David Hughes
David Hughes
My oldest and newest Barnacks cover from 1926 to 1946 and they have all been used with Kodak and Ilford cassettes. You need to pad them out a little to stop the cassette and film drooping.
FWIW, put a modern cassette in a Barnack and shake it and you can hear the thing going up and down.
Regards, David
PS Just one exception, they were all (or should have been) modified at some point in the 30's and a very small part was changed. I've never seen an unmodified one.
FWIW, put a modern cassette in a Barnack and shake it and you can hear the thing going up and down.
Regards, David
PS Just one exception, they were all (or should have been) modified at some point in the 30's and a very small part was changed. I've never seen an unmodified one.
Erik van Straten
Veteran
carbo73
Well-known
Mine's, from 1929, looks almost identical but just with the shiny tip in yours, cut off. Just a bit, maybe 2mm at most.
David Hughes
David Hughes
Thanks, another loose end tidied up...
Regards, David
Regards, David
cassel
Well-known
I have one! Here is it, unmodified.
My very original (new to me) III from '35 looks just like Erik's -unmodified-
loading a modern canister was no problem
Erik van Straten
Veteran
The modification would be the replacement of the cassette-stabilisator at the left, next to the shutter tensioners. The old one, like this one, has a long "tail". On later cameras it has a shorter tail, to provide space for the later type cassettes. I don't think that a model III from 1935 has the old type because loading a modern canister was no problem. On first sight it may seem the same, but I don't think it is. With the old type stabilisator loading a modern canister should be a problem.
The modification involved also another part. That part lives on the inside of the bottom plate.
Erik.
The modification involved also another part. That part lives on the inside of the bottom plate.
Erik.
cassel
Well-known
Next time I have it open, I will take a picture -could have sworn it looks exactly like your picture - long tail on that part - the 1932 II that I have has the shorter one like almost all the others out there!
Weird for a '35 I know..
There's film in it now.
Erik van Straten
Veteran
Anything is possible!
Erik.
Erik.
SimonPJ
Well-known
IIIf which I acquired from the collection of Paul-Henry van Hasbroeck. Black paint by G B Metzcar. I would be interested in any information about G B Metzcar's Leica restoration and re-finishing work. I believe he also restored and painted some of the cameras shown in James Lager's books. (Sadly I no longer have the Summicron.)
https://flic.kr/s/aHsmNefw7x
Erik van Straten
Veteran
Very nice camera, Simon. Sad that you do not have the lens anymore. Is it an original black one? Could very well be, but then it is the only one in LTM I've ever seen.
You can put on the camera a Color Skopar 50mm f/2.5, looks very nice.
Erik.
You can put on the camera a Color Skopar 50mm f/2.5, looks very nice.
Erik.
SimonPJ
Well-known
Thanks Erik. The lens is an original black chrome one, but in M mount, not LTM. I had removed the M mount to use it on the IIIf.
I agree about the Color Skopar. It does look very good on your cameras.
Best,
Simon
SimonPJ
Well-known
Very nice camera, Simon. Sad that you do not have the lens anymore. Is it an original black one? Could very well be, but then it is the only one in LTM I've ever seen.
You can put on the camera a Color Skopar 50mm f/2.5, looks very nice.
Erik.
It's interesting that my lens and the HCB one both have 1959 serial numbers. Which does seem early for a black chrome finish.
Erik van Straten
Veteran
It is not black chrome, but chemically blackened aluminum as far as I know.
Is the lens an LTM when the bayonet-fitting is removed? Then the bayonet-fitting is only an adapter with a small set-screw. I have a Summaron f/2.8 that works this way too. I never knew that there were also Summicrons that work this way. Interesting.
Erik.
Is the lens an LTM when the bayonet-fitting is removed? Then the bayonet-fitting is only an adapter with a small set-screw. I have a Summaron f/2.8 that works this way too. I never knew that there were also Summicrons that work this way. Interesting.
Erik.
SimonPJ
Well-known
Yes - It is LTM when the bayonet-fitting is removed. From Lager's Vol II on lenses it looks like LTM and M 35 Summicron production overlapped using this hybrid LTM/M construction between 1958 and at least 1960.
rfaspen
[insert pithy phrase here]
I noticed that simon's lens has min focus of 1m. HCBs lens has 0.7 which I would expect on an M mount lens. Oddness.
SimonPJ
Well-known
That's interesting. Is this true for all of the Leica lenses that appear to be black chrome, or only earlier ones?
Erik van Straten
Veteran
LTM-lenses usually have a 1 m limit. I think that the rangefinder is not reliable closer.
Erik.
Erik.
Erik van Straten
Veteran
It is not possible to chrome-plate aluminium AFAIK. Brass lenses can be chromed and then made black, wich gives a different effect than black paint on brass.
Erik.
SimonPJ
Well-known
The LTM version of the 35 Summicron (SAWOO) had 1m min focus, whereas the M version (SAWOO-M) was 70cm.
The M version shown in the Lager book with an LTM to M adapter flange secured by a set screw, like mine, actually has a 70cm min focus. So mine would appear to be the LTM version fitted with the adapter. As often with Leica, it seems that there were several variants of the lens until production settled down.