Barnack Leica Love

This may not be a big deal, or fantastic, or new lol .....

 

But! I thought I would share.

 

I own a Leica III (believed to be converted to a IIIa due to the 1/1000 shutter). The lens I purchased an OG, the 3.5 Elmar 5cm, post war coating. They look so good together...

 

 

I had this camera for almost two years without shooting it. Finally, I have had time to gather chemicals, a scanner, and film!

 

...And most of the exposures came out far too underexposed due to shooting indoors. Oops!

 

But the ones that did come out came out great. I can't wait to take this camera out more, it feels great on the hand (small female hands) and the little 'ziiiip!' of the shutter sounds great. I also have a 1.4 S.C Nikkor for the camera I'll have to give a shot. Show me your love for your Barnack, and what other lenses do you like?

 

The good images :

 

My free model (aka sister!)

 

 

Patient kayaks waiting for spring.

 

Little shovel.

 

All shot on Ilford HP5+, developed with Cinestill Monobath, and scanned with an Epson V600. First time home developing and scanning. Thanks for looking!

Great shots. Welcome to the forum. And a great camera. HP5 is good, and you've done it a treat. If you can, try FP4 as well. Lens choice? I think that the prophet, Oscar Barnack (I am almost tempted to add, 'blessed be his name', but won't) probably only thought in 'normal' 50mm lens terms. If you want, the 35mm summaron is very good. I have to say, though, the zeiss (aka cosina) LTM's are exceptional. But you will need add-on viewfinders - a PINTA. You may find a yellow filter a good add on. Best wishes. Keep the shots coming. Regards, Arthur (apiarist1)

Glad to see another convert. The Barnacks are really fun and there are a wide assortment of lenses for them these days giving the full range of renditions from classic to crisp modern. The 50/3.5 Elmar perhaps the most classic of all!

I recently purchased a Zorki E in order to try out an Elmar 3.5 thread mount (f3.5, 4.5, 6.3 etc.) that I've owned since the 1950's (originally purchased to use as an enlarger lens). The Zorki has no strap lugs so I had to buy a Barnack field case to avoid dropping it. Then I had to buy a tripod socket bushing to adapt the case screw to the Zorki tripod socket. Even the Zorkis are mesmerizing.

I used a Leica III in the field in 1963. I found it to be usable, although I much preferred my Heiland Pentax H2. I finally got an M3 and I confess I love it.

 

I am happy for you-- shooting these is, as we've discussed elsewhere, a wonderful kind of time travel - recherche du temps perdu

Great shots. Welcome to the forum. And a great camera. HP5 is good, and you've done it a treat. If you can, try FP4 as well. Lens choice? I think that the prophet, Oscar Barnack (I am almost tempted to add, 'blessed be his name', but won't) probably only thought in 'normal' 50mm lens terms. If you want, the 35mm summaron is very good. I have to say, though, the zeiss (aka cosina) LTM's are exceptional. But you will need add-on viewfinders - a PINTA. You may find a yellow filter a good add on. Best wishes. Keep the shots coming. Regards, Arthur (apiarist1)

 

 

Thank you! I actually got FP4 as a Christmas gift in both 35 and 120: the Leica will definitely get one (Maybe two?) of those rolls! That will have to wait for a sunny day. Thanks for the lens recommendations : when I got the camera, it did come with a small Dejur accessory shoe viewfinder for 38mm. Odd length, but it could work on a pinch of I find a nice lens first. I'm in need of a yellow filter, I find myself wanting just a touch more contrast in my photos for personal taste.

The yellow will add a touch of contrast particularly in outdoor shots. As most of my work these days is scanned and post processed, I can do most modest contrast adjustments online, but it does help to have the best possible exposure on the negative.

I love the Barnacks. That's despite their slow operation and crappy viewfinders. I owned quite a few, but I sold them all. Yes, a very bad mistake. I will eventually get one (or two) again. The lenses aren't cheap, though.

I agree that the viewfinder is something to be desired , especially on my IIIa where both are separate. Mine does need a cleaning and I think it'll brighten up at least some.

 

The lenses are not cheap at all. Somehow I've managed to score a few, some I'm very lucky to have found at a rotary sale. I saved them, knowing Right now I've got:

 

Coated post war Elmar f/3.5, 5cm

135mm f/4.5 Hektor (hazy though)

Nikkor H, f/1.4 50mm; big, heavy and beautiful

Nikkor 8.5cm f/2

Canon Serenar, f/3.5 50mm (oil on elements).

 

The Nikkors I found at the rotary sale and they are as clear amnd perfect as can be. SO heavy though lol, all brass and glass. The Hektor I have due to a friend finding it in some of the parent's junk; now where's the camera lol

Edited February 9, 2020 by katie_pype

You've done well. The hektor -well,what to say. Leitz did make some wonderful lenses. But the hektor. Ah. Hang onto the nikkor's - their optical pedrigree owes more to zeiss than leitz (a post 2nd WW phenomenon - patents, etc). If they are clean, they will bring you that classic zeiss look. The oil on the serenar should not be a problem with a rangefinder. You can live with it. But if you are meticulous, get an accomplished and reliable technician to clean it. It will cost. And you need to weigh up if its worth it. I myself (εγο ειμι) think we participate in the past in cherishing for the present, and holding on for the future, these things. Now: 'where's the camera'? Tell me - where is the camera?

Nice images Katie_Pype.

My first real Leica was a IIIa as well. Love at first use!

 

Arthur, what's wrong with Hektors? Yes, the 135mm f/4.5 is a bit unwieldy with the long focus throw, but it does what it does well enough. Well worth the money they go for these days. ( I love my 5cm f/2.5 Hektor by the way. )

 

The 90mm f/4 Elmar is another underrated beauty. Great for portraits.

Arthur has a valid point with the f4.5 Hektor 135. Assuming it is a good, clean coated version, wide open it is acceptable in the center, but I found it very soft otherwise. It is useful like the 90 Elmar as it seems to give a very pleasant out of focus background when used as a head and shoulders portrait lens. Both the Hektor and Elmar need hoods as they flare. Stopped down both are pretty good. I do use a tripod with the Hektor and that seems to help. Where I get my most use from the Hektor is using the optical unit for macro with the Visoflex and bellows. Further on the subject of medium focal length LTM lenses, I was lucky when I was given a Canon 100 f3.5 LTM. It it light, a stop faster than the Elmar 90 and noticeably sharper.

There's a very interesting find over on l-camera-forum. A guy goes to an estate auction and comes across an old Leica, which he knows nothing about, and puts in a bid (presumably not much). Nobody else bothers, so he gets the camera, No 360001. Then he finds conflicting information about the model on a couple of serial number lists, posts some pictures, and asks the forum for advice. Maybe it's a fake of some kind?:

 

Auction Find

 

It turns out to be an extremely rare IIId (basically a 'stepper' IIIc with a self-timer). But not just any IIId, the first IIId. And since the IIId, at least by serial number, preceded the IIIc, it is (if genuine) a landmark Leica, not only the first with a self-timer, but also the progenitor of all the cameras that used the new die-cast construction method, including the IIIc, IIIf and IIIg. It's off to Germany for authentication.

Wouldn't you love to know the back history on this one.