No, this is not a wireless call sign. It represents an example of what is today called the Leica 0 (Null) Series which came between the early prototypes made by Oskar Barnack and the first production models of 1925. This one, No 105, which was used by Oskar himself and carries his name, will go under the hammer at the Leitz Auction to be held in Wetzlar on June 11.

Pre-production
In 1923 Leitz distributed somewhere between twenty and thirty cameras developed from the earlier prototypes (the UR-Leica and further developments), with various features, to factory personnel and trusted outside parties. These can truly be said to be the ‘pre-production Leicas’. The name Leica, an acronym of LEitz CAmera, did not exist then. In fact, the first appearance of the word “Leica” on an actual camera was on the II Model D, which was launched in 1932.
The No 105 camera was originally distributed to Henri Dumur, a senior manager and later company managing director. Dumur was related to the Leitz family. Barnack is listed as having initially received No 112, but there is evidence Barnack subsequently used No 105 according to available records and his own son, Conrad Barnack, who sold the camera to a US collector in 1960.
Apparently, there is also evidence that the cameras, which were not owned by the people using them, often came back to the factory for ‘updating’ and they were sometimes distributed to other parties following being worked on. The lot in this auction contains some documentation relating to the camera.
Oscar Oskar

This camera carries the name ‘Oscar Barnack’ engraved on its viewfinder. The Anglicised spelling of ‘Oskar’ as ‘Oscar’ is to be noted and while there is no evidence of when this was added, this was almost certainly after the first distribution of the camera in the 1920s.
The first batch of the 0 Series cameras, which included No 105, had non-capping shutters which meant that the lens had to be capped when winding on/shutter cocking took place. There was a clip on the front of the camera to hold a short string which was attached to a leather lens cap. As well as the leather cap, this camera also comes with a metal cap carrying the initials O.B.

There were three types of viewfinders associated with these early cameras,
- a folding finder with a ‘cross-hair’
- a tubular Galilean type with ‘cross-hair’,
- as for 2 with no ‘cross-hair’.
It is believed that this camera, like others, initially had a type 1 viewfinder, which was then replaced with type 3 and then subsequently engraved.
The photo above shows a lever with an arc marked Z, M and R to the right of the viewfinder. According to Jim Lager in “Leica – An Illustrated History – Volume I Cameras, published in 1993, this represents:
- Z = Zeitaufnahmen (Bulb) for operator timed exposures
- M= Momentaufnahmen (Instantaneous) for camera timed exposures, and
- R= Ruckwand (Rewind) for releasing the advance cogs to allow rewind
This camera did not have the first and second curtain system which appeared later. Using the M setting, the shutter speeds are not set in the usual way, but by setting a slit width with a dial giving results, according to the following table
Slit width in mm – fraction of a second = effective shutter speed
- 2 – 1/500s
- 5 – 1/200s
- 10 – 1/100s
- 20 -1/50s
- 50 – 1/25s
This, of course, reverses the situation with which we are familiar. Under this system, the higher the number, the slower the shutter speed, which reverses the cognitive approach which we have today.

Elmar
The Leitz lens is the Anastigmat which was the original 50 mm design by Max Berek, and which in turn developed over time to become the wonderful Elmar lens, ‘the lens that made Leica’. This one has apertures of f/3.5, 4.5, 6.3, 9 and 12. Later designs went to f/18
The original rewind knob on the camera was replaced by a later design for a 1 model A. Although somewhat ‘upgraded’, this would still not have been an easy camera to use. A separate rangefinder such as the FODIS could perhaps have been used for distance, but metering and film speeds were not yet fully developed. The German Scheiner exposure had been around since the 1890s, but it generally relied on comparisons between different films. DIN did not arrive until 1934 and ASA and ISO were even further down the road.
Today we have wonderful light meters and automatic and program exposure, so, for the average photographer, using a camera like this today would be difficult. Even back in the day, Barnack was forced to admit that it was initially difficult for many photographers to produce good results with “das kleine Photo-Wunder”. It was only when expert users such as Paul Wolff found out by trial and error how to produce great negatives that the camera achieved general acceptance.
Starting at €1 million
All of the above is by way of introduction to the fact that whoever buys this camera on June 11 is unlikely to walk around the streets or the countryside using it. Ease of use won’t be the only factor determining this, as the camera is likely to sell for a huge sum of money, based on previous results for similar examples, as well as its rarity, significance and provenance. The starting price will be €1m, with an estimate of between two and three million.
