The 35mm Kardon: the Leica clone that failed miserably, despite its robust technical prowess

David Lyga · Sep 15, 2019

https://www.shutterbug.com/content/kardon-camera-american-tale

AgX · Sep 15, 2019

First time I learn about it.

(Did I already say there were way too many camera models made? Not good for the health of collectors...)

MattKing · Sep 15, 2019

Sounds like it would have been in competition at the time with the Kodak Ektra: https://www.cameraquest.com/ektra.htm

abruzzi · Sep 15, 2019

Interesting. I hadn’t heard of this camera at all when yesterday, I bumped into in on KEH for $999, and my first though was “a Leica clone selling for significantly more than a similar era Leica?”

Now this article. Thanks for the link.

https://www.keh.com/shop/kardon-civilian-3.html

film_man · Sep 16, 2019

Interesting story. But I like the angle of "here's a story about something you've never heard of, it is the best thing ever and brilliant and by the way I have some to sell".

guangong · Sep 16, 2019

Both the Kardon and Kodak Ektar were conceived as wartime substitutes. Both cameras failed at the market place for one simple reason that has nothing to do with their capabilities...cost of manufacture resulted in non competitive pricing after the war. Their rarity now makes them desirable collectibles.

Ko.Fe. · Sep 19, 2019

It was nothing robust technically according to the article:

"First, the production equipment provided by E. Leitz was in such poor condition it could neither be used nor serviced. Second, detailed analysis of the IIIa showed that its design didn't allow for mass manufacture. Rather, each piece required hand adjustments from experienced craftspersons. This would not do for mass manufacture or for easy repair in the field."
Read more at https://www.shutterbug.com/content/kardon-camera-american-tale#9jsK2KxLjpYWiptx.99

John51 · Sep 21, 2019

From the article:

This improved design capable of mass manufacture is the first significant contribution by Kardon to the photographic world

Do they mean the first Leica type camera or were all high quality cameras hand built before then?

blockend · Sep 23, 2019

There were a number of Leica clones or near-clones made in Japan, the US and UK, some of which attract a higher rarity value than the original today. The motive was to generate a high quality rangefinder camera in an era of post-war prejudice, questionable supply, government demand and commercial self interest. My favourite is the British Reid, a Barnack copy reputed to be better made than the original, but competing in the Leica M period, and thus doomed to failure. The Reid came with Taylor Hobson lenses, much sought after today (I have a TH lens, it's superb).

https://collection.sciencemuseumgroup.org.uk/objects/co8206217/reid-ii-slr-camera-slr-35mm-camera

AgX · Sep 23, 2019

AgX said:
First time I learn about it.
(Did I already say there were way too many camera models made? Not good for the health of collectors...)

Meanwhile I found that in the past I filed several articles on them... as said too many models out there and too little memory...

John51 · Sep 26, 2019

Sold listings for Kardon = Zero.

John Koehrer · Sep 28, 2019

There's only one in the bays sold listing from 2018. No idea how for back the listings go but someone
must be accumulating one or two.

TheRook · Oct 2, 2019

For a camera to achieve success in the consumer market, the company needs to invest extensively in marketing - ads placed in photography magazines, for example. Which Kardon appears not to have done. Good product alone is simply not enough. Once the government contracts dried up, Kardon was essentially finished.

__Brian · Oct 3, 2019

The one at KEH came with the 47/2 Ektar, which compares well with a collapsible Summicron.

My post-war Retina II has the same lens on it. My lens "cameraosity" SN puts it as being manufactured in 1947.

Ray Morgenweck · Oct 7, 2019

The sheer amount and variety of New cameras appearing a few years after the war was staggering. Not to mention New concepts (or revived ones) becoming popular, such as the Poloroid instant prints, The Stereo Craze, Home 16 And 8 mm movie cameras.....there was sooooo much new, did the public Really want an already dated copy of a Leica?

AgX · Oct 7, 2019

Was that camera really dated at the end of WWII ?? The M model only emerged about 10 years later.

Dated however were the dropbed press cameras as Speed Graphic, but nonetheless used in the USA for at least 2 further decades. In contrast to Germany for instance.
So "dated" does not tell much.

Ray Morgenweck · Oct 7, 2019

Sadly, yes. The design in all respects goes back to 1932. Remember too that “real” Leicas were on the shelves again. I’m sure not many who witnessed the damage done to German industry thought “anything” survived.

AgX · Oct 7, 2019

The Leitz works were not harmed by bombing but I can't say for the availability of their specialist workers and for raw stock. Anyway, Leicas were immediately in production again, but I do not know about numbers.
But more important, how many of these were available to the US consumer, and at what price, to be a viable alternative to the Kardon?.

Concerning being outdated. As said the professional US photographic world stuck to the Graphics for further decades, why then should any possible consumer of a Kardon/Leica see it as outdated as early 1945?

StepheKoontz · Oct 7, 2019

As another person said, I think the advances in film after WWII is what made 35mm cameras more viable. Those speed graphic type 4X5 cameras were the really dated technology.

Ray Morgenweck · Oct 7, 2019

The speed graphic had a Huge advantage. One picture could be taken, that negative used without enlargement for the evening newspaper. Quick!

guangong · Oct 7, 2019

Leica was assembling cameras from available parts immediately after war. Then began producing the IIIc, which was designed during war. As I understand, at first sales were restricted to US and perhaps allied military personnel. I own the 180th IIIc made and like new after magic hands of Youxin.
As far as I know, Leitz did not suffer from skilled workers because their workers were needed for war time production. The same was not true for Zeiss. But after war Zeiss found itself in Soviet zone and many workers shipped off to USSR. Only a skeleton group of some top people able to get to western zone.
Japan was making 35 mm cameras before WWII. However, German cameras still desired, as shipments to Manchuria (by submarine!) attest.
Back to the OP topic: would you pay more for an unfamiliar brand than for a Leica, or 3 or 4 times as much for a Kodak Ektar? No matter how good these cameras...price matters!

AgX · Oct 7, 2019

-) when were new Leicas available again to the US consumer ?
-) at what price?

Shutterbug:
"The civilian Kardon was introduced in '47 at a retail price of $393 (and a wholesale price of $175)."

guangong · Oct 9, 2019

My sentence was poorly constructed. Indeed, Zeiss was very vigorous in protecting those deemed undesirable to the Gestapo by emphasizing how important they were to making specific items important for the war effort. Leitz did the same.

AgX · Oct 9, 2019

Zeiss was deeply involved in the armament production and had forced labourers work for them.

John51 · Oct 10, 2019

Ray Morgenweck said:
The sheer amount and variety of New cameras appearing a few years after the war was staggering. Not to mention New concepts (or revived ones) becoming popular, such as the Poloroid instant prints, The Stereo Craze, Home 16 And 8 mm movie cameras.....there was sooooo much new, did the public Really want an already dated copy of a Leica?

I'm a UK boomer and from what I remember, the public in the 60s wanted almost anything they could get their hands on. If the factory could make it, it got sold. What limited profits was a shortage of labour. To get a new job, all I had to do was go to a factory and ask the foreman for a start. It wasn't until the 70s that unemployment became a concern.

The 35mm Kardon: the Leica clone that failed miserably, despite its robust technical prowess

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency