Spicy
Well-known
I was just wondering if I were to buy a CL with an inoperative meter, would I be able to mount an Industar-22 (basically the Elmar 50 3.5 collapsible) on it?
My understanding is that the CL, much like the M5, has the meter arm stalk, which pops out, and that's where you run into problems with the collapsible lenses. However, wouldn't it be fine to just never hit the shutter button when you're lens is collapsed? I never understood why there would be a problem if it only pops up when you're taking a picture, and you'd never be taking a picture with the lens in its collapsed position...
I don't really need the meter (sunny 16 works just fine). I'd prefer not to have to remove it (using the aforementioned method), but is there any way to remove it?
My understanding is that the CL, much like the M5, has the meter arm stalk, which pops out, and that's where you run into problems with the collapsible lenses. However, wouldn't it be fine to just never hit the shutter button when you're lens is collapsed? I never understood why there would be a problem if it only pops up when you're taking a picture, and you'd never be taking a picture with the lens in its collapsed position...
I don't really need the meter (sunny 16 works just fine). I'd prefer not to have to remove it (using the aforementioned method), but is there any way to remove it?
Spicy
Well-known
Not a single person can tell me if I can just yank out the meter arm with a pair of pliers...?
Livesteamer
Well-known
I think Sherry Krauter is the one to talk to. I don't think the pliers method would work. Good Luck. Joe
Vickko
Veteran
Um, not with pliers. The CL isn't that hard to open up. If it were me, I would disable the mechanism that raises the meter arm. It is pretty obvious when the camera is opened up.
Vick
Vick
Brian Levy
Established
The arm moves with the film advance and in that postion causes the problem. There was a thread somewhere discussing removong the metering system arm but it is not simple as it interconnects with the film advance and shutter release. Unless you got a junker at less than a parts price unit better to let someone who knows the workings well to do the job if that is the direction yoou want to go but, I'd just sell it and get an M or ltm before doing that. With the going prices there is a decreasing spread between a very good example of the CL and a user LTM or M. Add the cost to have the arm removed and even less.
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hi,
I guess the answer is another question: why?
If you want to avoid damage to the meter arm than get an elastic band and wind it a few times round the barrel of the lens. Stops it going back in and you keep that wonderful centre weighted metering...
Regards, David
I guess the answer is another question: why?
If you want to avoid damage to the meter arm than get an elastic band and wind it a few times round the barrel of the lens. Stops it going back in and you keep that wonderful centre weighted metering...
Regards, David
Coldkennels
Barnack-toting Brit.
I'm with David: Why? The CL, while generally lovely, seems like a more awkward home for the Industar than, oh, I don't know, a Zorki 1? Or if you want to stay Leica, a Leica II?
Joking aside, if you remove the meter and intend to stay purely with a 50mm collapsible, what reason do you have - other than lever wind - to keep you with the CL?
Joking aside, if you remove the meter and intend to stay purely with a 50mm collapsible, what reason do you have - other than lever wind - to keep you with the CL?
Brian Legge
Veteran
Eh, if I had a CL with a dead meter, I could imagine the interest. From what Ive read, repaired meters also seem to die at a disturbing rate. Writing the meter off and using it as a manual camera seems understandable if it enables the use of collapsible lenses of all sorts (without having to worry about damage caused to/by something that didn't work anyway)
Coldkennels
Barnack-toting Brit.
Oh, I'd totally understand that. But to buy one with a broken meter just to remove it...?
Don't get me wrong, CLs are great. But I think I'd take a Barnack rather than go through the hassle of removing the CL's stalk. But hey, that's just me...
Brian Legge
Veteran
And I get your position too.
I use Barnacks; I don't have an M body.
I use Barnacks; I don't have an M body.
Steve M.
Veteran
So, did you go the Hunter Thompson Gonzo route and take after that little arm w/ your pliers? I really like the image of that. No sissy camera repairs here!
I once owned a meterless (not working) CL that had a collapsible 50 Summicron. What a wonderful combination that was.
I once owned a meterless (not working) CL that had a collapsible 50 Summicron. What a wonderful combination that was.
Spicy
Well-known
Nope, nothing as glorious. Just pondering the thought of getting a small pocketable M-mount platform. I have a IIIc that I really like, but it's a bit obnoxious to use sometimes when you just want to take pictures -- you've really got to be in the mood to do things old-school. Fine sometimes, but a little taxing other times.
I have a really nice example of the I-22 as well as an LTM to M adapter. A nice pocketable camera would be nice -- the IIIc is ok but long and a bit heavy. Not sure how the CL compares with regards to weight/lumpiness (better to have a slightly larger perfect box than a smaller thing with tons of knobs and stuff sticking out).
I have a really nice example of the I-22 as well as an LTM to M adapter. A nice pocketable camera would be nice -- the IIIc is ok but long and a bit heavy. Not sure how the CL compares with regards to weight/lumpiness (better to have a slightly larger perfect box than a smaller thing with tons of knobs and stuff sticking out).
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
On the M5 it is really easy to modify an LTM to M-mount adapter so that when the lens is mounted, the metering arm stays down. That way the camera can remain as it is and the lens can be mounted anyway.
(M5 with a Jupiter-12, which without the modified adapter would interfere with the metering arm.)
Maybe on the CL it is just as easy? Then you could use the I-22 without yanking anything out of the camera.
(M5 with a Jupiter-12, which without the modified adapter would interfere with the metering arm.)
Maybe on the CL it is just as easy? Then you could use the I-22 without yanking anything out of the camera.
Coldkennels
Barnack-toting Brit.
That's really reassuring to know. I'm dreaming of an M5 in the near future but really like the J12 (a lot of Leicaphiles just died inside), so this is something I'll probably end up doing myself.
David Hughes
David Hughes
Hmmm, if, as you say you " just want to take pictures -- you've really got to be in the mood to do things old-school. Fine sometimes, but a little taxing other times" then why mess up a CL?
The CL is a lovely little camera and perfect if you want a 2 lens, small CRF with CW metering and "Leica Wetzlar" on it but it's not a mainstream M series and never will be.
I don't know about others but fitting a 50mm lens to it gets irritating when looking through the VF as the frame lines for both 40mm and 50mm are there at the same time. Using the 40 most of the time you get used to ignoring the 50's lines but try it the other way round and it's a pita.
It also has a short RF base and I'd not use it with a wider aperture than f/4 (as on the "C" 90mm lens) because I'd worry about the DoF and the RF's accuracy not quite working together.
As I see it you need a M series like the M2 etc but they are all bigger and heavier than the IIIc, although a lot easier to use. Then there's the FED 2 which would take your 50mm lens and is a much easier camera than the IIIc in many ways.
Returning to the original quotation I can think of a lot of cameras that will take pictures without much hassle and take better ones than you'd expect. Most of them, these days, are despised because they are point & shoots but so what. Also, being despised by "serious" photographers they are dirt cheap. For the price of a CL body you could probably buy fifty to a hundred or so of them and throw them away if they fail.
Better still, there are cult cameras like the Olympus XA or XA2 with specialised repairers lurking all over the place. So it can be a very simple and cheap exercise to buy one and get it checked over etc. Then there's overlooked cameras like the Pentx ESPIO mini or the Minolta Riva Mini or the Konica A4 with great prime lenses on them, or their bigger brothers with the zoom and so called macro lenses. All easily available for a pound or two and no real problems picking up one that matches exactly what you need for your style of photography.
BTW, I use a IIIc and a CL and the M2 and a FED 1 and an Olympus XA, XA1, XA2 & XA3 and all the others I've mentioned so my comments are based on experience of using these outfits and a lot of others in the collection.
Anyway, it's just my 2d worth to save a CL from a fate worse than death and you from a bit of expensive hassle.
Regards, David
The CL is a lovely little camera and perfect if you want a 2 lens, small CRF with CW metering and "Leica Wetzlar" on it but it's not a mainstream M series and never will be.
I don't know about others but fitting a 50mm lens to it gets irritating when looking through the VF as the frame lines for both 40mm and 50mm are there at the same time. Using the 40 most of the time you get used to ignoring the 50's lines but try it the other way round and it's a pita.
It also has a short RF base and I'd not use it with a wider aperture than f/4 (as on the "C" 90mm lens) because I'd worry about the DoF and the RF's accuracy not quite working together.
As I see it you need a M series like the M2 etc but they are all bigger and heavier than the IIIc, although a lot easier to use. Then there's the FED 2 which would take your 50mm lens and is a much easier camera than the IIIc in many ways.
Returning to the original quotation I can think of a lot of cameras that will take pictures without much hassle and take better ones than you'd expect. Most of them, these days, are despised because they are point & shoots but so what. Also, being despised by "serious" photographers they are dirt cheap. For the price of a CL body you could probably buy fifty to a hundred or so of them and throw them away if they fail.
Better still, there are cult cameras like the Olympus XA or XA2 with specialised repairers lurking all over the place. So it can be a very simple and cheap exercise to buy one and get it checked over etc. Then there's overlooked cameras like the Pentx ESPIO mini or the Minolta Riva Mini or the Konica A4 with great prime lenses on them, or their bigger brothers with the zoom and so called macro lenses. All easily available for a pound or two and no real problems picking up one that matches exactly what you need for your style of photography.
BTW, I use a IIIc and a CL and the M2 and a FED 1 and an Olympus XA, XA1, XA2 & XA3 and all the others I've mentioned so my comments are based on experience of using these outfits and a lot of others in the collection.
Anyway, it's just my 2d worth to save a CL from a fate worse than death and you from a bit of expensive hassle.
Regards, David
TheHub
Well-known
I was told by a long-time CL-using friend NOT to do that. Long story short, if you rip the meter arm out with pliers, the shutter won't work anymore (and he speaks from direct experience.)