Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/07/05

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Leica H, Leica IIIc, and the Baneful Influence of the Contarex
From: marcsmall at comcast.net (Marc James Small)
Date: Thu Jul 5 11:28:26 2007
References: <200707051436.l65EZava073720@server1.waverley.reid.org> <C8205470-C6F1-41BD-9FD4-A49C0D9EA340@optonline.net>

At 12:34 PM 7/5/2007, Lawrence Zeitlin wrote:
 >The actual number was
 >361,691.

 >As far as Adam Wagner's Leica Model H, Emil shows the patent number
 >as 1,233,250. I assume it was the German patent. I was unable to find
 >the equivalent US patent however I did locate the Canadian patent. It
 >was assigned to Ernst Leitz GMBH. Clearly this implies that it was a
 >"work for hire" produced as a condition of Wagner's employment rather
 >than an independent project.

Larry

This camera was part of the first block of IIIc 
bodies and dates from 1940.  It was one of 5,070 IIIc's made in that year.

We are really not to far apart on Adam Wagner and 
the Leica H, but there is a bit more to the tale.

Leica experienced a total lack of demand when 
they produced the Leica 72 in the early 1950's, 
and only around 180 were produced at Wetzlar and 
Midland.  They then produced the Leica Box as a 
concept camera but there was absolutely no 
interest by Ernst Leitz III to manufacture this.

Adam Wagner's background and expertise was in LTM 
cameras.  The cessation of LTM production in 1959 
meant that there was no longer a position for him 
at Leitz.  He then asked to be kept on to develop 
the Leica H.  Ernst Leitz III agreed in order to 
protect Wagner's retirement but told Wagner 
before he started that the Leica H, like the Box, 
was to be a concept camera only and would not be 
placed in quantity production.  Leitz just had no 
interest in repeating the disaster of the 
72.  Wagner got full retirement when he left and 
there were no hard feelings towards him by Leitz 
management, though Wagner seems to have held 
quite the grudge against the mavens of Wetzlar.

The decision not to pursue an SLR in the middle 
1950's was a simple and relatively wise 
decision.  The guys at Wetzlar only had to glance 
over to Stuttgart to note how Zeiss Ikon was no 
longer making a profit (the last was in 1954, I 
believe) due to the development and production 
costs for the Contarex which, by the time of its 
introduction in 1959/1960 (it was introduced 
twice), was making the Zeiss Ikon balance sheets 
resemble hospital bedsheets from 
Stalingrad.  Kodak AG endured similar fiscal 
horrors when it began to shift from the Retina RF 
to the Retina SLR lines.  Zeiss Ikon was 
ultimately backed by the Carl Zeiss lensworks, a 
phenomenally profitable concern by 1958, while 
Kodak AG was backed by Rochester.  Leitz had no 
such underpinnings:  their only financial 
reserves were the personal wealth of the Leitz 
family, and that was not that large.  Leitz could 
not risk significant  financial losses and 
available funding had to be dedicated to their 
leading M3 and M2 line which, at the least, they 
were able to produce with some profit or at least 
parity:  Leitz' fiscal woes only came with the 
introduction of the Leicaflex and successors.

The most successful Postwar camera line produced 
by Zeiss Ikon was the Contaflex SLR line, a 
camera system narrowly aimed at advanced amateurs 
and quite popular.  Zeiss Ikon made a mistake 
from the hubris of insisting on making the 
ultimate SLR system with the Contarex:  had they 
simply absorbed Voigtl?nder, rationalized the 
lines, and stuck with the money-making Contaflex 
while shifting RF production from the Contax IIa 
and IIIa to the IV, we would probably still have 
true Zeiss Ikon products in our camera 
stores.  Leitz missed the boat by not producing a 
rival line on the order of the Contaflex, a 
quality camera with a few add-ons and auxiliary 
lenses.  This could have been a cash-cow 
providing the necessary fiscal underpinnings to 
allow the proper development of a capable top-end SLR.

The running joke among Zeiss historians is that 
Zeiss Ikon lost money on every Contarex they made 
and sold so few that they couldn't even make up 
for it in volume.  The Contarex was such a hyped 
vehicle that it caused Pentacon-to-be to cease 
production of the very promising Praktina, the 
first professional-level SLR.  The extreme cost 
of the Contarex was known throughout the German 
camera industry by 1955 and influenced Leitz to 
avoid developing a quality SLR and also caused 
Franke & Heidecke to defer introduction of a 
medium-format SLR for a decade.  It caused Kodak 
AG to shift from production of high-end technical 
and scientific cameras and aim only at the 
amateur market.  Und so weiter.  Hindsight is 
always 20-20 but, in the end, the Contarex 
provided a horrible example.  (It would have been 
better had they all looked to Voigtl?nder as a 
better example, as the Braunschweig Boys managed 
to shift from the Prominent RF to the Bessamatic 
and Ultramatic SLR's with minimal financial problems and decent sales.)

The Contarex was a superb camera and its lens 
line was to become the best ever offered for a 
system camera.  But it failed to maintain the 
presence of the Contax RF in professional 
service, it failed to penetrate deeply into 
scientific and technical markets, and it sold 
miserably to the amateurs who had so loved the 
Contax RF and the Contaflex.  It was not defeated 
per se by the Nikon F:  it was defeated by Zeiss 
Ikon's insistence that it be better in all 
regards than the Nikon F and the Praktina, which 
caused it to be priced beyond all reason in a very competitive market.

Leitz would probably have done best to have 
produced a relatively inexpensive SLR aimed at 
the amateur market while developing a quality SLR 
system.  As it was, they had little to offer and 
then threw everything they had to developing the 
Leicaflex which came late to a market already 
dominated by the Nikon F.  (And Leitz, Zeiss 
Ikon, and Franke & Heidecke failed to properly 
support professionals, where Nikon bent over 
backwards to provide loaner bodies and loaner 
lenses even in isolated locations and on an 
emergency basis.  This led to the early 
abandonment of the Contax RF and Leica M and 
Rolleiflex TLR by professionals, especially when 
Hasselblad followed Nikon's lead in support for professionals.)

There is a book to be written here.  Gads.  Maybe 
I'll put one together, though I have more writing 
projects on my desk than I can handle at present.

Marc


msmall@aya.yale.edu
Cha robh b?s fir gun ghr?s fir!



In reply to: Message from lrzeitlin at optonline.net (Lawrence Zeitlin) ([Leica] Re: Gear I wish I'd kept.)