The year was 1967 when I acquired my Leica IIIa screw-mount camera. I was a student in the town of Reading, which lies some 35 miles west of London in England. It was before I packed my bags and moved to Australia, where I’ve lived on the East Coast for the best part of 50 years. It was already nearly 30 years old, and something of a veteran in the heady days of the newfangled rangefinder Leica M3. I wrote about the camera here on Macfilos five years ago.
The Leica IIIa was not my first camera. My interest in photography had started at the age of thirteen when I acquired and a Halina 35X, an inexpensive Leica lookalike, made in China. The Halina was followed by a rather unusual little SLR, an Exa, made in Wiesbaden by the Wirgin Camera Company.
Although I took some very acceptable photos with the Exa, I had started to read the UK photography magazines, in particular the venerable Amateur Photographer. I had a definite itchy shutter finger. I had convinced myself that what I really needed was one of the new Japanese single-lens-reflex jobbies which were then taking over the market.
Sadly, I could not afford one. Being a university student and living away from home, complete with a motorbike and a steady girlfriend, did not leave surplus cash. But it was a chance glance into the window of Whitby’s camera shop in Reading that started me on a lifetime of Leica ownership.
Part exchange
I exchanged the Exa for a Leica IIIa with an Elmar 50mm f/2.8 lens, a bright line 50mm viewfinder, a genuine lens hood and the original Leica strap. The camera had been manufactured in 1938 and so when I purchased the body it was already nearly 30 years old. The lens was a later addition, manufactured in 1958. The camera would probably have been equipped with a 50mm f/3.5 Elmar lens when originally sold.
The Leica had been taken in by Whitby’s in part exchange on a Japanese SLR. I made a good buy that day.
The Leica may well have been old when I bought it, but it served me well for ten years. I took hundreds of photos with it—mainly black and white but also colour slides with Kodachrome. A few examples are scattered around this article. Today I am surprised at how good those early photos are, particularly the colour shots taken on Kodachrome, which has a very slow ISO rating of 10!
I took the Leica IIIa on a university expedition to the north of Norway in 1967 and my father treated me to a Weston Master exposure meter for the occasion. Now I was a serious photographer. The four black and white photos below were taken on that expedition in a very isolated valley very close to the Arctic Circle. There were wonderful portrait opportunities in that valley but sadly I only took up a few of them.
At that time, I was processing and printing my black and white photos and colour printing from colour slides with Cibachrome. I only disbanded my home darkroom in 1998. Now I know how toxic the Cibachrome processing chemicals were, I count myself lucky still to be alive!
Leica displaced
By 1982, I was living in Australia and the Leica was displaced when I succumbed to the siren call of a Japanese SLR in the comely form of an Olympus OM-2. A superb camera. In the intervening 41 years, I have owned cameras from many manufacturers and of all shapes and sizes, including quite a few Leicas. But by good luck rather than design, I never traded in the Leica IIIa and have kept it carefully stored away all these years.
Until 2008, the Leica was stored unused in a drawer. I did once buy a film to put through it but never found the time to even load it let alone shoot it. In 2015, I used the Leica’s Elmar lens on my Sony a7 using an adapter and the results were excellent. One of the photos from this short-lived trial is below.
When I moved house in 2008, I put the Leica on display on the top shelf in my home office, right under a skylight. The house was close to the sea and the atmosphere can be very corrosive, particularly when the surf is up. I had a large outfit of Leica M lenses and a Leica M6 at that time. But, in the first flush of digital enthusiasm, as I sold the lot rather than keeping them largely unused in that corrosive atmosphere.
Leica ignored
The IIIa however stayed, largely ignored, under the skylight exposed to UV in the salty air for 14 years. I am ashamed to say that the old lady from Wetzlar really suffered as a result.
Then, last year, as I cleared my house before sale, friend and Macfilos contributor, Wayne Gerlach, spied the Leica and volunteered to take it to a repairer in Sydney, vivalafilm.com, for a full restoration job.
It was a timely and very fortunate intervention. Vivalafilm have done an excellent job: Exposed metal surfaces cleaned and corrosion gone. Full strip down. Lens disassembled, and accessible surfaces cleaned of mould and fungus. New shutter curtains, new leatherette covering. The list goes on. But, in short, a comprehensive refurbishment for the old girl in her 86th year.
The camera was returned to me just a few weeks ago, and I visited our local camera shop — a very rare survivor of the breed — and purchased a Fuji 200 ISO 200 colour negative film to run through it. It took me longer to shoot the film than I had anticipated, but the results are now at hand.
The camera is a delight to hold. It’s not difficult to think that the designer of the Leica X1 was familiar with a IIIa before putting pencil to paper or mouse to pad. It is small and sits easily in the hand, but it is not light for its size by modern standards, at 650g, complete with lens.
For those not familiar with pre-M Leicas, the screw-mount (LTM, or Leica Thread Mount) models, which were manufactured for nearly 30 years until the late nineteen-fifties, had an odd approach to focusing and composing. At least, it seems odd now. In the day, though, this was second nature to keen photographers. It does take some getting used to for anyone familiar with the more modern combined viewfinder and rangefinder on current Leicas. That’s where the “M” comes in. It stands for Messsucher (yes, only German can give you three sss in a row) which can be translated roughly as “measuring viewfinder” or focus viewfinder.
Two eyepieces
The Leica IIIa camera has two eyepieces. One is for the rangefinder and the second for the viewfinder. The rangefinder window is tiny and very difficult to use, particularly with my weakening eyesight. The viewfinder is only marginally better. However, the Leica bright line accessory viewfinder which came with the camera is excellent. I thoroughly understand why the previous owner had purchased it.
There is, of course, no exposure metering. Since I no longer have an exposure meter, I downloaded the Lightmeter app for my iPhone, and it worked surprisingly well.
By the end of the 36 exposures, I felt that I was beginning to handle the camera intuitively. I was even remembering to wind the film on after every exposure. However, by today’s standards, using the camera is very slow work. I take my hat off to Henri Cartier Bresson and all the other early photographers who so effectively used these early Leicas.
I have mixed feelings about the results. The grain seems intrusive, and I had problems with accurate focusing down to operator error. Camera shake was also an issue.
A selection of photos from the test film are below. Next I will try a black and white film, but the reality is that I cannot see myself using the IIIa beyond that. It is an octogenarian camera, and photography has moved on so much. But the Leica IIIa remains a beautiful mechanical marvel from another age.
Read more from John Shingleton
Visit the author’s blog, The Rolling Road
Signing up for the Macfilos newsletter
The SUBSCRIBE button (below) is now working again. If you have recently been unable to register for the Macfilos newsletter, please try again now. We apologise for the error which crept in during the recent site redesign. If you have any other queries or wish to contact us, use the CONTACT button.
Very nice article on the IIIa. I have one from about 1936 which after a cla works great. Been a M shooter since the 70’s with M2 and M3. Shooting a Barnack Leica different experience but no less enjoyable. Never went digital as film is my passion.
I noticed that you got the Leica 50 mm finder to fit. I have the same finder and it doesn’t fit. I believe that these fit later Leica Barnacks like the IIIf and IIIG and M’s. So how did you get yours to fit the IIIa?
Gary, the viewfinder was with the camera when I purchased it and I have never experienced any problems with it going into the accessory shoe.
I’ve never seen it mentioned anywhere but I think the accessory shoe changed with the IIIc and the switch to a single-piece body casting, rather than one with a visible divide between the body and rangefinder. This may have been to incorporate extra contacts in the shoe for on-camera flash guns. Certainly my VIOOH universal finder is a snug fit on my IIIf, but (dangerously) loose on my IIIa – the the extent that it once slipped out and needed its prism re-cementing (Doh!). Knowing Leitz, its quite possible that later shoe-mounted accessories (including finders) were slimmed down to fit the tighter shoe. – so I wonder if your IIIa was synchronised for flash at some point, with the later style of shoe? Also out of interest whether your 50mm finder fits your Ms or is too ‘portly’ for them, too?
Ah, the Leica lllA, what a gem. Mine, a hand-me-down, is from 1939, and came with the uncoated Summar 2/50mm. A fast but very soft lens, both image-wise and materially speaking; it scratches very, very easily. A soft type of glass was used, I read somewhere. An Old Delft 3,5/35 mm came with it, together with its dedicated viewfinder.
It was my dad’s, who, on his turn got it from the director of the chemical factory where he worked. It became my first serious camera when I was about 16 years old. I got An Elmar 3,5/50, which was a huge improvement particularly in terms of contrast. Being a student as well, I only had money to buy a Jupiter 4/135 as a telephoto lens, which triggered my interest in bird photography – despite the fact that one needs far longer lenses.
Thousands of pictures I have taken with this small set, for which I made a small wooden case, clad with faux leather. I still cherish it, but it seldomly leaves the house. There are many almost romantic stories about the lllA tot be found on the internet. A Leica as reverent as the lllA clings to people. At least to me, I won’t well it, ever.
My most valued camera, a Balda Super Baldina, was my father’s and was the subject of my first ever article for Macfilos. It is a camera which I would never sell. I have two or three Leica IIIas, definitely an early one, which featured here in my ‘Swiss Photos’ article, and a later one which was altered for flash sync in the Leica factory post World War II. I may have another one somewhere. Some people prefer the widely separated rangefinder and viewfinder on the IIIa to the closer together items on the IIIb.
As regards the Summar, I have an ‘accidental collection’ of 12 of them, including an early Rigid Summar which I used to photograph Editor Evans at Leica Mayfair on one occasion. I must be lucky with my collection of Summars, as I find most of them to be excellent. See my ‘Last Rose of Summar’ article on Macfilos. That said, the little 50mm Elmar is an excellent lens which rarely flares or has issues of any kind. It truly was ‘the lens that made Leica’. A well tuned IIIa and 50 Elmar combination should provide you with excellent photos as long as you want to use it.
William
I recall Whitby’s was still trading in Reading in the 1980s.
Great to hear that your IIIa has had a new lease of life, John. I think I commented on this camera a few years ago, before you got the work done on it. To Tony’s points, I go for about 21 perforations. I love the look given by uncoated lenses, but I’ve never had to add any extra exposure. I agree with John that as one gets older using a rangefinder becomes more difficult, although a cataract operation which I had earlier this year has helped. I love using older cameras with no rangefinders and just zone focus available. It is very liberating. I got a very nice roll of images using a Leica Compur B from 1928 earlier this year. Mike saw the camera at the Photographica Camera Fair in May and I might do a piece on it for Macfilos. Not only does it not have a rangefinder, but the wind on and the shutter are disconnected which leaves open the possibility for double exposure. I actually prefer the widely spaced rangefinder and framing windows on the IIIa to the joined up items on the IIIb.
I am very fond of the LTM Leicas, as they have a size and simplicity of function which is most appealing.
William
Thanks for a feature that rang a few bells. My 1935 IIIa was my first Leica, arriving as a very special birthday present when it was a sprightly 42, twice my age at the time. It’s now put up with me for more than half its current lifespan and still comes out to play two or three times a year, so that each of us keeps our hand in. Those who’ve only seen such things as props in historic movies are somewhat shattered to hear that it really does take pictures. Of course, there are quirks, ready to trip up any new user of a ‘Barnack’ Leica. These days you ideally need to trim a longer film leader for easier loading (about 21 perforations long is best). Wear a lens hood at all times, especially with earlier uncoated lenses like my 5cm Summar (don’t laugh, that will also ensure you’ve removed the lens cap – otherwise it’s surprisingly easy to lose any vestiges of street cred, with no built-n metering to warn you of unexpected darkness). Uncoated lenses also like around an extra stop added to the exposure, to compensate for the light bouncing around inside among the elements. Enjoy the experience.
For me, this article raised an interesting issue.
After reading recent posts on the M6, I pick up my M240, think ‘Wouldn’t it be nice to have something as thin and light as the older Leica (Leicas? Leicae?). Your article made me realize that’s nostalgic romanticizing. Using these older cameras requires a great deal of technical knowledge and skill. By comparison, an M240 with an EVF can be used more like a point-and-shoot (as well as a serious camera).
Along those lines — I was really taken with the photos you took in Norway. Not only the portraits but also the lovely image of the boat heading out. Magic stuff! when you have he skill to do it.
I use my 1939 vintage IIIa a lot – it is my favorite 35mm film camera (just beating out my wonderful Nikon F2 titan which is also a joy to use). I use mine mostly with the 5cm Summar lens of its era, but I’ve recently found a very nice, ultra-fast, modern lens for it – the Summarit 5cm.
In spite of its age, and the absence of metering, autofocus, auto-wind, etc etc, it still makes pictures just as good as any new(er) 35mm film camera. The basics – the essence – remains the same.
Dear John, thank you so much for sharing this story and your images. I never really used a screw mount Leica and I do try to steer off these ones because I am so afraid a collection might be the result. But what I know is that working with such a camera needs much experience and dedication. Add enough talent, and here we go with your experience. Thanks for sharing again and I hope your beautiful camera will get a second lease of (active!) life. All the best, Jörg-Peter
A resurrected IIIa is anything but a flop. These cameras are still very capable of producing excellent images, if the user is up to the task and knows how to properly operate the camera. Bringing this beauty back to life was money well spent IMHO.
Find a college student like u that has the enthusiasm but not the cash, surprise that person anonymously thru the school.
I actually did that about 15 years ago with a IIIa and a 50/3.5 Elmar..
Lovely article John! Your fine images are no surprise given both the equipment and your long history as a photographer.
I myself came to SM Leica later than you, only after being bitten by the Leica bug and then wanting to see exactly what is was like shooting with them. Before that, it was Nikon SLRs yielding to Leica Ms. So, mostly 40 years ago. Given the SM camera’s peculiarities that you mention and which of course I too experienced with them, it was so very satisfying anyway to shoot with such a highly precise piece of equipment. Mine were mostly a rather run-down-looking postwar IIIc, and later an equally beat-up IIIg. But despite their externals, their feelings of precision is what I remember most. That was so addictive that I tried improving them by adding a rapid winding after-market gadget, and even had a local machinist make up several replacement rewind knobs that had a little crank embedded in them.
The other wonderful thing about them was their relatively light weight as compared to my Nikons, and now to my M10s. And with a collapsible lens and lens cap, they would fit in a large pocket.
Nowadays, I no longer have a darkroom and while I could develop Tri-X in a daylight tank and then scan, I am too lazy too do this. So, I really wish that Leica saw fit to make a digital SM camera, as faithful to the IIIc or IIIf as possible. Why nort Of course it would be heaver than the originals, but I’d simply love to use it.
Ed