Leica II copy..anyone have one?

[photobizzz]

Just wondering if anyone had one of those Leica II copies that *bay seller grizzly33bear sells for $109 USD with the copy elmar. I think they look pretty good in the auction, just wondering how they function. I was thinking about the "golden" copy, although it is pretty obviously a fake I still want one...LOL

:)

[laptoprob]

Nope. I got a real one for less!

[photobizzz]

At least you hope it is real....or is it?

[Keith]

It would be a pain if you were going for one of these FSU clones and finished up with a real Leica because of a dishonest seller ... I mean, how annoying would that be? :p

[laptoprob]

It is real allright. So is my '37 Elmar 50. I was surprised it works so flawlessly though!
All I had to figure out and correct was the fine banding at 1/1000 and 1/500.

[photobizzz]

Yea I paid more, but I got a nice III w/summar that is E++ condition that dosent need any work plus I am waiting for a IIIf RD and a black 9cm Elmar + ROSOL finder right now, cant wait to try those out...it would be fun to walk around with at gold plated "leica" and see how many people think it is real!

[jamiewakeham]

Photobizzz - go look at my ad! Not gold-plated but really convincing; it's fooled a couple of dealers. In fact, I should go back and sell it to one of them...

[wolves3012]

If you want one, you want one! The only real drawback to them is: why someone would do this to a camera. The answer is often because they had a junk camera or several parts cameras that were not marketable, so they turned it/them into this. If you get a decent one it'll work just fine, if you don't it'll have problems. For display purpose, why not? For a user, beware!

[wolves3012]

Photobizzz - go look at my ad! Not gold-plated but really convincing; it's fooled a couple of dealers. In fact, I should go back and sell it to one of them...
No offence here but it was obviously a Zorki 1 - the shutter release is an easy giveaway and the RF sensor is clearly Zorki. If it fooled a dealer he must be very green!

[jamiewakeham]

I think that used to be generally true, and there are certainly still some out there that have been turned into looky-leicas because they'd be unsellable as actual functioning cameras.

There are, however, people taking good Zorkis and FEDs and leicaficating [sic?] them to produce reliable copies. Spotting the difference can be tricky... I've nothing but good experiences with DVDTechnik, though, and they usually have a few for sale.

Cheers
Jamie

Edit - fair enough, it wouldn't fool anybody who really knew Leicas. It convinced the guy who ran Morris in Oxford, which (to be fair) didn't have much of a high-end rangefinder stock. Surprisingly, it also convinced the guy who runs the camera stall in the antiques centre in Warwick, and he did have a shelf of IIs and IIIs.

I've found it invaluable for weddings; you always get a know-it-all who is bemused/dismayed/even angry to find the photog using a russian camera, but smiles knowingly when he spots my 'Leica'. Of course, now I have an M3...

[photobizzz]

I dont know about someone turning junk cameras into one good one, this seller on ebay has them listed continuously so someone must be producing them. They are also in several rare (if real) models like the lutwaffe, anniversary, and olympic editions.

[payasam]

Rob, a II with 1/1000?

[laptoprob]

Yes, a IIf. Not an early II. Leica numbering... grmbl.
I did have a Zorki 1 earlier, great camera that didn't cost me ¤ 109 though...

[wolves3012]

I have a Zorki 1 and two FED 1s and I find them really nice (and not to mention the umpteen derivatives I have). I'm about to invest in a IIIc, it'll be an interesting comparison...

[Ron (Netherlands)]

Just wondering if anyone had one of those Leica II copies that *bay seller grizzly33bear sells for $109 USD with the copy elmar. I think they look pretty good in the auction, just wondering how they function. I was thinking about the "golden" copy, although it is pretty obviously a fake I still want one...LOL

:)

Saw some of these golden fakes at local market here but obviously they had lost most of their shine: after a while, the gold changes into an unpolished brass color. However people may like that, at least the camera then looks much older. May give you quite some polishing work

[Leigh Youdale]

Yes, I have one of the 'gold' plated Fed I fakes. Bought it on EBay a couple of years ago from an FSU seller thinking if it was OK I could save on the cost of a real Leica. Although listed as a "Vintage Leica II" there was some fine print saying it was a replica, so I knew what I was getting.

It looked gorgeous in its sealed plastic wrap. Since then it has taken on that old brassy look someone else noted. I ran one film through it. Loved the feel of it but didn't like the quality of the photos and went back out and bought a couple of real IIIf's.

