Can't afford a Leica M3.......

Vics said:
Leica CL. A few Leica lenses can't be mounted, but...
Click to expand...

CL cannot use lens collapsible or have deep rear element inside the body due CL has meter bar.


FED 2. Zorki 6 and Kiev Contax have long rangefinder baseline that can make you easy focus, especially fast f1.5 Jupiter-3.
 
alphonse2501 said:
CL cannot use lens collapsible or have deep rear element inside the body due CL has meter bar.


FED 2. Zorki 6 and Kiev Contax have long rangefinder baseline that can make you easy focus, especially fast f1.5 Jupiter-3.
Click to expand...
You're right, but a CL with 40mm 'cron-C and Elmar-C 90mm, now that's a shooter.
 
Yeah the CCCP shooters can be great

Yeah the CCCP shooters can be great

Hi thanks! Youre so right!
CCCP Cameras (dont forget the Kiev 4 and 5 Contax copy line!)
are very very intersting,
all my cameras are CLAed and work like new, never problems since Fedka
or Certo6 did the CLA...
also my Chinese CLAed cameras (Seagull / Shanghai) work flawless.
:) Would never need to buy a Leica again....
There are good mechanics around restoring eastern cameras to better
than new condition, they are not too expensive...Fedka is good for restored
HQ Soviet gear!

http://www.fedka.com/Frames/Main_Frame.htm

You dont need to buy unkissed frogs from ebay, just get a restored Soviet Camera (Fed 3 with M39 Industar 61 f2,8/50 Lanthanium tessar copy lens is a good one!) from him than youve got a great shooter without any probs...

http://mattsclassiccameras.com/fed_3b.html

David Hughes said:
Hi,

A CL means almost all M lenses can be fitted but the VF is only for 40, 50 and 90mm and as the 40 and 50 appear together can confuse. But great if you stick to the 40 and 90mm lenses made for it. Beyond that you need extra VF's on top and the RF base is too short for 135mm lenses.

OTOH, a good FED 2 and Jupiter-8 can turn out excellent pictures. I used the J-8 on my M2 and still do.

Th trouble is people have had bad experiences with FED's etc and, for reasons that escape me, similar experiences with Leicas and Contaxes are seen differently. But ex-USSR cameras are much cheaper to repair and turn into a thing of beauty and a joy forever, etc, etc. (But there's lots of un-kissed frogs out there.)

Regards, David
Click to expand...
 
MiniMoke said:
Ok, thanks all for your insights!

One last choice, Bessa R or Leica CL, both about the same price?
Click to expand...

I've had both and prefer the Bessa R. The CL wasn't to my taste both in looks and function. The Bessa R is a nice camera and can be had at a decent price then jump on a Leica lens and no one here can tell what camera you used. If you are going to resale eventually then the CL it will hold value only because of name as I believe the Bassa R is well made.
 
If you keep your eyes open, and are patient, you can find an M3 and a decent lens for under $700.

I got this M4 for $200 last year, the lens was another $250. A CLA was another $200, total price: $650.

August12011019.jpg


I have an M3 SS and 40/2 Summicron which I found for $500.
 
Roger Hicks said:
Many did, though. And it depended on what they were photographing. By the 1960s, f/2.8 was regarded as unreasonably slow and very few good cameras were used with standard lenses that slow. Actually, even in the 50s, f/2 was not regarded as out of the way. Besides, the point really is that the cameras and lenses you refer to are not of Leica standard.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

Primarily because everybody was switching to SLRs though. :angel: You will in most circumstances not be using f2.8 or larger on a camera with a 1/1000 top shutter speed anyway.

I'll second the suggestion of a Canon P. Yeah it is screw mount, but it's about as good as screw mount gets - IMO better than any III series Leica (in terms of handling and useability), but compatible with Leica glass should you choose to use it. The Feds et al. are based on the III, and consequentially the Canons beat those too in my mind.

Or a Bessa! :)
 
Lenses on CL's and M5's

Lenses on CL's and M5's

Hi,

The user's instruction manual says that collapsible lenses can be used if modified to stop them going all the way in. They suggest a band of DYMO tape either 9.5 or 12.7mm wide around the barrel; so look in the instruction book... BTW, I use an elastic band round the lens barrel to stop it, simply because I can take that off after use.

For the M5 they list the lenses and say that they have to be returned to Leica for the modification. There's only a handful of lenses mostly 21mm and an odd 28, 35 and 50mm. Some need re-machining and some don't need modifying, depending on the serial number. They also mention that the metering will not be possible for some after modifying.

Best to read the manual I think.

Regards, David

Regards, David
 
Zopkuni said:
Hi thanks! Youre so right!
CCCP Cameras (dont forget the Kiev 4 and 5 Contax copy line!)
are very very intersting,
all my cameras are CLAed and work like new, never problems since Fedka
or Certo6 did the CLA...
also my Chinese CLAed cameras (Seagull / Shanghai) work flawless.
:) Would never need to buy a Leica again....
There are good mechanics around restoring eastern cameras to better
than new condition, they are not too expensive...Fedka is good for restored
HQ Soviet gear!

http://www.fedka.com/Frames/Main_Frame.htm

You dont need to buy unkissed frogs from ebay, just get a restored Soviet Camera (Fed 3 with M39 Industar 61 f2,8/50 Lanthanium tessar copy lens is a good one!) from him than youve got a great shooter without any probs...

http://mattsclassiccameras.com/fed_3b.html
Click to expand...

Yup, good advice but as he's on the other side of the world and import duty and tax are payable I'd go for buying one in my country and then getting it done either here or by Oleg. Tax etc then being paid of the cost of the repair only.

Buying something from the USA, importing it and paying tax etc, then returning it as U/S can be complicated and expensive.

Regards, David
 
On a tight budget?

- Zorki-4 plus Jupiter 8 and Jupiter-12
- Yashica Electro 35GS (and forget about the changeable lenses)


On a medium price level:

- Leica CL & 2.0/40 (or Minolta CLE)
- used Bessa
- M5 (if you're lucky to find one cheap)
 
I guess I'm set!

I ordered a CL from a reputable seller (offers refund if not OK) and a Jupiter 8 and adapter for staring. I think I'll look for a 40mm Rokkor or similar soon.

Wish me luck with the camera.
 
Good luck! :)
Jupiter 8 Lens is excellent!
Wont find anything better for the price ;-)

Try to find a good Russar "PYCCAP"
'5.6/20' lens with M39 its a super HQ 20
wide angle lens and its pure fun and the image quality
is fantastic, look here, its one of the nicest M39 soviet lenses:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=74004

attention there are fake / Low Quality Russars made for tourists on ebay....
only buy a 1950, 60, 70s or early 1980s version.
Those from the 90s tend to be lousy...
 
Zopkuni said:
Good luck! :)
Jupiter 8 Lens is excellent!
Wont find anything better for the price ;-)

Try to find a good Russar "PYCCAP"
'5.6/20' lens with M39 its a super HQ 20
wide angle lens and its pure fun and the image quality
is fantastic, look here, its one of the nicest M39 soviet lenses:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=74004

attention there are fake / Low Quality Russars made for tourists on ebay....
only buy a 1950, 60, 70s or early 1980s version.
Those from the 90s tend to be lousy...
Click to expand...
As was the 1970s version I had. And the others I've tried/seen results from (all pre-1990s). Yes, some people swear they're great. Some may be. But I wonder whether how mamy of their advocates have ever tried many other old non-Soviet 19-21mm lenses, especially 21mm Biogons or Nikkors. And how many judge them from prints, not internet pics.

Cheers,

R.
 
My Russar from 1965 ;-)
isnt a fake, results are great...sharp and contrasty -- pure
fun to use! And you can find them for a reasonable price...dont buy the first best you can find (those mostly are fake or much too expensive)
Ive tried 2 others before, one from 1978 and one from 1982, both were equaly good (got them from Fedkas webshop not from a tourist marked..)
I kept the oldest Russar because I allways try to get the oldest lens of any type.. ;-)
Mostly the oldest (talking about coated post war CCCP era) are the best...
 
OK, MiniMoke! I hope it works out well for for you. I recently bought an Elmar-C 90mm for my M3, and I think it's wonderful. Great for close-ups, portraits and landscapes. Cost me $250 in EX condition at KEH. Consider it for your CL. Would be great for outdoor car shows (details, etc). Enjoy!
 
The CL arrived yesterday..... I have to say it is in excellent condition! Virtually no signs of it's age on the body, inside and out. Very minor fogging of the viewfinder, but really nothing to lose sleep about.

All speeds fire OK (tested by ear...) and the light meter seems to work.

Now I anxiously wait for my Jupiter 8 which is on it's way, so I can give the CL a run (provided the lens is OK...).

I am really impressed with this camera! OK it's only a half-Leica, but the build is really good and it seems to handle like a charm, even without lens. It seems to really fit my hands, just feels great to hold it.

One day a light CLA seems inevitable, perhaps just for the peace of mind.

I already thought about selling my beloved Canonet QL17 (exactly same size as the CL by the way!), and concentrate on the Leica.

I would love to find a 40mm Rokkor for a good price, so if anyone has one lying around unused or knows of one.....
 
That Leica CL is a great camera!

I got my Jupiter 8 lens some days ago and it handles incredibly well (OK, for the results I'll have to wait to develop my film). I also got a very good Elmar-C 90 F:4 from the dreaded bay, and it is very clean. Stil waiting for the 40 mm Rokkor...... hope it turns out OK too.

Now a question: In low light the CL underexposes by up to 2 stops. Low light means indoors with not too bright lamps - a moderately well lit pub perhaps. Outdoors, the meter is spot on!

I read somewhere that the meter is suposed to work from 3 to 18 EV, but this indoor situation is rather about 6 to 7 EV.

Anyone has any comment on this?
 
If you were to decide that you could live with a classic SLR rather than a rangfinder I would suggest considering an early Pentax (pre Spotmatic) in M42 mount. The various models made by Pentax around 1960 were superb little cameras- the s1, s1a etc (also known as the h1, h1a etc in the US) these little cameras always remind me of handling a Leica thread mount camera. Partly because these cameras also use a thread mount but mostly because they are a similar size and shape. Closer to an LTM camera than an M camera I must admit but nice to use and inexpensive. If well treated these cameras are still highly reliable today and seldom seem to need repair. They are similar in other respects to the Leica. The camera has no light meter like the Leica and the Pentax range of lenses (which was very extensive) was of extremely high quality (and still are - these little beauties still acquit themselves well.) These cameras do seem to have had a resurgence in price lately - they were almost giving them away a few years back. The BIN price on eBay seems to be from $100 up to around $200 for a body and standard 50mm lens - still much cheaper than a Leica. I really like these cameras and cant say anything bad about them except that its easy to get hooked.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom