USSRPhoto.com

Forums / Collectors and Users Open Forum

Fed NKVD with odd serial numbers

98 posts in this thread showing replies 21-40 of 97
Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply

Sure I did not live in a FSU country, so I just can imagine.
For the moment, we have 30 of these Feds in our listing. If you are right, that would certainly mean that hundreds of Feds were made in fraud during this prewar period, as they are rather difficult to spot...

Before leaving this s/n 1126, two pictures more, with the s/n 21225, a regular one which could be its twin. Absolutely no difference.


http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1472018_IMG_0140.JPG


http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1472018_IMG_0144.JPG

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
I did not live in a FSU country too. Smile
But some rules in all communistic countries were the same.

Regarding FED 1126 there are almost no doubts this is "error" when engraving. The question is: why ?
Really hard to guess after 80 years. This could have been made by mistake or intentionally.

Maybe a worker had papers for FED 1126. So he has taken a camera from current production and gave number 1126 to it. He could say this is my camera I have papers for that.
In communistic countries papers were very important. Based on a paper you could have a car faster then others, you could buy a flat without waiting 20 years, you could buy even better radio which were not available in a shop.

Mentality of people were complitelly different.
Now if you work in e.d. Renault company you understand you cannot put a car part out ot the factory because it does not belong to you.
Communistic propaganda was telling that everything was common. So everybody was an owner of all factories and everything what was inside. So from formal piont of view I was owner of busses on a street, trains all industry and so on. Propaganda was telling: in capitalistic countries you don't owe all these goods. Here you have this all.
People in Poland realises we are governed by thiefs and they will officialy take for themselves almost all which was produced. So if you took a part from a factory it was not treated as thief.

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply

If we accept to consider that these two cameras are twins, the most simple explanation is probably the best.
The 1a s/n 1126 was made in mid 1934. It was taken in charge by the warranty later, and its s/n engraved on a 1b, in mid 1936 (approximate date of making for the s/n 21126.

So, the actual s/n 21126 is wanted!Big smile
Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply

Of course, no more inside screw, which is specific to the 1a-s and 1b-s.

http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1472018_IMG_0150.JPG

That time, the reason of the s/n is perhaps more difficult to explain.
First, it seems that this sort of vulcanite does not appear after s/61000 (but we are not so far with 62092 if we add the "6" which could miss). And there is more time between january 1935 (making of the s/n 2092) and early 1938 (for the s/n 62092). Perhaps 3 years are a bit too long...

Just to say: I bought the camera with a 2/50mm Fed lens s/n 33428, so which belongs to the end of the batch. It should have been mounted on a Fed 1e.

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
quote:
Originally posted by Alfa2

I did not live in a FSU country too. Smile
But some rules in all communistic countries were the same.

Regarding FED 1126 there are almost no doubts this is "error" when engraving. The question is: why ?
Really hard to guess after 80 years. This could have been made by mistake or intentionally.

Maybe a worker had papers for FED 1126. So he has taken a camera from current production and gave number 1126 to it. He could say this is my camera I have papers for that.
In communistic countries papers were very important. Based on a paper you could have a car faster then others, you could buy a flat without waiting 20 years, you could buy even better radio which were not available in a shop.

Mentality of people were complitelly different.
Now if you work in e.d. Renault company you understand you cannot put a car part out ot the factory because it does not belong to you.
Communistic propaganda was telling that everything was common. So everybody was an owner of all factories and everything what was inside. So from formal piont of view I was owner of busses on a street, trains all industry and so on. Propaganda was telling: in capitalistic countries you don't owe all these goods. Here you have this all.
People in Poland realises we are governed by thiefs and they will officialy take for themselves almost all which was produced. So if you took a part from a factory it was not treated as thief.



alfa2, the picture that you are drawing of communist countries in many of our threads, doesn't match with my impressions. a part of my family lived in eastern germany and a part in former czechosloakia. we visited them quite often from the late 50s onwards and as it was family, we had quite some insight. we met in bulgaria each summer and I have been to russia several times with them in the 60s and 70s. my mother was a teacher in occupied poland in the 40s, she kept in touch with her pupils and we visited poland regularly as well.

there were well expensive products on display in stores, like cameras, that sat on the shelf because they were too expensive for ordinary people. it was not the case with cars, there you are right.

