willb
newbie
Reged: 20/03/2008
Posts: 2
Loc: Sheffield
|
|
I've just managed to get hold of a Leica IIIb (from eBay, remarkably cheap considering its perfect condition) and I really can't find many mentions of this model anywhere on the net- are they very rare? Or is there some inherent defect in them which makes people embarassed to own them? I'm using a IIIc manual I found to try to decode the workings of this gorgeous shiny thing, but as a newbie, used to idiot-proof semi-automatic SLRs, I'm finding it a bit of a struggle...
--------------------
Always be good. If you can't manage that, don't get caught.
|
El Sid
Going potty
Reged: 14/04/2003
Posts: 9296
Loc: Sussex-by-the-Sea
|
|
It appears from this page that they aren't that common....
More...
Yet more...
--------------------
Nigel
Completely BSRIPN 
ElSid Gallery
A camera in the hand is better than one in the cupboard........
|
Tacitus
History
Reged: 17/01/2006
Posts: 871
|
|
The IIIb is rather less common than other models, it was produced from 1938 for a few years and so few were exported. The earlier IIIa is much more common and was widely exported. But all this has relatively little impact on prices - condition is usually more important. Also, for the IIIb-c models, black/grey military versions command much higher prices.
Differences between the IIIa and IIIb are minor, and the the IIIb and IIIc can be almost indistinguishable except for them smaller details. Hence the IIIb doesn't get many specific mentions on the internet. It's a decent camera - just fairly uncommon.
For more information visit Cameraquest for summary information or search www.rangefinderforum.com, www.l-camera-forum.com. .T.
|
LargeFormat
old hand
Reged: 24/10/2006
Posts: 1059
Loc: Buckinghamshire and Cumbria
|
|
Interesting buy willb and welcome to the forum. What lens did you get with it?
|
willb
newbie
Reged: 20/03/2008
Posts: 2
Loc: Sheffield
|
|
Wow thanks everybody! Mine's from 1939, I checked the serial on the net and it was from a batch of a thousand apparently. It's in perfect condition though, feels like somebody shut it up in a drawer and forgot about it. The lens is a 1938 Summitar 50mm 1:2 in good working order, but the aperture ring is rather stiff.
I'm a first year photography student and I wanted a camera that would force me to think about the actual process of taking a picture, hence the Leica. Also they are nothing short of legendary and I've always dreamed of owning one, and this one popped up cheap. I've only had it a week and I'm growing to love it, now I've just got to learn to use it...
Does anybody know whether anything about differences between film now and in '39 in terms of what was the standard? Was it a 100? I'm using a b/w TX 400 at the mo but seeing as the aperture only closes down as far as f12.5, even if I go up to the fastest shutter speed I get the feeling I'm going to have a whole lot of very thick, if not entirely black, negatives.
--------------------
Always be good. If you can't manage that, don't get caught.
|
melek
Reged: 12/12/2003
Posts: 22
Loc: USA
|
|
If I recall, film speeds were quite slow with most averaging about ISO40 or ISO50. I wasn't alive at that time, but I believe the fastest film was ISO200, which was Kodak Super XX (I'm not positive on that name).
I would test the camera with Kodak TMax 100 or Ilford FP4+.
I'll also add that I often will test a camera with Kodak Gold 200, because it's a nice film with good rendition of color. And you can get one-hour processing to assess the camera and see if the shutter is working correctly.
Either way, nice find!
--------------------
-Mike
Edited by melek (22/03/2008 13:47)
|
Tacitus
History
Reged: 17/01/2006
Posts: 871
|
|
A stiff arerture ring on a Summitar suggests that it needs a service: however, because there are no click-stops a (very) small amount of tightness is needed. If the lens is even slightly hazy the loss of contrast at f2-5.6 will be fairly pronounced: again, cleaning will help.
1930s-40s films were indeed very slow by modern standards - down to about 12ASA/ISO for colour films, with 25-40 being a fairly common 'everyday' speed. Also, as the emulsions and developers were different in many respects to today's formulations the image rendition was quite different too. This can be seen in sharpness and tonal range, and in halation (essentially film plane flare), which all added to vintage effect.
Retrophotographic.co.uk lists several 'traditional' B+W film types, including a 'Classic' film, which emulate some of those effects. Adox films are particularly good examples of silver-rich films, and are available at 25, 50 and 100 ISO. All are worth a trial, although a compromise is to use a pretty standard (and flexible) film, like FP4, and to rate it as you prefer (depends on the developer you use): I'm quite happy with it pushed to 200 ISO, for example. Many differences between films can be lost - or hidden - in the scanning process.
