Leica CL: The Gateway Drug?

J

John Noble

Established
Local time
3:36 PM
Joined
Apr 9, 2007
Messages
101
[de-lurk]

First, a plug for fellow RFFer cnguyen, from whom I bought my "new" CL: good on ya!

So, I have a new toy. It's my first real rangefinder (stop snickering, you LHSA-Hammertone-Noctilux guys), and I have to say that after one quick test roll I'm a believer. I'll hang on to my vintage Minolta MF SLR rig for longer focal lengths and flash use, but a CL/VC 21mm/?? 50mm/M-Rokkor 90mm travel kit is what's going on the road for longer trips from now on. Not that I drag the SLR along for more than a couple of days, but I've often wished that my current travel camera (Leica CM) could go longer or (especially) wider. Having two films availble at the same time is nice, too: Provia 400F in the CM and HP5+ in the CL sounds like a sweet combination. If the slope is as slippery as claimed, we can all assume I'll find a way to justify an iridium alloy Bhutan Independence Day MP within a year or two.

The sharp-eyed reader will have noted that I haven't settled on a "normal" lens, and that I *have* settled on a 50mm fl. Why 50mm? I already have a fairly decent 40mm with a permanently attached autofocus body. The 50mm framelines in the CL are a lot easier to see with glasses, too. After squinting at a bunch of samples of dubious provenance on the intarweb, I find myself really liking how CV's Heliar Classic f2 combines a classic rendition with modern sharpness. The problem is that it's collapsible (said to be OK with a CL, but sounds like an annoyance) and rather heavy. So ... does anyone know of a 50mm lens with the same kind of character that doesn't have those vices? It seems like a vintage-ish ('70s?) Summicron would get me in the ballpark, but I dunno.

Now that I'm a junior member, I understand I'll be receiving a secret decoder ring. According to club rules, I also know that I'll have to get a Real M to qualify for my X-Ray glasses and that I am automatically entitled to complain about M8 magenta issues by virtue of not owning one.
 
Welcome! I had a CL with a flakey light meter for quite awhile & rather than pay to fix it, I sold it to buy a Bessa R. That said, the CL is an excellent camera and is a wonderful introduction to what is good about Leica.

I'd suggest that the collapsible Summicron is a very good match for the CL. I used one for the whole time I owned the CL & basically it was welded to the camera :) It collapsed just fine and gave a very fine look. If you're interested in a faster lens with the Sonnar look instead, the Canon 50/1.5 is a very compact lens that fits the CL quite well too. I haven't had a chance to use that combination, but it's spoken highly of by Brian Sweeney.

Two other tidbits - first, the 28mm focal length is very easy to use by using the whole of the VF area. I used to have a Canon 28/3.5, Cron 50/2 & Elmar 90/4 as my carry kit when I owned my CL. Second, give Reala a try in the CL. It remains my favorite color negative film by a large margin.

Good luck & good light!

William
 
Hmm. I don't see "collapsable" as a vice, but rather a virtue. I love my M-Hexanon 50 to death, but my M3 packs away much more easily with a collapsable Elmar on it, and similarly fits more easily into a coat pocket. "Uncollapsing" it is no difficulty, and it stays extended until the camera is ready to go back into the bag or pocket (note: it locks in the extended position, so it won't collapse accidentally). Given that compactness is one of the virtues of the CL, I'd imagine a compact lens would only help that.

...Mike
 
Last edited:
The Elmar is _NOT_ a good match for the CL. It will foul the swing arm for the meter cell unless you put something on the barrel to stop it from collapsing too far - which rather defeats the purpose. The collapsible 'Cron doesn't get as small as the Elmar, but OTOH, it worked fine on the CL that I owned.

One of the fun things about these cameras is that there are so very many really great 50mm lenses available. Pick one - any one - and go have fun learning what it can and can not do. Then you'll know what you really need :D

William
 
wlewisiii said:
The Elmar is _NOT_ a good match for the CL.
Click to expand...
And (this may not have been clear) I was _NOT_ recommending it. I was simply noting that a collapsible lens (in the OP's case, the CV 50/2 Heliar) was not a bad choice just because its collapsable. I used the Elmar as an example since its the one I use on my M3, which it is a good match for. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

...Mike
 
Gotcha. I just wanted to make sure about it as well. There are some that do work wel though, so it's not a matter of a blanket "NO" either. Then again there area all the variations between individual cameras :bang: :bang: :bang:

;)

Wiilliam
 
The leica cl has always been my favotite camera, bar none. I've had 5 or 6 over the years, selling them off to raise money for something else, but like a love struck fool, I always come crawling back begging forgivness and getting another. The thing is, they're (in my mind) the perfect 35mm camera; tiny, not too heavy, built in meter, and the best interchangeable glass money can buy. I'd go with the 40 though, preferably the nocton 40 for the extra stop, the 90, and a 25mm scopar -- put in your pocket.
 
Thanks for the comments, guys.

There are only a few collapsible lenses that will safely and fully collapse (I think): both CV Heliars and the 90mm M-E. I appreciate Mike's point about pocketability; I don't object to collapsing the lens so much as having something even heavier than my 90mm on the camera most of the time. A lightweight "rigid" f2 Heliar would do nicely, Kobayashi-san. It's not like it collapses all that much anyway: it's 50% more than the collapsed depth of the current Elmar. OTOH, it's a stop faster.

The main aim is the character of the lens. I suppose I should just fill the body with helium or learn to live with the weight if I really want that look on film. I would just go for one of the default 40mm choices, but I'm not overwhelmed with the OOF rendering or general look of any of the usual suspects, especially compared to what I get with my CM. The f2.4 Summarit is kind of a hard act to follow.
 
Hi John and welcome to the world of constant gear upgrading plans...
I bought a CV Skopar 50/2.5 for my CL. It looks great on the camera, small as a collapsible, but rather heavy for its size and not that fast. To be honest I haven't used that much that I can tell You about the optical qualities. It looks good on small prints but I've read that it is not as sharp as many other CV lenses. Maybe a vintage look that You might like? Other lenses I've thought about is the Konica 50/2, Canon 50/1.8 or a cheap Jupiter 8. Pleasant choices ahead of You...
Best
//Jacob
 
However much you like the CM, do give the CL's designated 40mm Summicron C a chance. I bought a CL and loved it, and the lens.

THen I felt I ought to buy an M4 - you know, a proper Leica - plus a 50mm lens - and used the Elmar 50/2.8, the Canon 50/1.8 and the Summicron Collapsilbe, plus a 35mm Summicron C .Eventually, I came to realise I liked the CL and the 40mm best, both for the FOV, and the quality of the photos, particularly the B&Ws. The lens such a bargain that it would be a shame not to try it, and I also think that the 40mm and 90mm combination is the most versatile there is.

all that said, if you want a 50mm, then the Heliar is good value although I've heard suggestions it renders skin tones very warm. I'd feel uncomfortable using the Summi 50/2 collapsible on my CL, not necessarily for reasons of damaging the meter cell, rather because CL is a less rigid platform if you're constantly collapsing and extending the lens. However, the Canon 50/1.8 is compact and felt good on my CL, although I didn't use it enough to comment on how photos looked with it...
 
John Noble said:
[de-lurk]

So ... does anyone know of a 50mm lens with the same kind of character that doesn't have those vices? It seems like a vintage-ish ('70s?) Summicron would get me in the ballpark, but I dunno.
Click to expand...

My knee-jerk reaction is to suggest a 1950s dual-range or rigid Summicron. But, if you can live with modern sharpness and rendition both, try a fifth model tabbed Summicron from the eighties. It's a brutally crisp, contrasty lens, but remains a half-decent match for the CL body because of its relatively light weight.

These days, my fifty is a 1960s Summilux, a monstrously dense lens and thus a decidedly poor fit for the CL, balance-wise. It does, however, give me that old look with modern sharpness thing you mention.

With that said, the CL and a 40mm Summicron is one of those perfect technological meshings. I use mine all the time with sunglasses, and never have a problem finding the 40mm framelines.
 
I've actually gone the other way. From M6TTL to a Leica CL. It's a great littlet pocke camera that takes the gamut of M lenses. I love the shutter dial on the CL, very ergonomic. Not sure what to suggest in the 50mm range as it really depends on your shooting style and budget. I've got my 35mm CronV4 on the CL most of the times as that is my working lens.

BTW: Yes, The noctilux fits on the CL ... but it blocks the rangefinder :)

Hope you enjoy your new CL.

anhtu
 
must say I quite like my little CL, don't seem to use it enough at the moment though and it could do with a good CLA
 
In my case, the CL led to the M5. So it was the gateway drug which I still partake in frequently (with the 40 m-rokkor or 90 m-rokkor). Based on your original post re 50mm, the Canon 1.4 or 1.8 are worth looking into.

CL=MJ
M5=H with a dirty stick
 
Well, that kind of muddies the waters, memphis. Speaking of Memphis, some ribs from Rendezvous sure sound good right now.

Lots of good suggestions, everyone. A MKII Canon sounds interesting. They're kind of rare, aren't they?

What I really want is a 150g pancake Nocti (self-focusing, please). Hmmm... maybe I'll just grab the Heliar and go take some pictures.
 
Hi John, congratulations on your purchase. I completely agree about the gateway thing -- the CL was my first rangefinder, and it quickly led me to an MP. I now have a two-body travel kit to take with me to Europe in a week.
 
Perhaps a lower cost alternative, if you like the Canon 50/1.5 Sonnar look (and I sure do), is the Jupiter-3. I have one that Brian Sweeney worked on that is a very nice match for the CL. Not only is mine black, which nicely matches the CL, but due to it being lighter in weight than the Canon presumably because the material used in the Jupiter, it balances better on my CL than does the Canon. Can't really say anything bad about either lens (nor the 40 Rokkor or Cron, as others have suggested), but the Jupiter just seems to physically and visually match the CL better than does the Canon.

Of course, just as with the CL to a regular M camera, the lens story is an equally slippery slope. For example, based on previous comments and pics posted by William, I have now added the Canon 28/3.5 to round out my CL kit which previously consisted of the 40 Cron and the 90 Rokkor. Other than the Canon 28/3.5 being a bit slow for indoor work, I love the fact that the 28, 40 and 90 fit so easily into a small, lightweight kit yet still provide a wide range.

Bottom line is, regardless of what direction you decide to go, you will enjoy it. The CL is a sweet little camera. Although I have to admit that after having Sherry Krauter CLA mine and put in new meter, the "lower cost entry to the M world" turned out to be a false economy. But I love my CL now that the meter is right on and it feels so buttery smooth. Oh, and the Luigi half case really adds a measure of quality to the normally lightweight feel of the CL.

-Randy
 
I'm enjoying this thread, and have eyed a CL as a first M-mount camera. CL's these days seem to go for around the same $$$ as used Bessa r2s, and for not much less than new Bessa r2m/a's. Apart from smaller size, are there other advantages to a CL over these newer Bessa models, as a first M-mount RF?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom