This is a nice reference to the Leica IIIc in the professional photography world .http://www.nicobastone.com/Leica_3c.htm
The Leica IIIc straddled WWII, a long-running model, featuring a solid die-cast body; this made it more durable than its predecessors. It was worthy of many photography greats. How many world-famous photographs were taken with a Leica? Your guess may be as good as mine, if indeed you know much of the history of photography.
Henri Cartier-Bensen is considered one of the greatest photographers of the Twentieth Century. This link shows a few of his photographs. Notice they are black and white, and they were taken with the Leica IIIc.
http://www.afterimagegallery.com/bresson.htm
I feel something special when I use one of these old relic's such as the Leica IIIc or similar wind-knob models. It is the feel of precision mechanical engineering. I feel it with other vintage German cameras, or Swedish Hsselblads, or even Swiss or German firearms.
Switzerland was never been occupied by a foreign power during the Tentieth Century. The Scmidt-Rubin K-31, in 7.5 Swiss caliber, was used by the the Swiss Civil Militia. Since its inception in 1931 until the early 1960's, the K-31 was issued to every able-bodied young Swiss man. The militia drills once a month with these fine rifles. Thes rifles are con sidered the Swiss watches of firearms, the most accurate military long rifles ever made. I love these wonderful rifles. The action is as smooth as butter. In the hands of a marksman, they can't be beat. Do you know who, on the whole, are the greatest marksmen in the world? One guess.
The Leica IIIc is this kind of a precision instrument, with just as important a history as the K-31. They have recorded life and death and the greatest ugliness of humankind, as well as the extreme beauty of it all.
They are not artificial. They are special. I was a slow convert, but a convert to these old fellows, I am.
The following link tells more technical information about these old Leica's, from someone who knows more than I do.
http://cameraquest.com/ltmcam.htm
One of my childhood photographer heroes was Alfred Eisenstaedt who lived though most of the Twentieth Century. He was one of the first photographers to adopt the small 35 mm format Leica IIIc and similar models to do the big job of world news photography. He snapped the famous photography of the sailor who kissed the lady in Time Square upon hearing the end of WWII.See this link for some of his famous images. http://www.answers.com/topic/alfred-eisenstaedt
Let me be perfectly clear, even though it may bring the universe down upon me, I don’t much like most Leica cameras. There. It is out! It is not an entirely rational thing, although I am pretty sure a rational mind could arrive at the same conclusion. It is more born of my intolerance of intolerance. That is to say, I am snobbish toward snobs.
And those who own Leica cameras are largely snobs. In a sense, aLeica IIIc camera is a true pain in the hiney to use. I had one for years. I often cite my dad’s Yashica 44 LMas the first adjustable camera I ever had. That’s not really true. In an old chest of miscellaneous junk, I had several old rangefinder 35mm cameras from as far back as I recall.
I didn’t use them much, because I had a not entirely founded opinion of 35 mm cameras in general. I preferred the utility of medium and large format cameras for their wonderfully clear images due to the larger negatives. I considered 35’s mere play things.
There have been periods in my career when I intentionaly handicapped myself by limiting my photographic efforts to the purist forms of artistic expression though one camera and one lens. If you've read my blog, you may know that the Leica IIIc was one of the models I did this with. You absolutely can not do all the same things with such an instrument as you can with one of the digital wonders, which I too enjoy today. No. You can't. But you can do so much more with your own creative genius when unleased by breaking your dependence on all of those whistles and bells. You'll be a better photographer for it.
I had an early Leica, an early Konica, and an early Argus. I simply didn’t like the looks of the Argus. I later learned that it had been dubbed, “the brick”, by photographers of its time. I liked the looks of the Konica and the Leica, but I didn’t like the whole hassle of loading them, the lens/range-finder issues, and odd as it sounds, I found them too small and light for my taste.
I recognized Leica cameras as one of the famous brands, but I thought it was for their newer models. Even if I could have afforded one of those models, I would never have spent the amount required to acquire one. I have always been frugal and pragmatic. Although I would have readily spent the bucks on a medium format Hasselblad, I would never have spent the requisite arm an leg for even a moderately used, newer Leica.
Although I remain unrepentant, it is for another set of reasons. I consider myself a world-class photographer. I don’t know if the term carries with it a specific set of criterion, but here’s how I figure it I have taken pictures all over the world, even some really exotic or nasty places, I have had many pictures published since the age of twelve or thirteen, I have sold many of my images fairly consistently when I have gone into that mode, so I know people like them. I have made many postcard scenes in bulk and have always run out of them fairly quickly. I feel something when I take a great photograph—and the feeling seems to be a good predictor of my audiences favorite images.
And I have aggregated among other photo-journalists with the best of them, while covering world events, and I can talk the talk, and walk the walk, as well or better than any I have ever encountered. Like the old one-season TV show staring Walter Brenner as a character who used to say say, “No brag just fact.”
The funny thing is that I have often observed the pecking order of these journalist based upon the kind of equipment they used. There are by far more Canon and Nikons out there in the field of journalism than any other cameras. There are always a few Leica’s though. Their owners wear them like fur stoles which I don’t believe in either.
While I have killed most species of game and fur-bearing animals with both firearms and bows with arrows—I have never again sought them with steel traps, since my first trapping expeditions in the arctic. I am soft on animals unless I am using them for some necessary cause, such as lean meat to eat for health, or leather or fur to keep warm. I don’t need the latter. And I cannot approve of the horrors the trapped creatures endure during their capture.
I have known of legs gnawed off in steel traps. Yet furs remain a status symbol among the wealthy, or more likely, the wannabe wealthy. I have even observed vegetarian Green-Peace types throw their standards to the wind, once they felt it necessary to demonstrate to the world that they had presumably arrived at some place financially. Cameras should not be used for such petty things.
I have even been guilty myself, albeit in my younger years, of showing off my expensive gear when arriving on location, and then deferring to my ragged out old army surplus gas mask bag full of beat up, though functional medium-tier equipment when I actually left to follow my assignment.
I have photographed, upon invitation, heads of state, including a very popular US President. Many of the places I have shot are more conducive to being killed for your fancy equipment, or at least having it routinely ripped off or confiscated. I have fancied myself as adventure photographer.
Around the turn of the millennium, I joined a High Adventure Photography Tour Group. It sounded like my kind of deal. When I invited the group director to allow general participation in my tours, she informed me that their people would not be interested in live-fire (especially at them), poisonous snakes and spiders, and covert operations. I never did find out how high their adventures got.
My point is, that these cardboard-cutout wannabes, with their latest greatest elitist toy cameras, garner more disdain from me than any degree of respect. Real journalists laugh at them. Not-with-standing, some of the greatest news photographers of the last century did use Leica Cameras as their tools. I just never personally knew any of these my photographic heroes. I was born three decades too late.
As a youth, I worked as a flunky, for a cool photographer named Bill Ward. He was a good photographer, and a good guy—if a little snotty himself. I was included for a time, if only just barely, within his sphere of, well, snot.
The first half of the Twentieth Century was one of the most important, though tumultuous, periods of all time. Among the most tumultuous were the years that happened during the years of the Leica IIIc's manufacturer 1941 top 1950. The Lieca IIIc, has perhaps photographed more important events than any other camera model.
If anyone had reason to be so, it was Bill. He had a lot of great contacts. His brother John,was the publicist for one of THE Rockefeller boys. WhenWin was the governor of my state, his son Winnie, who was a few years older than I, would come ‘round the studio, with all of his branded gear.
Not only did Winnie have his Hasselblads and Leicas out the wazoo, they were gold-plated and what not. His pictures were not even marginally as good as mine—God rest his soul. It wasn’t his fault he had money to burn. So I have always had a bit of a chip on my shoulder about such things. It happens.
When I finally did gain an interest in the old Leica and the Konica (I gave the Argus away) residing in that junk box, it was not for reasons of elitism. It was because my retro-interests had given me an appreciation for their historical roles in the evolution of photography. I took an interest in making the best photographs that I could, given the limited functionality of these vintage pieces. It always gives me a reverent resonance to juxtapose myself into the minds of those photographers who used these tools for greatness.
This Leica IIIc is the most plentiful model of the old screw-mount Leicas. It was produced longer. It had a great run. Still it is getting harder and harder to find these in any kind of decent shape. Mine works quite well, it is even cosmetically in good condition. Not perfect, by any means but as my pictures illustrate, it is very good. It has few dents or defects, the covering is good.
The black lens and filters themselves and the one auxiliary finder have some brassing. Even the leather camera case is in entirely in tact. The lens casers are in outstanding shape. The original manual is a little brittle, but aside from the front cover being completely detached, it is in excellent condition, too.
Konica Model I
My Konica is made well enough. The brittle leatherette covering is coming off in flakes. I suppose I should recover it, but probably won't. Otherwise, it will be functioning for a long time. I will readily tell you though, it is no Leica. Not just because the lenses and finders wo't interchange either. The Japanese are great engineers. This camera is no exception. But it was an early attempt. Thise companies who merely copied the Leicas don't even compare to the Leicas in feel and operation. I have made a few cameras. As a hobby gunsmith, I have all the required metal working tools and precision instruments to do a good job. I have access to superior materials. One day I may make a camera that meets the Leica bar--but I doubt it. I can't even tell exactly what makes the difference. But there is a tangible difference, which I have already alluded to.
I believe my Konica is a model I, which is actually Konica’s second model. It uses a Hexar lens, which is known to be of among the very sharpest type lens ever made—so much more remarkably, from that era. It takes very nice pictures.
The historic rung that the Konica occupies is as one of the first models of 35mm rangefinder cameras ever produced by the great Japanese photographic company, Konica. The lenses from the era including both of these rangefinder cameras did not have near the science behind their coatings. Coatings were just being employed for the routinely, primarily to decrease the phenomenon of double imaging which could happen under certain conditions of refraction through glass--it is akin to the multi-tailed blure we get wehn our eyes are tire and we are driving a night. the points of light begin to take on ragged edges. The coating really do help this phenomenon.
I have used these cameras for color photographs with good results. And I will soon post some images from each as compared to other cameras, both film and digital, using modern lens coatings. You can tell the difference as you will see when I post the examples from each, but you may be surprised, at how little difference—given all the fanfare of modern formulations and coatings.
However, I most enjoy these cameras most for the images I make using good, low-speed black and white films, self-developed and printed to the old news submission sizes. When so doing I feel that I am more nearly using them within the environment and application for which they were designed. This is where these vintage photographic treasures shine brightest.
