Opinions: CL/CLE

P

photogdave

Shops local
Local time
1:14 PM
Joined
Sep 25, 2005
Messages
2,142
I'm considering the idea of trying to get my hands on a Leica CL or Minolta CLE.
I'm intrigued by the super-compact design and the built-in meter seems easier to follow than the M6. I like the 40mm field of view and it would be a good platform for the CV 40mm 1.4 (wish I was quicker to score that great deal Dave had going recently!:bang: )
Seems like a great little package for walks to work etc. when I have to carry other stuff in my bag.
I like the idea of AE exposure on the CLE but I also prefer the mechanical operation and the general appearance and ergonomics of the CL. I will probably have to sell my M6 to finance this.
Any user opinions and comments are most welcome.
 
Think long and hard about selling the M6. I do not have a cl/cle but from what I have read about them that camera may have serious issues with its meter longevity.
 
I purchased a cl a while ago. The viewfinder is fairly nice, but I hated the advance. It felt cheep (at least compared to my M2 and M3). It is a minor thing really, but it bugged me. I also thought the bottom loading of the m2 and m3 was easier that loading the cl. I traded it in september, and I feel no remorse at all. I hear the CLE is a better camera than the cl, but I would much rather have the M6.
 
The CL has a good finder--for a little camera--and I agree that the wind is not a smooth as an M, but I don't find it objectionable. The main thing about the CL is that it has a good spot meter, which I prefer, whereas the CLE meters uniformly from the shutter curtain.

I carry a CL with my M5 in a bag. It's not burdensome, but if I had two M5s, it might be too heavy.
--Santafecino
 
I have no qualms about selling the M6 because:
1) I will ALWAYS have my M4
2) I HATE the metering system.
I hope to eventually, one day in the future, be able to buy an M7 for my full-size metered M needs!
But until that day...
 
My first Leica was the CL. I liked its compact size. I didn't really used the built-in meter as I use a Sekonic light meter. A very usable mechanical camera, imo.
Using mostly bulk film, the CL's film pickup would remove the need to cut a leader.

I don't use the CL anymore and a friend had sold it here sometime ago but now, I missed it and won't rule out getting another CL in the future.
 
Hi!
I still miss my CLEs. I had two of them (one in each jacket breast-pocket, they are that small, one 90/4, a 40 and a 28 - two rokkors and a Leitz). They suited my needs at the time perfectly. And; the still worked out in very cold weather, despite the 70s/80s electronics. When back alley offered a M-Rokkor 90/4 in mint condition I just couldn´t resist, but haven´t used it much. It deserves a CL(E). So, avtually; it´s for sale if you´d like it :) And; cross my heart it looks as if it came out of factory yesterday.
 
I have came close to getting a CLE twice. The first I missed as it sold previously same day (I pondered for 1-2 months before that!). The second I passed since it developed a rather unpredicable shutter and no working AE. Might have help with a clean as it spent some time at the dealer, but I feared bad electronics. I did massage the shutter dial a bit, but no go.

Instead, I took my Hexar AF out from the closet and has used it recently as a walkaround camera. I had considered selling it, but after using it for a while I remember what a sweet thing it is. No selling anytime soon.

/Håkan
 
i recently bought a CL as my first Leica and i think im in love. ive always used an m6 and after only a few weeks i was used to the CL's size and didnt miss the larger more solid feeling body of the m6. i got my CL with the 40 summicron c for only 300, and its in excellent condition. i wouldn't reccomend selling your m6 though. you should try to find a deal like mine, and keep all 3 bodies!
 
Maybe it's me, but the CL (I have one) doesn't seem that much smaller than the M body. It is a ton lighter, to be sure, but it's also less robust. You give up some rangefinder accuracy, which isn't a big deal with the lenses marketed for the CL, but you're not going to use a Summilux (50mm or 75mm) on this - not that you would anyway, for half a dozen reasons. It is a nice platform to have alongside the Ms, so if you aren't going to miss having a metered M body, it's a reasonable choice.

I'd stay away from the CLE. Great camera, lousy parts situation. The CL is still easily repaired, if necessary, by folks like Sherry or DAG.
 
The CL and CLE are considerably different cameras, with no parts in common (that I know of). So I'd suggest some research to help you narrow down further which you'd prefer. Other than an overwhelming need to go smaller in size, it's awful hard for me to look favorably on getting rid of an M6 for a CL...

I have no qualms about the electronics or longevity of the CLE, as mine has been reliable since new 25 years ago, with just periodic cleaning of the electrical contacts under the shutter speed dial. The circuit board design is old enough that individual components can be replaced with standard off-the-shelf parts. And it shares some electricals with some Minolta SLRs of the same vintage. The CLE is a gem, still my favorite 35mm RF after all these years.
 
I have a CLE in the shop now, and while I had it I really liked it. Feels more rhobust than the CL to me, a bit bigger and very smooth and very quiet. It felt to me like a very fast operating camera and less fiddly than the CL.

I'm not sure about the parts situation...mine had bad contacts and DAG for instance said there were no parts. But Essex said they could fix it, and so did Steve's Camera Repair in LA. I sent it to Steve and he said it is repairable. He still has it...

So although the CL can be done by lots of folks, it's also more likely to need that service, and the CLE can still be tackled by some repair shops and is less likely to need it.

The fact that the CLE shares parts with the XG line may or may not be true. Steven Gandy said yes, then said he was wrong. No consensus on the net, but then again, people are still passing rumors around about the Epson Rd-2.
 
The CL is a nice little camera but the rf base is too short for my aging eyes. One thing though I have found with these cameras is metering accuracy isn't always up to standards. My CL new was and still is 2 stops off (even after sending it in for calibration) so I mainly use it with the Voigtlander 15mm lens and handheld meter. I recently picked up another body which is the same (metering) plus the previous owner did some minor cosmetic damage while trying to do some repairs so it will either be used as a parts camera or for trading material..
 
I really like my CL. It has taken a few rolls to get accustomed to the spot metering (vs. averaging) but I think I have it down now, and the size is perfect - I can take it everywhere. The Rokkor 40mm lens is fast, tiny, fantastic, and, um, tiny :)

I probably will be picking up an M3 or M2 sometime later in the year mainly for the longer rangefinder base, but it isn't like the CL is unusable with a 50/1.5. I need my glasses for accurate focusing in low light, but that's not that big a deal, IMHO.
 
I'm a CL user, and booster. I don't like "real" M bodies much. I've never owned one, and probably never will. But a CL is no M6, and I certainly wouldn't sell an M6 to finance a CL.

M6, by all reports, seems like a terrific generalist rangefinder, a great all-'rounder. CL is a fragile, lightweight piece of specialist high-speed low-drag kit that's optimised for a peculiar focal length. Within its niche, it's brilliant. Take one out in the rain, though, or spend a day shooting through a 90 with it...

Save your pennies and end up with both the field gun and the recoilless rifle.
 
I have owned three CLEs and now only have two left... I was a moron and sold one, but I won't make that mistake again. They are quick, light (however not lacking in physical solidity) and the ergonomics fit my (medium large cadet golf glove) hands perfectly. I use a leica 28 'cron primarily, with the Voigtlander 40 second and the leica 90 elmarit-m the least. But that whole system can be carted anywhere very easily and the results have been wonderful.

Maintenance has been minimal and less the cameras problems than my own stupidity. In fact I have yet to have an electronic issue of any sort in any of the three I've owned..

I sold my MP because the CLE was so much more usable. I still have an M7 which just hasn't been the camera I reach for when I leave the house (and I have no compulsion to keep it as a museum piece...I would use it if I felt the need). I have also used an XPAN a great deal because of its obvious landscape capability, and a nikonos for some rough, wet outdoor photography. However, I always come back to the CLE for my basic shooting.

I may be a bit biased, but in your shoes I'd pick up a CLE, I do not think you will be disappointed. If, in the off chance you are disappointed in your purchase of a like-new or excellent CLE, let me know and I may take it off your hands...I gave one to my daughter and I miss not having a few of those CLEs around!
 
Since you were looking for something smaller and lighter and also dont mind the 40mm focal length then a CL or CLE will suite you well.

Your choice between them shouldn't be too difficult. If battery dependence bothers you then go with a mechanical CL. Keeping in mind that CLE's go on for ages on one set of batteries. If you want to use a 28mm lens, a better viewfinder, TTL flash, a self timer, longer base length and conventional swing back loading then the CLE is the camera to go for. It is the better camera of the two. With the advent of the Bessa ranger, ZI and Hexar RF prices of CLE's arent as high as they once were. But as you can tell from readers that most who use them hang onto them. Like another user above I pretty much stopped using M's altogether and like a compact combo of a CLE and a CL for backup and a few compact lenses in a camera case hardly larger than a lunchbox.

The CLE doesnt share parts with XG cameras as sometimes stated.
 
I have an M3, a IIIa and a CLE. The CLE is the one I bring for travels (along with my DSLR). It is smaller than my M, lighter, and it has not only a meter but AE for those street life snapshots :) I use it with CV 28/3.5, 40 Cron and 90 Rokkor - lovely and compavt. And If you wear glasses, you can easily see the 28 frameline as opposed to an M6. Or and M3 for that matter :)
 
Don't sell your M6.
The CLE is not very sturdy and the electronics are not reliable and they can't be repaired anymore. I had two of them and both failed on me. Both camera's are not that much smaller than the M6. The M6 is much more versatile and much better build. I think you're better of with Bessa.
Leica M rules, period.
Cheers,
Michiel Fokkema
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom