Leica Ernst Leitz Wetzlar - Real or fake?

<p>Hi,<br>

I am not familiar with Leicas so am seeking leica gurus to see if this is real or a fake copy .<br>

 <br>

Thanks in advance,<br>

RM<br>

 </p>

<p>Here is another pix of the camera</p><div></div>

<p>Fake</p>

<p>Rather poor images but this seems to be a Leica II D, my info is around 15000 where made in chrome.</p>

<p>This is definitively a fake, you can easily tell fakes from genuine Leicas by the frame of the rectangular window, the Leicas have a step between the upper frame edge and the top plate while on the russian fakes the upper edge is flush with the top plate.</p>

<p>A real fake</p>

<p>Thanks Guys for your fast response.<br>

Apart from what Winfried mentioned about the frame, are there any thing else that we can look out for to spot a fake?</p>

<p>It's pretty common for our rather resourceful friends in eastern europe to scour the chrome off a russian camera, engrave "Leica" on it, apply some tacky snakeskin, and call it a Leica.</p>

<p>The plus side is that it will work great as an actual shooter.</p>

<p>Winfried's clue is the most obvious. Other tell-tales include the brass finish - this is common, because the fakers have to strip the chrome in order to re-engrave the top. If you look at the cam follower - the lever that buts up against the cam on the lens, and communicates the focus of the lens to the RF mechanism - the Leica original is circular, whereas that part on a Zorkii or Fed is more of a teardrop shape, and doesn't rotate.If the shutter release has a socket for a cable release, that is another warning sign (although a few Leicas might feature this). Do some Googling, somewhere there is a good site with photos of both.</p>

<p>Once you've seen a few of both, even the leatherette is different, the Soviet version is more plasticky and crude, and you'll notice where they've burned the 'Leica' logo into the nose of the leather case. Not that I'm dissing their cameras - one day, perhaps a genuine, unaltered Fed or Zorki will be a rarity.</p>

<p>The common theme with these "is it a fake or not" is the NEVER show an image of the cam follower area.<br>

It is like asking if a car is real; but folks cannot show or will not show an image of the engine area. Thus we fart around looking at external features<br>

<br /> As Paul mentioned; a Leica has a cam roller follower; Zorki's and Feds have pie/wedge cams with no roller. In a few super rare fakes there HAS been a crude roller a fixed to a Zorki or Fed; it is hard to do. Thus if there is no roller follower; it is a fake. If the roller looks odd and crude; compare it to another Leica.<br>

<br /> It is a real Porsche 911 or a converted VW bug? Let us ask a million experts with crude blurred images; with never the hood/boot/enegine compartment being open!<br>

<br /> It is in the DNA of folks who ask these questions to never show clear images; to never show an image of the cam follower area; it is like UFO images. Is it a garbage can lid or UFO?<br>

<br /> ****Many times they never show the lens removed since it is not their camera; it is one on an auction; a friends camara; or one at a pawn shop.<br>

<br /> A fake Leica with a roller cam is a rare bird; I saw one at a camera show several years ago. If it has no roller; it is a fake. If it does have a roller; it probably is real; but it is not 100 percent a valid test since a few fakes have been made with crude rollers.<br>

<br /> If the body has military markings; engravings with generals names; or has that Elvis wild paint job; the fake meter points more towards the fake zone.<br>

<br /> Folks would rather post 1000 external images of a car or camera then one with the lens removed or hood popped; to add to the X-Files ; ie UFOology; ie Leicalogy of being vage! :)</p>

<p>For reference, there's a photo of a Soviet, or 'fake' cam follower on <a href="../leica-rangefinders-forum/00Hp3v">this thread</a> . You'll see it's roughly triangular, or a teardrop shape.</p>

<p>Your first photo featured another tell-tale, the flashy 'lizard-skin' cover. Together with the brass finish, this would be all the clue you need to walk away without even taking off the lens.</p>

<p>The seriel number would make this a II model from 1932 -- the window frame is wrong and, one presumes, the cam follower for the rangefinder. In addition to lacking the step, the frame around the finder window on this camera is also flush with the top -- on a real II it is a distinctly separate window with an edge between the frame and the top of the camera almost as if it is a separate piece of metal screwed on.<br>

Leicas, even of this vintage, also have a much better build quality inside than a Zorki or a Fed. Once you've handled a few real Leicas, you can spot a fake with your eyes closed.</p>

<p>"Leicas, even of this vintage, also have a much better build quality inside than a Zorki or a Fed."<br>

I do not really agree with this. I have a Leica IIIa (built in the 1930s) and a FED1g (from the last series). Well, the Leica obviously was used a lot, it has a lot of brassing, and the FED seemed to be almost unused. But there is no real difference in workmanship, everything fits and works neatly on the FED.</p>

 

<p>It's really not necessary to see the cam follower. Winfried's method of checking the finder window frame is, in itself, pathognomonic--a dead giveaway all by itself--of a fake. If the top of that window frame is flush with the top plate, it's fake.</p>