it looks like chrome. If it was adapted later to be compatible with the Leica III (infinity stop at 7 o'clock) it would probably have retained nickel finish - unless it was modified much later.
I just notice on Red Dot Cameras list that the the serial number 189077 would fall in the interval 187001-190000 which were assigned specifically for Elmar 50/3.5 in 1933. So the theory of a missing 1 from the engraving is a possibility.
I guess someone with a 1933 lens could compare engraving details to see if it matches.

 

[newst]

Very nice looking lens. I'm sure you will have a lot of joy from that.

I think we can out-rule it is from 1930. It would have been 11 o'clock infinity stop and nickel. To my eyes it looks like chrome. If it was adapted later to be compatible with the Leica III (infinity stop at 7 o'clock) it would probably have retained nickel finish - unless it was modified much later.
I just notice on Red Dot Cameras list that the the serial number 189077 would fall in the interval 187001-190000 which were assigned specifically for Elmar 50/3.5 in 1933. So the theory of a missing 1 from the engraving is a possibility.
I guess someone with a 1933 lens could compare engraving details to see if it matches.

Yes, that's about where I am at right now. Thanks.

 

[Erik van Straten]

There are extra markings on the distance scale such as those found on some later samples at some time between 1938 and 1941.

Yes, the distance scale looks exactly like the wartime ones. On my wartime model the serial number is very hard to read, but it is on the black painted brass ring on the front: 572948.

Erik.

 

[Johngwill]

I would post the information and photo's on the Leica Forum, Collectors & Historica area ( https://www.l-camera-forum.com/forum/35-leica-collectors-historica/ ). They have many very knowledgeable members that specialize in the early Leica cameras and lenses.