Ron (Netherlands)
Well-known
Is the Reid III (seems to be a fine Leica III copy) a rare camera?
How about the quality of the standard lens
Any info about its value is appreciated.
thanks
in the meantime, found these prices on the web (apart from the collection that Arsenal has, but their prices tend to be 'way out of spec'):
Photographica World (2007)$ 641 - 743
Photographica Auctionen (2007)$ 1755
Tamarkin Auction (2007)$ 1035
Christies Auction (2007)$ 2064
How about the quality of the standard lens
Any info about its value is appreciated.
thanks
in the meantime, found these prices on the web (apart from the collection that Arsenal has, but their prices tend to be 'way out of spec'):
Last edited:
Peter_Jones
Well-known
This is not the voice of experience, however by reputation they are a fine camera, the shutter mechanism having bearings similar to Leica 111K (?). The lenses are supposed to be very good for the era, and they are rarer than 111c etc. and often sell for well over UK£1000 in user condition.
I was talking to an old guy who used to be in the RAF aerial reconnaisance unit, he reckoned Taylor Taylor Hobson lenses were superior in both build quality and optical resolution, having had the opportunity to test various equipment during his carreer.
I was talking to an old guy who used to be in the RAF aerial reconnaisance unit, he reckoned Taylor Taylor Hobson lenses were superior in both build quality and optical resolution, having had the opportunity to test various equipment during his carreer.
payasam
a.k.a. Mukul Dube
A Reid would make sense for a collector. A user is better off with a Leica, the IIIc being perhaps the best choice. As Peter says, TTH lenses were excellent.
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
read what Ken Oakes had to say on the Reid Camera at the end of this thread:
http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00Bitm
http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00Bitm
Roger Hicks
Veteran
I had one, years ago, and it was very good; the lens was one of the best of its era. Reid were among the few Leica copies that really could compare with the original in fit and finish.
In the days when I had Reids, they went for rather less than Leicas, but now, their rarity has pushed the price up to levels where only a collector would normally be interested: a good deal more than a comparable Leica.
They are especially valued in England, much as Focas are especially valued in France.
Cheers,
R.
In the days when I had Reids, they went for rather less than Leicas, but now, their rarity has pushed the price up to levels where only a collector would normally be interested: a good deal more than a comparable Leica.
They are especially valued in England, much as Focas are especially valued in France.
Cheers,
R.
M. Valdemar
Well-known
The Leitz factory was studied by British Intelligence after WWII. The Reid was then produced in UK from the Leitz blueprints. It's practically a total reproduction, even more so than the Kiev was a copy of the Contax, because the original Contax blueprints were destroyed and redrawn after the war:
http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Leica/page26.html
http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Leica/page26.html
furcafe
Veteran
From what I've read, that's 1 of the reasons why the Reid was actually better made than the Leica originals: during & before the war, the British didn't know that Leitz's production methods involved a lot of adjustments made on the assembly line (the most valuable tool being a small mallet), so Reid & Sigrist made parts, etc., to higher tolerances than Leitz, assuming that the cameras were supposed to work properly from the get-go.
As far as their market value, I bought a Reid III, Type 2 body (has the flash sync connectors) about a year & a 1/2 ago & IIRC, the going rate for the body alone in good working condition (not like mine) was in the $600-900 range.
As far as their market value, I bought a Reid III, Type 2 body (has the flash sync connectors) about a year & a 1/2 ago & IIRC, the going rate for the body alone in good working condition (not like mine) was in the $600-900 range.
The Leitz factory was studied by British Intelligence after WWII. The Reid was then produced in UK from the Leitz blueprints. It's practically a total reproduction, even more so than the Kiev was a copy of the Contax, because the original Contax blueprints were destroyed and redrawn after the war:
http://www.angelfire.com/biz/Leica/page26.html
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
speaking of Taylor, Taylor and Hobson, I would love to try out a Cooke Amatol 2" lens in LTM.
M. Valdemar
Well-known
Why not try it on a Bell & Howell Foton, which it was made for? It produces negatives like a Summicron, on my Foton.
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
Why not try it on a Bell & Howell Foton, which it was made for? It produces negatives like a Summicron, on my Foton.
owning a Foton sound like a good idea.
M. Valdemar
Well-known
The Foton will destroy your eyeglasses.
The tiny, squinty viewfinder is it's Achille's heel.
Otherwise, a great camera, way ahead of its time.
The tiny, squinty viewfinder is it's Achille's heel.
Otherwise, a great camera, way ahead of its time.
furcafe
Veteran
Mine hasn't been noticeably tougher on my glasses than my other vintage cameras w/metal eyepieces, even though the Foton's RF eyepiece ring should be much worse because of its serrated edge.
The RF window is indeed tiny & squinty, but the VF is OK. Too bad Bell & Howell couldn't have added an extra 1/2 inch or so in height to allow for a bigger RF & VF (& combined the 2 while they were @ it).
The RF window is indeed tiny & squinty, but the VF is OK. Too bad Bell & Howell couldn't have added an extra 1/2 inch or so in height to allow for a bigger RF & VF (& combined the 2 while they were @ it).
The Foton will destroy your eyeglasses.
The tiny, squinty viewfinder is it's Achille's heel.
Otherwise, a great camera, way ahead of its time.
Last edited:
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
xayraa33 said:speaking of Taylor, Taylor and Hobson, I would love to try out a Cooke Amatol 2" lens in LTM.
You can't use a LTM Amotal on the Foton because although the Foton has a 39mm thread mount the pitch and optical registration is different from the Leica.
M Valdmar meant to get the whole camera, a Foton with the Amatol lens.
probably a bit cheaper to buy than just a coverted LTM for Leica Amatol lens.
The Amatol lens in LTM for Leica was just a conversion done in Italy with the leftover Foton camera lenses by photo stores in NYC like Peerless and Willoughby.
The Amatol lens was aslo converted in smaller amount to Contax mount.
These big stores could sell a Leica IIIc body much cheaper with an Amatol lens than a IIIc with a Summitar as a manufacturer could at the time dictate the selling price by law if the camera was sold with his make of lens.
Last edited:
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
furcafe
Veteran
Nah, the lens itself can be had for much less than a Foton w/lens. Even accounting for condition, Kevin's prices are about twice what you would pay on eBay if you're patient. The LTM Cooke Amotals will often be found together w/Leica IIIc, etc. bodies (probably for the reason they you mention, the avoidance of the old retail price maintenance rules).
Also, for the record in case anyone's confused, the TTH Cooke Amotal Anastigmat for the Foton (later modified to LTM) was a different lens from the standard lens on the Reids.
Also, for the record in case anyone's confused, the TTH Cooke Amotal Anastigmat for the Foton (later modified to LTM) was a different lens from the standard lens on the Reids.
M Valdmar meant to get the whole camera, a Foton with the Amatol lens.
probably a bit cheaper to buy than just a coverted LTM for Leica Amatol lens.
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
a lot of people say they prefer the Amatol over the TTH Anastigmat.
Share:
-
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.