"Vulcanite vs. Sharkskin" - how do you tell the difference?

[Luddite Frank]

Is there a simple way to tell whether a Barnack is covered in vulcanite or sharksin ?

Thanks,

Luddite Frank

 

[ferider]

It's pretty easy to tell, visually:

Normal covering:

Shark skin:

Best,

Roland.

 

[Luddite Frank]

Thanks Roland.

Were there specific years / models that received a certain covering, or was it "whatever was on hand" ?


Regards,

LF

 

[ferider]

I don't know LF, maybe LeicaTom or somebody else can answer.

What I know is that the oils in the Shark Skin often cause corrosion in the adjacent chrome/brass, so "normal-covered" Leicas are usually prettier.

Also Shark skin is nice to hold, has more grip. But not as good for a user as Cameraleather's Grip-tac.

Roland.

 

[ray*j*gun]

I believe that Sharkskin is just a different texture mold for the same process and material as Vulcanite. I have both coverings and both of my Barnacks are pristine...... but I do like the feel of the Sharkskin better.

 

[Luddite Frank]

Thanks guys.

I think all my Barnacks have vulcanite; none have that "vertical-grain" like Roland's sharkskin II.

I was curious about my 1934 III 1366XX (chrome); the coveirng is lifting a bit at the bottom of the lens-mount, and to the left, and has a slight brown-ish sheen on the wear-surfaces, which made me wonder if it was animal-hide losing its suface finish.

I keep my LTMs in an everready case when I'm shooting; the vulcanite does feel a bit slippery on its own.

Regards,

LF

 

[Vince Lupo]

I have a Leica III (#151xxx) that has sharkskin and I love it (don't know how the sharkskin ended up on such an early camera). As well, I have a couple of cameras that have the sharkskin going 'horizontally', so I don't know how that came about either.

 

[LeicaTom]

There`s like 3 or 4 different patterns/styles of vulcanite and sharkskin was produced for only 2 years 1949 and 50 (due to a shortage of materials for the regular vulcanite mixes).

Tom