The Summitar (esp. uncoated) is very prone to flare, and a hood is almost obligatory: the best hood is the monster 'barn-door' SOOFM version. Late Summitar versions with a hexagonal iris will (securely) accept a Summicron 12558 metal hood, but the similarly proportioned plastic version is too loose to fit securely. I don't know if the early versions of the lens will accept the 12558 securely.
You may find the Summitar is a bit quirky. If so, I'd suggest that you also consider a later coated 5cm f3.5 Elmar (link) - this is an excellent everyday lens, with some interesting characteristics that give a different rendition to the Summitar, and without that lens' bad habits.
.T.
|
hhmr
Reged: 21/04/2005
Posts: 296
Loc: London
|
|
Quote:
.......... Kodak Super XX (I'm not positive on that name).......
Yes, I can remember Super XX back in the very late 40s or early 50s when I was just beginning with a Box Brownie.
I wouldn't have thought Tri-X would cause too much hassle for a shortest shutter speed of 1/500 except with very sunlit subjects. A yellow (or darker) filter might help with that one. Most things I find interesting for B&W are a bit dark so 400 or even 800 EI is quite welcome.
Henry
|
mike_j
nobbut a beginner
Reged: 23/08/2005
Posts: 1304
|
|
Quote:
Does anybody know whether anything about differences between film now and in '39 in terms of what was the standard? Was it a 100? I'm using a b/w TX 400 at the mo but seeing as the aperture only closes down as far as f12.5, even if I go up to the fastest shutter speed I get the feeling I'm going to have a whole lot of very thick, if not entirely black, negatives.
I find that a very useful accessory is a x4 neutral density filter. I normally use ISO 200 film and this is often too fast - the ND cuts it down to an ISO 50 equivalent which is much more manageable in sunlight but the option of the faster film is there when the light fades. Do buy a good filter though.
|
Tacitus
History
Reged: 17/01/2006
Posts: 871
|
|
The only medium speed Kodak B+W film I remember from my youth was Verichrome Pan. In my 'circles' Panatomic-X and Tri-X were popular, though Ilford HPS/HP3 was often preferred in the faster range. The mainstay medium speed film was Ilford Selochrome or FP3, although the connoisseur's film was Adox KB17. The combination of KB17 and Agfa Brovira paper had a strong following, notably for the rich warm tones that this gave.
The earliest colour film I remember was Gevaert (pre-Agfa-Gevaert) which I recall was just a tad undersaturated, but that could be due as much to the inherrent low contrast of cheap camera lenses as the film, etc. Kodak colour film was very popular, though pre-1960s all colour film was expensive and often only used (by most amateurs) for 'special' occasions.
Interesting Ilford history website
.T.
|
hhmr
Reged: 21/04/2005
Posts: 296
Loc: London
|
|
Quote:
[..........I normally use ISO 200 film and this is often too fast.............
Mike,
I find that fascinating as even in summer I find myself grateful for as much speed as I can get. It's all so subject dependent, isn't it. Forty years ago when I was living in Borneo I used to use Tri-X pushed to 800 EI and I can't ever remember needing the 1/1000th shutter speed on my IIIg. Even in the tropics deep shade can be deeeep!
Henry
PS I had a red and a yellow filter but I can't remember ever using either. H
|
TimF
Senior Member
Reged: 30/07/2001
Posts: 16037
Loc: Herts/Beds border
|
|
Quote:
A stiff arerture ring on a Summitar suggests that it needs a service
Agreed. Any decent dealer can arrange this. Some years ago I bought a 50mm Summarit from the late (and only partly lamented Jessops Classic). The lens was in beautiful condition but everything was a stiff as could be. So I took it to another store (Classic Camera - speaking of which, has this place ceased to be?) and it got sent off to Leica for a full work-out. Came back as good as new.
--------------------
Tim BSRIPN
The camera makes everyone a tourist in other people's reality, and eventually in one's own - Susan Sontag
|
BrianT
Old Hand
Reged: 16/05/2001
Posts: 5987
Loc: Leeds
|
|
Quote:
Classic Camera - speaking of which, has this place ceased to be
Good morning Tim, No, well at least their website is still up and running. I see they are now pushing Nikon.....it could have been worse.
--------------------
Brian BSRIPN
Oh for the days when Elvis was king and everything else was a 50th @ F11.
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
