Record auction price for Leica Luxus

[Pioneer]

I'll stay with my Leica II (D). It works great and cost me a lot less.

And $7950 for a Monochrom is still a pot full of money in my house. 🙂

 

[Rob-F]

Wow. It certainly looks like a FSU fake doesn't it!

I think this may very well be the case. I'm looking through my books and not even seeing a Luxus with a Leica II configuration. My copy of Rogliatti lists the Luxus right after the model I (A) and shows a picture of it that conforms to the model I's form factor except that he shows a I with a Leitz Anastigmat, and another with an Elmax. There is no rangefinder, just the viewfinder and an accessory shoe; and both have the "hockey stick" infinity lock (PP 20 and 21). Page 22 shows the Luxus as having the same body conformation, but fitted with a Leitz Elmar f = 5cm, and it is fitted with the lizardskin cover. No. 9781 is pictured, and Rogliatti says it is (or perhaps was) "at Wetzlar."

Turning now to Jim Lager's "Leica Illustrated Guide, (1975 edition) on pp. 14 and 15, model I No. 48401 is pictured, and has the same body form factor as the one Rogliatti shows.

Only four were made? I don't think so. Lager says (p. 14) that 15 are listed in production records: 34803 through 37817; adding that " . . . it has become apparent that a few more were produced." And Rogliatti says, "A total of 87 Luxes are recorded at Wetzlar small batches being manufactured to demand during the run of the Leica I."

And the auction article lists it as a "Luxus II." I can't find a Luxus II in m books. Doesn't mean it doesn't exist, but you wouldn't think Lager would miss that. or Rogliatti, either.

So the evidence seems to be that whoever bought that camera may not have gotten a real Luxus; and that there have been many more than four.

I think I will go look at Photo.net and see what is being said over there.

Edit: I suppose it could have been mentioned in a later edition. My Lager and my Rogliatti are both from 1975. I think the exposed screw heads in front are legit, though.

 

[Rob-F]

Some additional research: My Hove Pocket Book 7th edition (2002) lists the Luxus as a variation under the Leica 1 (A) listing on page 18. But it makes no mention of a Luxus II under the Leica II (D) discussion on page 23. In fact, it says there were no variations of the II except for factory updates to a III or IIIa.

So if there was a Luxus II, I haven't found it.

 

[Dez]

Associating great value with rarity to the exclusion of everything else is a funny concept. Here is a camera of mine that looks almost exactly the same as to one that just sold for a fortune, is in better condition, and will operate just as well for its original purpose, the making of pictures.....




.....but its value is maybe 1/10,000th of that of the rare Leica. Even though mine is objectively so much better though, I would be willing to trade. Rather generous of me, I think.

Cheers,
Dez

 

[35mmdelux]

@OP - that is serious brassing. At least it came with the case.

 

[sjones]

The Leica Elmar appears similar to the early "11 O'clock" focus stop version, which used "F" and "50mm" instead of "f" and "5cm".

The Luxus II's absence from certain publications might be due to its considerable scarcity. If it matters, the alligator skin case was also included with the Luxus I.

 

[noimmunity]

.....but its value is maybe 1/10,000th of that of the rare Leica.

Must be because yours is missing the finder on the top 😀

 

[literiter]

Don't worry if you missed out on this one folks, there will be tons of them on Ebay in the next few months.

 

[Dez]

Must be because yours is missing the finder on the top 😀

Or maybe it's the crocodile case.

Cheers,
Dez

 

[johannielscom]

...


But the camera below has different round RF covers, and the lens says "50mm" not "5 cm", and the Iris control looks wrong.
And the "F' on the "F = 50mm" is in caps.... not a cursive f as on the Leica II (D)
And the front has 4 exposed screws that on the above camera, are covered by the black covering.
The RF Arm in the camera will tell the truth! ...

Yes it's suspicious that the Leica Luxus II wasn't mentioned in literature anywhere but the script on the lens is no sign of this one being a fake. My Leica II has an early nickel Elmar 50mm F1:3.5. it came off a Leica I and was converted to a screw mount lens. The italic script on Elmars was introduced later.

Nobody will buy a Leica for that much money and not look at the RF arm, it's the most obvious sign of a fake. And, nobody faking a Leica Luxus II will fake one and not bother to change the RF arm!

 

[Dralowid]

I was suspicious when I first posted this, not having heard of such a beast but take a step back and consider the auctioneers for a moment.

Admittedly it is a case of 'caveat emptor' but Bonhams have reputation to maintain. One would have to be pretty certain of one's facts to advertise such a thing and I guess they may have sought advice from the likes of Ottmar Mikeley or Peter Coln at Westlicht (apols for spelling). After all, we all think that a real Luxus II doesn't exist and we all think we are experts🙂

(I have heard of a case where a major London auction house refunded the purchase of an Anastigmat Leica that turned out to be fake)

One has to assume the purchaser might have done something similar... and if they were someone unschooled in the topic they would soon realise that the lack of any mention in the best known books on the topic would raise an eyebrow or two, hopefully before the auction.

So, on the one hand it is as well to keep an open mind, and on the other just ponder the fact that there would appear to be more rare things in in circulation than there used to be!

Michael

 

[Rob-F]

Associating great value with rarity to the exclusion of everything else is a funny concept. Here is a camera of mine that looks almost exactly the same as to one that just sold for a fortune, is in better condition, and will operate just as well for its original purpose, the making of pictures.....




.....but its value is maybe 1/10,000th of that of the rare Leica. Even though mine is objectively so much better though, I would be willing to trade. Rather generous of me, I think.

Cheers,
Dez

Well . . . maybe not exactly the same. Actually, yours looks better, even though it is a Russian copy.

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

Silly question I know but why couldn't it be a gold plated model II etc with the appropriate leather cover but made by or for someone who wanted it like that? OK, not done by the factory but still a Leica.

If it was done in the 30's when you could buy non-Leica leather cases* for them, then the case could be contemporary.

Regards, David

*Wallace Heaton's did one for certain. I've seen one for sale this year and, vaguely remember that I looked it up. It was the "Meta-Case" or similar...

 

[Dez]

A very good point, David. This camera appears to be super rare, but I thought that EVERYTHING ever shipped by Leitz was documented and known by really serious Leicaphiles. This one nobody seems to know about, except presumably the auction site and the wealthy buyers that bid on it.
Clearly if it were a fake, which I doubt, it would be made from a real Leica II, not an FSU clone. That's a different league altogether.

Cheers,
Dez

 

[Dralowid]

Reading Laney...I quote:

"...but Lager illustrates several Model C non-standardised interchangeable Luxus cameras, as well as a Leica II converted from 1930 model A Luxus No 34809"

Lager 1993 pp27-32

 

[David Hughes]

A very good point, David. This camera appears to be super rare, but I thought that EVERYTHING ever shipped by Leitz was documented and known by really serious Leicaphiles. This one nobody seems to know about, except presumably the auction site and the wealthy buyers that bid on it.
Clearly if it were a fake, which I doubt, it would be made from a real Leica II, not an FSU clone. That's a different league altogether.

Cheers,
Dez

Hi,

I gather, through talking to people, that there were lots of small firms that could do this. I've also heard of lens coatings that weren't Leitz or Zeiss and edge blacking and so on. Even had them offered in the last ten or so years. And I guess leather work and gold plating are easily done, if you've the money.

I'm just surprised I've not seen a Luxus version of a FED or Zorki that is offered as a FED or Zorki. Ditto a black chrome ad white lined one.

Regards, David

 

[Dez]

For that matter, you or I could create a gold plated Leica II with a fair bit of effort and expense, and every part except the plating and the skin would be genuine. Presumably people don't spend 600,000 pounds for a rather shabby-looking camera unless they are absolutely certain it came from the Leitz works with the plating and the lizard skin. There must be some kind of unassailable pedigree involved, unless the bidders were total fools, which could be, I guess.

Cheers,
Dez