Leica Conversion Conundrums

[steve salmons]

I have recently acquired a Leica II converted from a Leica I (Model A)

SN 24650 which has led me upon a very enjoyable trail of detective

work trying to establish what was done to the camera and when.

This made me realize that while there is oodles of info on Leica

freely available out there,there is precious little on the whole

process the owner went through to get an upgrade done. Was there a

sliding scale of charges ever published or a range of "from/to"

options. Was the method through a dealer or directly via the

distibutor/factory? Other limitations or options?

I have attached a picture of the camera and would welcome comment on

the conclusions I have drawn:

The camera started life in 1930 as a Model A. The SN,nickel fittings

and the hole in the film pressure plate bear this out.

The "DBP"(Deutsches Bundes Patent)in the top-plate engraving indicate

a post war conversion of the late 1940s/early 1950s.And what a

conversion job: removal of the hockey stick infinity focus lock and

complete vulcanite renewal and then addition of a chrome rangefinder

housing and full repaint in black.

This begs a couple of questions:

Why if the owner was getting an upgrade did he/she only upgrade to the

Leica II spec at this much later period?Cost or limited options?

The other thing that grabbed my attention is the difference in the

shape of the r/f housing and the extra screw by the shutter speed

dial. The bevelled shoulder portion around the shutter speed dial is

much less pronounced than on regular production Leicas. I wonder if

this was a special housing used on conversion jobs only.

In Gianni Rogliatti's book "Leica ,The First 60 Years, on page 58,

there is a picture of an early black Leica which has been converted to

a IIIa with flash synch. This exhibits the same minimal bevelling and

engraving. He also explains that where a black camera was being

converted to a model made in chrome only,then the chrome parts were

always refinished in black at the factory.

In the same book he also has a picture of a Canada built Leica 72 with

this same minimal bevelling but without the screw by the shutter speed

dial.

Any further pointers much appreciated

Steve S<div></div>

[james_baker6]

I don't have any answers to your questions but I must say, it certainly is a handsome Leica !!!

[jorn ake]

You might check with Westlicht in Vienna Austria as they have a fairly extensive Leica museum, as well as being associated with the Leica Shop in Vienna. Peter Coeln is the person who might be able to help you there. Otherwise you might contact Leica-Solms directly.

[john_shriver]

Someone recently noted here that one advantage of upgrades is that they were considered "repairs", and thus were not subject to the rather substantial excise taxes and/or tarrifs that various countries (including the United States) charged on imported cameras. This was happening back in the "protectionist" era of international trade. Kodak had to be protected from all those "foreigners" willing to work for low wages.

 

I remember leaving the country with a Japanese camera around 1970, and having to have customs at the airport certify that that particular camera was already "in" the country, so that we would not have to pay duty on it when returning.

[Rob F.]

It may or may not be helpful to note that although the serial number does correspond to 1930, and to model 1, that there were apparently two variations of the 1. The "A" had the hockey stick, but the "C" did not. The "C" accepted interchangeable lenses, which the "A" did not. The 1930 "C" mount was however "non-standard" in that the lenses had to be hand-matched to the camera. In 1931, the mount was made standard, yet the camera was still designated as the 1 "C".

 

I would imagine that yours has the standard interchangeable mount, owing to its having been upgraded. But it's possible that it started as a "C" in which case it would not have had a hockey stick.

 

Does that add anything?

 

BTW, I don't think it's hard to email Jim Lager, if you want.

[frank_scheitrowsky1]

Russian fake. ;)

[steve salmons]

Thanks for the feedback.

I hadn't considered contacting any of the cognoscenti on this. Maybe a bit presumptuous of me to think they would take time out to answer.

But I will try to dig out email addresses for Peter Coeln and Jim Lager. Could try Hasbroeck too while I am at it.

Rob,there were two other reasons why I thought it likely that this started life as a Model A.

1 The Rogliatti book says Model C production didn't start till 1931. It is possible that some of the serial number range 21811 to 34450 allocated in 1930 didn't go into use till 1931. That would account for it but it is a relatively low serial no. in the range and there were lots of Model As made.

2 The vulcanite just looks too damn good to be 75 years old. The finish on my III is almost smooth and its ten years younger!

 

Frank, this is absolutely not a Russian fake............perhaps it's just a very,very good Polish one. (Ho Ho Ho)But would they have gone to the trouble of drilling a sighting hole through the film pressure plate? Well maybe if they were very,very,very good.

Thanks again for your interest

Steve S.

[roland_haid]

I am no Leica expert but I think you have to consider the following:

 

In the late 40ies, supply of everything was poor (money was there but wasn't worth anything) in Germany. So a Leica I to II is the cheapest upgrade. The parts (rangefinder house) for the upgrade could be older stock from late war years, although it is unclear why it is chromed then. If there were old stock parts (or non-regular) in the shops, it is likely to use them for such upgrades then for the regular line.

[steve salmons]

Roland, I too am no expert but I love the process of trying to get at the facts from information that I can unearth. I think you make a very valid point regarding the social and economic conditions prevalent in the immediate post war years. This was very much a time of make do and mend.Only the most well off could have afforded a Leica upgrade at this time.So perhaps I am trying to find a pattern or set of rules where none existed.Another thought is that it may well have been owned by a user outside Germany facing import restrictions on new equipment from Germany.

In some ways it would have been wonderful if all cameras came with a log book. I often wonder about the previous owners of some of my "oldies", what they were like and where the cameras have been and the sights they have recorded. Not only a camera detective but a romantic too eh?

Steve S

[Richard Williams]

I don't know if this is at all authoritative, but the Hove 'Leica Pocket Book' has a chart of available conversions. I don't have it with me, but AFAIR it was possible to upgrade a I all the way to 'IIIa sync' specification (all the shutter speeds and IIIf-style flash sync). Maybe the owner simply had no need for the extra speeds (how often are the slow speeds really used by most people?) or flash (which is sacrilege with a Leica, anyway :-) )

[john dorfman]

Steve, the minimal beveling was to leave room for the numbers 0 to 20 to be

engraved around the shutter speed dial, in the case of a full IIIf-style synch

conversion. On your camera they just left it blank. The synched version is what the

handbook referred to as a "IIIa synch" -- i.e., IIIa body shape and shutter with IIIf

(black dial) style synch. The Leica 72 had this feature as well, I believe. To see a very

nice example of such a conversion, go to this link:

 

http://www.schouten-select.org/collectables/IIF23750.html

[steve salmons]

Richard, I take your point about the slow speeds and the flash capability. If I was doing a conversion job right now,I reckon I too would go for the low spec configuration. But if I was back there in 1950 with one camera that had to everything and electronic flash in its early days....well my decision would likely have been different. Whoever did this was either short of money for the full upgrade or was admirably single minded and clear sighted about the strengths of the Leica system.

John,That is is a great link to some wonderful photographs of the synched IIIa. Engraving and r/f housing identical to mine. This reinforces the idea I had that their was an r/f housing used specifically to accomodate upgrades from early cameras. It just happened to get used on the 72 as well.

[anthony_brookes5]

I have the prices in pounds sterling for the conversions somewhere. I will try to dig them out.