JohnTF
Veteran
Possible exception for the CL? I think when I had the top on mine replaced, they charged almost the original price of the camera, but I was told the tops were blank so they could engrave them for the German cameras or the Minolta versions?
Serial numbers were on the shoe as I recall?
Just what I was told, perhaps to justify the $240 fee?
Not an M2 though, but some of those blank tops must be somewhere?
I believe I have a Standard and a II with numbers much older, and one of my M2's has an M4 finder in it-- another interesting camera, well used, to the point the shop did not want it in their inventory, so they shipped it to me and told me it was coming-- at the trade in price, no complaints.
Now, if I could get frequent flyer miles for some of these?
Regards, John
Erik van Straten
Veteran
I really don't know anything about CL-cameras. I think it was a pretty stupid move from Leitz to introduce a camera that was competative to their flagship M5!
Erik.
Erik van Straten
Veteran
Yes, there are many conversions around, just check the conversions thread in the Leica screwmount section.
Erik.
JohnTF
Veteran
I recall a lot of folks thought the M5 a mistake, and the correction the M6. I worked in a store, and the sales of the M4 went up when the M5 came out. Probably the only Leica I do not have.
I assumed the CL was at attempt at collaboration with Minolta, the CLE is quite something else, plus it got some people in to M mount cameras at "entry" level pricing, plus I carried it when I was traveling and did not want to haul my SLR kit. I had the 28mm and the 40.
I bought a CL new, and I thought the M6 was out then, but would have to go look at some data to figure it all out. Camera may have been NOS, I saw a new one in the box in Germany in the 80's with full warranty for $1500. My 28mm was mis-boxed and labeled a 40, so I paid the 40mm price. One of my CL's is from Sonny Bono's estate.
Regards, John
Last edited:
Erik van Straten
Veteran
Yes, but it was an extremely expensive camera to produce. Leitz lost DM 1000 on every camera.
The CL did not stimulate the sales of the M5, on the contrary. At that point, Leitz almost went out of business. So the introduction of the CL was not smart. The profit was for Minolta.
Erik.
morback
Martin N. Hinze
Very interesting read. I have an M2 myself, and she has taught me to read light with my eyes. I love everything about it, but wish for a clearer, contrastier viewfinder. I had it overhauled a year ago after the 1/1000 failed, and the viewfinder cleaned too. It's still pretty dim (compared to ZI).
Does anyone know how a brand new (or a CRR Luton rebuilt one) M2 viewfinder would stack with "modern" Ms? There have been a few occasions where my viewfinder caused trouble: too dark and/or lack of contrast for focusing (My ZI focused brilliantly where my M2 would not).
What options are available? Can we put an MP viewfinder in this machine?
p.s.: I love my M2
Does anyone know how a brand new (or a CRR Luton rebuilt one) M2 viewfinder would stack with "modern" Ms? There have been a few occasions where my viewfinder caused trouble: too dark and/or lack of contrast for focusing (My ZI focused brilliantly where my M2 would not).
What options are available? Can we put an MP viewfinder in this machine?
p.s.: I love my M2
sanmich
Veteran
What options are available? Can we put an MP viewfinder in this machine?
p.s.: I love my M2
Martin,
My half educated guess is that it's not worthy to put an MP finder on an M2.
first, this will cost you the price of a nice M2.
second, from comparing my M2 and my MP, they look quite similar in terms of brightness. Maybe it's not a really good comparison becaus my MP is 0.58x, but still..
Maybe your M2 is basically less clear than it should?
Or you simply were spoiled by the ZM finder which some claims to be much clearer than the Leica.
P.S. My name is Michael, and I'm addicted to my M2...
Erik van Straten
Veteran
The M2 viewfinder is better than the MP viewfinder, I mean, the framelines of the M2 are better. The 50mm frame of the MP indicates far less than you will see on your picture. You should prepare yourself for nasty surprises as all kinds of disturbing objects will be included in your picture. The M2 frame is much more precise.
Erik.
sanmich
Veteran
oh, yes...
I forgot that important point...
luckily, the 35mm frames on the 0.58x are a bit better in that regard.
It always puzzled me why on earth wouldn't Leica offer the older style frames as an "a la carte option".
They do offer some options pretty unrelated to actual shooting.
Oh, well...
Erik van Straten
Veteran
morback
Martin N. Hinze
Thanks for the info. A bit disappointing, truth be told. I was expecting a clear preference for the MP, in the brightness/contrast side of things. I have an MP on the way, so I will be able to get a first hand experience of M2/MP/ZI, and then hopefully make a final decision.
I guess there's still the M3...
I guess there's still the M3...
boffen
Established
I love my M2. Before I got it I was sure I'd at some point get an M6 to complement it with a modern, metered M, but now I'm leaning towards the M3 for the viewfinder/M4 for the different loading because I find that I love shooting without the meter.
peter_n
Veteran
Same here. Perhaps the viewfinder in your particular body is faulty or the person who cleaned it didn't do a good job? Youxin Ye worked on mine and he has old cameras in his collection that have unbelievable VF brightness. A Barnack and an M3 in particular are amazing.
JohnTF
Veteran
Very interesting read.
What options are available? Can we put an MP viewfinder in this machine?
p.s.: I love my M2
One of my M2's has at least M4 frame lines in it, it is the scruffy, pardon, most experienced M2.
I was told this was not an uncommon modification, though I am unsure as to which set ups interchange.
Am pretty sure someone here will know.
Regards, John
JohnTF
Veteran
JohnTF
Veteran
Am sure they made more on the new top on my CL than they did on the camera. ;-)
Perhaps a Henry Ford approach? Make it on the parts?
I have no idea on their reasoning, would be an interesting research project. I have made them some money subsequent to the CL.
John
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
Consider that the MP and the ZI are "new" cameras and most M2's are close to 50 years old. The finder coating do oxidize with time - as well as gather dust. Usually a good cleaning will cure it - or at least improve it.
As for brightness, finders like the ZI and Bessa R2/R3 are brighter than the MP - particularly the ZI one!
The M2 has a big advantage in that it only shows the frame you are using, less cluttered than the rest.
Changing the M2 finder to a 0.58 MP finder is appealing - but the cost would most likely be prohibitive.
As for M4 frames in M2's - no major gain except the 135 frame-lines. The M2 finder is the "grand father" to subsequent M-finders with 0.72 magnification. Good thing too - as parts can be used to fix M2 finders by raiding M4P/M6 finder parts bins.
I have been shooting with Nikon Rf's for the last 2 months - and I am looking forward to load up some M2's and go back to "normal".
As for brightness, finders like the ZI and Bessa R2/R3 are brighter than the MP - particularly the ZI one!
The M2 has a big advantage in that it only shows the frame you are using, less cluttered than the rest.
Changing the M2 finder to a 0.58 MP finder is appealing - but the cost would most likely be prohibitive.
As for M4 frames in M2's - no major gain except the 135 frame-lines. The M2 finder is the "grand father" to subsequent M-finders with 0.72 magnification. Good thing too - as parts can be used to fix M2 finders by raiding M4P/M6 finder parts bins.
I have been shooting with Nikon Rf's for the last 2 months - and I am looking forward to load up some M2's and go back to "normal".
suraphat
Member
Love my M2 too.
Last edited:
mynikonf2
OEM
Iver Aldas
Member
Great captures sir! I love the way you compose your photos! Show us some more!