Opinion needed on KM Eagle

[harrison987]

Hey guys,

Thoughts on this? Came in the original KM Case, with the standard eagle impressed into the top.

I recognize this type of eagle...but I cannot recall if it was deemed an odd variant...or if it was deemed fake.

Thoughts?

Mike

[Sgt Bilko]

Leitz eagles usually have a wreath affair around the crooked cross and the "M" seems a little small (se link below). Unusual variants are known but I'm not sure about this one...

http://dev.wehrmacht-awards.com/foru...d.php?t=471208

[Mikedenmark]

My guess would be the top covers has exchanged places.
Eagle should be on right side plate.

I also note that the (T) looks as if it was added to the original engraved beh text seperately. It does not line up with the rest of the text lines.

Apart from that, it might be okay. Lower inner feather field on the eagle looks large. I wouldnt mind that, except now the plates has been off the bino...

If it was mine, I would try to hunt down similar beh marked bino´s on the web, with serial numbers close to this one, then compare eagles.

[Sgt Bilko]

A fine example from a member of this forum - 346571 with feathered body, bigger M and wreath - 6 binoculars away in serial from harrison987's one;

http://www.historicacollectibles.com...ine-ii-modello

[harrison987]

Thanks guys...

The case it came in, is the same one on that other website. Tall type with the large cover and eagle on top...

Seems odd that it would a legit KM case...but the markings on the binos be questionable?

The markings are in the correct spot..."IF"...these started out as a standard 7x50 with no KM adler (non-KM Marked variants had the info on the right side).

I wonder if these were made as a standard Leitz that was later requisitioned by the Kriegsmarine? Then markings added? So note done at factory.

A lot of the KM time pieces had markings added during production...however a vast majority were requisitioned by the KM...and then the markings added wherever they fit...with many variants of the eagle

Soooooooooo...

My opinion is that these were a standard non-KM Leitz that was either:

a) requisitioned by the KM, with markings added...

OR

b) A standard Leitz that someone has messed with post-war.

Thoughts?

[Mikedenmark]

Bilko, Thank you for that link.

I note, that the (T) marking on that other one looks normal/aligned. And it is KF marked.

If this was my bino, I would believe it was reworked at some point.
Notably, the KF marking has been exchanged with the blue +.

The basic markings now corresponds well with later beh porro 1 binoculars.
The older (T) marking, and a less detailed eagle, added.
As on other later war binos, no detail on use, like an N-number, is now present.

It might be a civilian changed into a Navy model. I doubt this. I believe it was "born" as a navy model.
Serial number indicate war time manufacture. Few civilians around by then.
And, if civilian, then all lenses has been exchanged to conform with the (T) markings, as coated lenses are not usually seen in civilian binoculars.

If it was mine, I would believe it to be an original period rework with new top covers.
Not fact based, I admit. Just sufficient indices pointing that way.

[AndyC]

Here is one of my old Eagle marked Leitz binos to compare with.




Andy

[AndyC]

2

[AndyC]

3

[AndyC]

4

[Lumix]

It does look more like the eagle usually seen on CZJ glasses, and the feet look wrong (or rather the lack of feet). A tad suspect in my personal opinion.

[stroh]

Visit www.gjaltkemp-sheepsantiek.nl for some more comparisons.

[Mikedenmark]

Isn´t the foot issue related to a wreath made out of plain circles ?