Leica CL VS. Voigtlander Bessa R

Leica CL VS. Voigtlander Bessa R

  • Leica CL

    Votes: 198 56.7%

  • Bessa R

    Votes: 72 20.6%

  • Bessa R2

    Votes: 24 6.9%

  • Bessa R2M

    Votes: 55 15.8%
  • Total voters
    349
I had a CL several times, and I sold my last CL last year. I got a Bessa R. It failed on the first trip with it. My CL is missed, but I was wise enough to keep the Summicron-C and 28mm Rokkor. One day, I may get a CL again. We'll see.
 
I just have to jump in and remind folks of just enough of the CL's history to put the "Minolta underneath" comment in perspective. The CL was designed in Wetzlar Germany by Leica's design and engineering staff. They partnered with Minolta to manufacture the body. If you've worked in a camera factory in the 1970s (I have), you'll know that the jigs and tools to manufacture and assemble and adjust the camera are an important part of end quality of the instrument. These components were made in Germany and then installed at the Minolta factory, along with German assembly engineers moving to Japan to get the assembly process off the ground. I have no doubt that Minolta manufacturing people worked with the Leica people to refine the assembly line processes, but the body of the CL is very much a Leica-generated design and implementation. The 40mm Summicron-C and 90mm Elmar-C were designed and built in Wetzlar. The camera is not built to the same toughness or tolerance standards of an M-series Leica, but in my opinion they are as close to M quality as you can get without being an M.
 
Fact is the CL uses a battery that is now hard to find. Also the CL is more difficult to reload than the Bessas. And I´ve had some difficulty to read the CL exposure needle...
That said, results with both cameras are pretty much the same.
 
Can anyone tell me if CL (or the CLE for that matter) would work with Summicron 35 pre-asph aka v4?
 
Save longer and buy a quality Leica camera.

Option 2 is a CL and send it to Sherry and she will make it like new. She has all the upgraded and spare parts.

Besa is a consumer grade camera. They don`t impress me much.

In the last year, I bought like new Nikon F2 for $200 and virtually unused Nikormat for 65. Those are pro build quality cameras.

You ca nuse M mount lenses on you Leica when you get there.
 
varjag said:
Can anyone tell me if CL (or the CLE for that matter) would work with Summicron 35 pre-asph aka v4?
Click to expand...
Yes, the lens will mount and focus properly. Beyond that, I can answer only for the CLE. The 35mm lens will cause the CLE to display 28mm viewfinder framelines. A 40 or 50mm lens will show the 40mm framelines. A 28 or 90mm lens will show the 28 & 90 frameline pair.
 
I had both. Loved the CL, it is small and quiet, a lot quieter than the Bessa. I only sold mine to finance the M6. Had the Bessa R, nice camera, never used it much, a lot more noise than a CL, sold mine.
 
I owned a Rollei 35 briefly. Based on that experience
I wouldn't touch another 35mm camera with rewind crank on the bottom.
OTOH the ergonomics of the Bessa R are quite good. It is quite pleasant to use.

Chris
 
I am a little confused by this poll. The Bessa is in size and functions more comparitive to a full sized M model than the CL/CLE. Also, it boils done to whether as a purchaser you prefer new with a waranty vs. a used model of some decades that to get generally will need servicing to bring back into specification.

The CL after so many decades has proved itself as a reliable and robust body. Mechanical meters usually need service between 5 and 10 years when they are in a tuner or receiver and these do are not usually subject to the elements. The battery issue is common to many cameras of that period and later. The camera can be recalibrated or a CHRIS adaptor used and the issue becomes a non-issue.

Yes, top plates and bottoms are more prone to denting or brassing than an M but not any more so than most other cameras.

Yes, the camera is small compared to the M series but there are many reangefinders/viewfinders that are as small and smaller. I find it somewhat amusing that a number of these other cameras are loved as they are small but the CL, it almost becomes a liability. Control layout and use does not follow the norm buy after sitting back and thinking about it and how it works plus some practice, it all makes sense. I'm amazed other camera makers have not done it.

I've not used a Bessa but in handling the body, I found it to be of about the same material quality of the CL but not of the same fit and finish and QC possibly less stringent as the advance and shutter on several of the same model each had a different sound and feel. I do not remember the model I was looking at but, I wanted to buy one but walked away thinking I'd rather buy an M or add to the Bronica system.

