USSRPhoto.com

Forums / Collectors and Users Open Forum

A curious Leica fake...

New Topic Reply to Topic
Back to Forum Previous TopicNext Topic
Printer Friendly Send Topic to a Friend
84 posts in this thread showing replies 21-40 of 83
Jump to reply Jump to bottom

11/20/2014 19:02

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
FAG was made by factory Geodezia which also made aerial cameras. In 1941 it was evacuated from St. Petersburg, already under different name, to Ural mountain region to city of Sverdlovsk. It was making production for the war after the move. In 1949 it was repurposed from optico-mechanical factory into a radio-radar factory. Currently it exists under name of "Vektor".

Here's the site and some history if anyone is interested in running Google translate if you don't read Russian. http://www.vektor.ru/o_predpriyatii/istoriya

Cheers,
Vlad.

11/24/2014 09:00

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply

I have just received the camera.
Some words to share my first impressions.

It seems homogeneous: all is well adjusted and would work if the shutters were cleaned.
The chrome looks like the first Leica III(F) one of 1933: bright and somewhat peeling.
No hole to adjust the lens on the back, no hole on the press film inside.
The tip of the rangefinder could be a Fed 1c's with its drop shape.
The lens must be a Fed with the diaphragm at the rear (middle on Elmars) and its number: 15035 (probably 1935).

But there are things which are very strange: the main buttons, the inscriptions on the counter and the speed dial, the rear of the shutter box when the baseplate is removed, the setting of the baseplate and the position of the screws which fasten the shutter box on the front. All that is neither Fed's nor Leica's. And that could hardly have been home made.

Photos as soon as I can!

Amitiés. Jacques.

11/24/2014 10:48

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
quote:
Originally posted by Jacques M.


The lens must be a Fed with the diaphragm at the rear (middle on Elmars) and its number: 15035 (probably 1935).

the main buttons, the inscriptions on the counter and the speed dial, the rear of the shutter box when the baseplate is removed, the setting of the baseplate and the position of the screws which fasten the shutter box on the front. All that is neither Fed's nor Leica's.


That's interesting, no Fed cam and no Leica cam.

Would someone fake a Fed lens from 1935 into an Elmar nowadays?

11/24/2014 11:18

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
This is what I also thought at first. But...
Maybe a loose lens with no camera to have it on? And no camera telling about the age of the lens?
Lens made of junk parts? Even I have some old FED lenses that are good for parts only.
Faked when, maybe an old production that was put on this camera to make it complete?
And maybe this obvious lens fake made the seller to believe also camera is a fake?


Best regards,
Juhani

11/24/2014 11:56

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
I have now partially dismounted this mysterious camera and a second one (a Fed 1d) to compare.
Of course, the technical solutions are globally the same: they both are Leica II copies. But almost all the internal details are different: position and size of screws, shape of the shutter box, springs and position of the film plate...

Feds are Leica copies; this one is not exactly that. It's a sort of transposition. For example, the release lever doesn't work like on Feds or Leicas.

Photos tomorrow: the battery of my numerics is OK now, but it's night here...

Jacques.

11/24/2014 12:16

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
quote:
Originally posted by Jacques M.

almost all the internal details are different: position and size of screws, shape of the shutter box, springs and position of the film plate...

the release lever doesn't work like on Feds or Leicas.


The Pioneer on fotoua.com has a picture without the bottom-plate.

There might not be many other inside pictures of other early Leica copies.

11/25/2014 04:12

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply

Yes, Juhani. When a lens without body meets a body without lens, it can make a camera... We have the date of the lens, not of the body...
Lenny: I have looked for internal détails on the net. I had seen the Pioneer on Fotoua. But they don't look like.

Jacques.

11/25/2014 05:21

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
quote:
Originally posted by Jacques M.


Detail concerning the screws to regulate the shutters and the lock of the baseplate.
Note that the Leica used two slot screws for their shutters until 1931, then 4 slots in 1932 (appearance of the Leica II), then 6 slots (Leica III). Fed kept the 2 slot one, except on the only Fed b (or V) I have seen (4 slots).

The lock of the baseplate is original.


Thank you so much Jacques. I love it. You must be very happy to own this cam. This cam seems to be much more advanced in technic.

I love that there are 2 different locking nuts of tension setting screws, A 2-sided nut is only needed for the closing curtain because it doesn't need much tension. A 4-sided nut is much better for the opening curtain which needs much more tension and so it's better to adjust. But here it's just opposite, the opening curtain has the 2-sided nut only. Seems someone changed it by mistake.

11/25/2014 05:28

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply

Just a last one about the cover.
Compared to a Fed's, the cover of the fake seems shorter on the right (when looking from the front).


http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/25112014_DSCF1707.JPG

The Fed is in fact a "no name", as you can see.
That's all for today. If I can, I will post some other photos of the ciphers and of the inside of the rangefinder.

The adaptation of the lens was certainly home made. But not the mechanism. So, where does it come from?

Amitiés. Jacques.

11/25/2014 05:32

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
quote:
Originally posted by Jacques M.


And the lensplate. On the Leica fake (forehand), the shim is realised with a ring of metal. Strong paper on Feds.


This metal distance ring seems to be a step back. With the paper shims the mount can be adusted much better and sometimes were used in more layers on one side then the other.

11/25/2014 05:47

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
quote:
Originally posted by Jacques M.


Compared to a Fed's, the cover of the fake seems shorter on the right (when looking from the front).


It seems the distance between RF-eye and VF-eye on the backside is shorter.

11/25/2014 05:53

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
quote:
Originally posted by Jacques M.


The adaptation of the lens was certainly home made. But not the mechanism.


Jacques, do you mean the M39-mount was added home made?
New Topic Back to Forum

Reply to Topic

Forum code enabled