Thought I might get Charles Woodhouse to give the Fed/Leica an overhaul, but with two working IIIf's it's going to end up beign sold or used as an attractive paperweight!

[dee]

There have been questions about Grizzly from some people in the past.
I have far to many Leica-ized ex-Zorki / Feds.
The best have been the OTT wartime chrome/ black cameras from moscowphoto.
I bought an older Brass '' wartime ''Leica '' because it has the older shutter button . I bought some brasso and it looks lovely - to the extent that I would love a brass real Leica II !
To black Leica cameras from moscow were not so good , but again , I cut my losses , and , thanks to Oleg , now have twin Fed 1g '' Leicas '' to complement my twin black Leica IIs !
I intend to have the brass camera Oleged - and shall recover it myself.

These cameras are likely to have parts from several dud camera , so don't expect any thought of originality [ though Oleg was surprised hwo original my black Fed pretenders were ] - for me , it's a worthwhile method of recycling - but then , I am registered crazeee !!

dee

[Mr_Flibble]

I've had several fake leica's, 2 came from Grizzlybear on Ebay. The first was a right mess, curtains were so full of holes they might as well have not been there. Shutter was hesitant. First roll I shot throught it was a complete loss.

The second one I bought had trouble rewinding, cam on the rewindswitch did not function. Tore the film in half. the photos that came out were quite good though.

The third I bought through someone else and it was of the horrible golden plated kind. But it did seem to function okay. Never bothered to shoot with it though. Gave it to a guy in the UK.

Then I bought my original Leica IIIa, it's not given me any grief yet ;)

[ErnestoJL]

Some time ago I bought a Zorki 1 made in 1954.
I knew it and I accepted it was just a Leica II copy, because I couldn´t aford the real thing.
But anyway It was a satisfying purchase.
Now, I´m thinking of a IIIc....

Cheers

Ernesto

[Mudman]

Funny Thing is that I'm getting a FED 2 sometime this week from a friend of mine... While another friend without me knowing got me a Leica III! So I'm going to be awash in Leicas and Fakes soon enough. I can't wait to run a role through both of them.

[Brennotdan]

Funny Thing is that I'm getting a FED 2 sometime this week from a friend of mine... While another friend without me knowing got me a Leica III! So I'm going to be awash in Leicas and Fakes soon enough. I can't wait to run a role through both of them.

I need new friends!

[Mudman]

I need new friends!

I do seem to be blessed with knowing good people. However I think the Leica was more of a end of the year Bonus from a professor that I had set up the class and helped get everything in order for for the semester.

[Brennotdan]

I do seem to be blessed with knowing good people. However I think the Leica was more of a end of the year Bonus from a professor that I had set up the class and helped get everything in order for for the semester.

I need new professors!

Not really, I have had some great ones. Sounds like you worked for it, enjoy!

[ErnestoJL]

Just wondering if anyone had one of those Leica II copies that *bay seller grizzly33bear sells for $109 USD with the copy elmar. I think they look pretty good in the auction, just wondering how they function. I was thinking about the "golden" copy, although it is pretty obviously a fake I still want one...LOL

:)


One thing I forgot, is that the lens is only an Elmar copy in regard of the external styling. Inside, the Industar 22 is a good coated copy of a prewar Zeiss Tessar 3.5
Some time ago, Zorkikat pointed out that the Elmar (even being a Tessar like lens) has the iris diaphragm placed between the first and second element, unlike the Tessar which iris is placed between the second element/group and third group.
It´s said that this was done by Leitz as a try to avoid vignetting at full aperture.

Ernesto

[shadowfox]

How about the Fed 50/3.5? is it an Elmar copy or not?

I have one like sitemistic does, and it takes darn sharp pictures.

[ErnestoJL]

AFAIK, both lenses share the same design, it is both are Tessar clones, but maybe I´m wrong.
At least, my I 22 is razor sharp too.

Unfortunately, there are very few FEDs here in Argentina, most of them are Fed 2 and newer models and all of them came with either I 50 or I 61. Never seen with the older I 10 or even I 22, so I never had the chance to investigate.
Hopefully some other RRF member (with better kwoledge) would tell Us about.