In my head, I can already hear people saying that every camera deserves to be used. They are mostly those that don’t understand the motivation behind collecting. Also, I can imagine people saying that is a criminal amount of money to spend on a 100-year-old camera with all of the things which are going on in the world. People collect many things, including paintings, furniture, watches, jewellery and antiques, and often pay much greater sums than this item is likely to fetch. Nothing we might say here will deter the small number of wealthy camera collectors who will bid on this item
The camera has form
But, will it fetch the predicted price level? As horse racing pundits might say, this type of camera has ‘form’.
In May 2012 another Leica 0 Series camera, No 116, fetched €2.16m, including premium, at the Westlicht Auction, the forerunner of the Leitz Auction. This was then a world record price for a camera.

The world record price for a camera was broken, again at the Westlicht Auction (now Leitz), in March 2018 when another 0 series, this time No 122, fetched a price of €2.4m, including premium.

The eagle-eyed will spot differences between the three cameras, as was common for Leitz in those days, but they are all essentially the same thing.
The No 105 camera will come to the new owner with the Nettel camera used by Barnack which was one of the items which persuaded him to invent the little 35mm camera. As previously mentioned, there will also be some documentation going with the lot.

Potted history
Who is the lucky person now selling the camera? I have heard some names, but my lips are sealed. The broad history is that Conrad Barnack acquired the camera after his father’s death. It spent some years in a museum in Munich, but after his grocery shop business had run into trouble, Conrad took back the camera and sold it to American collector Jim Forsyth around 1960.
Jim sold the camera to Frank Christian in 1969 but, thereafter, there is no further public information. What I do know is that it has changed hands on at least two more occasions. There is evidence that the camera was serviced in the early 1970s at the Leica facility at Rockleigh, New Jersey, USA, but no parts were replaced at that time.
I hope to attend the auction in Wetzlar in June. I will be writing two more articles here before the auction, one about the highlights and another one with a selection of items from the general catalogue.
I was invited to Los Angeles to view the camera on April 9, but I had already seen it in Wetzlar last September at the opening of the Ernst Leitz Museum and the event also clashed with the Leica Society (UK) meeting in Buxton where I had arranged to meet my friend Jim Lager. Jim, who is a leading authority on vintage Leicas, had shown this camera in his book ‘Leica An Illustrated History — Volume 1 – Cameras.
Whether you agree or disagree with collecting such old and valuable, but significant, items I am sure that most would agree that this is a fine-looking camera which started the heritage of Leica cameras that we still enjoy today.
Taking the risk
Without the 0 Series cameras and the decision of Ernst Leitz and his team in 1924 to ‘take the risk’ to produce the Leica camera, we would have no Leicas to play with today. I’d like to think that this article is as much a history lesson and a reminder of where the Leica camera came from as about an upcoming auction. Despite the price, there is something in this for everyone interested in the history of Leica.

Queries about this item and the Leitz Auction generally, contact:
Leitz Photographica Auction, Westbahnstraße 40A-1070, Wien — Telephone +43 1 523 56 59, Fax +43 1 523 56 59 88. Email: info@leitz-auction.com
Read more from the author on Macfilos
A cup of coffee works wonders in supporting Macfilos
Did you know that Macfilos is run by a dedicated team of volunteers? We rely on donations to help pay our running costs. And even the cost of a cup of coffee will do wonders for our energy levels.
Just so we don’t misunderstand each other:
The Leica no. 105 is most likely a true 0-series Leica, but all the rest about of the engraving and personal ownership around Oskar Barnack is just a Jim Forsyth construction in my eyes.
Thanks William,
Actually, I didn’t want to comment on the subject anymore.
In Germany I have tried to openly discuss the subject with other collectors and camera experts, but so far I have met only rejection there as well.
For example, the administrator of the German-language site “Leica Forum” immediately blocked me as an author because he was allegedly worried about the “peace” within the discussion community and characterized my statements as too polemical and provocative.
I continue to contend that the camera is fake.
Neither Oskar Barnack nor his son Conrad Barnack had anything to do with the engraving of the camera and there is no evidence to support the claim that Oskar Barnack was the owner/user of the camera.
I even suspect that even Conrad Barnack never saw the camera in this engraved condition.
But the well-known facts speak for itself and are mostly freely accessible e.g. in the LHSA Viewfinder magazine:
After the Second World War, Conrad was in dire financial straits and only owned a few items from his father’s estate that he wanted to sell. For none of these pieces did he know concrete details, of who used the pieces, when, or what their origin/purpose was, let alone about the technical details.
Among them was a draft of a cinematographic projection apparatus. Also – among other things – two Leica 0-series cameras, which users had sent back to Leitz in the 1920s after a test phase, as well as pictures and personal everyday objects of his father.
I don’t know what became of the projection apparatus, but the first 0-series Leica was still intact and could be traded for food on the black market by Conrad shortly after the war. I don’t know their number.
Does anybody know?
The other camera, the Leica No. 105 (defective) he kept and only much later (in the 1960s) offered it to James “Jim” Forsyth, a journalist from Jacksonville Florida, along with other interested parties.
The early pre-series Leica cameras were already very popular with Leica enthusiasts at this point.
Forsyth was very interested and promised Conrad a fantastic future in the US if he could get the camera and some other parts from Oskar Barnack’s estate. He even promised Conrad that he wanted to open a museum in the USA with it.
None of this has come true. Forsyth didn’t keep any of his promises to Conrad, merely sending him a series of bigger tips.
He then had the camera repaired and initially kept it in order to gradually build an urban legend with it.
In order to increase the value of the camera – and his own reputation – first he had this Leica No. 105 engraved in the USA with “Oscar Barnack” circa 1967.
Then, when he realized the error with the wrongly engraved first name, he constructed an exchange of letters with Conrad, from which it should appear that it was Oskar Barnack’s personal camera.
For this reason, in this correspondence with Conrad, his father’s first name always appeared in the misspelled form “Oscar”.
Through the engraving and with the rumored correspondence as “proof” he was able to increase the value of the camera enormously in order to then be able to sell it at a very high price. He even published the “new” history of the camera in his own publishing house for the members’ magazine of the “Barnack Leica League” from 1968 and marketed it with inflated superlatives.
20 years later – the camera has since changed hands – the urban legend has gradually become a fact. Beginning in 1989, more and more articles promulgated Forsyth’s legend as fact. For example, in LHSA Viewfinder Magazine, Issue 23, No. 2 in 1990, and then through an illustrated article by Alfred C. “Al” Clarke, who had bought the camera at a very high price in the meantime.
After Lager’s “Leica an illustrated history” was published in 1993, in which the history of the Leica No. 105 had been “undoubtedly documented,” Forsyth’s story finally became a generally accepted truth.
The value of the other 0-series Leicas had increased enormously in the meantime anyway, but due to Forsyth’s “new” story about the No.105 and the fantasy engraving he added himself in 1967/68, as well as Lager’s Leica book, the alleged “value” exploded immeasurable until 2022.
Because of this history, I have my legitimate doubts about the real value of this faked “tinkering” from 1967.
OK, but who am I…? Just one single opinion among others.
Frank
Thanks Frank. There is no need to reply further. The person who bought the camera for €14 million + should have done some due diligence, of course, and with the camera came a fat file, full of documents and correspondence, some of it originating from Forsyth. I went through this and it was not really conclusive either way, but others, including the purchaser and/or their agent, would have had an opportunity to do this. Reading the documents is not helped by Forsyth’s florid ‘circus barker’ style, particularly as regards the ‘Barnack League’. For provenance, I would not rely on the engraving, but on what Conrad Barnack may have represented to Forsyth. As regards whether this is an original 0 Series, I would rely on Ottmar Michaely.
Let’s leave it at that.
William
You justify completely uncritically and unquestioningly an – at least in my eyes – extremely questionable transaction, which can probably not be surpassed in terms of audacity.
The (supposedly) long undiscovered Leica No. 105 from the pre-series of this camera from 1923 was auctioned off on June 11, 2022 at the 40th Leitz Photographica auction in Wetzlar for the sensational price of 15 million US dollars!
An event that has captivated and excited the entire worldwide camera collector scene, isn’t it?
You’re celebrating the absurd auction proceeds for an early Leica camera said to have once belonged to Oskar Barnack himself.
Wow, the camera even bears the engraving of the original owner – in large and clear writing – the name of the (today) prominent designer of the legendary Leica: Oskar Barnack!
…but is that true, at all?
For clarification:
Oskar Barnack was German, he never spelled himself anything other than “Oskar Barnack” and his name was never before published other than “Oskar Barnack” – …until the year 2022.
This fact raises the following questions:
Why should he have engraved the English-language version of his German first name Oskar (with “c” in “Oscar”) on his own camera in 1923?
Why would someone as reserved and humble as he was did have his name engraved on his own camera in such a prominent and pompous manner, at all?
Was Oskar Barnack as prominent at the time that it was necessary?
Was it ever done this way with valuable instruments in the 1920s – or even today: to engrave your own name large and visible on the top?
And if so, why should a qualified employee at Leitz misspell the name of the chief designer (in English!) and then hand over the correspondingly wrong engraved final result – uncorrected (!) – to Oskar Barnack?
Also noteworthy:
The Leitz company had never before used a serif font for engravings – only with this unique “original”.
Hmm… serious camera collectors shouldn’t worry about such “insignificant” details. Finally, the prominent auctioneer Wolfgang Pauritsch, who was hired specifically for this 40th Leica camera auction for the first time, vouched for seriousness.
He has been known throughout the German-speaking world for many years for the well-known ZDF program “Bares für Rares”, in which he buys up rare antiques from naive private individuals.
So it was important to act quickly – what’s 15 million US dollars for such a valuable one-off, isn’t it?
Admittedly, the few details that were revealed about the camera before the auction were so sketchy and vague that one would only have smiled mildly at a comparable art auction for a rare painting:
Why hasn’t this camera been known for all these years, why has it never been mentioned before, where has it been all this time, why has there never been a picture of it before?
Well… who cares?
The Leica company, the auctioneer Paulitsch, all the fanatical camera collectors, you?
Obviously not.
If you ask concrete and critical questions about these discrepancies, you immediately get a plausible answer:
All nonsense, the camera was of course NOT engraved at Leitz at the time, but, um… much later, um… somewhere else, of course, um… namely somewhere abroad, um… by someone other than Oskar Barnack, um… someone who didn’t notice the spelling mistake at first and um…
Well, at the end of the day, any sane person thinks: if one commissions the counterfeit production of a camera in a foreign-speaking country, with such a high level of criminal energy, in order to make a fat illegal deal at an auction, then, at least, one should have told the ignorant counterfeiter the correct German spelling of the name, that he had to engrave onto the camera.
Ideally, this should be done large and clearly printed on a piece of paper!
This was possibly – or even quite obviously – neglected here.
But I may be completely wrong and there is a, um… much more harmless, um… and for everyone, um… reassuring explanation for all the discrepancies.
After all, a nice story and in the end a fat loot was distributed to everyone involved!
The entire world press fell for it – as did the highest bidder at the auction.
And probably you, too!
This reminds me a little of the “Stern” story in 1983 about the forged Hitler diaries, which was the subject of the 1992 film “Schtonk!” after the protagonists involved had been sentenced to long prison terms.
When will the Leica No. 105 story be filmed?
Who will play in this movie the roles of those facing arrest?
It might even get an Oskar, um… sorry, an Oscar.
Dear Frank, Thank you for your long contribution. I am sure the author of the article, William Fagan, will respond to most of your points.
However, part of your argument is based on the spelling Oscar rather than Oskar, which you regard as non-German usage. Until the spelling reform introduced as a result of the Zweite Orthographische Konferenz in 1901, a hard C was common in German (Cöln, Cöpernick). Barnack was born in 1879, and I believe he was named Oscar on his birth certificate (William can perhaps confirm). After 1901, there was a transition from the hard C, which is now little used in German, to K. Oscar became Oskar, and that is the spelling used most often in the Leica world. But the hard C was also in use until after the First World War, and there would have been a degree of choice in its use.
William and I discussed this issue exhaustively at the time of the publication of the article, and what appeared was a consensus that our German colleagues approved.
Mike
Dear Mike,
thank you for your quick reply.
Well, I live in Germany for 60 years and speak native German.
Oskar Barnack NEVER (!) used his first name in the way “Oscar” and nobody else in Germany did.
It is true that the spelling of city names or objects was handled differently in Germany at the time up to about 1901. However, this is not the case for personal names AFTER the First World War – never!
Anyone who was baptized with the name “Oscar” used the name in this form; as with people who were baptized with the name “Oskar”.
This has to do with the underlying system of the so-called “Taufregister” baptismal register in Germany. At the time, this register was the basis for issuing documents (identity card, driver’s license, passport, etc.).
There is and never was a publication about Oskar Barnack in the Anglo-Saxon spelling – neither by himself nor by others.
…until 2022.
And: Do you know of any Leica camera that was engraved with serif writing?
I have reasonable doubts, but I am happy to await a coherent explanation from William Fagan.
Frank
Dear Frank,
I did assume from your name that you were a native speaker, and I understand and appreciate your further explanation of the use of C and K. William will have more to say, I am sure, and I am certainly not arguing for the authenticity of this camera. With you, I share doubts, and I suppose no one will ever get to the bottom of it.
Again, thank you for your contribution to the discussion. Often, discussions here at Macfilos can add to a subject by process of debate. It is one of the most compelling features of the blog.
Mike
First of all, I missed Frank Christian’s comment from last year until. I find it interesting as it shows more information on the history of No 105. I am not wholly sure why he is sad at what has happened, but if this relates to value, the growth of global auctions on the internet has enhanced prices to a degree which was not possible or imaginable 40 or 50 years ago.
Moving on to the points by Frank Gosebruch I will try to be as brief as possible.
No 0 Series cameras were originally not sold, but were distributed by the factory for test purposes. They were back and forwards to the factory many times for alteration. Any ‘ownership’ which seems to have evolved later on happened over time and by various routes and avenues.
In the case of No 105 the camera was originally distributed to Henri Dumurr, a senior Leitz official who was related to the owners of the firm.
The camera came back to Barnack, who was in charge of the ‘Leica project’ and he used it and tested it over a period of years.
4, Barnack gave the camera to his son Conrad who put into the Munich Museum where it seems to have remained until after WWII. Conrad Barnack took it out of the museum a few times and eventually took it out for good before he sold it to Jim Forsyth.
It is generally accepted that it was Conrad Barnack who had the camera engraved ‘Oscar Barnack’ .
The Osckar v Oscar’ thing has been done to death already. Conrad always referred to his father as ‘Oscar’ and did so in a manuscript which he wrote about him in the late 1940s- I had a chance to examine that. A copy of Barnack’s wedding certificate from 1904 came with the No 105 camera and that also read ‘Oscar Barnack’. Barnack’s grave in Wetzlar reads ‘Oscar Barnack’. Yes, he always used ‘Oskar’ in his working life, but the use of ‘Oscar’ always leads back to his family and I am not going to dispute what they did.
The references to the ‘celebrity auctioneer’ used by Leitz Auction are hard to follow. As far as I am aware he has nothing to do with the auction lots other than to sell them on the day of the auction. I am not a fan of the ‘concept of celebrity’ but at least Wolfgang does provide a degree of entertainment in what might otherwise be a long and boring process.
Ottmar Michaely, the fabled camera technician, has confirmed to me that the camera itself is genuine with a number of alterations having been made during its long life. Ottmar even successfully took photographs with the camera after working on the focus mechanism.
I’ll leave it at that. The stable door is long since closed on this one.
William
Hello William,
Well, the second tombstone on Barnack’s grave in Wetzlar was obviously made and placed much later, after 1946, after the death of his wife Emma:
https://www.alamy.de/stockfoto-grabstein-von-oskar-barnack-und-emma-barnack-in-wetzlar-friedhof-deutschland-146971026.html
Was this commissioned by Conrad Barnack at the time?
Why this happened in this form, I do not know.
If Conrad Barnack didn’t engrave the camera until much later, after his father’s death, it will forever remain a mystery as to why he did it in this form. You can’t ask him about it anymore.
Hmm… “generally accepted”?
I never met Conrad Barnack while he was alive, nor do I know of any of his statements in which he is said to have used the name in the form “Oscar Barnack”. That can no longer be proven today just by claiming it.
I have never seen the original of the manuscript he wrote about him in the late 1940s and Barnack’s 1904 marriage certificate.
An original picture of the camera at the time it was in the museum in Munich would be interesting in this context.
I believe you, however, that you have personally checked all of this in the original.
But I remain skeptical about this specific camera. When it comes to a lot of money, I’ve often read very adventurous stories, already.
OK, you are of course right. As long as the highest bidder in the auction is satisfied with his purchase, you should leave it at that.
I bow my head and will be silent henceforth in puplic.
After all, the original Barnack monument in Wetzlar bears the correct name “Oskar”:
https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Oskar-barnack-2011-wetzlar-094.jpg
Frank
Thanks, Frank. Ottmar Michaely has confirmed the camera as largely original. One the changes made related to the wind on as the original cassettes for the ) Series were different to the production FILCAs I spent over an hour discussing the camera with him after the auction last year. There are photos of the camera in the Munich museum which show no engraving. The US photos I have seen all have the engraving. Conrad always used ‘Oscar’ when talking about his father. There is no 100% certainty about this, but the evidence points towards Conrad Barnack having had the engraving done.
There is no need to bow your head as everyone is entitled to his/her opinion. This must be one of the most analysed cameras in history. The best person to pass judgement on the camera is Ottmar as, not only does he have the technical knowledge, he has actually handled and worked on the camera.
William
I want to comment on the recent sale of Leica 105. I bout this camera along with a number of other important Leicas, books, persnal items that belonged to Oscar Barnark including his large plate which he used to take many of his personal photos., all except no 105 In the late 1960s I decided to build a new photographic studio in Augusta, Ga., my home town. I was the third generation of my family to own the Augusta Studio. To refurnish the new building I decided to sell off my Leica collection, all except No105. At my last Leica Collectors meeting I told all my fellow member, we had about 20 members at that time, that I would like to make sure that all my fellow members would have a chance to have 105 in their collection. I told them I decided to sell 105 at a very reasonable price $3500 to a member whoo would agree to have it in his collection for a year and then pass it on to another member for the same price. I the end it would be returned to me and I wanted to gift it to the Official Leica Museum so that all the public could very it free of charge.During the ensuring years I kept in touch with some of the members who had told me that my plan was not working because 105 was not being passed on as I had requested. During that time I was having heart difficulties, with by pass surgery and later stents. My thoughts were primarily on my health and not on Leica collecting. I am deeply saddened by what has happened to 105 and would appreciate any information as to the chain of sale of 105 so we all may know who violated this agreement. I sold it to Dr. Al Clarke to begin with and Rolf Fricke says that Al would not pass it on. Who can fill me in on the events from there. I was only 38 years old when this took place and today at 87 a lot has been lost to most memories but I am sure there are folks out there who can bring us to date on the whole story. When I sold my collection I had a total of 109 Leica cameras and many attatchments in my collection. I sold part to my friend and fellow collector Matt Isenberg of HadLyme, Conn., some to Charles Messer of Ohio, and the rest to Dr. Al Clarke of Ohio. If there is anyone out there who can help me put this puzzel together, then please respond to me at frankchristian35@gmail.com
Excellent article, William. One picky point: the 50mm slit setting produces a 1/20 sec. exposure (not 1/25). One handy way of remembering how the settings translate into sec. fractions is to divide 1000 by the slit width number.
Thanks, Alfonso. I am sure that your calculation is correct. I got the table of figures from van Hasbroeck’s book. He said that the figures were derived from observation of No 107. The difference between 1/20th and 1/25th is negligible and would have been even more so in the era of extinction meters and Scheiner etc. There was a lot of early discussion between Barnack and his contemporaries about how to get satisfactorily exposed negatives from a ‘Leica’ and it was the later work by Paul Wolff and others that made a big impact on getting great photos from ‘das kleine Photo-Wunder’.
I was hoping that I would see you at the Leica Society AGM in Buxton. Jim Lager was in sparkling form and gave a wonderful talk which covered some of the 0 Series cameras.
William
Thanks William for a wonderful article. My local camera dealer has a copy of the Barnack Leica which was produced at the beginning of this century. I can’t afford the original even if I sold my house that wouldn’t be enough.
Jean
Thanks Jean. Your analogy is a good one. Most people would take a house over a camera, of course. Still, it is interesting to watch this piece of Leica history passing through during our lifetime. One of my early cameras from 1926 is recorded as having gone back to Herr Barnack*, but I don’t think that he used it. I have always thought that was just how they described the Leitz Camera Department in those days. So if a camera went back for repairs it went back to Herr Barnack. In the case of No 105 and other 0 Series cameras, the cameras were not sold and when they came back to the factory some were redistributed and this one found its way to Herr Barnack who kept it and used it.
*Anyway, I’m not thinking of changing house soon or ever, for that matter!
William
Thanks, William, for a fascinating read – your enthusiasm shines through, as always. As others have said, I do hope 105 goes to a good home, where it will still be possible to gaze upon it on special occasions. However I have a nagging fear it may follow some ‘important’ vintage cars into some secretive private collection, probably in the far east, disappearing from public view for the foreseeable future, until no one’s quite sure whether it still exists (or ever did). I’m told that the motivation behind such acquisitiveness is just to own the thing, rather than to show off with it (as any ‘normal’ multi-billionaire should be expected to do).
Thanks Tony. It is impossible to regulate what people do with what they own. With an auction, we can see the thing and talk about it as it passes across our gaze. I have a lot more photos of the camera than have appeared in the article. Likewise, the online catalogue has more photos. I also have a nice little book about No 105 which Leitz Auction gave me when I was in Wetzlar last year. My article, though, is based on a lot more information from a wide range of sources as this camera has been ‘known’ for many years. So in a way, the auction has done us all a favour.
William
What an amazing piece of camera folklore William, thank you for sharing this informative article. I will look forward with piqued interest to the future auction highlights.
Thankfully (I can see Liz breathing a sigh of relief) this one may be a shade beyond the finances of Chateau Seargeant. So I will pass on making a bid.
Thanks Dave. Your bid will be missed! I need to start work on the highlights and the general catalogue may appear by the end of next week, but even ‘vin ordinaire’ is starting to get expensive at camera auctions these days.
William
I always wondered why other brand’s extremely rare vintage and beautiful cameras are sold for 50 € instead. I owned and used a good bunch of them. Thanks
You can still buy usable and repairable 35mm cameras for very little money and Camera Rescue in Finland do wonderful work in this area. Leicas have usually sold for more, but that has more than just functionality at its core. The camera described above is, of course, priced in accordance with totally different criteria, even by comparison with other Leicas.
William
Thank for the feedback, William. That was about the criteria. Are Leicas pieces of antiquary?
Also Sprach Lars Netopil
Z Zeitaufnahme (B)
M Momentaufnahme (regular speeds)
R Rückwicklung (rewind)
That settles it then.
William
Glad it’s settled. So many words beginning with Rück! Anything but Rückwand.
Interesting and informative article as always William. I did feel a little faint when I read the starting price and estimate!
Thanks Lisa. Just think of all the TLRs and Box Brownies you could buy for that much. I still have that Rollei manual for you. We must arrange a handover during the Summer.
William
An amazing historical article – by a collector that has superb knowledge due to a passionate interest.
Unfortunately, I am not into film anymore so I will not be bidding. Kidding aside, I hope the camera finds a good home.
Thanks Brian. I’m sure that it will sell to a good home, unless the actual seller (the current owner) has a reserve put in which cannot be exceeded. All of the strategy on that will have been sorted before the election.
William
Dear William,
thank you very much for this excellent story. I think your article shows what true enthusiasm is all about – dedication for the essence or the soul of a collectible item and not obsession for its value or even for its price. You can collect financially worthless things with all your heart and amass valuables without real involvement.
You are showing this in a subtle but unmistakable way by telling the story of this camera. Thank you for sharing this, it gives us mortals with no million ambitions and possibilities a grasp of the auction. Let’s hope that the person who wins it will see the soul of the object he or she just bought and not only the price tag…
Best wishes, Jörg-Peter
PS: The Rückwand can’t be anything else than a long proliferated error (think of iron in spinach). A Rückwand is rear wall and nothing else. R must stand for Rückspulen or rückwärts (with respect to the film movement).
Thanks Jorg-Peter. Everything is built on top of what came before it and Leica cameras are no different to anything else in that regard. As for what ‘R’ means, well we know what it really means, even if there is discussion about the correct German word. Mike and yourself are right about ‘Ruckwand’, but I was quoting a respected text. I showed the article to Jim Lager tonight and he was very pleased with it. He even borrowed John Wilson’s term above and addressed me as ‘Professor Fagan’ when replying. Jim has a wonderful sense of humour, as well as being an absolute gentleman, as Mike can also attest.
William
Thank you so much William – what an interesting story, I think that it’s wonderful that all this history is kept alive . . . fortunately I don’t feel the need to own the history!
all the best
Jono
Thanks Jono. I’ve just been told by someone at Leica told that nobody can tell this story like an avid collector. I have a fair chunk of Leica history in my own collection, but my aspirations stop well below the value of this item.
Hope to see you at some Leica events during the year.
William
Holy Cow £1 million, Mike must be the seller, is that the model camera that was issued as a replica? I get confused on these early film cameras, just wish I had courage try one! Thank for fascinating history lesson Professor of Leica, much appreciated.
I didn’t want to spoil William’s fun… but I’ve booked my luxury vacation in Shangrila-on-Sea.
No, John, it is 1 million Euros, but I did not say that the current owner was European. I am not the seller, of course. I have bought many Leicas, but have never sold one. My latest purchase at the weekend was a ‘Half Ball Race’ Leica IIIc, which is perhaps an interesting concept to conjure with. It was much less than 1 million Euros as indeed are most of the items in the 11th of June auction. I will do further articles on the more humble fare to be found in the auction catalogue. I will try to make the articles as much about the history of the cameras as about the prices they may fetch.
William
Thanks William for this fascinating piece of history. I just wonder what it must have been like at the time to use this camera vs. what was typically available. It must have felt like a revolution.
Thanks. That is the main point. Barnack had stories about photographers coming back to him and throwing their cameras at him as if to say ‘I cannot get any good negatives out of this thing’. But then Paul Wolff and others came back with tips about exposure and development which, when widely disseminated, aided the take up of 35mm photography and Leica sales through the creation of low grain negatives. In a sense this was part of the ancestry of the Leica Akademie.
William
I’m no German speaker (at least not since A’ Level German back in the 1980s), but I’d always assumed that the ‘R’ on Leicas stood for ‘ruckwarts’ (with two umlauts), menaing reverse.
It’s a possibility… Rückwärts (don’t you just love those Umlauts) means “backward”. It’s marginally nearer the intent than “back wall”. Let’s see what the native German-speaking readers have to say. I’m just an Auslander. I’m still placing my bets on “Rückspulen”.
‘Reverse’ or ‘rewind’ would capture the intended meaning. Whatever about ‘Ruckspulen’, I am reminded by this that a ‘Wand’ was probably compulsory at ‘Hogwarts’. I would be interested in any further contributions on the linguistic side of the article. I will be distributing it tonight to a number of German speaking and will report back any findings.
William
Great article, William, yet again demonstrating your in-depth knowledge of vintage Leicas.
As you know, when editing your copy I mentioned the interpretation of “R” engraved on the top plate. According to Jim’s book, it stands for “Ruckwand” (to be picky, this should be Rückwand with an Umlaut). Unfortunately, this translates as “rear wall”. I cannot imagine any way in which the R was ever meant to represent rear wall. I have always interpreted the R as “Rückspulen” which does indeed mean rewind. It does sound more logical.
We decided to leave it as “Ruckwand” since we are quoting the book here and it isn’t up to us to reinterpret what has been a published record for over 30 years. However, I would be interested to hear if any native German speakers can explain “Rückwand” in this context. I stand to be corrected if anyone can see a connection between “rear wall” and “rewind”. Perhaps it is some arcane usage from the 1920s, of which I know nothing. Naturally, I discussed this with our colleague Jörg-Peter Rau (with Umlaut, therefore he must be German) and he cannot envisage any way in which Rückwand was ever used for “rewind”.
Please put us out of our misery, someone! I have raised this as a matter of record for future reference so let’s get it right.
Thanks Mike for your kind words. I’m happy to leave the final word to my good friend, Mr Lager. For the record, respected Leica authors Dennis Laney and Paul Henry van Hasbroeck both said that R= rewind which, of course, is correct in English. I should also add that two Leica experts who are native German speakers had no problem with the article when they saw the draft. I was, of course, intending this article to be about the origins of the Leica camera rather than a lesson in translation. There is more to this camera than the huge price it may attract.
William
Good day,
“Ruckwand” (or better “Rückwand”) may just refer to the back door when used in connection with a camera. I agree that this hardly makes sense in this case. Well, one probably could construct a sentence like removing the “Rückwand” after rewinding the film, but that seems a bit far-fetched. As a native German speaker, I agree with you, Mike, that “Rückspulen” is the most likely candidate for “R”.
Best regards,
Joachim
PS: Very informative article, as usual, William! Thanks.
Thanks Joachim. It looks like Ruckspulen is now ahead on points or, in horse racing terms, by a neck ahead of Ruckwarts.
I’ll do the final tally after the votes of the full German jury come in. Apologies for the Eurovision allusion!
William