If I was not already enamoured with the CL feel, advance and shutter or the M body, the Bessa would be a no brainer. It is a competent body and I think as robust as most any camera. If I were a professional traveling, I do think it would be my camera of choice as it is newer and if it hit the deck, water, crushed or whatever, it would not be a major loss. It is the M body of years ago. Meant to be a beater in any environment and treated as a disposable asset. As a nonprofession, I do not subject my equipment to the same abusive uses and using an older vintage camera is less of a concern. However, I would still would be torn as a professional between a new Bessa and a properly serviced M body.

It is no different than having to decide on whether to buy a vintage car and new car. Both will get the job done, it boils down to feel and what it is used for. A car used by a taxi company can not afford down time while a Sunday driver seldom needs a warranty,

It happens it is even ess of an issue for me as both the M body and the Bessa body is a bit too large for me. I prefer the LTM bodies and the CL and if I were buying tomorrow I'd probably opt for a IIIG with a collapsible Sumicron 50 and a low profile 35. f/2.8-3.5 is fine for me or max ap. The original concept of the Leica was it be a small camera, a goal only minimally compromised by the end of the LTM body but all but lost with the M body. The CL in my mind is the only M mount camera from Leica to go back in time and meet the original specification.
 
R2m with either the 35 2.5 pancake or splurge an extra $50 and get it with a 40mm 1.4 nokton

that's the package i'm putting pennies in a jar for (I've used a CL a friend owns and it is a beautiful little camera but getting long in the tooth)
 
Just send it in for a service and it will act like a new kid on the block. Compared to the Bessa where is the CL long in the tooth? Just curious as when I tried the Bessa it reminded me more of an old camera in layout, feel and sound than the CL. The CL reminded me more of a current smaller RF such as something from Canon, Nikon, etc. but a Leica engineered, designed and specified version. The CLE of course was the logical result of the Canon, Nikon, etc. designs taken to their ultimate concept whereas the CL was not as it stayed with the Leica mechanical camera mandate of the time.
 
Old post, still relevant

Old post, still relevant

Hi all

First, thanks for running RFF. It helped me with this one:

I had a similar decision to make six months ago. I wanted to try out rangefinder photography, having only used SLRs, and the excellent camera store I use in Perth offered an R3-A, an R4-A or a CL. I chose the CL as it worked very well, it was cheaper than the Bessa options, and it was smaller. My original reason was wanting a camera to carry around all day, every day.

I was doubtful before getting it, but the confidence people on the forum had in the camera and lens swayed me. I now find that mine doesn't suffer from meter or battery problems as quite a few have mentioned of theirs.

I'm addicted to the CL now. It's costing me a fortune in film and processing.
 
Avoid that CL like the plague, they are nice, cool looking but poorly built and have a stupid loading style (Leica did it (like their M9+8 also) to keep consistency in their lineage), Bessa is more accurate, meter is better, and actually (I know because I see the insides all the time), the Bessa's are better built then the CL.
For everything that the CL is bad for the Bessa is good for and an improvement on and in many cases excels over Leica.
However we buy Leica M bodies because they go on forever and they are maintainable, and that's really all there is to it.
 
I disagree about running from CL's like the plague. I recently got one to replace a bessa. Yes the Bessas are newish and have the meters with lights, but not as well made as the CL-no way. i used my bessa T for less than a year, took good care of it, and when I sold it I was told it looked very used because the finish of the metal parts were scratching and wearing off!
The CL I got has to be more than 30 years old and is in remarkable condition. A few of the dials are stiff, but whatever...and I do not know why people complain about the poor build quality. Yes the CL might have some plastic, but it is very solid, well made, the film lever thing is much smoother than on a bessa and light, but heavy at the same time.
For people without oodles of spare money, it is a way to get a rangefinder Leica.
The film loading business took me less than 5 minutes to figure out, the viewfinder is so wonderful, the meter works fine....And guess what, the batteries are widely available. Mine came with a battery and the camera store gave me a new wein cell for the next million years of use.
And the shutter has a very nice quiet sound. The bessas are very loud compared to the CL and I've lost shots with the bessa because of that.

Only hard part has been that my first roll of film was TERRIBLE! The 'frameline' for a 90 mm lens is imaginary at best, and my only lens currently is a 90mm, so I was very disappointed in myself. Should have started with some cheap film instead of slide film.
So, if you have limited funds, which I gather was the original basis for this question, I would find a CL in great condition. They are so small which is perfect for little people like me, and would be very portable with a small lens. Plus they look hot!
Bessas are really good cameras though.
 
Well said, Heather.

The size, or rather the lack of it, is great for tired old fogies like myself.

The addition of a Mr. Zhou case puts the CL in an upright stance,

protecting that pretty top plate in addition to providing a secure grip.

.
moz-screenshot-27.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom