Great description of the Barnacks .

[Dave16]

Harry,

you wrote

"Old Oskar designed a compact, ergonomic and pocketable camera"

What a great description of the 111c!

 

I love this camera. IMO much, much easier and nicer to shoot than the

M6.

[richard s.]

Great description of the Leica II as well! Never owned an M, but every time I pick one up I

remark how big and ungainly they are compared to my Barnack. And with a collapsible

lens (I have an Elmar 50 f3,5 and a Heliar 50 f3,5) they really are pocketable.

 

Beautiful cameras to shoot as well, so simple. I know this goes against what many say,

but I really do think that my photography has improved dramatically since getting my

Barnack last year.

[robweatherburn]

I've worked with III, IIIb, IIIc, and IIIf. These cameras fit the hands perfectly - neither too big nor too small - and are beautifully balanced. Of these I prefer to work with my IIIb - just a fraction smaller than the c and f - and I mostly use two 50mm elmars; coated and uncoated. I like the positive feel and shape of the Barnacks, and the spread and seamlessness of the tonal range with the smooth creamy look of the images the elmars can produce - if I get it right!

 

I also use a Summar and a Summitar, but their size makes the camera just a little bulkier. I carry a 90mm uncoated Elmar, and the magnification of the rangefinder of the IIIb gives me a good idea of the image I want if I don't have an alternative finder with me.

 

Recently I bought a 1930 IA - blinds full of holes to start! - but after just one film I realised what a joy it is to use! Fractionally smaller - really the height of the nobs - than the IIs or IIIs, but the same comfortable and practical feel Focus? - well, you soon get used to judging distance, and I'm not saying it is the camera for all occasions. But great to carry around for everyday use.

 

Rob

[working camera]

You Barnak guys are an interesting mob.

 

To me an M3 offers one of the most pleasurable photographing experiences. It lends a freedom though its compact size and sheer simplicity.

 

I've played with a couple but only ever had the pleasure of putting just one film through a Barnack, an early production I and many years ago. I must say the bare bones photography offered by that little camera was a great experience. You aint done 35mm photography 'less you have used a Barnack.

 

But I shall content myself by slumming with 'Oskar B' my SS M3. I like the luxury of VF I can see and focus through way to much. But its nice to know folk are out there doing it properly with barnacks.

[anthony_brookes5]

I have a III which I bought from an estate in 1981. It was fitted with a Summar but on going through the items that came with the purchase was a brand new f3.5 Elmar which I assume came with the purchase as both lenses were on the invoice. I have never used it and it sits in its original tissue paper and unmarked box. Maybe I shall get it out and give it an airing. Just imagine a brand new 1936 lens could well be having its first film. Can't be many others like that. I too prefer using my III for its shere handiness.

[paul_neuthaler]

How about Erich Salomon's Ermanox? How far back do we go? Craig, I'm with you re: the M3.

[victorm.]

I've owned and used a IIIf since 1969-it's my all time favourite camera-and I hate it when they're pretentiously referred to as "Barnacks".

[gerald_mullen1]

Hello: I have owned and used M3's and all the Barnacks from my

first, which was a IIIA with a 50 Elmar, IIIB, IIIC, both IIIF's

BD and RD and a IIIG. I now own & use two IIIC's. with 35 and 50

Elmars(1930's). I feel that the Barnacks are easier to handle

at least for me. They are the epitome of mechanical design,con-

sider that both my IIIC's were built in 1943, and are still

operating beautifully. Had both CLA's by Essex in N.J.one of

them has the quitest shutter of ANY of my Leicas.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder however, and it's all subjective

The main thing is that they are Leica cameras. 'Nuff said'

Gerry

[jtk]

For the only important advance past IIIF, consider a Canon P.

[r s]

I've lately been getting more and more interested in trying out a Barnack camera. What is a good site that shows the differences between all the various models? My own limited research has so far highlighted the IIIc (seems to be a very solid feeling body) and the IIIf and IIIg.

[dan flanders]

*I've owned and used a IIIf since 1969-it's my all time favourite camera-and I hate it when they're pretentiously referred to as "Barnacks".* <p> One story has it that Barnack laid a straightedge across the tops of the advance and rewind knobs and stated that should be the defining paramater of the Leica. The IIIc was lengthened about an eighth of an inch and the IIIg was made higher to accommodate the revised VF, thereby according to purists, violating Oskar's design. That extra eighth of an inch does make a difference and is readily detected when handling both versions. As much as I have enjoyed my M's over the past forty years, I am considering cutting down my battery and going back to the bottom feeders for my remaining Leica days. <p> "Barnacks"? . . . Can you think of a better description without going into lenghty dimensional explanations?

[ben z]

I have and use some screw mount Leica stuff, I think they're better than the M in only one respect (size). In particular, having to switch my eye from the rangefinder up to a VIOOH for any lens other than 50mm, and having 2 dials for the shutter speeds and can't set the fast speeds unless the shutter is wound, do tend to slow me down a lot. Oddly (or maybe not, as a long-time Pentax screw user) the threaded lens changing is not a top issue for me.

[dan flanders]

RICH SILFVER: There are several sites that might provide useful answers to your questions, but better sources are two books: "The Leica Pocket Book" by the Hove Press, and "Identifying Leica Cameras" by Ghester Sartorius. The Hove Press also has the "Leica Accessory Guide" and the "Leica International Price Guide". The Hove books are slim pocket guides that are easily carried on the person for ready reference at camera shows, swap meets, and similar venues. Quite frankly, the Hove books are where we "experts (ha ha!) usually obtain the profound wisdom we proffer on these threads. Al, of course, has a stack of catalogs that go back to the invention of the Daguerotype! (I only go back to the stereotype!) (:^]

[rico_tudor]

Earlier discussions like this one perked my interest in Barnack. My current gear is '70s M and, rather than explore the ASPH stuff, I'm going back in time. Acquired the first piece last month (LTM Summaron 35/2.8), and am mulling a body. The purist choice sounds like pre-war, with the easy (and expensive) way out being a IIIg. I really like having slow speeds and a self-timer, so the IIIg or qualifying IIIf bodies are my current contenders - barring this crazy pre-war notion.

 

And yes, Harry's lectures about VF-on-a-string is sinking into my brain. What next, frame the scene with my hand? :-)

[Richard Williams]

"I really like having slow speeds and a self-timer, so the IIIg or qualifying IIIf bodies are my current contenders - barring this crazy pre-war notion."

 

You could always have it both ways with a IIIa and an APDOO:

 

http://www.vintagephoto.tv/apdoo.shtml

[dan flanders]

It took me many years to realize that I used slow speeds for considerably less than one percent of my exposures. Thus when it came time to relegate my faithful III to semi retirement I chose the IIf since it was not inhibited with slow speeds. If I have need for anything less than the minimum I can estimate it or use an APDOO or similar accessory. One of these days I am going to come across a decent II at a favorable cost and then I can enjoy the best of Leica's ergonomics.

[russell_brooks]

"What next, frame the scene with my hand?"<br><br>Yes, now you're talking. Did you know that if you extend your hand and make a big L with your thumb and 1st finger that the two of them make up half of a 135mm frame? The thumb being the 24mm side and your finger the 36mm side... For other trick I'm sure they'll be some posts. The real goal is so that you start to memorize the 50mm view so you dont even have to look through the viewfinder.