One way to check for the iris position is to look inside the lens closing a little to 5.6 and count how many air to glass surfaces can be seen reflected. If there are four, then its a Tessar like lens, otherwise (two only) it´s closer to the Elmar design.

Ernesto

[davidxmartins]

I just paid $135USD for a camera titled ”Leica II D regular D.R.P. copy, chrome, in leather case”.
I bought it from "grizzly33bear" on eBay.

The Description goes as follows:
.
“This Leica copy is really professionally-made and is in excellent condition! All is fully functional!
Leica II (D) - 1932-48 - first Leica with built-in coupled rangefinder.
# 303366"

.
"Camera is easy to operate and because of a simple design is very reliable. Works with standard 35mm films. But please remember - even refurbished now, these cameras are still over 50..60 years old cameras, so you cannot expect the same smooth work as from modern cameras...”
.

Here are some pictures of the camera:
.

http://ebay.grizzly33bear.com/imgs/photo/leica_10699_00_nickelized.jpg
.
http://ebay.grizzly33bear.com/imgs/photo/leica_10699_01_nickelized.jpg
.
http://ebay.grizzly33bear.com/imgs/photo/leica_10699_02_nickelized.jpg
.
I just don't know what to make of it...
I would appreciate if anyone could tell me what we are looking at here.
Any information is welcome.
Thank you.

[FrankS]

As the ad says, you're looking at a Leica COPY (based on a Russian FED or early Zorki camera.)

[davidxmartins]

Very nice pictures...
Your photos show exactly the kind of soft old touch I'm looking fore.
Did you use a Leica II copy to do then?

[FrankS]

Hi David,

If you posted "nice pictures" to me, then thank you. These were taken mostly with modern RF gear. I do have a Russian FED 50mm f3.5 lens and it is as good as a real Leitz Elmar 50mm f3.5 lens that I also have.

Good luck and have fun with your new camera!

[David Hughes]

Hi,

I wonder why anyone would want a fake when the Fed 1 and Zorki 1 are decent enough cameras in their own way. And the Fed 2 is an excellent example of how they developed them. Ditto the Jupiter-8 which can be picked up cheaply with an export Zorki 4(K) on it. I often use the Jupiter in the M2...

Regards, David

[David Hughes]

I just don't know what to make of it...
I would appreciate if anyone could tell me what we are looking at here.
Any information is welcome.
Thank you.

If you stll want to know what exactly it is, then I'll suggest these two pages.

http://www.sovietcams.com/index.php?-149094172

http://www.sovietcams.com/index.php?-1952259024

but you'll have to do the donkey work. The easy give aways, when dating them, are the shutter button and its surround and the speed range. You may also find dates etc scratched inside them. I've a Fed from 54 (by the serial number) and found 27-11-54-3 scratched inside it. The reason escapes me.

The easy give-away when looking at or sorting FED/Zorki/Leicas is the view-finder window and the shutter surround which will be a simple milled collar without the "bar-stool" surround on a Leica.

Another quick check: take off the "Elmar" and lock the little knob on the infinity clip (or whatever). Then turn it round until the knob and infinity lock are at roughly 8 o'clock: at 9 o'clock you'll see the figure "1,25" on a Leica and on the FED the figure will about the same position but up-side down. That's based on comparing 1930's Elmars with mock-Elmars and FED's. Also a pre-1946 (? 46) Elmar will have f/3,5 - f4,5 - f/6,3 etc and the FSU ones (usually 50's) will run f/3,5 - f/4 - f/5,6 etc.

Take all this with a pinch of salt and don't rely 100% on it as there's a lot of variations out there.

One last point, take off the base oplate and Leica's have a little drawing and instructions in two languages explaining the film loading. It's got a screw at each corner and you can see the screw heads outside with out removing the base plate. And the release knob for the Leica baseplate is labelled "zu" and "auf". These little details are time-heavy to fake and often left undone. Like, who would notice the distance scale figures are up-side down? Well, that seems to be the reasoning.

Having said that, I'll add that I've Leicas, FEDs and Zorkis in the collection and like all of them. The FED 1 and a Jupiter-8 is the answer to a 1930's dream as it's a Leica clone with a Zeiss clone lens on it.

Regards, David

[davelrods]

Nope, though they are pretty. He is a good seller. I've bought a couple lenses from him.They were well represented but the delivery was slow.

