sparrow6224
Well-known
I didn't want to begin an inquiry into this camera while it was still on sale, lest one of you had his/her eye on it and would have been thwarted by someone drawing attention to it. It sold to 1 bidder for $75, so now I'm free to ask: what do the experts think of this? Even the seller conveded he thought it a fake but it looks different from all other Russian fakes I've ever seen. Course, I don't get around like I used to once. Here's the camera:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Leica-35mm-...oIBvoxCmFLWudkpxMxW5I%3D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc
Have at it.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Leica-35mm-...oIBvoxCmFLWudkpxMxW5I%3D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc
Have at it.
lonemantis
Well-known
100% fake, no question. Others will probably see more signs, but first things I noticed were the rectangular window around the front viewfinder (should have a slope on the right side), wrong lens engraving, wrong aperture dial, wrong engraving style/colour, and wrong shutter release. This is a good reference: http://rick_oleson.tripod.com/index-213.html
Robert Lai
Well-known
Fake - no loading diagram on the bottom of the shutter crate. The shutter spring tension adjusters remind me of the ones on the Zorki 1 that I once owned.
This is besides all of the other external items that aren't Leica-like.
This is besides all of the other external items that aren't Leica-like.
zuiko85
Veteran
The winning and only bid is also a clue. If it's operating good enough to be a user it's a little cheaper than one from Fedka and while not a bargain is within current market prices.
colyn
ישו משיח
It's a Zorki... Very common fake..
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Easy to spot that this is a fake.
1: has 'ridges' along the top and bottom plate, in the 'vulcanite'. Not Leica.
2: has a rectangular 'window pane' around the viewfinder window that extends up all the way to the top plate surface. Not Leica.
3: Accessory shoe is fitted with three screws only while the IIIc that this is trying to mimic had four screws and also two spring-loaded ridges that press against the accessory installed. Not Leica.
4: Has a partly covered 'B' for rewind, instead of a fully visible 'R' that Leicas have.
5: Has incorrect internal springs and curtain tensioning screws, and film loading diagram indeed is missing. Not Leica.
6: Tripod bush is secured with three screws from the outside, while with a Leica the screw heads are on the inside. Not Leica.
The shutter release is standard for a Zorki, but those bowl-shaped shutter releases were available for Leica too, as an after-market accessory. They are mostly seen on Barnacks by both Leica and other brands that come for sale in the US. I suspect they were introduced with a Japanese Barnack copy and were a short-lived sales success in the US, nowadays they sometimes surface on all sorts of cameras.
1: has 'ridges' along the top and bottom plate, in the 'vulcanite'. Not Leica.
2: has a rectangular 'window pane' around the viewfinder window that extends up all the way to the top plate surface. Not Leica.
3: Accessory shoe is fitted with three screws only while the IIIc that this is trying to mimic had four screws and also two spring-loaded ridges that press against the accessory installed. Not Leica.
4: Has a partly covered 'B' for rewind, instead of a fully visible 'R' that Leicas have.
5: Has incorrect internal springs and curtain tensioning screws, and film loading diagram indeed is missing. Not Leica.
6: Tripod bush is secured with three screws from the outside, while with a Leica the screw heads are on the inside. Not Leica.
The shutter release is standard for a Zorki, but those bowl-shaped shutter releases were available for Leica too, as an after-market accessory. They are mostly seen on Barnacks by both Leica and other brands that come for sale in the US. I suspect they were introduced with a Japanese Barnack copy and were a short-lived sales success in the US, nowadays they sometimes surface on all sorts of cameras.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Zorki and Industar. Nothing else.
Seller indicated in the description it isn't Leica.
Still need help to distinguish?
Here are two very reputable sources :
http://www.cameraquest.com/leica_II_fake.htm
http://jay.fedka.com/index_files/Page367.htm
Seller indicated in the description it isn't Leica.
Still need help to distinguish?
Here are two very reputable sources :
http://www.cameraquest.com/leica_II_fake.htm
http://jay.fedka.com/index_files/Page367.htm
rfaspen
[insert pithy phrase here]
Zorki 1D, and I believe an Industar-22, but I could be wrong on the lens (could be Fed 50, but not likely I-10)
farlymac
PF McFarland
Definitely Zorki, and the the back and top engravings don't jive with each other (air force on the back, navy on the top).
PF
PF
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Zorki 1D, and I believe an Industar-22, but I could be wrong on the lens (could be Fed 50, but not likely I-10)
Fed (I-10) has different, Elmar-like, aperture control ring.
wolves3012
Veteran
Only the Industar 22 & 50 had that style of aperture ring. It's likely to be a 22, which would've been original with the camera but it could be a 50. Neither of them went to f/18 though, so that bit is a lie.Zorki 1D, and I believe an Industar-22, but I could be wrong on the lens (could be Fed 50, but not likely I-10)
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.