what is a "Barnack Camera"

ok, I hope this isn't providing both gasoline and a match... but what exactly is

a "Barnack Camera?"

 

Everyone knows that Barnack designed the "Ur-Leica" etc., but he died in 1936,

so any Leica camera beyond that are not true Barnack cameras if you are going to

be a stickler for detail, right? In my other thread the moderator felt the need

to defuse a potential feud resulting from my use of the term "Barnack camera" to

include both Leica and nearly identical clone cameras. Since Leica

users/enthusiasts tend to be fanatics about the details, which cameras can be

considered an actual Barnack camera in friendly conversation? My initial

thought that it was more respectful to attribute the designer credit for a

wonderful design, even when the design has been ripped off (actually, I don't

understand WWII era international patent law fineries but...)... but this is why

I chose the term in the first place... I guess it is a matter of giving credit

to an individual vs. a company (IE. "Barnack camera" vs. "Leica clone").

 

Just interesting chatter, but still curious... and obviously, it does matter to

some people.

 

:)

So, then any Ford built after Henry Ford's death, "really isn't a true Ford". IMHO, any Leica (read that as QUALITY) built using Oskar Barnack's design, up to and including the IIIg can truly be called a Barnack. Leica clones do not have the same quality when it comes to materials or workmanship to deserve the name Barnack.

Any that came from his basic design.

 

No Canonos, Kievsm Niccas, or other look alikes.

The fact that you may refer to all the copies of the early leicas as "Barnack cameras" seems to me very flattering indeed ! I denotes actually that it was a very "paradigmatic" design.

 

Same story as with Luger pistols or Kalashnikovs automatic guns for instance. Aren't leicas also kind of guns ?

 

Paul

A Barnack Camera is any Leica based essentially on designs by Oskar Barnack. This is just a popular description used by Leica enthusiasts, there is no such factory designation. It includes the Prototypoes and Models A, B, I, II, III, and all variations of those models.<P>It does not inculde any "M" model Leicas, or the various Single Lens Reflex cameras.

no reason to upset people, so I'll go back to calling them "Leica copies."

 

:)

I didn't see anyone getting upset. But it's nice that you're going back to terminology that everyone will understand.

Yes Mike, thank the moderator.

 

;)

Unfortunately outside Germany many people use designators for the Leicas different from those used among german collectors.

 

We do not use the term "Barnack Leica", we just make a difference between thread-mount Leicas (Schraubleica) and M-mount Leicas. Also, we do not use the (bold) A, B and C designators, we rather use the designators originally used by Leitz.

 

Also, Barnack was NOT involved personally in the design of all thread-mount or "Barnack" Leicas, the Leica D series was the last design he worked on. The E series was never manufactured, and the F models (I f, II f, III f) were designed after his death.

As someone has said , Barnak died in 1936 so a Barnack is any camera designed before his departure, so IMHO that's any Leica up to a IIIB.

I am curious whether Mark ever had a satisfactory answer to his original question.

 

Collectors like to showcase the depth of their knowledge and "Leicaphiles" are exceptionally dedicated to this. Many of us who spent our careers working in the technical and scientific fields experienced the young graduate student who often knew the literature much better than did their mentors. After all, Leitz's own web site provides a history of Leica cameras and the Leica II, but then shows an image of an upgraded camera that obviously has a Leica III body (they don't even know their own camera history?).

 

These forums (i.e. fora or fori, of course) provide a way for us to enjoy our interest in old cameras. However, precise use of terms often takes precedent over the substance of a question.

 

When I read Mark's initial question, it was clear that he was referring to a Russian Fed camera, because he stated so. The moderator changed the topic heading in order to enhance clarity and to hold down the hyperventilation that he knew would be generated when some of us clicked the topic and found that it was not a Leica to which Mark referred, but rather the lowly Fed. This too brought on another posting and even more responses, each with a contribution to maintain precise use of terms. Meanwhile, postings such as those from Martin, appeared to answer Mark's question but only Mark can tell us whether it in fact did so.

 

Anyway, it provided a divertimento and never became caustic. None the less, it all contributed to the sense that "Leicaphiles" are indeed more often concerned with preservation of precise terminology and perhaps made it less likely that those not among the cognoscenti will post earnest questions here.

 

Just my personal opinion.

 

Ciao from Roma.

 

David

well... I'm not sure it was *exactly* satisfactory, but my take from the discussion is that "Barnack Camera" is not a recognized or well defined term... so cameras "based" on Barnack's unique design are either Leica Cameras or not Leica cameras... and that while the design of some of the early Leica cameras can be attributed to Barnack, there is no precise agreement on which ones.

 

:)

 

I had just seen the term used on other forums... I'm no "Leicaphile" by any means, but still find it all interesting.

<i> my take from the discussion is that "Barnack Camera" is not a recognized or well defined term</i><P>

That's an odd take on the discussion. Other than you, every person in the discussion and every web hit I saw on the first several pages of results from a web search for "Barnack camera" used the term to refer to Leica thread-mount cameras.

I agree, Mike. I was just wondering whether Mark's original question was answered satisfactorily. I used to use the NOOKY years ago on a copy stand to copy data sheets and it was very easy and precise, but I wasn't sure whether that addressed Mark's question and whether the NOOKY could be used on a Fed.

 

David

An "odd" conclusion from the comments? (I guess if we are splitting hairs, I should have said, "not *precisely* recognized" which was my intent... and we are splitting hairs IMO).

 

Winfried: "We do not use the term "Barnack Leica"

 

AND

 

Bill: "A Barnack Camera is any Leica based essentially on designs by Oskar Barnack. This is just a popular description used by Leica enthusiasts"

 

ALSO

 

Stuart: "IMHO, any Leica (read that as QUALITY) built using Oskar Barnack's design, up to and including the IIIg can truly be called a Barnack."

 

VS

 

Anthony: "Barnak died in 1936 so a Barnack is any camera designed before his departure"

<i>. . . so cameras "based" on Barnack's unique design are either Leica Cameras or not Leica cameras.</i><P>

Where did anyone, other than you, say that a "Barnack camera" was not a Leica camera?

On some Russian camera lists over the years I have heard them referred to as "Barnack Cameras." From a 1 minute google search, I came across this site which lumps both a Leica and FSU copy under the heading "Barnack Camera."

 

http://members.myactv.net/~je245/userbarnacks.htm

 

Not saying it makes it right or correct or anything... I personally don't care... as I said, it was just interested me. My main interest is in Leica-R users and not collecting or anything.

 

thanks.