Waterman100
Established
I've read quite a few stories praising the reliability and durability of Leica Ms -- how they continued to work after being dropped, soaked in water, or in freezing cold weather.
I do not expect the same from the CL, not least because that's not its reason for being. However, I would love to hear stories from owners how their CL survived (or not) accidents or terrible operating conditions. Any stories to share?
And BTW, what material is the camera's housing?
Many thanks.
I do not expect the same from the CL, not least because that's not its reason for being. However, I would love to hear stories from owners how their CL survived (or not) accidents or terrible operating conditions. Any stories to share?
And BTW, what material is the camera's housing?
Many thanks.
ramray
Newbie
I have had and used a CL made in 1974-ish and still use it. It was dropped once on a sidewalk in '83 and the meter arm was disengaged as well as the rangefinder off. Cost almost $300 to fix, but is has been working fine ever since. As it is a 40 year old camera I use sparingly now, I dressed it up in red snakeskin from Cameraleather...looks cool and I get a lot of questions on it. BTW, for the first time in 30 years my CLE needs work so off it goes, but it too has been a reliable worker.
As to the body: "Black-anodized aluminium top-plate and die-cast alloy shell".
Not made as brick like as an M camera, but for my money a far better value
I had an M6, but after a year, sold it and kept the CL and CLE. I found the M6 to have issues the CL/CLE didn't.
As to the body: "Black-anodized aluminium top-plate and die-cast alloy shell".
Not made as brick like as an M camera, but for my money a far better value
I had an M6, but after a year, sold it and kept the CL and CLE. I found the M6 to have issues the CL/CLE didn't.
Waterman100
Established
Thanks for the response Ramray -- I have since the posting of this message bought myself a CL, and both the size and built of the camera fit my expectation.
Do you think it's worthwhile to rebuild its light meter? Mine kinda works but is awfully unreliable. I am waiting for a Sekonic Twinmate meter to arrive, but I wonder if having the CL's native spot meter is advantageous to shooting?
Do you think it's worthwhile to rebuild its light meter? Mine kinda works but is awfully unreliable. I am waiting for a Sekonic Twinmate meter to arrive, but I wonder if having the CL's native spot meter is advantageous to shooting?
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
Sherry Krauter told us, at the Leica Historical Society Meeting in 2002 (I think) that the CL went through some 23 improvements and strengthenings during its production life. She said that an easy way to make sure that yours has as many of these as possible, is to buy the Minolta version, which, she said, has at least 19 of those improvements.
BillBingham2
Registered User
Send her off the Sherry, she makes them better than new. I lusted after CLs for many years............saddly never hooked up.
B2 (;-<
B2 (;-<
Steve M.
Veteran
One of the cameras I regret selling was my Minolta CL. The meter was dead, and I liked it all the better for that. Didn't have to worry about it dying. I thought the build quality was fine. It's made from much thinner metal (aluminum?) than the M cameras, so it's not unusual to see the top housings dented here and there, but they're great cameras. Especially for us glasses wearers.
David Hughes
David Hughes
In the 80's I checked that they hadn't sold my CL and went back to the shop with my brand new CLE and walked out with the CL again (that's what I call customer service). I've still got it and still use it and It's only been serviced and repaired once after an accident...
Regards, David
Regards, David
Paul T.
Veteran
i love mine. In a way, more than my old M3 or M4. I had to buy a Zhou case because I hate it hanging sideways (it gets dented). A lot of the meter problems are simply the connecting wire, which deteriorates according to Peter at CRR, so repairing it doesn't always cost a fortune.
ramray
Newbie
I know many people who got the little CV clip on meter for CLs with non-working meters and are happy. The swing arm meter is the most fragile part of the CL but you can live without it and use it like a pre-M5, M6 Leica. BTW it is the same process as the swing arm of the HUGE M5 that no one loved.
If you can get it fixed, it is a joy and easier to use as it is faster and more accurate as through-the-lens is better than outside the body.
If you can get it fixed, it is a joy and easier to use as it is faster and more accurate as through-the-lens is better than outside the body.
lic4
Well-known
I hated the sideways hang too and had Sherry install a third strap lug (she uses an M5 lug). The cost was around $100.
Brian Levy
Established
I've been using one for 20+ years and other then a CLA when I got it have had no problems and it is an early 130xxxxx model. While it does not feel like a M series that is built for driving nails, it easily is as rugged as any other I've had my hands on. The guy I bought it from was a professional photographer and used it as his 35mm for weddings and other assignments so he did not baby it. It has been my only true 35mm system camera for all these years other than the 35mm backs for using 35mm film with my Bronica. I prefer the feel and holding of it to the M6 I tried out.
The depreciation on these seems to have bottomed out and appears to be increasing in value so the public may finally be giving the CL the dues it deserves in the Leica lineup.
The depreciation on these seems to have bottomed out and appears to be increasing in value so the public may finally be giving the CL the dues it deserves in the Leica lineup.
Last edited:
Biggles
My cup runneth amok.
And you shouldn't.
I think I'm up to numbers 3 & 4 of the stupid things. (It may be 4 & 5; I'd have to check serials.) I've broken all of the first three, or otherwise had them go out of adjustment. Meters, rangefinder mechanisms, winding spools... And all of those had/have been maintained by Sherry Krauter. #3 is busted again right now; good thing I bought #4 to have as a spare the last time #3 asploded.
Reliability- and durability-wise, in my experience, they're sh*tful cameras. Truly, truly sh*tful. I keep going with them ONLY because of the size & weight, the built-in-meter, and the M-mount. And, maybe more than a little, because I'm in gape-jawed, pantsless lust with the 40mm Summicron-C that only the CL has framelines for, in the Leica factory body repertoire. To wit:
A lens with crispness and bokeh like that, I'd screw it into a Soviet-era can of cat food if it had the framelines for it.
Love/Hate.
Brian Levy
Established
I finally got through the other cameras I've been carrying around and shooting the film loaded into them and today put the CL in my pocket to head to the hospital for my radiation treatment. As I sat there, I pulled it out and was fingering it when the patient next to me spoke up. He immediately recognized it as a CL.
After poking fun at me for being so out of date with a film camera, I got a bit exasperated as I am not in the best condition and he then said, hold it and leaned over, pulled up a bag, reached in and pulled out his CL also mounting a Summicron-C. We spent a relatively enjoyable 30 minutes talking about them. He has a M-4 and an M-5 and prefers the M-5 over the 4. He bought each new and they ave been the only cameras he has ever owned. He thought it interesting I used the Visio on the CL though he had read it could be done.
Small world.
After poking fun at me for being so out of date with a film camera, I got a bit exasperated as I am not in the best condition and he then said, hold it and leaned over, pulled up a bag, reached in and pulled out his CL also mounting a Summicron-C. We spent a relatively enjoyable 30 minutes talking about them. He has a M-4 and an M-5 and prefers the M-5 over the 4. He bought each new and they ave been the only cameras he has ever owned. He thought it interesting I used the Visio on the CL though he had read it could be done.
Small world.