JoeFriday
Agent Provacateur
my Leica CL is 1,406,xxx.. which seems to match up with those lists
cl chat
- Thread starter back alley
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 107
- Views 5K
S
StuartR
Guest
Now that I have sent mine off, I don't have it in front of me, but it is a Leitz Wetzlar marked one, and the serial number was 1312xxx, so pretty early...within the first 12000 or so. It still had the plastic spool. I remember that it matched the lists.
ERV
Well-known
Mine is 1327xxx.
Here's a photo of it pimped out with a CV II meter, 35 Cron hood on the 40C and a mini soft release. (I couldn't resist the picture)
BTW, How many of you have functioning meters?
I like my CV meter, however has anyone had their meter repaired, and if so how much did in cost? I know I could contact DAG or Sherry to find out..thought I'd ask..
Here's a photo of it pimped out with a CV II meter, 35 Cron hood on the 40C and a mini soft release. (I couldn't resist the picture)
BTW, How many of you have functioning meters?
I like my CV meter, however has anyone had their meter repaired, and if so how much did in cost? I know I could contact DAG or Sherry to find out..thought I'd ask..
Attachments
W
wlewisiii
Guest
DAG quoted me $55 to adjust the meter as mine is functional but way off. This would include adjusting for Silver batteries.
William
William
S
StuartR
Guest
ERV -- how easy is that hood job? I was outbid on a ebay auction for the retaining ring, but I was happy, as I found the ring at adorama for 10 bucks, when my max bid was 21...but anyway, I figured it would be both a better hood and include a cap.
JoeFriday
Agent Provacateur
here's the details on the hood job.. I've been thinking of doing the same thing, myself
http://faculty.smu.edu/sshepher/Summicron40Hood.htm
http://faculty.smu.edu/sshepher/Summicron40Hood.htm
ERV
Well-known
Re: ERV -- how easy is that hood job?
Stuart, You need to sacrifice an original rubber 40C hood to do this mod.
Cut the hood off the metal retaining ring of the hood and trim the remaining rubber down with an xacto knife.
You can gauge how much you need to trim by eye-balling the diameter of the 35 cron hood and the retaining ring. The rubber should be trim enough for the hood to clip on normally.
Once you get the hood on the ring, screw it on to the lens, and then remove the hood and align it correctly. You can still use a 5.5 filter since the retaining ring is the same.
I also cut 4 thin strips of black gaffers tape and layered them on the aperture ring of the 40C so it is easier to grasp, since the 35 hood is a little wider and is close to the apt. ring.
The setup works well, the hood is compact and doesn't flop around like the original rubber one.
There is no problem with vignetting, either.
BTW, is your avatar the little church in San Simeon, at the base of Hearst Castle?
There was a nice country store right near there..
Eugene
Stuart, You need to sacrifice an original rubber 40C hood to do this mod.
Cut the hood off the metal retaining ring of the hood and trim the remaining rubber down with an xacto knife.
You can gauge how much you need to trim by eye-balling the diameter of the 35 cron hood and the retaining ring. The rubber should be trim enough for the hood to clip on normally.
Once you get the hood on the ring, screw it on to the lens, and then remove the hood and align it correctly. You can still use a 5.5 filter since the retaining ring is the same.
I also cut 4 thin strips of black gaffers tape and layered them on the aperture ring of the 40C so it is easier to grasp, since the 35 hood is a little wider and is close to the apt. ring.
The setup works well, the hood is compact and doesn't flop around like the original rubber one.
There is no problem with vignetting, either.
BTW, is your avatar the little church in San Simeon, at the base of Hearst Castle?
There was a nice country store right near there..
Eugene
ERV
Well-known
Brett, I tried that mod first and couldn't get it to work. I bought the correct component ring from B and H, filed the ridges down with a dremel and it was still too big for the hood.
I gave up and sac'd my perfectly good original hood. (gasp)
I got my mod instructions online as well- don't remember exactly where.
I gave up and sac'd my perfectly good original hood. (gasp)
I got my mod instructions online as well- don't remember exactly where.
Last edited:
W
wlewisiii
Guest
I've been pondering the little metal hood that Mr. Gandy sells. Has anyone here tried it?
Also, ERV, your photo with the VC Meter makes me wish I hadn't had to sell mine - OTOH, selling it got me my CL 😱 6 of one, half a dozen of the other...
William
Also, ERV, your photo with the VC Meter makes me wish I hadn't had to sell mine - OTOH, selling it got me my CL 😱 6 of one, half a dozen of the other...
William
KoNickon
Nick Merritt
William, thanks for pointing me to the KB site. My L/M CL serial number definitely begins with 103, which is consistent with the range apparently assigned to the CLE. But I need to look at the number again, because it might actually be higher than 1033. That would be odd, since the CLE is a newer model. In any event, I'm thinking the information at the KB site (which may come from Minolta?) doesn't distinguish the Minolta-badged CLs from the CLEs. I'll report back.
KoNickon
Nick Merritt
OK, another CL topic: Can anybody name another 35mm camera with a cloth vertical shutter? This is common with medium format SLRs (Bronica, Hasselblad, Mamiya), but I don't believe I've ever seen or heard of this design in a 35mm camera other than the CL.
Andrew Touchon
Well-known
I never knew there were so many CL owners on this forum. I am a proud owner of Leitz-Minolta CL serial No. 1015585 purchased new in 1974. It has had one visit to to Leica NJ about four years ago for a CLA for a sticking frame counter and light meter calibration for using alkaline batteries. I just had MPIX print a 20X30 of a Kodachrome slide made with the CL/40mm Rokkor. The detail on the print is amazing. 🙂
Last edited:
TEZillman
Well-known
Just to throw another serial number into the mix here, my Leitz-Minolta CL has the serial number 1032758, some 17,173 units after Andrew's. It's interesting that between the two cameras we seem to cover the entire serial number range attributed to the CLE.
Palaeoboy
Joel Matherson
As you have already figured out by the looks of it is that the Leitz Minolta CLs have a different serial number range to the Leica CL's. The Leicas are spit up into batches but the Leitz Minolta ones have a consistant stream of serial numbers starting with 1015XXX the latest serial number I have collected so far is 1034XXX.
Andrew your camera was one of the earliest production examples of the Leitz Minolta CL's. The earliest serial number I have seen on a Leitz Minolta CL is the one pictured in the original instrauction manual (where they often picture very early production models) and its number is 1015502. If you have the original lens with your camera it should also be marked QF, only the very early CL Rokkors bare this marking.
CLE serial numbers start differently to the Leitz Minolta CL's and do over lap in their range. Minolta reused numbers when they went to different models so that they didnt end up 10 digit numbers from vast production.
Andrew your camera was one of the earliest production examples of the Leitz Minolta CL's. The earliest serial number I have seen on a Leitz Minolta CL is the one pictured in the original instrauction manual (where they often picture very early production models) and its number is 1015502. If you have the original lens with your camera it should also be marked QF, only the very early CL Rokkors bare this marking.
CLE serial numbers start differently to the Leitz Minolta CL's and do over lap in their range. Minolta reused numbers when they went to different models so that they didnt end up 10 digit numbers from vast production.
Andrew Touchon
Well-known
Palaeoboy said:
Yep, the 40mm rokkor serial number 1016003, that came with the body is marked QF. 🙂
KoNickon
Nick Merritt
Joel, my Leitz/Minolta CL's serial number is 1038XXXX, so that's a new high number for you.
Palaeoboy
Joel Matherson
Excellent Nick thanks! I have been collecting the serial numbers for several years now. Your number puts production at over the estimated 20,000. Could you email me in private with the complete number so I can add it to my list. Thanks
Andrew your lens is only a few hundred from the earliest recorded number for that particular Rokkor. Those early cameras were generally for the Japanese home market, im quite suprised it went to the USA that early.
Andrew your lens is only a few hundred from the earliest recorded number for that particular Rokkor. Those early cameras were generally for the Japanese home market, im quite suprised it went to the USA that early.
Andrew Touchon
Well-known
The CL didn't go to the USA. I went to Japan. The camera was purchased in a camera shop in Iwakuni, Japan.
Palaeoboy
Joel Matherson
Ahhhhh, that fits then.
But what is interesting is that many people claim that the Leitz Minolta CL's were only made after the Leica CLs were discontinued, which I have always disputed. Even Sherry K who people in the USA say is the most knowledgable person on the CL in the world (But I take that to mean the USA, like the world series LOL) has claimed this but it just isnt true, you are living proof! LOL
But what is interesting is that many people claim that the Leitz Minolta CL's were only made after the Leica CLs were discontinued, which I have always disputed. Even Sherry K who people in the USA say is the most knowledgable person on the CL in the world (But I take that to mean the USA, like the world series LOL) has claimed this but it just isnt true, you are living proof! LOL
Andrew Touchon
Well-known
Palaeoboy said:
I am sure that the Leitz-Minolta version came on the market the same time as the Leica CL. After Leica stopped selling the CL, I believe Minolta made a name change on the camera from Leitz-Minolta CL to Minolta CL and produced a few of these cameras until they introduced the Minolta CLE. I may be wrong on this point but I definitely remember reading this somewhere. 😕 😕
Last edited:
