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

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Thinking of getting a Leica CL
Old 03-27-2014   #1
outbr3akxal
Registered User
 
outbr3akxal's Avatar
 
outbr3akxal is offline
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Singapore
Posts: 52
Thinking of getting a Leica CL

I've been looking around for a metered M.
But unfortunately, the M6 is currently out of my budget for now.

So I've been reading up on the tiny awesome Leica CL.
Nice small camera. Metered.

What are your thoughts?
Has anyone used a 35 lens on it?

Thanks all!
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2014   #2
santino
eXpect me
 
santino's Avatar
 
santino is offline
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Autriche
Posts: 1,066
why not a Minolta CLE?
It seems to accept more lenses (no metering arm)
__________________
Vivent les télémétriques ! -
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2014   #3
Dan Daniel
Registered User
 
Dan Daniel is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,564
It isn't an M. Lighter, flimsier construction. The shutter noise is, well, different? The viewfinder is smaller. The meter is prone to not working, a combination of age and design.

And except for one thing, I would still be using one as my main 35mm camera- You can't add a diopter to the viewfinder. Wonderful size and design for me, but my eyes need a diopter for viewfinders.

But it isn't an M..... Consider it on its own merits and flaws, not as a 'sort of ' M. The Bessas are probably a better 'sort of' M?
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2014   #4
Chris Bail
Regular Guy
 
Chris Bail's Avatar
 
Chris Bail is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Near Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Posts: 461
It is a nice camera, and easier to use a 35mm lens on than it's cousin the Minolta CLE, in my opinion, though I do like the Auto Exposure of the CLE. The CL can mount and shoot a 35 mm with no problem. Just keep in mind that you'll see the 40mm frame lines and have to look a little beyond them to imagine your field of view. It's not difficult.

Meter reliability is a major weak point of the CL. Make sure you find one from a reputable place that has a return policy if you find that the meter no longer works or is inaccurate. There are a couple for sale in the classifieds here...Including mine that has a complete overhaul and meter replacement. A CLA and replacing the meter will cost you as much as a nice CL body. I learned this the hard way....do yourself a favor and buy one that has already been replaced, or that you can return if it doesn't work quite right.
__________________
My Smugmug

My Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2014   #5
Dave Jenkins
Loose Canon
 
Dave Jenkins's Avatar
 
Dave Jenkins is offline
Join Date: May 2010
Location: The Beautiful Northwest Georgia Mountains
Age: 82
Posts: 608
Lots of people like them, but I've owned two and consider the CL the most inconvenient camera I've ever used.
__________________
Dave Jenkins

My newest book, Backroads and Byways of Georgia is available now wherever books are sold.
Georgia: A Backroads Portrait http://blur.by/1gg1SMt is awaiting publication.
My best-selling book (28,000+ copies) is Rock City Barns: A Passing Era.
My web site: davidbjenkins.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2014   #6
burancap
Registered User
 
burancap's Avatar
 
burancap is offline
Join Date: May 2010
Location: South Carolina
Age: 54
Posts: 2,193
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Jenkins View Post
Lots of people like them, but I've owned two and consider the CL the most inconvenient camera I've ever used.
I did not care much for it either! Admittedly the size was nice, but I found the finder very difficult. If the OP really wants an M mount and a meter, then save up and wait for an affordable M6 -there will be no regrets.
__________________
Jeff
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2014   #7
anjoca76
Registered User
 
anjoca76's Avatar
 
anjoca76 is offline
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 611
They are outstanding cameras. As mentioned above, get one with a good working meter--I much prefer the needle meter in the CL to the one in my M6.

It's a lot like the M5 (same era, not coincidentally)--those who have had good working copies and actually USED one tend to really like them. If what you really want is an M6, then you may never be satisfied. But if you give it a chance, you just may love it.
__________________
Andy

Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2014   #8
kbg32
neo-romanticist
 
kbg32's Avatar
 
kbg32 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, New York
Posts: 5,592
I would look for a used Bessa M-mount than a CL or a CLE. CL are hardly robust. CLE are nearing the end of their lifespan due to aging electronics and available parts to fix them.
__________________
Keith

http://keithgoldstein.me/
Keith’s Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2014   #9
Dave Jenkins
Loose Canon
 
Dave Jenkins's Avatar
 
Dave Jenkins is offline
Join Date: May 2010
Location: The Beautiful Northwest Georgia Mountains
Age: 82
Posts: 608
I did indeed actually use one (two, in fact), and extensively. And the results were fine. But I still say the CL is the most inconvenient to operate camera I've ever used.
__________________
Dave Jenkins

My newest book, Backroads and Byways of Georgia is available now wherever books are sold.
Georgia: A Backroads Portrait http://blur.by/1gg1SMt is awaiting publication.
My best-selling book (28,000+ copies) is Rock City Barns: A Passing Era.
My web site: davidbjenkins.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2014   #10
burancap
Registered User
 
burancap's Avatar
 
burancap is offline
Join Date: May 2010
Location: South Carolina
Age: 54
Posts: 2,193
Quote:
Originally Posted by anjoca76 View Post
...those who have had good working copies and actually USED one tend to really like them...
My copy was excellent and worked great. It got a lot of use...
__________________
Jeff
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2014   #11
whited3
Registered User
 
whited3's Avatar
 
whited3 is offline
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by outbr3akxal View Post
I've been looking around for a metered M.
But unfortunately, the M6 is currently out of my budget for now. ...
Have you considered reaching out to some of the better known leica repair people and waiting it out? Let them know you're looking for a user M6 and check in every month or so. That's how I got my M3 on the cheap when the auction site wasn't panning out.

I also got my M6 for what I consider to be a great deal on the 'bay of all places (but more importantly), sold by a used leica guy in NYC. PM incoming on his contact info - partially on the chance he can do a repeat performance for you, and partially because he was so nice to work with I owe him a reference or two.

Aw hell - let's just say I got the M6 for under $800 but more than $700 & it works perfectly. Is that in your price range?
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2014   #12
saturnales
Registered User
 
saturnales is offline
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 59
Just bougt one. Great camera.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2014   #13
Dez
Bodger Extraordinaire
 
Dez's Avatar
 
Dez is online now
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Minnesota North Woods
Posts: 1,532
The CL is a beautiful little camera, and in my opinion, a joy to use. They tend to be a bit fragile. It is unusual to find one that doesn't have dents, as the thin brass top is not happy about being dropped. The meter reliability issue is not as bad as many people think. The weak link is actually a sliding contact point on the printed circuit board that houses the adjustment pots for the meter circuit. Almost exactly the same arrangement is to be found in the M5- the difference is that accessing the contacts to clean them is considerably more difficult in the CL than it is in the M5, but it is a job I have done successfully.
You need to check the slow speeds as well. The slow speed escapement is built into a vertically-mounted frame much like the slow speed movement in a Barnack Leica, but the mounting can be jarred out of place if the camera is dropped.

I just sold a near-mint CL in the RFF Classifieds. I really liked the camera, but I liked my CV Bessa 3A a bit better. You should have a good look at the Bessa 2's and 3's as they are a good alternative to the CL.

Cheers,
Dez
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2014   #14
Steve Bellayr
Registered User
 
Steve Bellayr's Avatar
 
Steve Bellayr is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1,943
Parts for repair are difficult to find. If you can not afford an M6 why not an M2 or M3 and download a free lightmeter app to your smart phone?
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2014   #15
filmtwit
Desperate but not serious
 
filmtwit's Avatar
 
filmtwit is offline
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: West Coast
Posts: 3,050
Have you looked into Hexar RF?
http://www.cameraquest.com/konicam.htm

The CL and CLE and R2 all have tighter RF baselenth if I remember.
While the Hexar has the SAME rangefinder baselength: 69.2 mm as the Leica M
__________________
Instgram
https://www.instagram.com/filmtwit/

The Flickr Stream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/filmtwit/

The Blog (Boring Sidney, Boring)
http://jeffthomasallen.blogspot.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2014   #16
kbg32
neo-romanticist
 
kbg32's Avatar
 
kbg32 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, New York
Posts: 5,592
I have owned 3 CLs and 2 CLEs. Lovely cameras. Never again. Save your money and get what you really want. You won't regret it. The CL was my first M. It is nothing like the real thing.
__________________
Keith

http://keithgoldstein.me/
Keith’s Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2014   #17
Takkun
Ian M.
 
Takkun's Avatar
 
Takkun is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Sunny South Seattle
Posts: 792
Haven't owned one, but used one. Agreed on its level of inconvenience; the RF base is too short and the shutter speed is in a very odd place. I much prefer the M5's. It also just doesn't have the same solidity an M does, which is why I ended up buying a real M.

The Bessas are solid cameras and are going to get you a bright finder and a longer baseline, particularly the R3. The Hexar is also a good bet, if you want a RF with a motor drive. Stephen can elaborate further, but here are the various finders compared in a nutshell from his site.
The CL made a lot of sense when it was produced, but not so much these days, with a great selection of compact bodies since produced.
__________________
Ian M., Seattle
Current bag contents: Just a Fuji GX680iii. Nothing else will fit.

--
my infrequently updated blog
Finally on Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2014   #18
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 20,004
From the owners other site:

http://cameraquest.com/leicacl.htm
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2014   #19
Brian Levy
Registered User
 
Brian Levy is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 200
I bought my CL outfit back in the late '80s or very early '90s. It, at the time had a little finicky meter movement. Sent it off to be serviced by Leica and the speeds were right on, the metering contacts were cleaned, viewfinder cleaned and had an option to replace the top cover that had the slightest infamous CL indent. The service was done in early '91. Thereafter it served as my only 35mm system camera along with a Minox ML that gave up the ghost decades ago and my MF system.

It was used to teach courses, weekly Saturday shoots, daily walkaround, vacations and everything in between with no, none, consideration as to it being supposively fragile. To set things straight. 1) it is no less robust than almost any other camera; no not built to hammer nails like the LTM and M models but easily as robust as most everything else and better than many. Weakest point is the metering is not as dust proof as the M.

The denting seems to really require some serious hitting right at the edge. Mine has been banged about and there has been no additional indenting and I am not particularly careful and with other cameras I have used equally as hard, have incurred more visable damage.

The plastic sprocket issue seems mostly related to not understanding completely how to load the leader, it is opposite of most cameras and if done improperly, stresses the tabs. Reading the manual does matter with the CL.

Some comments about the finicky metering I have found when working with new owners often is more related to not understanding the metering than the mechanism. It is a semi-spot, closer to spot metering and hence with only a minor movement the meter can react quite a bit. The metering spot is about the size of the spot in the center of the viewfinder, think 12 degrees. At the time, it was the only camera with t5his type of metering including the Pentax "Spotmatic" that has a much wider metering area. The M5 also has this. Hence, those used to the more common averaging metering pattern of thl metering seem to intially fond iot a bit finicky. Years ago in discussing this issue with Leica, I was told modre than 2/3rds of the CLs returned with reported metering issues were in fact within all specs but they as a routine cleaned the circuits, anyway.

The Summicron-C is IMHO about as good a lens as made that I have used and has that distinctive Leica glow. I used to summit slides in competition and at the time the only regular Leica user. There were a couple of really old timers who had for years used Leica rangefinders before moving to an SLR and these guys almost 100% could pick out the Summicron-C 40 and Rokkor-M 90mm lenses as Leicas. Others noted there was some difference but not sure why. At times in shooting assignments were shot the same subject at the same effective fl, lighting, settings and film to do some lens comparisons in these slide competitions.

There is a difference of opinion by Elmar-C 90MM lenses vs the later Rokkor-M version. Some who have both say the Rokkor is noticably better. I have never had the Elmar so can not comment but when I bought the system from someone whom I well respected he had the Rokkor and said it was the better and though it required a different set of filters, the difference was worth the added costs.

I sort of got the CL by mistake. I was not looking for it, just helped a friend in financial need and had a Leica on my short list but not the CL. Since then it has been a most reliable user and though I have had chances to buy other M flanged bodies at decent prices all feel too large and unweildy now. It also killed any desire for an SLR other than my MF.

The other big adjustment that makes the camera seem to difficult or nonintuitive to work with is the speed setting dial and metering movement. The meter moves down when overexposed and vice versa. This coupled with the speed adjustment dial that is reversed of most and on the front can drive an occasional user totally nuts. Reading the manual again helps. After reading it and thinking about the design it is evident it makes more sense in use than the conventional systems but, one needs to practice and not shuffle between cameras to really get used to it and use it as intuitively as with the more conventional systems. I have more problems when using other cameras in this regard as the CL is used maybe as much as 90%
of my 35mm shooting.

If there is a pain with the camera, it involves the issue of the battery. It is inboard where the film loads so, make sure it is up to snuff as replacing it when there is a roll installed presents a problem. It is compounded now with the problem that the 625 is no longer available as it is a mercury battery. One solution is to send it to someone like Sherry in the US or Kindermann in Canada and have the metering adjusted to use a modern battery that can be done, use an air cell or an adaptor such as the C.H.R.I.S. Getting the adjustment is maybe the best idea, as at the same time the camera can be cleaned and speeds checked, etc. Remember any camera of this age possibly can stand some hospital time. 2nd is the adaptor as it does not have the disadvantage of the air cell while not costing as much as having the metering adjusted. The air cell is probably 3rd. Once activated it begins to die pretty quickly whether used or not and usually within couple of months is too gone to have sufficient voltage and current for the metering to work. This is a problem when there is a roll of film in the camera as previously discussed. I use the adaptors as I have meters and another camera that used the 625 and the CL works fine. Metering is dead on with the adaptor when checked against my Weston Ranger and Metrawatt meters that all meter about the same angle as the Leica. The Ranger a couple of years ago was checked and found to be dead on well, within 1/8th stop of the standard it was tested against so, all seems good.

There is a caution as to using some of the collapsing lenses as the backs can hit the metering lever. Leica published a list of these and recommended if they were going to be used, the easiest thing to do would be to wrap around the barrel a length of the 1/4" plastic DYMO tape that then was so common. Other fixed lenses with long backs were also listed.

The rangefinder is shorter than the other M flanged bodies and 90mm is the longest practical focal length. That said I have mounted a Canon SM 135 mm with the LTM to M adaptor on the camera and used the aux viewfinder than comes with the lens with success. Stopping the lens down helps in the rangefinder. It is not shorter than the Voightlander and a black rangerfinders I have and I have used all 3 with success with the CL. I am not as comfortable the front of the camera is sufficiently strong enough to handle the weight of the lens as it is very heavy. The 90mm is fine for almost all use so, not a significant matter. Also, and maybe the weirdest is my use of the Visioflex on the CL. I have a LTM version and with the M adaptor can close it and the shutter with the same finger. I all works as well as on an M or LTM body and just as weird to use. A real Rube Goldberg special by Leica and when I used it and persons were around, an instant way to have an instant crowd with their Nikon and Contax cameras wrapped around their neck.

I am not sure if compared to others I am one of the longest owners of the CL system responding or not but after all these years with mine going as strong as ever since the "overhaul" that in the end was all but not needed other than the contact cleaning, I figure my experience may carry some assurance that it is an excellent camera.

In closing, love the idea of the CL, the controls, the metering, the size, the concept, the reliability and, the associated lenses.
  Reply With Quote

The truly awesome CL
Old 03-27-2014   #20
mani
Registered User
 
mani is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 770
The truly awesome CL

I genuinely don't understand a lot of the complaints. I've been very reluctantly considering whether to sell my CL (for non-photographic reasons), and clicked on this thread expecting a chorus of enthusiastic posts: it's such a great - almost cult - camera I thought everyone loved it!

’Odd shutter noise?’ My CL makes an almost inaudible ’snick’ when I take a picture.
’Dents easily if you drop it?’ I'd say a rangefinder camera has more problems than just a dent if you go around dropping it. For that matter, I can definitely say I've never, ever dropped a camera my entire life.
I'm not really sure how to respond to ’inconvenient’ - especially when this vague and subjective term comes without any explanation? There are a couple of things that are mildly irritating to me about the CL: the fact the back needs to be taken off to change the metering battery (so it can't be done mid-roll), and (this really is just a personal thing) I always like the reassurance of seeing the film visibly winding forwards when I cock the shutter and the fact you have to turn the CL upside down to double-check that the rewinder is rotating... well I'm clutching at straws really to find fault and appear unbiased.

In my view, the only way to criticize the CL is by actually comparing it directly with a Leica M: the viewfinder isn't as crystal clear as a perfect M6, M7 or MP - but then again, it’s very much better than any Canon P or Canon 7 I've tried. And naturally it's not built like an M6 either, but it's always felt really solid and heftily compact in my hands.

I've found it to be a wonderful and totally reliable camera, and the 40mm Summicron lens that came with mine has transformed my photography: it convinced me to abandon the vast majority of fast lenses (mostly Summilux 35s and 50s) of which I was formerly so enamored and settle on a trio of Summicrons (35, 40 and 50) for pretty much all my 35mm photography. Amazingly sharp subject and pleasing out-of-focus bokeh, and a great focal length, especially for the sort of ’environmental portrait' type images that are 95% of what I do these days.

In a way all the negativity in the thread has made me think twice about selling - I'd hate the camera to go to someone who just wanted to find fault with it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2014   #21
burancap
Registered User
 
burancap's Avatar
 
burancap is offline
Join Date: May 2010
Location: South Carolina
Age: 54
Posts: 2,193
In my opinion, it is not that there is anything fundamentally "at fault" with the CL. My gripe was the base length and all that that inescapably presents, especially to someone with waning vision. I won't even bring up requiring any dioptric correction.

The CL is a lovely camera. It is compact, light, and sublime. I DO recommend it if your vision is at least better than mine. I also recommend considering being patient, saving a bit more, and finding an M6 -which the OP seemed to "really" want.
__________________
Jeff
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2014   #22
Takkun
Ian M.
 
Takkun's Avatar
 
Takkun is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Sunny South Seattle
Posts: 792
I wouldn't say I have any complaints with it--it's a locale camera with plenty of quirks ( and I'm a cheerleader of sorts for the maligned M5). But if it's an M6,you really want, you'll be sorely disappointed. And if it's a light and compact metered RF, there are better options, particularly with respect to RF baseline.
__________________
Ian M., Seattle
Current bag contents: Just a Fuji GX680iii. Nothing else will fit.

--
my infrequently updated blog
Finally on Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2014   #23
mani
Registered User
 
mani is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 770
I didn't mean to get into any sort of argument about the CL - I was just a bit shocked to find so much criticism of what I genuinely thought was a universally adored little camera.
Taken on its own terms it's a wonderful piece of equipment. But yes if it's an M6 the OP really wants, then maybe they'd never be happy with a CL.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2014   #24
santino
eXpect me
 
santino's Avatar
 
santino is offline
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Autriche
Posts: 1,066
the cl almost killed the entire m series so it better be good
__________________
Vivent les télémétriques ! -
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2014   #25
anjoca76
Registered User
 
anjoca76's Avatar
 
anjoca76 is offline
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 611
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbg32 View Post
I have owned 3 CLs and 2 CLEs. Lovely cameras. Never again. Save your money and get what you really want. You won't regret it. The CL was my first M. It is nothing like the real thing.
I agree. The CL is a great camera--I loved mine and it served me well. But if what you really want is an M6, then save up and get the M6. It's on another level. You won't regret it. I went through the same thing.
__________________
Andy

Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2014   #26
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 9,173
The CL has been on my list of favorite Leicas for many years. I bought the third one I've owned a year or two ago. It remains a favorite of mine.

I've had the Summicron-C 40, M-Rokkor 40 v1 and M-Rokkor 40 v2. They're all very similar in rendering; what I use now is the M-Rokkor 40 v2 as it has multicoating (a little less susceptible to flare) and the JIS thread 40.5mm filter bezel.

Similarly I've had both the Elmar-C and M-Rokkor 90mm f/4 lenses. Both of them were made in Germany, on the same production line. I have the M-Rokkor version now, it's still a great lens.

The CL was a favorite of mine because of the size and weight. It would have been nice if Leica had developed it a little further (a longer baseline RF would have been nice, but I've not really had any issues focusing the 90mm or even a Hektor 135mm f/4.5 with it), but Leica went back to the M4 body style when the M5 proved such a sales flop, ran with that instead.

The CL sold well in its day, but didn't make a profitable return due to rework costs and issues with Minolta as I understand it.

I've used mine with both the PX625 mercury cells and the CRIS MR-9 battery adapter. The metering differences are insignificant, no changes to the meter have been necessary.

If you really want an M, buy an M. If you want a CL, good ones are still available and it's a delightful camera.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2014   #27
bushwick1234
Registered User
 
bushwick1234's Avatar
 
bushwick1234 is offline
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 294
I owned a CL and if you don't mind if the meter stops working some day (mine never had an issue!) because of the age, I would recommend it. I bought a vintage Gossen Scout meter for 20 bucks on eBay as a back up.
The CL will give you beautiful contrasty and sharp photographs using either Summicron-C or Rokkor lenses (40mm f2). The Rokkor has more frequent coating issues than the Summicron-C.
__________________
Kaniel M
"If I could tell the story in words, I wouldn't need to lug around a camera." LH
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2014   #28
Scrambler
Registered User
 
Scrambler's Avatar
 
Scrambler is offline
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Toowoomba
Posts: 1,279
A Leica M is a Leica M. My view is that anything else (including a CL) is an M-compatible. And there's nothing wrong with that - I own 2 M-mount cams and have never owned a true "M"

I recommend looking at the list of M-mount cameras (it's not very long) and considering what features you want, what your price range is, and what features you will "put up with" to achieve the first two.

For example, if you want metered manual, less than $300 and realistically you will stick one lens on it and use just that, plus you are fairly gentle on gear, than a Bessa R is suitable, though it is not M-compatible. Your lens choice is future-proofed (can be used easily on an M) while your camera delivers a great RF/VF and the most predictable metering in Bessas.

There are other oddball options that might work.

If you want the nearest you can get to a Leica M6 and don't mind the extra features (sounds strange, but many do) then I would say the Hexar RF is nearest. Has all the usability of a Leica M but with auto wind/rewind and faster (metal) shutter. And compared to an iPhone, all focal-plane shutter cameras are loud.

If it just has to be a Leica, consider an unmetered body or even a screwmount camera - again these are future-proofed with lenses and deliver the "mechanical jewel" Leica feeling, which the M-compatibles don't. Though I would say that the Hexar RF is an electro-mechanical jewel.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-27-2014   #29
outbr3akxal
Registered User
 
outbr3akxal's Avatar
 
outbr3akxal is offline
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Singapore
Posts: 52
Wow. Thanks all for all the response.
Really appreciate them.

I gotta read thru all again.

I was looking for the CL as one its nice and small and compact.
Secondly it has a meter. Although I'm aware it can die off anytime.
I haven't had a chance to handle one yet though.

I have on the other hand, handled an M6 and it does feel good.
Nice never. Feels great. Prices are on the up where I'm from.
So its not really something I need. Just more of a want.

But I'm still deciding though. Shoot mainly on my 35mm on my M2.
Metered using my lightmeter now. Hence the reason for a metered "M" now.

But then again, i might look into some of the Voigtlander Rs.
Thanks again all.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-28-2014   #30
David Hughes
David Hughes
 
David Hughes's Avatar
 
David Hughes is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,507
Hi,

Do a bit of research about any Leica camera and you'll find a list of things that go wrong.

The CL gets its share but, like the M5, it's not a mainstream model and that's a crime to some. F'instance, you'll notice that no one moans about the M2 not taking more than a 90mm due to the frame lines but it's a dreadful matter with the CL.

Others expect the camera to be bomb proof, as though all the others are but they aren't.

And the meter needle can be seen, unlike scales and so on beside LED's. And you can change the shutter speed and see the range changing in the VF. And you can feeel the rewind handle turning without much effort, instead of having to look.

So my 2d worth is to say get the CL and its two lenses and you won't go wrong if you read the manual about metering and battery checks. It might also stop you hankering after the M6; as will reading about those dreadful M6's elsewhere on these forums.

Just bear in mind that it's a 1970's camera and use a bit of sense. If the worst happens it will be repairable and there are specialists who can help, just like any other Leica (except the minilux when the worst happens).

BTW, I've had a second-hand CL and still have it and still use it. It was the first second-hand one I could find many years ago and there were still new ones in the shops then, so I was lucky. And it meant I could afford the 90mm lens as well. Both lenses are up to Leica's usual standards and genuinely loved by people who have owned and used them. Search on the 40mm Summicron and see what they all say on RFF...

And I've never had people spit at me when they saw it, ever. Although you'd expect that from reading some of the comments.

I've also owned a CLE for a week, bought new and returned many years ago. (Having to switch it on and remember to switch it off again irritaed; unlike the sensible system of the CL.) I'm not so certain that they (CLE's) can be repaired but the 28mm lens sounds nice and could be added to the CL one day.

Regards, David
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-28-2014   #31
kbg32
neo-romanticist
 
kbg32's Avatar
 
kbg32 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, New York
Posts: 5,592
Parts for the CLE are becoming very hard to come by. The electronics are based on the XG7, if I remember correctly.
__________________
Keith

http://keithgoldstein.me/
Keith’s Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-28-2014   #32
Scrambler
Registered User
 
Scrambler's Avatar
 
Scrambler is offline
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Toowoomba
Posts: 1,279
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Hughes View Post
I've also owned a CLE for a week, bought new and returned many years ago. (Having to switch it on and remember to switch it off again irritaed; unlike the sensible system of the CL.) I'm not so certain that they (CLE's) can be repaired but the 28mm lens sounds nice and could be added to the CL one day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kbg32 View Post
Parts for the CLE are becoming very hard to come by. The electronics are based on the XG7, if I remember correctly.
The CLE is not supported by repairers and some parts are impossible to obtain (there are some people that know and love them who are hoarding parts - you know who you are!)

X-series Minoltas do NOT contain any usable parts. Sorry.

But on the plus side, you don't need to turn CLEs off. The meter only activates when either (a) there is a distinct press of the shutter or (b) there is a finger (or other conductor) resting on the shutter release. Turning off does ensure that the shutter CAN'T release, but doesn't save batteries.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-28-2014   #33
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 46
Posts: 20,004
The Leica CL is an ok Leica. I've used one in the past and it is nice with the 40mm lens. I would only buy it if you want a compact M camera. I wouldn't buy it as a substitute to the more traditional M camera... unless it was a stop gap solution on your way to a regular M model and you got a good price.

I owned mine in the 90s and was photograohing in a canoe with it. Unfortunately, the canoe tipped over and my CL went in with me. The only thing that died was the meter though... still worked otherwise.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-28-2014   #34
David Hughes
David Hughes
 
David Hughes's Avatar
 
David Hughes is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,507
Hi,

Been pondering this, we CL owners and users don't attack the M series and yet many would say we could. Interesting isn't it?

I own a few Leicas ranging in age from 1926 to a few (5 or 6) years old and including that APS version the C11. I think the CL is nothing more or less what it claims to be; meaning a Compact Leica. So it shouldn't be expected to be an M but it is and always will be a Leica. Just the same as the mini 3 is and so on.

