My last three unmarked EKII's for ID

[iron_cross67]

Hello all, Here are my last three unmarked EKII's for ID Your help plesae. Mick
P.S. Number 1 was sold to me as a mm44 but i just cant read it (to small) for my eyes again thanks for any help you can give me Mick.

[iron_cross67]

No 2.

[iron_cross67]

No 3.

[streptile]

No. 1 is a 6. The photos are too angled and weird to make much sense of the other ones.

[iron_cross67]

No. 1 is a 6. The photos are too angled and weird to make much sense of the other ones.

Weird

[J0hnny]

He says that if you want photograph the EK2 in plan view. Thus the cross recognizes better

[fledermaus1945]

Ekii

Hello, the pictures are not bad, but to recognize a manufacturer to directly photographed from above, thanks.
MfG fledermaus1945

[iron_cross67]

He says that if you want photograph the EK2 in plan view. Thus the cross recognizes better

Hello J0hnny, I did these photos like this so it is better to see the date & Swas close up ie: Big. As if i use my scanner they say they need to see the date & swas better! So this is why i did the close up photo's of all my cross's. Mick

[iron_cross67]

Hello, the pictures are not bad, but to recognize a manufacturer to directly photographed from above, thanks.
MfG fledermaus1945

Hello fledermaus1945, I will reshoot all the crosses again for all Mick

[iron_cross67]

New scans of both medals for id with thanks. Mick

[streptile]

Hi Mick,

Yes, sorry, I was in a rush but maybe "weird" wasn't descriptive enough. A determination of maker usually has to take into account the date and the frame, so both should ideally be seen clearly and in their entirety, like this:

[iron_cross67]

Thanks for your help streptile, But i still need these two id'ed as i have no numbers for my reference to date, please have a look and see if you can id the two in the scan's thanks. Mick

[iron_cross67]

The one on the left is an mm56? i think. Mick