there was well a notion of theft. they were proud of owning the land and the industry in common, but your car was your car, your camera was your camera and common goods were common. there were strict controls at the factories and taking parts was regarded as theft and heavily fined. and don't forget: there were always spies around you that would report wrongdoing. I doubt your theory of whole cameras being brought out of the production line in numbers.

if you owned foreign currency, a lot of things were possible, but then again, it had its rules. you would get official papers, but these would be within the ordinary production and the ordinary numbering.

if you knew high officials, as I did, you would be able to get products out of the official production, but these had their own numbering, which was recognizable in itself. it would not be similar to old numbers, there were letters added to the numbers or no number at all.

www.a7camera.com www.120folder.com www.instantphoto.eu
Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply

Many thanks for these enlightments, xya!Smile

I have found something about the delay between date of passport and sale. In my records, I have the 1b s/n 13748, lens 14280, controlled the 8 and 9 X 1935 and put to sale only the 26/4/1936. We don't know when it was really sold... So, a total period of 2 1/2 or 3 years between original passport and "new" camera does not seem impossible...

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply

Two last pictures to finish up with this Fed s/n 2092.
They show a comparison between the Fed S s/n 59549 and the 2092, possibly 62549. I have no other camera closer, but there is no modification in the original series between these two ones.


http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1572018_DSC00450.JPG


http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1572018_DSC00451.JPG

No difference in the features, except the varnishing of the vulcanite and the inscriptions in black, of course made by the seller. They are twins too. Very probably this s/n 2092 is in fact a s/n 62092.

I don't want to tire anybody, but the s/n 3631 will soon arrive! All comments are welcome, once more...Big smile

Jacques.


Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply

We had already spoken of the (my) last camera with odd s/n here: http://ussrphoto.com/Forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=2963

Two pictures, concerning this s/n 4580:


http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1672018_DSC00466.JPG


http://www.ussrphoto.com/UserContent/1672018_DSC00467.JPG

An interesting camera, easy to spot with the particular patterned vulcanite, the main buttons with two sorts of milling, the shape of the left side of the cover and the broad engraving. I have in my records the s/n 25617, 25840, 25922 and the 26327 which exactly look like the 4580. So, this camera should probably be the 24580.


Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply

A conclusion?

It seems there is no real doubt for most of the cameras. Every time or almost, we can find without many researches the missing cipher, by comparison with other cameras, with a good certitude. These cameras would have been picked up from the assembly line to take the place of a non working 1a, the s/n being the one of the 1a.

But things are perhaps too simple.

Suppose that I am responsible of the assembly line. I am told that I must prepare a camera to replace the 1a s/n 1126. The line is producing cameras in the s/n 25xxx/26xxx, well recognizable (brown pattern). I will engrave 1126 on one of them. But there is no 11126, or 21126, 31126, 41126... with these features. In that case, there is no relation between the features and the number.

And the first camera (S type 1c s/n 25726)is even more troublesome, with its magnetic questions and its plaque inside the bottom plate.

What do you think?

Amitiés. Jacques.

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply

So, to be clear, our main hypothesis -s/n of a non-working camera engraved on the replacing one- is probably non valid. To say that in other words: there should be no relation between the features and the number. The fact that there is obviously a relation should lead us towards other hypothesis: missing cipher, or special series.

I am very suprised by that conclusion... I will examine more closely the s/n to see if there are interesting differences in the engraving (position of ciphers, etc.).

But I can be wrong or I can have missed something... So, what do you think?

Amitiés. Jacques.
PS: all the pictures marked "DSC" were made with my prewar macro Fed lens on A7.
Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
Hello Jacques, Vlad and Everyone,

I hope you are all well! I will give some thoughts I have had over the years about the unusual numbers.

I can't see why the FED factory would go to the trouble to engrave an early number on a newer camera so that the original passport would remain valid for the owner. In the case that a camera was replaced for some reason, the owner would have likely just be given a new one, in the box, with its passport and manual. Did FEDs actually have a lifetime warranty where they could be returned to the factory if they were very badly damaged, and were then replaced? What does the warranty state? Has anyone ever seen an actual written warranty? Probably most repairs were done by the owner, someone he knew who could do it, or at some type of photo supply or repair shop.

On the other hand, when looking at the Wiki list for these cameras, there seems to be (in this small sample) a larger proportion of FED S models than are found in the general population of FEDs that have been collected. To me this makes sense because I have always suspected that the FEDs with unusual numbers were engraved that way because they were official cameras, used by government or official agencies, or by the military. And possibly the FED-S cameras were also made for special use.

I think that Jacques' newest camera, No.25726, with the instructional plate or plaque on the body cover, may be a good proof of official use. The plaque looks like the type found on many Soviet aerial and military cameras, both still and cine. No reason for a plaque like that on civilian models as they would have an instruction book or manual with the individual camera, but often official equipment is used by members of the government or military who do not have much experience using it, and the manual is not easily available when on the job or when the equipment is requisitioned from storage.

Possibly the unusual numbers represent a way of numbering the cameras that were taken from the factory for official or military use. Anomalies in the group of unusual numbers cameras, as far as exact model features, specific attributes, and where their numbers place them in relation to the features of higher or lower numbers, may very well have to do with replacement of parts, repairs during official use, as well as alterations made once the cameras left official or military use. That would seem to be usual and similar to the civilian cameras we see.

Maybe I'm wrong about it, but Jacques camera with the military - governmental style plate on the bottom is a big clue, in my opinion (and not seen before to my knowledge). The 'magnetic' or iron metal frame counter could have something to do with the camera being used in some larger device where the winding knob was moved remotely and a magnet helped to keep the winding knob up tight to the larger mechanism?

The 'missing number or cypher' by accident theory does not make much sense to me and I don't think these cameras belong to a specific series, they just have a different numbering system for official use. Passports may not have been needed if they were used by government facilities (or may have been lost in government files over the years).

I also remember that at one time, years ago, there was a theory that these cameras were assembled, or at least numbered in a separate FED facility at Lesopark. I was in contact with a Russian collector who had heard that was the case and even sent me photos of what the FED building there looked like when he took photos of it. But, unfortunately, I can't find my records or e-mails about it any more.

Best to you all, Bill



Regards, Bill

Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
Many thanks, Bill!Smile Really nice of you...
I am puzzled too by my last camera and its special features. Really, the plaque and the iron film counter are astonishing.

I had forgotten a last explanation we had already evoked in a previous post. Guido just reminds me: it's the improvement by the factory. Leica had done the same: I own for example a Leica III (slow speeds) with a Leica II serial number. And a Leica II 1932 with 1936 features. In both cases, Leitz had changed the totality of the camera without changing the serial number.

It's another hypothesis. Perhaps it is the best: it explains why we find twins.

Amitiés. Jacques.
Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply
Hello again everyone, and Bill great to see you here! Sorry for my prolonged absense, I've been travelling..

Regarding the original camera posted: all great points (especially Alfa's depiction of Soviet workplace is spot-on), a few thoughts from my end though. I am very puzzled by the warning plaque on the bottom plate, although I doubt a military connection, but may be techincal use by an organization.. it's probably the most interesting discovery I've seen in recent times with these pre-war FEDs..

I do have to argue a bit about the fact that they wouldn't engrave the numbers to match the passport. From the materials I've been reading in Soviet Photo and other pre-war articles, it seems like the FEDs before the war were almost an item of extreme luxury, a privilege to have in your possession, as these cameras very hard to find and it high deficit, and passports for those would prove your ownership as well and be on record at FED for warranty. Having multiple of these would possibly raise questions of impropriety in USSR (even consider you bourgeois). It's like having a deed to a house or a title to a car. So I can totally see them reengraving the number of the camera if it's beyond repair to match your passport...

Best regards,
Vlad
Reply with Quote Edit Reply Delete Reply

I have no problem to accept the idea to reingrave an old s/n on a new cover. Leica had done the same when improving cameras.

But I always lean upon the same obstacle. The reingraving should be made on a camera taken on the assembly line. For example, if the line works on the s/n 28xxx, and the original camera has the s/n 2500, we will find "brothers" (= same features) for the new s/n 2500 in the 28xxx. But there won't be any relation in the s/n.: nothing in the 125xx, 225xx, 325xx, etc.

Here we have a double relation in almost all my examples: features and numbers. Except for the 25726. Probably it's too much to be normal. But I don't know if my doubts are quite understandable! Big smile

It would be interesting that other owners can post pictures of their cameras... Perhaps there are several explanations?

Amitiés. Jacques.

Reply to Topic

Forum code enabled