FED-S camera and lens s/n needed for statistics

I have never seen a 1b S camera: certainly true ones don't exist. Even the odd serial numbers of S have a 1c or 1d cover with angles. That said, it seems that some 2/50mm have a curious s/n: 189 confirmed (owned by a friend) for the body s/n 2013... And the owner of the s/n 56041 only said to me "3 numbers.8B" for his 2/50mm...

Concerning the limit between 1b and 1c: the last 1b is the s/n 54223 and the first 1c is the 54369 by my data. I own the s/n 54223 which is in fact a transition model with the cover of a 1b and a "drop shaped" tip of rangefinder.

Your conclusions are right. The only real interrogations concern the 1a and 1b serial numbers: we have several explanations, but none is proved.

Amitiйs. Jacques.

Hi Jacques

I have another of these "curious" 2/50mm, with serial number 180, which also has a "toadstool" shape infinity release button and an unusual type of guide tube.

An identical lens shows up in "LEICA COPIES" by H.P.R on page 309, and another similar one in "1200 Cameras" attached to FED-S #70883 on page 388, although the latter has the normal knurled guide tube.

Do you recall which style of button is on lens 189?

Cheers
Geoff
http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/592013_IMG_0018.jpg

And here is the rear view with s/n


http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/592013_2-50 crop.jpg

Cheers
Geoff

Hi Christian

For your data-list, the seller of FED-S #148495 advises that lens #30650 is attached.

Cheers
Geoff

Hi Geoff,

I will ask my friend about the 2/50mm s/n 189 and its infinity button.

I don't understand about the guide tube: yours seems normal?
Concerning the serial number, it seems you don't have the main one which should be at the reverse of the f stop. Probably it was forgotten. Or arased for some problem of regulation.

Amitiйs. Jacques.

Thanks Jacques

Other than the two lenses mentioned and mine, every other 2/50mm I've seen has the "doorbell" button and full knurled tube. I'm interested to know which style is on #189.

Appreciate your help.

Cheers
Geoff

OK for the "doorbell" button which is the regular one.
But I don't understand what you mean by "full knurled tube"... Yours on the photo is perfectly regular and I don't know other types.

Jacques.

This is what I mean by doorbell button and full knurled tube.


http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/692013_$T2eC16NHJGoFFu9UFVGOBR5-u,Qknw~~60_3.JPG

Geoff

Thanks, Geoff,
I've added the serial to the wiki.

I will come up with some more interesting details from the statistics in the next days. As usual there are more questions than answers.

Two more things:
.)I've marked all serials up to the 55.xxx entry as "unusual" as they do not represent 1b but 1c cameras.
.)I think we should remove the category of authenticity, as it is not defined what + or ++ is supposed to mean.
What do you think?

Regards,
Christian

OK, Geoff, I had not understand it was the tube of the infinity button you were speaking of... I will ask my friend as soon as he is back.

About the + and ++, they were supposed to be signs of credibility, at least at the beginning... The ++ was for the "authentic" cameras = the ones we owned or those we had had in our hands. The + for those which had been seen on the net and which seemed genuine.

With the inflation of s/n for some cameras and for other reasons, it means nothing now. So, I agree with you. But perhaps it would be preferable to have first the opinion of some other members? Vlad first, of course...

Amitiйs. Jacques.

Nobody has answered. So, we can think that all are OK!
So, please, Christian...
Thanks!

Jacques.

Ok, I've deleted the authenticity-data, I think the wiki-entry looks better now.

Here's some better graph to explain the current situation:
As said we seem to have a different lens-camera relation in FED1'c' and FED1'd' cameras.



Note that the scale for lens and camera serials is different, in each square of the graph the camera serial rises per 10.000 while the lens serial rises only per 1.000 or 1/10.


Here each square represents 1000 camera serials and 1000 lens serials.

FED1'c':for about 6.000 camera serials the lens serials rise by 1.000 -> every 6th - 7th camera is fitted with a lens
Serial range 55.000-95.000 -> about 6000 FED-S

Note that this model estimates the earliest FED-S to be around 53.500 (where the red line reaches the bottom of the graph, the lowest possible lens serial of 20.000) which is too low. So the line should actually be a bit steeper. Hopefully this gets better when we have more late 'c' serials.




FED1'd': for about 10.000 camera serials the lens serials rise by 1.000 -> every 10th - 11th camera is fitted with a lens
Serial range 95.000-173500 -> about 7500 FED-S
However a significant part of cameras (about 1/4) seems to have earlier lenses (points far below the red line) and doesn't fall into this model so there might be more. Anyway, most points seem to group very close to the line which makes this a pretty good model. Not much should change with additional serials.




FED1'e': we don't have enough cameras to estimate a model here, but a lot of cameras also seems to have earlier lenses.
Serial range 173.500-184.000 -> very likely only a few hundred FED-S

If we sum this up we get about 13.500 FED-S cameras, which matches the range of lenses produced -> 20.000-34.000. This model probably overestimates the total number of FED-S'c' cameras and underestimates 'type'd' as we know very little about possible gaps in production and what's going on in late 'c' and the total of 'e' models.

Anyway it's a nice indication that we should not be on a totally wrong track here.

Conclusions:
.)It seems highly likely that far more than 2.000 FED-S were produced, more likely 10.000-13.000 depending on gaps.

.)Production procedure of cameras and/or lenses was changed dramatically between 'c' and 'd' model.
Lens-serial relation became much smoother in type'd', we see the datapoints are very close to the red regression line. In type'c' the datapoints are more clumped above or below the line. This may indicate that in the beginning larger batches of lenses and/or cameras were produced before assembly while in 'd' only small batches were produced and quickly assembled leaving less possibilities to scramble older lenses with newer cameras or vice versa.

.)I believe the datapoints far above or below the regression line indicate that these cameras had their lenses fitted at a later time or something else unusual happened here.
Note that you will never see two of these points close together. This makes sense as it would be very unlikely to create similar camera-lens pairs by freely combining the spare parts you find available, while it is more than likely if you have batches of cameras and lenses assembled in the factory.

Interestingly it is more common for cameras to have earlier lenses than having later lenses. This may indicate that a significant amount of lenses were "recycled" by matching them with cameras later produced. Either the original cameras had some defects and were replaced, or some lenses were sold singly without cameras so they could be used as spare parts. It would be highly interesting to know if it was possible to buy standalone lenses or cameras.

Please keep searching and submitting serials, our model will get better with every datapoint!

Regards,
Christian

The S entry is far better now...
And very happy that my idea of 12/13000 Fed S produced, rather than 2000, is gaining ground!

To complete all that, we should add too the Fed-KMZ and the Fed-Zorki with the 1/1000th, now we are sure they come from Kharkov, thanks to David Tomlinson. That was my other guess concerning the S.
So, c. 15000 S mechanisms could have been originally made. Impossible to be more precise: we don't know the number of Fed-Zorki with the 1/1000th... Only made in 1948, as it seems.

All that makes sense. Thanks, Christian.

Jacques.

Does anybody have an idea how and why the camera/lens serial relation could have changed between Type'c' and 'd' ?

Jacques, I remember you mentioned the 50mm f/2 lenses were maybe produced in 2 batches, the first being about 5000 lenses. This would match with the batch of the 5-6000 FED-S 'c'.


One more thing:
Do you think it would be better to put the current statistics graphs in the 1st post of this topic and remove the old ones, or leave it as it is?
Currently we have quite a lot of outdated graphs that don't really make sense or even give inaccurate information.

Regards,
Christian

Just concerning the old graphs: if you cancel them, you will cancel the discussion too. A pity.
I think preferable to insert the last modified graph in the wiki in the Fed S chapter, revised from time to time...
If it is possible...

Jacques.

Yes, that seems like a good option.
But that would mean that old graphs would have to be removed from the Wiki which only Vlad can do.

I am wondering ... if there were approximately 120,000 FED-1 cameras produced during this period of FED-S production and there were approximately 12,000 FED-S examples produced, that would make a ratio of nine regular FED-1 cameras to every one FED-S. To me, this does not seem to be the ratio that I see as a collector and from looking at FED-1 cameras on Ebay over the past ten years. It seems like there would be more FED-S cameras seen for sale than are seen from this serial number range.

What do other members think about their feeling of what has been seen of FED-S amounts compared to FED-1 amounts from that serial number range?

I have not kept records of all serial numbers of the FED-1 cameras that I have seen from this period (Serial No. 60,000 to 180,000) so I can not say for certain, but I am pretty sure that I have seen many more than nine FED-1 cameras for every one FED-S.

I'm not trying to make trouble with your theory Jacques ... you may be right, but the graphs and lens serial numbers (although helpful) may not accurately portray the story, or the whole story, as it really is. For example, sometimes serial numbers are made as 'codes' not just starting at a certain number and progressing evenly. To know for sure, the factory information concerning how to read the serial numbers of a specific production must be identified and confirmed. Many serial numbers may start with a year, or a batch number, or even skip large amounts of numbers that were never made or were destroyed, etc.

Also, in this case, I believe it was a time at the FED Zavod where many accessories were being made for the first time and the FED-S was part of a sort of more sophisticated system. There was a panoramic head, exposure meter, telephoto lens, wide angle lens, sports finder, and right angle finder. All had serial numbers and it might be that some F.2.0 50mm lenses were also made to be used even without the FED-S camera. I have seen many being sold without a FED-S, especially in the earlier days of collecting before the FED-S became so valuable and they were being matched to FED-S bodies by sellers because they would sell for much more together (the graphs probably show these matches very well). It is always wise to look at the whole picture even when it may make it harder to figure out some of the answers. Personally I doubt that there were 12,000 FED-S cameras made, but it is just my feeling from looking, not fact or knowledge.

But I like the graphs very much and think they do represent an easy way to look at the data that has been collected so far! Sorry for the long post!

Regards, Bill

You are a breaker of theory, Bill! But you might be right either...

I have just had a look at eBay. For the moment, there are 22 NKVD (1c to 1e) and only one S for sale. In june, they were 31 NKVD against 3 S. All that is of course too punctual to prove anything.

About my feeling, I don't know exactly. I think I have the tendancy to globalize the number of Fed 1 up to the model 1g. In that case, the ratio Fed 1/Fed S is not 1 to 10, of course... I wonder if all of us don't do the same.

I bought my first Fed exactly 8 years ago. But I don't remember having seen 2/50mm lenses sold alone in great numbers. 2 or 3 a year, perhaps... It's just the same for the S bodies equipped with an Industar 10. But 8 years ago, it seems to me that the S for sale were in much greater number than now.

The theory lies upon the number of 2/50mm lenses. I always have read and heard that this lens was exclusively made for the S (and the B!). So, number of 2/50mm = number of S (at 10 or 20% more or less). Now we know that certainly c. 13000 2/50 were made, the conclusion is evident. It's not the same for the other stuff made from 1938 which was prepared for all the cameras, not only the S.

The S were not made by regular batches (I have two consecutive bodies: S and NKVD). So, how were they "distributed" and regulated in the NKVD range? It's the mystery we must solve to prove anything...

That was my opinion.

Amitiйs. Jacques.

Bill does have a valid and important point here, thanks for your post!
Mine are usually a lot longer...

Our theory - or rather hypothesis - relies on many variables we simply have to guess as we do not know. The estimated number of total FED-S of course implies that there are no gaps in serials and all 50mm f/2 lenses were fitted to a camera. However the 10.000-12.000 cameras are already a very careful lower estimate I made with the following points in mind:

.)Are there any gaps in camera- or lens serials? - we don't know but very large gaps are unlikely on the data we have. See the graphs in my next post for more.

.)Were all 50mm f/2 lenses sold with cameras?
If you look at the graphs, I believe that the majority of cameras, about 3/4, were matched with lenses at the factory. There is absolutely no way to explain the grouping along the regression line if people bought lenses separately and fitted them to their cameras at a later time.
Still that leaves 1/4 - 1/3 of cameras which I believe do not have their original lenses - whether they received new ones or were sold without a original one we do not know.

I've been considering the crazy idea of collecting all FED1 serials for quite some time now - and I think we should do it!
It will be a lot of work but I think it should be worth it as this should help us to get a better idea about the relation between FED1 and FED-S, possible gaps and about the way numbering was done in general. We already have started this for FED'e', so let's extend this for 'c' and 'd' as well. I'll be very interested about number ratio of cameras we see for sale compared to FED-S.

More about the likeliness of about 10.000 FED-S in my next post.

Regards,
Christian

Hi Christian and Jacques and all,

I think the graphs are very important and collecting more and more data will make the picture clearer. My only concern is that the actual culture and circumstances of the manufacturing history of the Soviet Union during the Stalinist era, with the Five Year Plans and other pressures, restraints, and limitations, may not be the way we picture it. I believe that sometimes things like serial numbers were used to make actual production numbers look bigger, and other things like that. There were possibly serious consequences for not meeting quotas or production schedules during this time in Soviet history. And, serial numbers may have not been totally sequential, as can be seen in FED-1S. Even without political pressure and consequences, serial numbers have been meant more for internal use than for tracing history by collectors. In some societies and countries, and in some periods they are strictly adhered to and recorded by the factories, but I think in the USSR at this time things were not so simple and organized.

So my point is not to disregard any of the theories put forth here, especially with great work like the graphs by Christian and ideas by my friend Jacques! It is only not to jump to solid conclusions and decide they are fact without supporting evidence or knowledge. Unfortunately, the factory histories and direct knowledge is hard to come by after so much time. I can only hope that more collectors and knowledgeable people who are living in Russia may be able help shed light on these issues. (I am always interested in what Zoom can add to these questions of history of production!).

Regards, Bill

PS: You may notice that the image I use on my posts of Rasputin holding a camera has a FED-1S in his hands! (photo-shopped by me, of course)!