Fake or real Leica?

<p>Hi, I would appreciate any help in determining exactly what type of camera body I have here. <br /> Thanks in advance.<br /><img src="http://www.photo.net/photodb/member-photos?user_id=9060597" alt="" /></p>

<p>Could be either based on the information you provided (need more).</p>

<p>Sorry, new to board and having trouble putting images in question I posted.</p>

<div></div>

<p>Here are a few more images, hopefully!<img src="/leica-rangefinders-forum/rsz_front_view" alt="" /></p><div></div>

<p><img src="/leica-rangefinders-forum/rsz_front_view" alt="" /></p><div></div>

<p>Lacking any engraving or serial number could be FSU (Russian or Ukranian) clever Leica I copy?</p>

<p>Doesn't appear to be any Leica I'm familiar with. Probably a FSU body using Leica design characteristics.</p>

<p>Compared with genuine Leica I<br>

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/Leica_I_(model_A)<br>

your camera seems to have the large shutter release button surround characteristic of Russian copies.<br>

Not all do - this<br>

https://www.etsy.com/uk/listing/249716913/fed-1-vintage-soviet-film-camera-leica-i?utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=shopping_uk_en_gb_high-electronics_and_accessories-cameras-cameras&utm_custom1=19cc25f2-dd70-48ed-956a-2fdb590e873e&kpid=249716913engb&gclid=CPSF5uPwq8gCFcFf2wodlj8DDg<br>

would be hard to tell from the real thing if not for the gaudy paintwork and of course the engraving. </p>

<p>This seems like a tough one. The usual russian copy is easy to see but this one has a lot of good matches to early Leicas like the Model C. The control positions are in the right places too, though there is no engraving around the base of the shutter speed dial nor is there any serial number. The shutter release is russian like as well. It seems to me that either it's some kind of real Leica model or a Russian one with a LOT of effort put into the forgery. Plus the Russian ones are usually more showy.</p>

<p>Maybe you should query Leica. Usually when you open up Russian forgeries, the actual internals are clearly lower in quality as well and we can't see that here, but I guess I don't know.</p>

<p>I think it it is a Russian copy. The workmanship is not good enough to be a Leica, quite apart from the lack of engraving.</p>

<p>Thanks everyone for your input. The camera does have engraving around the shutter speed dial. It says "Ernst Leitz D.R.P. Wetzlar". The engraving is very light. However, it does not have a serial number. I would love to post additional photos but seem to be running afoul of the administrator by adding them to my responses. Thanks again.</p>

<p>Take a well-lit picture of the bottom with the bottom plate removed. That's where the Russian crudeness shows.</p>

<p>I took your suggestion Mr. Griffin and sent an email to Leica.</p><div></div>

<p>It does look crude. Back when I had a couple of these Soviet Leica copies (one made to look like a Leica and one with its original Soviet markings) and also a real Leica IIIf, the level of quality inside was REALLY different. The Leica was superbly finished and smooth as silk. The Russian was crude. It worked, but the quality was evident.</p>

<p>The only way this could really be a Leica would be if it were some kind of one off demo version. That's unlikely but since this seems like it's probably a more "serious" forgery, rather than the type of Russian Leica which is obvious just by looking at it for a second, it's worth some analysis.</p>

<p>Typically these forgeries don't worry me because they're so ridiculously inadequate as forgeries that they're more funny than disturbing. </p>

<p>Nothing about the shutter release is Russian. Russian "Leicas" have a regular cable release hole in the middle if the release. The funnel-shaped collar in the photo around the release was a normal Leica-NY aftermarket item, not Russian. In spite of people's vague impression of "crude", which early Leicas share, I don't see any uniquely Russian characteristics here.</p>

<p>You would be better advised to go to a Leica-specific board, where people are more informed about fakes.</p>

<p>In the internal photo, the details around the cassette well, including the shape of what Leitz calls the 'V2 lock' in the manual, look like those in a Leica rather than a FED or a Zorki, though the screws on the long spring seem mismatched, suggesting a third party repair. The positions of the screws (or screw holes) on the top and bottom plates also look correct for a Leica, as does the shape of the accessory shoe with its front stop and side indentations. The flared shutter release collar doesn't tell us much - presumably it unscrews. Is that some sort of flash sync mod on the shutter speed dial? No idea about the lack of serial number, etc. It doesn't look crude to me, but I don't think the photos and overall condition are doing it any favours.</p>

<p>Looking at this page: http://www.l39sm.co.uk/leica-reid-fakes.php it looks like a Fed. The Fed only has two notches in the shutter tensioner nuts on the left, the Zorki as four, and the Leica has six.<br>

On the other hand the retainer for the bottom latch looks more like on the Leica.<br>

Are the four screws on the front in the vulcanite blackened, or just painted black?</p>

 

<p>Yes, the flared shutter release collar unscrews. <br>

Also, of the four screws in the vulcanite, two are blackened and two appear just to be painted black on the upper portion, that is a few threads and the screw head. </p>

<p>So the bits all look Leica to me. Leica I & II internals look like this, and there are holes in the right places. It looks mid to late 1930's Leica Standard, Model E, mostly because of the chrome.<br>

With the top view; If Steve didn't photoshop the SN and Leitz engravings out, then the top plate and dial surround may have been re-chromed, and lost the SN during preparation. That would also account for a very pale Ernst Leitz around the speed dial.<br>

Could there be a graphite pencil copy of the SN inside the body where you can see it?</p>

 

<p>Good morning Mr. Elwing, nothing has been photoshopped I can assure you. It took me two hours to figure out how to resize and post the photos you see! My question, naive perhaps, is what would be the advantage/purpose of me photoshopping out the serial number?</p>

 

<p>I am not saying you did, but I don't know you. Some folk will test others, or try and make things more interesting, and this example is a highly unusual example. Even fakes will always have serial numbers, so the absence of same must be accounted for. Nothing personal; sorry if you feel slandered.</p>

No offense taken. This is one of the last pieces in my late father-in laws collection. Everything in the collection was

straightforward, except this one. This is the reason I turned to the forum.

The only other marking I see is what looks like a lower case "d" stamped on the inside of the bottom piece. I'll try adding

another photo.

Thanks<div></div>

<p>It is possible that the top plate was vigorously cleaned (sand blasted, wire wool etc) to make the crude top, but one has to wonder why someone would do this. The other possibility is that it is some kind of Frankestein Leica, made up of a mix of parts from more than one camera.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Looking at this page: <a href="http://www.l39sm.co.uk/leica-reid-fakes.php" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://www.l39sm.co.uk/leica-reid-fakes.php</a> it looks like a Fed. The Fed only has two notches in the shutter tensioner nuts on the left, the Zorki as four, and the Leica has six.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I think that's something that was different in earlier Leicas, e.g. in this 1930 model:<br>

http://www.trenholm.org/hmmerk/Kalbledr.pdf<br>

and in figures 3 & 11 of this 1930s manual:<br>

http://www.cameramanuals.org/leica_pdf/leica_iiia-1.pdf<br>

I think the FED was copying the earlier Leica design here, but the Leica V2 lock in figure 11 is distinct and looks like the one in Steven's camera (note the curved cut-outs for the nuts).</p>