As a compact camera it takes a lot of beating, two excellent lenses, neat design with many innovations in it and there's that excellent carry case for it and two lenses and a couple of cartons with film in. Like the CL being an up-to-date version of the pre-war screw thread cameras the case (14 825) being a modern version of the ETTRE and so on.

As for dioptre lenses, Leica listed part no's 14 081 for it in the 1975 catalogue. And the catalogue lists the few out of hundreds of lenses that can't be used on it (135mm with goggles f'instance).

If there's one word for the CL then I'd say it was "neat" or perhaps "elegant" or perhaps "very usable", only I'm straying into the Spanish Inquisition sketch script there. ;-)

Regards, David

PS Anyone ever seen a short wrist strap for the CL part No: 14 197?

PPS Praise for the 40mm Summicron here:- http://www.rangefinderforum.com/foru...d.php?t=140875
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-28-2014   #35
outbr3akxal
Registered User
 
outbr3akxal's Avatar
 
outbr3akxal is offline
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Singapore
Posts: 52
Hmmm....

I'll keep a look out for a nice clean working CL.
What's the going rate for them now?

If I were to compare with a Voightlander R2?
What would your thoughts be then?
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-28-2014   #36
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 9,173
Quote:
Originally Posted by outbr3akxal View Post
Hmmm....

I'll keep a look out for a nice clean working CL.
What's the going rate for them now?

If I were to compare with a Voightlander R2?
What would your thoughts be then?
I bought my current CL which had been recently CLA'ed from an RFF subscriber some time in 2011. Body only cost me about $320 IIRC. I already had the M-Rokkor 40mm f/2 gen2 lens, which was a trifle expensive (around $600 IIRC) but in absolutely mint condition.

The Voigtländer R cameras are good, but they have always felt a little clunky to me. Nothing wrong with that, some people prefer them, and they certainly work fine. I don't know much about the R2 model specifically.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-28-2014   #37
MISH
Registered User
 
MISH's Avatar
 
MISH is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 603
I love my Cl that I bought here in the classifieds. My camera had been to see Sherry and she had adjusted the voltage so that a new style battery can be used. While looking for s 40mm lens to match up with it I came across a 35 summicron ver 2 at a very attractive price so that is what is most often on the camera. I have also been known to put my Rigid 50mm or my 90 Tele-Elmarit on it with great success. I guess, as with anything else, not every one that has owned one has been entirely happy or found that it met their needs and or expectations. I own one, I am quite happy with it, and I will not be giving it up any time soon
Attached Images
File Type: jpg DSC00206.jpg (20.4 KB, 13 views)
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-29-2014   #38
Brian Levy
Registered User
 
Brian Levy is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 200
Considering it comes closer to the original design concept of the LTM in size and purpose than the much larger M body, maybe the CL is a real Leica and the M is too much a deviant from the original design goal to be considered a legitimate successor to the III and earlier series.

And remember other cameras bearing the Leica nameplate had their weirdness from unique take up systems to one of the most nutty loading systems requiring cutting the film leader to a specific shape and length to properly load.

As for the shutter release, the noise level is only slightly higher than the M series bodies that I find louder than the LTM series so what. We are not talking about say my Bronica that can wake up a Zombie at 5 miles. Certainly quieter than any SLR and any other rangefinder or zone focus camera I am aware of including the Leica made SLRs.

When the criticism gets to the level of the shutter release noise you know the CL is a great camera in its own right.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-29-2014   #39
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Bellayr View Post
Parts for repair are difficult to find. If you can not afford an M6 why not an M2 or M3 and download a free lightmeter app to your smart phone?
Dear Steve,

Not everyone has (or wants) a "smart" phone.

Cheers,

R.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-29-2014   #40
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,947
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
The CL has been on my list of favorite Leicas for many years. I bought the third one I've owned a year or two ago. . .
Dear Godfrey,

Why did you sell the other two? Just curious.

Cheers,

R.
  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 20:00.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, 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.