Leica CL vs. Hexar AF

The CLE battery issue is really a non-issue I think. I've had my CLE since new, and there've been times I've left the switch ON for days and weeks without apparent effect on the battery. It doesn't use much juice; batteries need changing very rarely. You might as well complain it'll run out of film. You carry another roll with you? Carry a couple of spare batteries too! I'll bet the local hearing aid place will have a small plastic carrier that will fit a pair of SR44 batteries to keep in your pocket.
 
Doug said:
The CLE battery issue is really a non-issue I think. I've had my CLE since new, and there've been times I've left the switch ON for days and weeks without apparent effect on the battery. It doesn't use much juice; batteries need changing very rarely. You might as well complain it'll run out of film. You carry another roll with you? ...
Click to expand...

I agree. This seems to be the standard "knock" on the CLE, along with the lack of AE lock. Maybe the knocks are a good thing. Popularity raises demand, and we all know what happens to prices then. Niether knock has been an issue for me. This is a great camera, with an excellent meter, and wonderful handling. I've grown to like the 28, 40, 90 lengths and lines.

As much as the fix lens cameras are wonderful too, I think I will always prefer a camera with the capability to change lenses. It just heightens the RF experience. :)

:)
 
Maybe if I leave the Hexar and the CL in the same dark drawer long enough, you know, I might have a CLE.

What are trying to do, give me the dread RFF disease (that which shall not be named?)

:)
 
I have both and would have to say that the Hexar would get my vote. Yes - it is larger and with a few annoyances (1/250 top speed etc. ), but it's a wonderful picture taking box and lens combination. The AF and stealth mode really change the way I shoot with this camera. I would say 1/3 of all pictures on the Hexar are taken without the use of the viewfinder. Being confident you can get a well exposed, well focussed shot at three paces without being noticed is a real bonus.

My main reason for owning the CL is the ability to create a wonderfully lightweight and compact 21-40-90 lens combination. I'm off to China in three weeks for a 1500km cycle, and this is the kit I'm taking (with a T4 as backup). But if I didn't have the 21 and 90, it would be the Hexar for sure.

The CL is a nice little camera. The Hexar is a great little camera.
 
I say the Hexar AF -- the silence, spot on focusing and metering and absurdly good lens make it a truly unique system. If you want an interchangeable lens camera, just get something like a Bessa R2 or a Leica. They are not THAT much bigger than the CL, especially when you put the same size lenses on them (like the 40, 35 pre-asph or c/v pancake, an elmar etc.).

By the way, 10 days for slide processing? What is going on there? Is there no lab nearby? My local lab does E6 in 3 hours....
 
Yeah, 10 days! It's Eckerds--they send their slides out. Not many options out here. But the prices for e-6 are really good, so it's a trade-off I guess.

I just got prints back from the Minolta 7SII I picked up from Ebay. Wow, nice lens and a nice little body. So that throws some more confusion into the mix.

I'm really pretty sure the CL meter is messed up. That means a CLA and money! :( The 7SII meter is perfect after 300 years of non-use. Go figure.

So maybe I will keep the Hexar, or maybe I'll sell both for the 7SII and put the 100s of dollars I'll save to child care and travel money. Anyway... then I start eyeing M3s and thinking, now, that's simplicity. I'm such a confused child.
 
"This seems to be the standard "knock" on the CLE"

I think the aversion to batteries stems from Leica electronics. I went on extended holidays with a friend with an M7, two battery changes (not to mention it takes twice as many batteries as my CLE) and I was still using my old batteries in my CLE that were in it from the year before. I can certainly see why Leica M users hate batteries. But the CLE just seems to go on for ages. It has a great battery check facility and when the batteries do happen to run low switch the camera to manual where it doesnt meter and without the metter draining power there is enough power to fire the shutter still!
 
You talked about wanting to ride out the last days of film with the camera that you choose. In terms of "what will the cameras of the future will be?", I imagine that there will one day soon be a digital camera that has all the benefits of the Hexar AF (and more). I will venture that it is not likely that there will be one that has the qualities of the Leica CL. For the pleasures of using a film camera to take pictures how can you beat a mechanical all manual camera?

It comes down to why you want to use film. Which camera is more fun to use? From your description it sounded like you enjoyed the mechanical qualities of the CL. Both are great picture taking machines so which side of the fence do you lean to when you look at the list of these camera's qualities?
 
I've owned both, sold the CL and kept the Hexar, then bought a new one when it broke.

They are both great cameras, but the CL is not that much smaller than a M2/3/4 etc., nor that much quicker to use, yet it has a dimmer and harder to use RF patch. I found that in practice, if I wanted to use a manual camera it was not really much more effort to take a M body or Nikon F with a pancake lens with me.

The Hexar AF, on the other hand, is almost exactly the same size as a M plus 35mm lens, but offers the advantage of super fast focussing in the dimmest of light, almost total silence, ae, and enough manual control when it is needed.

I think they are both great cameras but the Hexar AF fills a gap in my camera collection wheras the CL, for me at least, largely duplicated a M body.

The Hexar AF is considerably better than any of the good 35mm compacts (GR1V etc.) I've owned, in all ways apart from size. It's no pocket camera, but apart from that near perfect as a quality point and shot, or low light camera.

Some pics from the Hexar AF: http://www.flickr.com/search/?s=int&z=t&w=22377923@N00&q=camhexaraf&m=tags
 
I use both cameras and I prefer the CL for the simple fact that it allows me to change lenses when needed. On the other hand, this thread is inspiring me to use thes etwo cameras a my travel kit. In my case, I was/am debating between taking along CL + Contax T2 vs. CL + Hexar AF. It boils down to T2 vs. Hexar AF. The Hexar has the better lens [maybe] in terms of no vignetting, but the T2 also has an awesome lens and is more compact.

It is a toss-up.
 
As a compact, high quality body, I also tried the CL and CLE and kept only the AF. Should answer your question :) The AF is much more useful for some type of photos for me (fast, low light, possibly close distance).

Note that the AF is larger than the CL. Very similar in size to a normal M body. Of course lighter.

Roland.
 
I can't speak to the CL, but I love my Hexar AF.
I think it comes down to lenses. If you can live with one lens only, go with the Hexar.
More and more I'm finding, that for the type of shot I do with a rangefinder camera, the 35mm f2 on the Hexar is perfect.
For wide angle landscapes, I'd rather shoot medium format. For portrait, I'd rather shoot a SLR. For a camera to have with me all the time and shoot everything else, the Hexar is as close to perfect as I'm going to get.
I rant for a digital Hexar AF at every opportunity. I'd buy one if they made it, but I'd still shoot film in the one I have.
 
i have the hexar. I love it.
Here are a few negative points, though.

The close focus is not very close. The AF is fast but it does not focus if there's something closer than closest focus distance, and it focuses e.g. on the window instead of the scene out there. This might sound a non-issue but i fund out it is a problem when shooting in south africa through the car window.

The lens is very sharp etcetera, but it has serious vignetting very visible on slide film, even at less-than-max aperture. A shame, really.

The meter of my yashica gsn seems to be more reliable/accurate.

Regarding that in all the other respects it is very good, the camera is close to perfect. :)
 
I agree on the window thing. But it does focus closer than any 35mm on a Leica (maybe except for the goggled ones). At .6m a 35 becomes real useful for portraits.

Roland.
 
.6m is quite close...as close as I'd want to go really, with 35mm.
The window thing is unavoidable with active IR controlling autofocus.
Another poster made a point of the controlled Program exposure mode...which I think is brilliant. Add that to the great lens, autofocus and near silent operation and you've got a great camera for candids and informal close portraits.
I'm seriously considering getting rid of my R3A...if I can just get that wide medium format I want.
 
Pherdinand said:
The AF is fast but it does not focus if there's something closer than closest focus distance, and it focuses e.g. on the window instead of the scene out there.
Click to expand...

A couple tricks I found in the Hexar manual (PDF) to disable AF (though I guess you may already know):

Infinity Lock: If you have used a screw mount Leica, you know about infinity locks. This allows you to lock the lens focus at infinity to quickly take pics. Most everything will be in focus with this 35mm lens at smaller apertures.

1) Turn the camera on
2) Press the "MF" button until you see a "999" in the LCD window. Your camera is now locked on infinity in all exposure modes
3) It will stay locked on infinity until you press the "MF" button again to see an "AF" for Autofocus in the LCD window or you turn off the camera -- which will reset the Hexar to AF when you turn it back on.

Lock Focus Distance:

1) focus with AF
2) Press down shutter release half way
3) Press MF button to lock focus at that distance -- the distance will be indicated in the LCD panel
4) Focus will stay locked until you press the "MF" button again, or until you turn off the camera
 
1 touch infinity, CL meter info

1 touch infinity, CL meter info

in addition to the 1 touch infinity focus setting ("999" displayed), if you can stop down to f4/f5.6 or greater, you can set your manual focus to the hyperfocal distance (10 or 20m), and get from 5m to 10m to infinity in focus with the great lens.

Regarding the CL's meter, assuming the proper battery is used, and the electronics are good, the photocell could be dying, and not linear towards the EV extremes, even if it matches a known good meter at a center value.

I've owned 2 Hexar AF's and the metering was always great in P and A modes (center weighted, M uses spot metering), but the AF in new P&S digitals, especially the canons are more advanced and provide more accurate focusing through reflective scenes like car glass, in my experience (when the AF beams are enabled).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom