williaty
Established
OK, so I took a look at the Leica CL/Minolta CLE twins. Nice looking cameras, good price, but I assume the low EBL compared to the Bessa R2/R2M would make it considerably more tricky to focus precisely with a f/1.4 lens (someday...)?
mpaniagua
Newby photographer
Minolta CLE.
I don't think that outfit is within the budget restraint
. Lovely outfit by the way struene
Established
I regulary choose my Bessar R2 over my leicas and ZM, just because its lighter, better to hold with the back-grip. The finder is equally great as the other "big" options and it works just fine, all in all infact its a better "shooter".
Its especially a great match with the Voigtländer color-skopar 35/2.5 II or the nokton classic 35/1.4. But be aware the 35 /1.4 has much distortion and is "classic" at open aperture...
The Russian lenses are cumbersome to use... stepless aperture-rings, that turn with the focus... in case of the 35 2.8 you have to turn the aperture ring from inside the front, around the front element of the lens... Maybe the japanese 50ies are better "budget-options". But a used 50 1.5 nokton (ltm) or 50 2.5 skopar and a 90 3.5 lanthar could also be great voigtländer choises.
I wouldnt choose the first bessa r because of the thread mount and the outer plastic finish wich doesnt feel so good as the very sturdy finish, material and grip of the later bessas r2/3/4 with our without m/a. For the 35mm field of view it would actually be the r2 variants. - Really great cameras!
schöne Grüße,
Johann
Its especially a great match with the Voigtländer color-skopar 35/2.5 II or the nokton classic 35/1.4. But be aware the 35 /1.4 has much distortion and is "classic" at open aperture...
The Russian lenses are cumbersome to use... stepless aperture-rings, that turn with the focus... in case of the 35 2.8 you have to turn the aperture ring from inside the front, around the front element of the lens... Maybe the japanese 50ies are better "budget-options". But a used 50 1.5 nokton (ltm) or 50 2.5 skopar and a 90 3.5 lanthar could also be great voigtländer choises.
I wouldnt choose the first bessa r because of the thread mount and the outer plastic finish wich doesnt feel so good as the very sturdy finish, material and grip of the later bessas r2/3/4 with our without m/a. For the 35mm field of view it would actually be the r2 variants. - Really great cameras!
schöne Grüße,
Johann
Depends on the focal length. The EBL of the CL is quite sufficient at f/1.4 for focal lengths 50mm or less; the CLE EBL is significantly greater than that of the CL and also greater than the R2. Refer to the RF accuracy chart (click on Ok/Not OK at the bottom left for ease of viewing.)
Bear in mind this doesn't take into account potential finder blockage that such a lens might produce...
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
The CLE would be a nice basis of an outfit but they are all electronic and that means problems in the future as I see it. This is based on experience of Leica and Contax electronics. Leica can be repaired at a price and, as for Contax, no one would touch it when one of mine failed.
The CL is nice being mechanical with just the electrics for the metering but does not work as requested, with only 40, 50 and 90 mm lenses having framelines. Otherwise you need an accessory finder. The metering isn't half as bad as some say in use and, according to RFF users, for repairs.
I can't comment on the Bessa, as I've never owned or used one.
The USSR and LTM don't match the original specification. A lot of Leicas do but are way beyond the budget but, perhaps, a J-8 and a lot of luck might just mean it's possible but you have to bear in mind the repair costs of a Leica body. I often use USSR lenses on the M9 and find the stepless aperture setting no less irritating than the clicky ones.
Regards, David
The CLE would be a nice basis of an outfit but they are all electronic and that means problems in the future as I see it. This is based on experience of Leica and Contax electronics. Leica can be repaired at a price and, as for Contax, no one would touch it when one of mine failed.
The CL is nice being mechanical with just the electrics for the metering but does not work as requested, with only 40, 50 and 90 mm lenses having framelines. Otherwise you need an accessory finder. The metering isn't half as bad as some say in use and, according to RFF users, for repairs.
I can't comment on the Bessa, as I've never owned or used one.
The USSR and LTM don't match the original specification. A lot of Leicas do but are way beyond the budget but, perhaps, a J-8 and a lot of luck might just mean it's possible but you have to bear in mind the repair costs of a Leica body. I often use USSR lenses on the M9 and find the stepless aperture setting no less irritating than the clicky ones.
Regards, David
williaty
Established
Oooo.. hey that's a really useful chart!
So it looks like the Minolta CLE and Bessa R2/R2M are going to be pretty close to the same focusing wise. The CLE and the R2 seem to cost about the same with more CLEs available. The R2M seems to be ~$125 more. Sadly, looking at the chart, it seems like in the moderate telephoto range (85-90mm), neither camera would acceptably focus a lens of the speed I'm used to. That's probably a tradeoff I should just accept in order to test out a rangefinder for a price I can live with right now.
Given the electronics in the CLE, it seems to me like it'd be worth shopping for a while to get an all-mechanical R2/R2M instead.
So it looks like the Minolta CLE and Bessa R2/R2M are going to be pretty close to the same focusing wise. The CLE and the R2 seem to cost about the same with more CLEs available. The R2M seems to be ~$125 more. Sadly, looking at the chart, it seems like in the moderate telephoto range (85-90mm), neither camera would acceptably focus a lens of the speed I'm used to. That's probably a tradeoff I should just accept in order to test out a rangefinder for a price I can live with right now.
Given the electronics in the CLE, it seems to me like it'd be worth shopping for a while to get an all-mechanical R2/R2M instead.
mpaniagua
Newby photographer
Good choice. Wish you luck. Voightlander got some pretty nice lenses so check them out. Those with a LTM can be used with a M mount adapter without a problem (at least most of them
)
Having owned several CLEs, never have seen one have any electronic issues. Sometimes there is some oxidation on the shutter dial electrical contacts but that's easy to clean and it lasts several years.
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
I'm pleased to hear that but my comment was based on the/my failure to find anyone who would look at the Contax and the same happened with a Leica - except that Leica would do it for a price that shocked me.
Several repair people I contacted said the problem with all-electronic cameras is that they cost time and money to strip down and then re-assemble and no one will pay that and be told that the parts are not repairable or available.
The other problem is the owners who attempt the repairs knowing nothing of the precautions to take.
This is a pity as I suspect, often, that a simple mechanical part in the power part of the circuit (battery contacts, leads etc) and so on (buttons and switches) could be the cause and easily repaired but I'd hesitate to open up an all-electronic camera. And I've know so called experts wreck things...
Regards, David
I'm pleased to hear that but my comment was based on the/my failure to find anyone who would look at the Contax and the same happened with a Leica - except that Leica would do it for a price that shocked me.
Several repair people I contacted said the problem with all-electronic cameras is that they cost time and money to strip down and then re-assemble and no one will pay that and be told that the parts are not repairable or available.
The other problem is the owners who attempt the repairs knowing nothing of the precautions to take.
This is a pity as I suspect, often, that a simple mechanical part in the power part of the circuit (battery contacts, leads etc) and so on (buttons and switches) could be the cause and easily repaired but I'd hesitate to open up an all-electronic camera. And I've know so called experts wreck things...
Regards, David
williaty
Established
OK, so I'm pretty well sorted on what camera body I'll be chasing. Now I need to pick some targets for lens hunting.
What would you recommend in the very much lower price range in the 35-55mm focal length, f/2.8 or faster? I'm open to both M39 screw mount and M Bayonet mount lenses as everyone seems to say the adapters work quite well. I think I'd be a little more interested in the 45-55mm range for having only one lens, but anything on the normal to sort of wide range will work for me.
What would you recommend in the very much lower price range in the 35-55mm focal length, f/2.8 or faster? I'm open to both M39 screw mount and M Bayonet mount lenses as everyone seems to say the adapters work quite well. I think I'd be a little more interested in the 45-55mm range for having only one lens, but anything on the normal to sort of wide range will work for me.
Spicy
Well-known
LTM: Canon 50/1.4 - fairly classic handling, quite small (but quite dense, so not very light) for a 1.4. usually can be found in very good condition for ~300, and if you're willing to go for more user-grade, low 200s are possible if you're patient. -CV 35/2.5 - highly regarded and is typical cosina-voigtlander high value per dollar. doesn't have the speed or the distortion of the faster CV 35/1.4 which seems to bother a lot of people but I never really noticed until it was pointed out to me. Probably in the high 200s/low 300s. I've never owned/used one, but people on RFF do seem to regularly comment about how nice they are to use. Might also come in M-mount, I can't remember. Jupiter 8 50/1.5(?) - M-mount: M-Rokkor 40/2 is quite a cracker. Very small, very light -- quite a sleeper since people seem to think the CL lenses don't focus properly on M-bodies -- a rumor that probably started to make sure people bought $$$ Leica lenses rather than their cheaper counterparts (only differences I know of are coating and price-tag). Mount can be permanently modified to bring up 35mm framelines on M bodies (normally 50 shows up). posting from my phone, not sure why it keeps breaking the formatting -- sorry for this being an absolute pain to read
What framelines does said body feature?
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
This is going to be fun; the cheap but excellent value for money lenses are the former USSR made ones that came with the FED, Zorki, etc cameras. You can get them easily in 35, 50 and 85 mm (and 135mm but I've no experience of it).
They are rather old fashioned lenses and many people like them for that but the Industar-61 and 61 L/D are good and not so old fashioned. They are f/2.8 but there's the Jupiter-8 at f/2 and a Jupiter-3 at f/1.5.
The problem is, they are cheap and people will mess around with them and take them to bits rather than ask a technician with the tools and experience to check them. So you get them with lenses reversed and so on. Also, during the cold war the USSR, our former ally, was denied access to things our former enemies had like modern lubricants and so these are best replaced due to their age (just like old Leica ones, FWIW).
Having said that I'll add that I have bought these lenses at prices from 50 pence (about 65 US cents) to a fiver (about US$ 6.50), checked them and been pleased. I don't know what they cost to get sorted out - as mine seem OK - but a Leica lens needed the full treatment and cost about UKP 20 when done by the experts. Often the lenses are sold with cameras for equally silly prices.
I'll go along with the others about CV lenses and, as it's all been said, will say no more.
Regards, David
PS Sample photo's from the USSR made lenses in this lot of threads:-
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=34
This is going to be fun; the cheap but excellent value for money lenses are the former USSR made ones that came with the FED, Zorki, etc cameras. You can get them easily in 35, 50 and 85 mm (and 135mm but I've no experience of it).
They are rather old fashioned lenses and many people like them for that but the Industar-61 and 61 L/D are good and not so old fashioned. They are f/2.8 but there's the Jupiter-8 at f/2 and a Jupiter-3 at f/1.5.
The problem is, they are cheap and people will mess around with them and take them to bits rather than ask a technician with the tools and experience to check them. So you get them with lenses reversed and so on. Also, during the cold war the USSR, our former ally, was denied access to things our former enemies had like modern lubricants and so these are best replaced due to their age (just like old Leica ones, FWIW).
Having said that I'll add that I have bought these lenses at prices from 50 pence (about 65 US cents) to a fiver (about US$ 6.50), checked them and been pleased. I don't know what they cost to get sorted out - as mine seem OK - but a Leica lens needed the full treatment and cost about UKP 20 when done by the experts. Often the lenses are sold with cameras for equally silly prices.
I'll go along with the others about CV lenses and, as it's all been said, will say no more.
Regards, David
PS Sample photo's from the USSR made lenses in this lot of threads:-
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=34
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Pete B
Well-known
I usually use Leica MPs but after a trip trekking in Bhutan I decided I'd get a lighter kit for those situations. I have the R2 which gives me the comfort of a mechanical camera, and the electronic R4A which has frame lines as wide as 21mm. I've gone for Color skopar 21 and 35mm lenses which are low priced, superb, compact and light lenses. I don't think you can go wrong with 50mm lenses. I have a Jupiter 50/2 which I think is a Contax or Zeiss copy (?) with wonderful image quality. It's only the improved ergonomics (for me) which keeps me using my Leicas.
I have gone for LTM versions of these lenses so that I can use them on my Leica 111f which is another camera I enjoy using.
Pete
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Where is nothing very much lower price for 35 and wider. Except Jupiter-12.
And for 55 very much lower price the champion is Industar 61l/d 2.8.
Many fans of this lens. I'm not the one of them. I prefer Industar 26m which is very much lower price as well.
You're genuinely annoying, as well. Still not going to reply to your 'stupid' comment. Time to add to the ignore list...
mpaniagua
Newby photographer
Agree. Industars are pretty nice. Just be aware that the collapsible ones may not fit your camera of choice. Same with the Jupiter 12. Its a wonderful lens, I use it with my Bessa R2, but need to be careful that the rear lens doesn't scratch anything while put it in the camera. Also be aware that light meter may be inaccurate (this depend on the focus, the closer it is to infinitum, the more it blocks the ligh meter cell, the lens accurate reading becomes). This happens on my m6 as well.
easyrider
Photo addict
The Bessas are nice but if you really want to get into it, get a Leica iiiF or iiF. It's like buying a car with a gear shift. Screwmount Leicas are reasonably priced.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
If I remember correct, where is the reason why OP doesn't need LTM Leica, Canon P and such.