Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Leicas and other Leica Mount Cameras > Leica M -- Leica CL / Minolta CLE

Leica M -- Leica CL / Minolta CLE This forum is about all things Leica CL and Minolta CLE, remarkable compact M cameras

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

How much smaller/lighter is the CL?
Old 04-14-2011   #1
nightfly
Registered User
 
nightfly is offline
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,676
How much smaller/lighter is the CL?

From a practical standpoint, how much smaller/lighter is a CL than an M? That is would you grab it at times where you'd be inclined to leave the M behind because you are going light?

Basically if you already have an M does it make sense to get a CL for travel (thinking bike trip with camera in hip bag and one lens) or are they effectively about the same?
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-14-2011   #2
helenhill
Chasing Light & Shadows
 
helenhill's Avatar
 
helenhill is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Location: New Yawk
Posts: 5,966
I recently had one..loved the light weight
BUT
prefer an 'M' in terms of Build ,
steady in hands
overall ergonomics

an M is PURRfect !!

The BEST thing about a CL is the 40 cron that goes with it...
__________________
'Leica Myself': https://www.flickr.com/photos/helena...in/dateposted/
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-14-2011   #3
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,101
The CL is a lot smaller and lighter than an M but it's still not a pocketable camera ... probably very good for what you describe though.

An alternative would be a screwmount and it would cost a little less than a CL.
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-14-2011   #4
helenhill
Chasing Light & Shadows
 
helenhill's Avatar
 
helenhill is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Location: New Yawk
Posts: 5,966
get a screwmount/Barnack
if you want an ADDition
small . compact, Lightweight, retro sexy
fits in a coat pocket
dangles nicely from the wrist

I Prefer the LTM Body to the CL
__________________
'Leica Myself': https://www.flickr.com/photos/helena...in/dateposted/
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-14-2011   #5
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,101
Quote:
Originally Posted by helenhill View Post
get a screwmount/Barnack
if you want an ADDition
small . compact, Lightweight, retro sexy
fits in a coat pocket
dangles nicely from the wrist

I Prefer the LTM Body to the CL

Snap ..........!
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-14-2011   #6
helenhill
Chasing Light & Shadows
 
helenhill's Avatar
 
helenhill is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Location: New Yawk
Posts: 5,966
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
Snap ..........!
hehehe...we are on the Same Page
In Sync...In Unison...United !!
__________________
'Leica Myself': https://www.flickr.com/photos/helena...in/dateposted/
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-14-2011   #7
sepiareverb
aflutter.
 
sepiareverb's Avatar
 
sepiareverb is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: St Johnsbury VT
Posts: 6,864
Agreed with the above. A CL is smaller and lighter but feels much less substantial in the hand. I have a CL for the 40mm framelines, my 40/2 and the Rollei Sonnar work much better for me with some appropriate lines.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-14-2011   #8
dave lackey
Registered User
 
dave lackey's Avatar
 
dave lackey is online now
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Atlanta, Ga
Posts: 7,724
Quote:
Originally Posted by helenhill View Post
get a screwmount/Barnack
if you want an ADDition
small . compact, Lightweight, retro sexy
fits in a coat pocket
dangles nicely from the wrist

I Prefer the LTM Body to the CL

Agreed! Just get one before the prices skyrocket!
__________________
Peace, Love and Happiness...



Dave
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-14-2011   #9
ferider
Registered User
 
ferider's Avatar
 
ferider is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 10,858
Hmm. W/o lens protrusion:

CL 121x76x32, 510g
CLE 124.5x77.5x32, 520g
X100 126.5x74.4x34, 445g
Leica MP 138x77x38, 585g

Does this help ? None of them is truly pocketable and the sizes are quite similar. The CL appears small since it's so squarish. At the same time it feels somehow more flimsy than an M. Also, you cannt collapse a 50/3.5 on it, to make it small wrt lens sticking out. I very much disagree that a Barnack is better. I recommend a Rollei 35, at least you get a nice viewfinder, meter, etc.



Roland.

Last edited by ferider : 04-14-2011 at 16:21.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-14-2011   #10
helenhill
Chasing Light & Shadows
 
helenhill's Avatar
 
helenhill is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Location: New Yawk
Posts: 5,966
ok Roland...The Rollei is TRES SWEEET
Lovely Retro 'Look' as well
but a barnack Rules...

I was Smitten Instantly
even with the 2 window aspect ...I still LOVE it
easy to get the hang of it,,,Tres Pocketable / coats & jackets
perhaps not as BRIGHT as the rollei VF
but it's so smooth ...its Magic

and to Hell with a meter...
Sunny 16 or just use 400 Film Everyday and get to know the ' Light'

Well play with Both cam's in a Shop, Nightfly
I'm sure one will Beckon More...

Wonderful Shot Roland...Tres Sexy Combo !
__________________
'Leica Myself': https://www.flickr.com/photos/helena...in/dateposted/

Last edited by helenhill : 04-14-2011 at 16:37.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-14-2011   #11
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,101
Quote:
Originally Posted by ferider View Post
Hmm. W/o lens protrusion:

CL 121x76x32, 510g
CLE 124.5x77.5x32, 520g
X100 126.5x74.4x34, 445g
Leica MP 138x77x38, 585g

Does this help ? None of them is truly pocketable and the sizes are quite similar. The CL appears small since it's so squarish. At the same time it feels somehow more flimsy than an M. Also, you cannt collapse a 50/3.5 on it, to make it small wrt lens sticking out. I very much disagree that a Barnack is better. I recommend a Rollei 35, at least you get a nice viewfinder, meter, etc.



Roland.

Hey! We never said it was better ... just a classy alternative!
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-15-2011   #12
Ljós
Registered User
 
Ljós is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 821
I am with ferider on this one. (Small correction though: the weight of the CL body is 365 grams, not 510.)

I liked my CL while I had it - I think it is a great platform for wideangle lenses, also because the hotshoe is perfectly centered with the lens axis, and not offset like the Ms.

What I did not like was the (to my eyes) busy viewfinder, the shutter sound, the (compared to M) flimsier loading mechanism, and the inherent shortcoming (compared to M again) of the less precise rangefinder.

For a always-carry-with-me 35mm camera, the Rollei 35 has a lot going for it. Lack of rangefinder is a problem of course, but also a boon: no worries about getting the rangefinder whacked out of spec. Guesstimate focus works well enough for street etc. But I will grant that it may suck when you need to shoot close to wideopen and at short range (portrait etc...).

Actually I thought a lot about the CL recently when I handled the Rollei 35, made me smile a bit: there is quite a similarity in how the loading mechanism works, and the location of the CL's shutter speed dial on the front... rewind crank on the bottom... I am not familiar with the official design history of the CL, but I sure got the feeling they took some cues from the Rollei 35 ;-)

Truth is none of these cameras is the "perfect" solution, always tradeoffs and compromises.
I bit the apple and decided to just keep a Olympus Stylus Epic as always-in-a-pocket-35mm-camera, even though I dislike the lack of exposure control, having to rely on the autofocus doing what I want, shutter lag (although short)...

I really loved and wanted to love the XA-family, but once I conceded the point of electronics and auto-exposure, I thought what the heck, go all out and take the Epic.

My main camera is the M2, and after trial and error I came to the conclusion better not to try to find a smaller camera that would do most of what the M2 does. It set me up for disappointment. Instead I chose something entirely different, but very pocketable - something that even does things the M2 can't. And seriously, coming from a die-hard available light lover: sometimes auto-flash is a good thing.

---------

One last note on the Rollei 35 versus CL: buildwise, I like the Rollei 35 more. Feels a bit more "dense", and I never liked how the CL handled and felt with the back removed when loading film.

Greetings, Ljós
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 04-15-2011   #13
nightfly
Registered User
 
nightfly is offline
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,676
Hmm, had a Rollei 35 briefly and with those dials all over the place felt too fiddly to me. Also me and the 40mm focal length don't get along well. Maybe a Barnack.

Always comes back to the M. Suck it up and pack the M4-P and the 35mm Summicron and be happy.

Thanks for the suggestions.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-15-2011   #14
PentHassyKon
Registered User
 
PentHassyKon is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Irvine, CA
Posts: 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by ferider View Post
Hmm. W/o lens protrusion:

CL 121x76x32, 510g
CLE 124.5x77.5x32, 520g
X100 126.5x74.4x34, 445g
Leica MP 138x77x38, 585g

Does this help ? None of them is truly pocketable and the sizes are quite similar. The CL appears small since it's so squarish. At the same time it feels somehow more flimsy than an M. Also, you cannt collapse a 50/3.5 on it, to make it small wrt lens sticking out. I very much disagree that a Barnack is better. I recommend a Rollei 35, at least you get a nice viewfinder, meter, etc.

Roland.
Disagree with not being able to collapse 50/3.5.
I realize Leica's official position is to not collapse any lens on the CL. However.....
I have an Industar 50/3.5 and a collapsible 50 'cron - both collapse just fine and don't hit the meter stalk - at least on my 2 CL's. The problem is if one presses the shutter button with the lens collapsed - the meter stalk will hit the lens. So... one has to be mindful that collapsing the lens is only during storage/transport. Usually one has to uncollapse the lens anyways to take photos.

With both of my CLs (one Leica, one Leitz/Minolta) I'm not sure if the meter works since I no longer have a battery for them. I just use it meterless like an M2/M3/M4 . One option is to have the meter stalk removed.

Agree however that the CL is not truly pocketable - at least jeans pocket wise. If however one wants a compact M, other than the CLE you don't have a more compact option. If one chooses to eliminate the constraint of using an M lens and/or rangefinder then you have more options available to choose from

BTW, I also have a Rollei 35 - its a good scale focus option. If you don't like the XA, the Oly 35RC would be another good compact option to consider with rangefinder
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-15-2011   #15
Brian Legge
Registered User
 
Brian Legge is offline
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 2,523
The CL/CLE is the most temping M camera to me due to my preference for small cameras. Any time I think about buying it though, I realize that I'd probably end up with a 40mm as my primary lens... and that I've got some great, compact, 40mm cameras already.
__________________
Shooting whatever I can get my hands on.
Recent Work
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-15-2011   #16
FrankS
Registered User
 
FrankS's Avatar
 
FrankS is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Canada, eh.
Age: 59
Posts: 19,224
The CL is a great platform for wide angle lenses. I use it with a CV21 with ext. finder, and a Canon 28 with or without an ext. finder. (the entire viewfinder is close)
__________________
my little website: http://frankfoto.jimdo.com/

photography makes me happy
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-15-2011   #17
n5jrn
Registered User
 
n5jrn is offline
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 268
I'd rather guess the exposure with a Barnack Leica than guess the focus with a Rollei 35.
  Reply With Quote

Old 04-15-2011   #18
vrgard
Registered User
 
vrgard's Avatar
 
vrgard is offline
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Silicon Valley, California
Posts: 1,764
Sorry folks, but I've got to thrown in with those advocating for the CL. I have a couple of flavors of regular M cameras, a Rollei 35 and an Olympus XA so have personal experience with each (and enjoy each in its own way). Sure, a regular M camera is better built. And sure the Rollei 35 and Olympus XA are truly pocketable. But for a travel camera that takes M (and even LTM with an adaptor) lenses, is fully controllable, has a large, bright viewfinder and includes both a meter and a focusing rangefinder, the CL is hard to beat. And in my experience it does more easily fit into a jacket or coat pocket than does any other M mount camera. Would I choose to shoot with one of my M mount cameras if available to me? Yes. But for an amazingly good small travel kit, the CL is darned hard to beat. Mine includes the CL camera, the matching 40mm and 90mm lens and a very tiny Canon 28/3.5 lens (oh, and a very sexy LeicaTime leather half-case that all the chicks go wild for ). All this fits into a very small travel bag (the 90 and 28 are mounted to opposing sides of one of those Leica double mount lens carriers - sorry, I've forgotten the formal name for it). And when I want to step out with a smaller set up I just slip the CL with 40mm lens into my jacket pocket. Also, despite it not being that much physically smaller than a regular M camera it is considerably lighter. As a result, the CL does not pull down one side of my jacket like a regular M camera (or perhaps even a LTM barnack camera) would. And due to the small physical size of the 40mm lens and the collapsing rubber hood, it slides very easily into and out of a jacket pocket. As others have said, each camera comes with its own plusses and minuses. But I cannot so easily dismiss my CL camera.

-Randy
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-20-2011   #19
ianstamatic
Registered User
 
ianstamatic's Avatar
 
ianstamatic is offline
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 317
I have had just about everything affordable and ended buying a cl. I only just got it, ran 3 rolls through it this weekend, felt really nice to use. I have a feeling its going to be a favirite.
__________________


My site

My Blog
My Instagram


Rollei 2.8E, II and Vb, Autocord, Ricoh Diacord +225, Ikoflex
Leica M3 x2 + CL, Contax G1 +28 +45 +90, Rollei 35s, Nikon F3, Lynx 14, Oly OM1, 35RC, 35SP,Konica EE, S2
Fuji gs645 folder +645W, Agfa Isolette's J,I, III, Iskra x2, Welta Waltur x2, Zenobia x3, Super Ikonta 532/16, ZI Nettar
Mamiya RZ Pro x2 bods, 50, 65, 110, 180, 240
Crown Graphic, Toyo 45a : 75 + 90 + 120 +135 +150 + 203 + 210 + 240
PhotoTherm SSK-8R, Aztec Drum Scanner
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-20-2011   #20
vrgard
Registered User
 
vrgard's Avatar
 
vrgard is offline
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Silicon Valley, California
Posts: 1,764
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianstamatic View Post
I have had just about everything affordable and ended buying a cl. I only just got it, ran 3 rolls through it this weekend, felt really nice to use. I have a feeling its going to be a favirite.
Looking forward to seeing your shots taken with your new (to you) CL.
__________________
My Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-20-2011   #21
ianstamatic
Registered User
 
ianstamatic's Avatar
 
ianstamatic is offline
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 317
Me too Ill develop them tonight. I want to see how it compares to the oly sp that i have been using recently. Feels way nicer than other 70,s japanese rangefinder. Took it down to occupy wall st. Was photographing some crazy looking punk/hippie guy, he sees the camera and excaims 'leica !! cool!!' with a big smile. Confused me as i am usually shooting contax or olympus lately, but was very funny none the less.
__________________


My site

My Blog
My Instagram


Rollei 2.8E, II and Vb, Autocord, Ricoh Diacord +225, Ikoflex
Leica M3 x2 + CL, Contax G1 +28 +45 +90, Rollei 35s, Nikon F3, Lynx 14, Oly OM1, 35RC, 35SP,Konica EE, S2
Fuji gs645 folder +645W, Agfa Isolette's J,I, III, Iskra x2, Welta Waltur x2, Zenobia x3, Super Ikonta 532/16, ZI Nettar
Mamiya RZ Pro x2 bods, 50, 65, 110, 180, 240
Crown Graphic, Toyo 45a : 75 + 90 + 120 +135 +150 + 203 + 210 + 240
PhotoTherm SSK-8R, Aztec Drum Scanner
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-20-2011   #22
d_c
Registered User
 
d_c is offline
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 55
I've tried both the CL and CLE and it was the CLE that I ended up keeping even though it was a shade bigger and heavier than the CL, and didn't feel quite as substantial.

Why? I much preferred the ergonomics of the CLE, and the 28mm frame is a useful thing you don't find on the CL. Also for a small carry around, the aperture priority on the CLE is useful. Okay, it's not a pocket camera but then to be honest neither really is the Rollei 35s - which I find too heavy to be comfortable in a pocket anyway.

The thing I would change about the CLE if I could would be to add a 50mm frame.

In terms of lenses I find myself mainly using it with the 40mm Summicron and 90mm Tele-Elmarit.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-20-2011   #23
sykotec
Registered User
 
sykotec is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 226
speaking as one who has a great user CL for sale in the classifieds cheap..... it's not the pocketable leica i was hoping for. i love the size, feel, film loading, vertical carry..... but the old IIIf wins out for some totally inexplicable reason. maybe i'm just attached to the summitar that lives on it. these days i'd more likely consider a better point and shoot if i was looking for small.

that said, my go-everywhere 'pocket camera' the last half year has been..... a nikon f5. with a cheap and sharp 50/1.8 af-d on it it's worth less than most any leica body OR lens, and i hardly have to care where i put it down, toss it, etc.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-20-2011   #24
Registered User
 
raytoei@gmail.com's Avatar
 
[email protected] is offline
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,002
love the Leica CL.

+ Small and compact, perfect as a travel camera
+ Fix an Voigtlander Ultrawide to become a P&S camera
+ 40mm frameline is da bomb
- Irritating when using a 50mm line, the 40mm is there
- viewfinder mag is too small
- meter dies too easily

pictured here with a collapsible canon 50/1.9
http://retro2.ms11.net/self.jpg

taken lastweek with the CV 25/f4, manol restaurant, islamabad,



raytoei
__________________
------------------------------------
Film is Photography.
------------------------------------
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-04-2012   #25
Brian Levy
Registered User
 
Brian Levy is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 200
Want a pocket camera? Go for a Konica AA-35 and you also can carry 1/2 the amount of film. My CL with the 40mm fits nicely in my winter coat, London Fog and lightweight summer jacket pockets. Not as nicely as my Ziess Ikonta folder 35mm but, fits.

I've always wondered why persons say the CL is fragile. If it is you must go through a lot of cameras as I find it no less rugged than most cameras excluding the M, Ashai S1a, the Vito B and Zeiss Ikonta, all of which are relatively heavy all metal camera seemingly carved out of an igot of metal.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:57.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.