[davelrods]

Probably nothing wrong with Russian copies. I am into purchasing several Fed's and Zorki's right now. Missed a lovely Zorki one yesterday for $79. Got tied up and forgot to bid. I have no idea what they sold for last year or what they will sell for next year. I imagine the sellers get what they ask for most of the ones they offer. I try to never have buyer's remorse. If I can afford to buy it, I can afford to junk it.

[wolves3012]

I just don't know what to make of it...
I would appreciate if anyone could tell me what we are looking at here.
Any information is welcome.
Thank you.
It's a FED 1 body, probably around 1937/8, maybe earlier but not a lot. That's assuming it's all one camera. Often they aren't, they're made from bits of junkers. Fine as long as they're put together competently and set up properly. One quick check - will the mount accept other LTM lenses? The original mount is probably not going to, since the thread-pitch isn't standard LTM. The lens could be anything pre or just post-war Industar (FED) 10. They started coating them sometime around then, so if it's coated it's a later example.

Actually, it's a little hard to see on the photo if the lens has the Elmar-style aperture tab or a flattened-off mark. The flattened-off mark type will be a coated Industar 22 or 50.

[davelrods]

Fakes, fraud, poor copies, all these derisive comments about some really quite good cameras from everything I've read. I think the Russian copies kept in good condition were probably fine cameras in their own right and shouldn't even be compared with Leica's in spite of their being very similar with the first models. The later models are quite different from Leicas and functionally are quite good, with lenses that are fine performers.

I personally think we are blessed to have these fine cameras available to us. I don't much like to think of them as Leica copies. I think of them as Russian cameras that used German cameras as a base to spring from. No doubt the early models were quite the same as early Leicas, as are the lenses quite similar, and they really produce quite good work in the right hands, from what I've seen.

I am just now starting to receive my Russian cameras that I have bought from ebay sellers. Got a Kiev 4 yesterday and am quite pleased with the workmanship and obvious quality, all for the price of a couple nice meals.

Now the ones Grizzly is selling are interesting pieces, with little pretense to being anything but fakes. Really is there anything wrong with taking broken cameras and combining them to make interesting curio items. I don't think so. If someone fools himself into thinking he is buying a Nigerian windfall, then he probably deserves what he gets.

dave

[Drewus]

The problem comes from ruining what was a good camera in it's own right (a Zorki or FED) by filing off serial numbers and brand names, repainting and then engraving fake Leica markings back on.

It's not the fact that it's trying to be a Leica, it's just that in the process a good, original camera has been ruined.

I mean, if you want an old Leica, just save up and buy one. You can get a IIIc body pretty easily for about double of what you'd pay for a copy.

[peterm1]

I actually rather like the more restrained concoctions. When you know what you are looking for it is never possible to mistake a Fed or Zorki for a real Leica, but they can be fun, never the less and are capable of reasonable results - when they do not have problems, which unfortunately are not that uncommon.

[Vince Lupo]

Do you ever see any Leica I copies? It seems that most fakes start at the Leica II and up, but I haven't seen any Leica I copies.....maybe I don't get out enough.

[john341]

I have used a few of these lenses. I believe that the FED 3.5 is a copyof the pre-war elmar, as few were sold with a bloomed lens element. I found results extremely variable, from ok to really sad. On the subject of fake Leicensteins, I would not touch them..they are old and if you go for a "gold" example, you will finish up with a sorely tarnished brass look within a year or so. Save your money and buy something decent (like a Zorki 3S), the nicer cameras are the early Zorki 1s which don't need any adornment..

[wolves3012]

I believe that the FED 3.5 is a copy of the pre-war elmar, as few were sold with a bloomed lens element. I found results extremely variable, from ok to really sad.
You're misinformed, I'm afraid. The Elmar places the iris behind the first element and is an uncoated lens. Only early FEDs were uncoated and the iris is behind the second element. Externally the style is pretty much the same and they are both Tessar designs but I don't think it's fair to say it's a copy. I'd think production was somewhere between a quarter and half million coated ones, so I don't think you could call that "few" either.

I have two of these (uncoated) and would not call the performance "sad" but rather good for such an old design. Remember that early uncoated ones were generally matched to the body in terms of lens-to-film distance so they cannot be expected to work well on a mis-matched body. The coated ones and similar Industar 22 and 50 are even better, being both coated and of "standard" L-t-F registration (in theory, anyway).