heatherselkie
Member
Hi, I am working on getting a CL to replace my bessa t. The bessa T has been great, but I kept dropping, losing, breaking the external viewfinders and had enough of that. I can't afford a proper M leica. I've been reluctant to sell the bessa t, because I hate parting with stuff, but am going to trade it for a CL. I have read good and bad about the CL, but need a camera! It's Leica designed-nothing to wrong with being produced elsewhere is it? It's also cute and small which is a win win.
The only lens I currently own is a 90 elimar f4 so would that be a good match for the CL? It's true CL's are going up in price, so I better hurry.
Also, flickr has oodles of flickr groups for cameras and loads of drool worthy photos, but the CL flickr group had a great deal of photos that would be better suited for personal facebook pages. Some great photos too! Any photographs that would speak well of the CL?
The only lens I currently own is a 90 elimar f4 so would that be a good match for the CL? It's true CL's are going up in price, so I better hurry.
Also, flickr has oodles of flickr groups for cameras and loads of drool worthy photos, but the CL flickr group had a great deal of photos that would be better suited for personal facebook pages. Some great photos too! Any photographs that would speak well of the CL?
huntjump
Well-known
Sorry i personally do not...but looking at the used prices of CL's, getting an M body is marginally more and arguably a better long term investment, with great resale potential if you had to part ways.
M2's for $600 that do not need a CLA are possible. I wouldn't say common, but I was able to get one for $650 and in really nice condition, no CLA needed and i'd say arguably what looks to be a pretty expensive time to buy.
Some people have gotten their M's below 600 when buying it with a lens or two, then selling the lenses, assuming you find such a package of course. Good luck, hope you find what you need
M2's for $600 that do not need a CLA are possible. I wouldn't say common, but I was able to get one for $650 and in really nice condition, no CLA needed and i'd say arguably what looks to be a pretty expensive time to buy.
Some people have gotten their M's below 600 when buying it with a lens or two, then selling the lenses, assuming you find such a package of course. Good luck, hope you find what you need
Creagerj
Incidental Artist
I have both an M2 and a CL. I'm not going to post any pics because they are camera bodies, and the lens is what counts. Here is my experience with both.
M2 Pros:
-Nice VF, RF patch is larger easier to see
-Shutter is really quiet
-Construction is solid
-Feels much nicer in my hands than my CL
Cons:
-No hotshoe, just accessory. I've had three PC adapters and one of them has worked reliably. They get lost very easily, guess which one I lost
-Older, so more prone to age related issues
-Heavier than CL, which can be mitigated with a nice strap
-Tripod socket is on the side, which means that it doesn't sit flat on any flash bracket or tripod pad
CL Pros:
-Very small and light
-Hotshoe
-Less expensive to replace, so I feel better about taking it everywhere
-Has a meter that doesn't work, maybe you can find one with a working meter
Cons:
-Construction is nice, but feels cheap compare to my M2
-Cannot use collapsible- lenses (mostly) and that detracts from its small profile
-Small RF patch
-Shorter RF baseline, so if you like fast glass forget it.
-Strap lugs are on the side of the camera, not the top
My Recommendation:
If you already have some decent glass, really consider saving the extra 200-300 bones for an M2. You won't be disappointed. If you are lacking in the glass department, get a CL so you can get more glass. Also if you want a small camera, the CL is the ticket. I personally like my M2 more, but feel better about carrying my CL around when I'm out and about, which is the whole idea in the first place.
M2 Pros:
-Nice VF, RF patch is larger easier to see
-Shutter is really quiet
-Construction is solid
-Feels much nicer in my hands than my CL
Cons:
-No hotshoe, just accessory. I've had three PC adapters and one of them has worked reliably. They get lost very easily, guess which one I lost
-Older, so more prone to age related issues
-Heavier than CL, which can be mitigated with a nice strap
-Tripod socket is on the side, which means that it doesn't sit flat on any flash bracket or tripod pad
CL Pros:
-Very small and light
-Hotshoe
-Less expensive to replace, so I feel better about taking it everywhere
-Has a meter that doesn't work, maybe you can find one with a working meter
Cons:
-Construction is nice, but feels cheap compare to my M2
-Cannot use collapsible- lenses (mostly) and that detracts from its small profile
-Small RF patch
-Shorter RF baseline, so if you like fast glass forget it.
-Strap lugs are on the side of the camera, not the top
My Recommendation:
If you already have some decent glass, really consider saving the extra 200-300 bones for an M2. You won't be disappointed. If you are lacking in the glass department, get a CL so you can get more glass. Also if you want a small camera, the CL is the ticket. I personally like my M2 more, but feel better about carrying my CL around when I'm out and about, which is the whole idea in the first place.
af_
andrei
(although one weak point seems to be the plastic take up spool, mine just broke)
heatherselkie
Member
Hi, I have yet to see an m2 or any M for $600ish. While I almost believe such things exist, I have to work with what is doable. It is possible for me to trade in my camera and spend a couple of hundred on a CL, but even if I try save up for a $1000 plus camera, the money will be needed for something else. Maybe once I have the CL, an M will be next in the future.
Yeah, i know it's the lens and the photographer that makes the shot, but I read all this technical stuff about how the cl is limited to slower lenses, shorter something something than other rangefinders etc..so wanted to see what it could do.
Yeah, i know it's the lens and the photographer that makes the shot, but I read all this technical stuff about how the cl is limited to slower lenses, shorter something something than other rangefinders etc..so wanted to see what it could do.
jordan.dickinson
Jordan Dickinson
LOVE the CL. I don't shoot it enough, but I absolutely love it. For the price and the size, it doesn't get much better, IMO. If you start with the CL, and accumulate a small lens base, it will be a great way to get into M cams. The only thing, and this is minor, but relevant, is that almost all CL's have faulty or unusable meters...otherwise, it's a great little camera.
-The build is good, but not up to M standards
-Ergonomics are excellent, and the feel is quite good
-Meters are prone to fail or come already busted
-Lenses are mostly compatible, but have heard that close focusing lenses have some issues (50 Lux, as an example)
-Other than that, I'd say go for it. It's a beautiful, capable little camera with great feel
stop sign road by slantface, on Flickr
mike flip by slantface, on Flickr
Rhinoceropolis by slantface, on Flickr
Rhinoceropolis by slantface, on Flickr
ryan skates by slantface, on Flickr
kodi sleeps by slantface, on Flickr
field tree by slantface, on Flickr
flower stem by slantface, on Flickr
-The build is good, but not up to M standards
-Ergonomics are excellent, and the feel is quite good
-Meters are prone to fail or come already busted
-Lenses are mostly compatible, but have heard that close focusing lenses have some issues (50 Lux, as an example)
-Other than that, I'd say go for it. It's a beautiful, capable little camera with great feel
stop sign road by slantface, on Flickr
mike flip by slantface, on Flickr
Rhinoceropolis by slantface, on Flickr
Rhinoceropolis by slantface, on Flickr
ryan skates by slantface, on Flickr
kodi sleeps by slantface, on Flickr
field tree by slantface, on Flickr
flower stem by slantface, on Flickr
Last edited:
B.S.
Member
Here's two for now. I'm trying to post more, but flickr is giving me problems. I'll try again in the morning.
Loving the camera. Unfortunately the Nokton F/1.1 I use for most of my shots blocks the majority of the rangefinder patch making focusing a pain.
Loving the camera. Unfortunately the Nokton F/1.1 I use for most of my shots blocks the majority of the rangefinder patch making focusing a pain.
Attachments
B.S.
Member
huntjump
Well-known
this does not help you, and in fact might upset you, but an m2 sold an hour ago for $650.. although, there are some really nice shots in here that might make any sane person scoff at an M2 when a CL puts out great photos too.
But as anyone here will tell you, the difference isn't in the photos but user experience with the camera. Both have their pros and cons. Hope you find what you are looking for. $1000 for m2 is way high. $600-800 depending on condition and how hard u look. CL might be a great way to start
http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26389
But as anyone here will tell you, the difference isn't in the photos but user experience with the camera. Both have their pros and cons. Hope you find what you are looking for. $1000 for m2 is way high. $600-800 depending on condition and how hard u look. CL might be a great way to start
http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=26389
Last edited:
huntjump
Well-known
$550 M2 Beater body on eBay: http://cgi.ebay.com/Leica-M2-35mm-R...ilm_Cameras&hash=item35b2706732#ht_720wt_1052
PentHassyKon
Established
heaterselkie-
I have 2 CL's (Leitz Minolta and Leica), both with inoperable meters and due to this I was able to pay less than $200 for ea one.
A CL is a great compact M system. As already mentioned, it is the lens which you really want anyways. 90 Elmar was actually made for the CL.
As far as not being able to collapse a lens - hogwash! I have a collapsible summicron and it collapses fine. I also have a collapsible Industar 50/3.5 and it also collapses fine. I imagine they tell you not to collapse it as the meter flips out and can get damaged with the lens collapsed. one just has to remember to nut press the shutter release while the lens is collapsed.
Yes, I do wish i have an m2/m3/m4/m5/m6 but for less than $200? Someday an M body will become available to me/you for <$500. For now, spend the the extra $ on getting yourself the 40 summicron or even the CV 28/3.5.
I have 2 CL's (Leitz Minolta and Leica), both with inoperable meters and due to this I was able to pay less than $200 for ea one.
A CL is a great compact M system. As already mentioned, it is the lens which you really want anyways. 90 Elmar was actually made for the CL.
As far as not being able to collapse a lens - hogwash! I have a collapsible summicron and it collapses fine. I also have a collapsible Industar 50/3.5 and it also collapses fine. I imagine they tell you not to collapse it as the meter flips out and can get damaged with the lens collapsed. one just has to remember to nut press the shutter release while the lens is collapsed.
Yes, I do wish i have an m2/m3/m4/m5/m6 but for less than $200? Someday an M body will become available to me/you for <$500. For now, spend the the extra $ on getting yourself the 40 summicron or even the CV 28/3.5.
mooge
Well-known
there's also the Bessa R or Canon 7 if it doesn't have to be M mount.
heatherselkie
Member
Thanks jordan for the awesome photos. Thanks BS for your great shots too and the effort getting them on! I could feel the hot LA sun.
Yeah, a CL will be fine!
The CL I am looking at has a fully functioning fine meter, but I'd be willing to buy a CL with a broken meter if I could get it for less. Plenty of CL's out there, but decided to get one in my area, in Canada so don't have to deal with customs and ridiculous charges galore on credit cards or paypal etc. Trading in my bessa t helps me learn to let go of things, it's okay to switch cameras, sell, trade whatever. I still have the nikon 5700 I bought for a thousand and can't sell it for peanuts now. So what to do with it? So glad I went back to film. Good film cameras at least hold their value and even go up in value!
I'm not that interested in an M2. I'd rather get a bessa R2 before investing in something too old and possibly in dire need of help. While I do wish for an m4 or an m6, I know it isn't likely anytime soon. I'd like to know how the build of the CL compares to a voigtlander bessa. The bessas are fine, but do not have the weight of bricks that M cameras do.
And yes, if the CL works for me I can work on building my lens collection. My imaginary one is not very useful. My old ltm 90 mm takes gorgeous shots, can't wait to take photographs again.
Thanks.
Yeah, a CL will be fine!
The CL I am looking at has a fully functioning fine meter, but I'd be willing to buy a CL with a broken meter if I could get it for less. Plenty of CL's out there, but decided to get one in my area, in Canada so don't have to deal with customs and ridiculous charges galore on credit cards or paypal etc. Trading in my bessa t helps me learn to let go of things, it's okay to switch cameras, sell, trade whatever. I still have the nikon 5700 I bought for a thousand and can't sell it for peanuts now. So what to do with it? So glad I went back to film. Good film cameras at least hold their value and even go up in value!
I'm not that interested in an M2. I'd rather get a bessa R2 before investing in something too old and possibly in dire need of help. While I do wish for an m4 or an m6, I know it isn't likely anytime soon. I'd like to know how the build of the CL compares to a voigtlander bessa. The bessas are fine, but do not have the weight of bricks that M cameras do.
And yes, if the CL works for me I can work on building my lens collection. My imaginary one is not very useful.
My old ltm 90 mm takes gorgeous shots, can't wait to take photographs again.Thanks.
Creagerj
Incidental Artist
Don't discount the M2. They are solid machines, but you should expect them to need a CLA.
popch
Member
Here's one, taken with the 40mm lens which traditionally comes with the CL:
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
I've had a CL from the time when new ones were in the shops but mine was second-hand and so I got it and the 40 and 90mm lens for a nice price. (And I've seldom been tempted to get other lenses for it, although from time to time I've wondered about getting the 28mm Minolta lens for the CL...
The advantages are small, CW meter, repairable, cheapo batteries, those lenses I mentioned, hot shoe, shutter speed display in the VF and, of course, the words Leitz, Wetzlar on the top plate. Their fitted case is also great.
It's a very neat and likeable camera for travel. The 40mm is ideal for places and the 90mm is ideal for people and details.
I also have owned about a dozen Leicas over the years and heaven only knows how many lenses. That means CRF's, SLR's and P&S's. And I still like the CL and still use it.
I've also had the Minolta CLE and would be happy with one but would worry about the electronics failing: I've bitter experiences of all electronic cameras failing from Canon to Pentax via Nikon and others.
I'm sorry I can't help more than that.
Regards, David
PS (Edit) Getting a Leica M with a meter in it is going to add to the price; although decent hand-held meters are cheap enough these days. But there's nothing as good as a built in CW meter and the CL's one is ideal for those two (40 and 90mm) lenses.
I've had a CL from the time when new ones were in the shops but mine was second-hand and so I got it and the 40 and 90mm lens for a nice price. (And I've seldom been tempted to get other lenses for it, although from time to time I've wondered about getting the 28mm Minolta lens for the CL...
The advantages are small, CW meter, repairable, cheapo batteries, those lenses I mentioned, hot shoe, shutter speed display in the VF and, of course, the words Leitz, Wetzlar on the top plate. Their fitted case is also great.
It's a very neat and likeable camera for travel. The 40mm is ideal for places and the 90mm is ideal for people and details.
I also have owned about a dozen Leicas over the years and heaven only knows how many lenses. That means CRF's, SLR's and P&S's. And I still like the CL and still use it.
I've also had the Minolta CLE and would be happy with one but would worry about the electronics failing: I've bitter experiences of all electronic cameras failing from Canon to Pentax via Nikon and others.
I'm sorry I can't help more than that.
Regards, David
PS (Edit) Getting a Leica M with a meter in it is going to add to the price; although decent hand-held meters are cheap enough these days. But there's nothing as good as a built in CW meter and the CL's one is ideal for those two (40 and 90mm) lenses.
Last edited:
heatherselkie
Member
Wow popsh, cool photo!
Thanks for the positive feedback about the CL, hopefully I can get my hands on one soon.
Thanks for the positive feedback about the CL, hopefully I can get my hands on one soon.
deirdre
Well-known
Here's one of my early CL shots of my husband. His face is out of focus because he moved (it was a 1/15 exposure).
Rick at the Dutch Goose by Deirdre Saoirse Moen, on Flickr
Rick at the Dutch Goose by Deirdre Saoirse Moen, on Flickr
P
Peter S
Guest
Unless you really need the small size I would always opt for a second hand Voigtlander R3a or so. I had a CL for 2 years or so, but it was actually too small for my hands and I did not like flimsy plasticy feel. The 40mm summicron or m rokkor is a gem.
dboxer
Established
Shot with a CV Nokton 40/1.4 SC. My CL has a working meter and I've found it to be pretty darn accurate. Are you still looking for one - I might be selling pretty soon.
