Leather Camera Case Longevity

I have several older (pre 1970) leather camera cases for an Argus C3, three

Iskras, Yashica GT and a Zorki 4 which are in surprisingly good shape.

 

I have five 1970's and newer Canon cameras that have disintegrated cases. They

really just fall apart. I seldom see a newer Canon camera with a case.

 

What happened to Canon (and other mfg) camera cases after the early 70s? Did

the Canon rangefinder cameras have decent cases? Regards.

I've bought a lot of cameras and cases, and I can't see any rhyme or reason why some make it. Probably due more to climate and other factors. I pulled out a very expensive Nikon case from the early 80' the other day, and even though it hasn't been touched in years, it was losing its black finish and starting to come apart. Yet I sit here next to a couple of pristine cases from some 50's vintage Argus'. I think it's hard to say.

I can't speak for other brands, but the Konica Auto S2 has a remarkably strong, high quality leather case (superb) and the Auto S2 has one that is made of soft vinyl that self destructs in hot climates.

 

Did someone somewhere in the late 1960's make an executive decision about the quality of all camera cases?

 

Andrew.

Synthetic materials?

 

Lots of grades of leather out there, too.

Andrew, your post is confusing. I have several Konica auto S2s with nice leather cases, but they used some form of inserts that has turned in yellowish powder over the years. The cases themselves are still fine, as are the cameras. Pretty good, for a camera I bought brand new in viet nam in 1966 for about $35.

The best cases I see are those using tan leather, a plastic insert to keep the shape and loads of chromed brass to hold it all together (as with the 1950's and 60's Kodak Retina cases). These often still look good today, and only break through wear (constant bending of the leather).

 

Newer synthetic cases from the 70's like those for the Nikon FE, olympus Trip and all those with a white fibre 'base' and black material bonded on seem to disintergrate by flaking and going tacky.

 

The 1980's synthetic cases made with solid plastic material seem to last better.

 

The prices for used ever-ready cases for the Nikon FE in complete condition on ebay are astronomical!

 

Ian, UK

Some of the plastics and especially the foams used in cameras and camera accessories in the 1970s and 80s proved to be unstable and would break down over time or in the presence of certain solvents, such as synthetic oils. True leather cases, if properly cared for, should last virtually forever. The threads that hold them together will often fail long before the case itself.

The plastic case of my user Konica S3 is still as good as the first day it was used, over 30 years ago. While the cases of my two spare S3 are still in the boxes and have developed sticky plastic exteriors. I presume it's because of the constant exposure of the one to fresh air and daylight but I have no idea the mechanism.

Most Canon cases are vinyl over cardboard. They craze and crack with age leaving you with hundreds of black 'snowflakes'. Truly awful. Ricoh cases seem to be the same. The older the case, the more likely it is to be real leather or at least quality vinyl. The best cases I've seen come with the Zeiss Ikoflex, real leather with velvet lining. The worst cases come with Russian cameras. They stink - but at least they are leather.

David, if you have FSU camera cases that stink, I would toss them out. I've heard the smelly ones are that way because they were tanned with urine.

I suppose I have repaired several hundred Leica ER cases and found that except for rotted stitching the leather is long enduring if properly maintained; if not it soon crumbles or rips. Stitching around the retaining screw is practically impossible to repair without removing the screw, and that is a near impossible chore in itself. I have Benser cases that came apart within a year of purchase ('60s), re-stitched with waxed linen and sill sound today. It's all in the quality of the material and the way it is maintained.

I have a cupboard full of leather cases for Russian cameras. The leather is indestructible but the stitching rots out. A lot of the cases for Nikons in the '80s weren't leather--some sort of white material covered with black plastic. The plastic started flaking off after a few years.

It seems to vary a lot. Some of the leather cases I've had are not exactly synthetic, but they're some kind of poor quality gray suede-like stuff with a hard coating on it. As soon as the coating cracks off, the leather itself is like cheap felt. It doesn't fall apart right away, but it's ugly. On the other hand, some others of similar vintage are fine. The case for my Konica T3 appears to be indestructible, while that of a contemporary Yashica might just as well have been made of paper bags. Similarly, some of my old Nikon stuff is durable as anything, but the case for my 400/5.6 AI lens is made of that felt-like junk, and every time you touch something a chunk falls off. I finally had to scrape off all the finish, and rub it down with shoe polish. It looks terrible now, but at least it doesn't shed. Some time in the 60's I went to some camera store in NY and bought a case for my Leica IIIb out of a bin, for 5 bucks. It is still nearly perfect.

In my younger days, for a while I was a leather craftsman. I worked for a company that produced various stuff (belts, wallets) and I did custom orders (among other things), making briefcases and the like.

 

One thing I found out is that there are a number of different processes used for tanning leather. There are also a number of different types of dye materials, of vastly different chemical composition. These all have an enormous impact on the longevity of the stuff.

 

Regarding leather tanned in urine: I don't believe it. I think it's one of those urban myths that got started even before my time in the business (the '70s) and should be laid to rest. However, those cases might be made of poor quality hide, poorly tanned and processed.

 

There is also the matter of how the leather is cared for once in the consumer's hands. But -- as many of you have noted -- there is wild variation from product to product. For many of those products, mainly the poor-quality ones, the potential for longevity is out of the consumer's hands. Crap leather just won't last very long.

 

Hope this helps.

Yeah.. my experience the same as most here... it varies.. One mentioned the high replacement cost for plastic/synthetic cases

another mentioned Yashica as matted paper... They want 25US$

for an FX series SLR case! My case got soaked in a downpour

one day and because of the papaer content swelled and broke all the glued seams.. I still have it as dust protector. I think the tanning process plays a big role and the material thickness. My Russian leather is thick! Some of the German leather of the sixties is thin and now brittle from age and storage. There was a thread about smells

a week ago.. Interesting how we as humans experience our joys in life!

I have had such good luck with the old Rollei TLR cases, but they tend to wear out where the knobs come through. The last beautifully made case I remember for 35 was the leather case for the R3 Leica. I don't use them anymore, for me they really are 'neveready'. Especially inconvenient for TLR's.

Some of the Nikon FB camera cases (the ones with the lens mount plate in the bottom) used a synthetic that self-destructed after 5 years or so. Others were leather and are still in good shape. The Japanese manufacturers often seemed to have trouble making durable plastics.

 

Just a caution, be careful before trusting your wonderful old treasure to a 50- or 60-year old leather strap.

I've seen few Minolta SLR cases from the '70s that lasted over the years, but conversely my Mamiya/Sekor and Miranda cases are in very good shape. I have no idea what their construction is, though. Older cases from the '50s and '60s seem to be better constructed and are usually all leather - My Primo Jr. and Yashica TLR cases are in excellent shape, as is my Retinette case. The only problems are stiffness and the resulting cracks. Heck, even my Kodak Pony cases are in fine shape. I guess it's the (cheaper) unstable materials and adhesives that doom most cases.

I admit I had to "air out" one of the Iskra cases, must have belonged to a heavy smoker. After that it cleaned up nicely. The intent of this post was to confirm what I've experienced. I haven't learned though, just bought a nice looking F1-n case. DUMB. Regards.

Dear all, as I am from Ukraine (i.e. FSU state, now independent from Russia after nearly 350 years of slavery), and I know the soviet kitchen from the inside, I dare say a few words regarding statements of James Lai (I've heard the smelly ones are that way because they were tanned with urine) and Michael Hendrickson (I don't believe it. I think it's one of those urban myths ... and should be laid to rest. However, those cases might be made of poor quality hide, poorly tanned and processed).

 

I don't believe it either, though the belief in this case is a poor argument. I have a real leather case too for my German (about 1938) dual-frame Welta Weltur. Exept for the front with little spiderweb-like fractures (if I am correct in English) and some rotten threads on top, which I don't care yet (just in project), otherwise it is wonderful, even the velvet inside. Not like new but very close. It was rather crispy dry when it came to me, and I faced the same problem of how to preserve it. From my experience, which really works: Saddle sope first then Vaseline (there were some threads in the web on the subject). As I could not get here either Lexol or SnoSeal, or other like products, I tried Vaseline - first on the belt and sparengly, then more thickly and rubbing it in. Left it hanning on a rope for a couple of days to soak. The result was fine - the leather became soft and flexible. The same I did with the case itself. Repeat if needed. Though go sparenly, perhaps. When the Vaseline completely soaks into the case you may treat it with good shoo-polish cream and buffed. Some dye, nut-brown as a rule, may be applied after Saddle sope and drying (I did in some places).

 

As for tanning with urine. Once, when I got interested myself in the leather manufacture processes, tanning including, - just to know the types of leather used on old cameras, I found there the info on tanning with urine. Yes, it's true and possible. Though. This process was (and I believe is still) widely used by the inhabitants of the Far North of Russia in the tundra region where no other sutable materials could be found. They specially collected the urine (human?) in the barrels which was then used for tanning the deerskin. I have also no info on such process be used by the native Alaskan people, maybe.

 

Thus the leather can be tanned this way. Though it's highly problematic to be used commercially in the former russian empire - you may call it FSU. Sooner it was really "poorly tanned and processed".

"Regarding leather tanned in urine: I don't believe it."<p> If you had lived in Alaska in the '60's and got downwind of a native made parky or pair of oogruk mucklucks you'd believe it. When not in use I used to hang my 'lucks out the window of the Northward Bldg in Faibanks, and the apartment still reeked from just passing through! I have several FSU cases and they smell much the same!

Hi, guys, again,

 

Just checked the tread and found interesting info from Tom Flanders. To end this and close this my threading I'd like you to go Google for <urine "leather tanning"> - you'll find a lot on the subject, especially on using urine in tanning in Meadeval times in Europe, Asia and North Africa - mostly urine (cattle)and dung of some animals or birds (dogs or pigeons). They also widely used the urine of children and women (more preferable against men's), for which purpose there were webs of "piss-pots" located on street corners, where human urine could be collected for use in tanneries or by washerwomen. It was combination of urine, animal feces and decaying flesh that made ancient tanneries so odiferous - as Wikipedia states.

 

Nevertheles, I don't believe the soviets used urine for tanning hides to produce cases for cameras. I remember well the original smell of NEW cases (freshly made), nothing common with urine. Maybe in time, because of action of fungi, they acquired an unpleasant odour. Moreover, the soviets had always preferred artificial products (chemistry) to those natural. They hated everything natural - in economy and in society development. They were lazy too to go natural.