M3/CL Shootout, w/ Russo/Japanese Intervention

Hey! I might need to sell that. DAG's opinion is the CL is a great camera, but the M3 is "cooler"--his words, not mine. I tend to agree. But I have to stand up for the little guy, too.
 
Impossible to tell anything definitively from the posted shots.. Image quality only really becomes apparent at bigger enlargements 12"x16" etc. but really I know it's dull but you should really shoot the same thing with both set ups and compare like with like. It's still a very subjective game you can only go with what you like, having said that camera bodies are only really boxes to hold the film. I would keep the rokkor and the jupiter and then at least try a Bessa R3a/R2a for what you will pay for it if you could probably add a CV short tele or wide angle lens for the combined selling price of the CL + M3 which will give added functionality plus you get aperture priority metering, a warranty, and a better flash sync/ top shutter speed. You lose out on the "cool" factor but for example I own a £2000 Rolex and a £25 digital watch guess which keeps better time?
 
Toby's sentiments makes a lot of sense... but not for the lots of us with lack of common sense :)

A Bessa R2A could have served me very well. But I lusted for that M6 body.
 
ywenz said:
Toby's sentiments makes a lot of sense... but not for the lots of us with lack of common sense :)

A Bessa R2A could have served me very well. But I lusted for that M6 body.
Click to expand...

I won't sell my rolex that keeps dodgy time and I wear it every day :)
 
If it were me I'd keep the CL and both the 40 and 50. I have an M2 I definitely prefer my CL over the M2. I fortunately don't need to sell either, though. :)
 
Trust me on these issues, I just finished graduate school in Russo-Japanese relations (seriously). Wait until you get the 50 collapsible back. It is perfect with the M3 and it can do the work of the 40/2 and the J-8....it is slightly soft and fuzzy wide open (more in the backgrounds...it still is more than sharp enough), but it is still extremely sharp from f/2.8 and up. It also makes for a relatively compact kit due to the collapsible aspect. Here are some taken with the M3 and 50/2 collapsible:
 
I took the M3 and CL yesterday for a shoot. Will drop of the pictures today. The CL is certainly compact. On multiple occasions, the Finder patch of the CL flared out and I had to move around a bit to get it back. This just does not happen with the M3. The meter in the CL is nice and comforting, but I did not have to change exposure much once it was set. I had the 50mm Canon on the CL, and the Summicron on the M3. The Canon is well balanced on the CL. It is a small lens, and fits into the CL case.

And the keeper is: Both.
 
I wonder why Cosina doesn't built a finderless Bessa for wideangle, à la Bessa L or T, that's as narrow as the CL. The width of the Leica M series makes sense when you consider the RF baseline, and more stable handholding, but both of these considerations are irrelevant when shooting wideangle. Chop the top off a CL, add a centered accessory shoe, and there you go.
 
Well, the CL is on the chopping block. It came down to economics and the fact I can't keep two such cameras at once. Though the CL is smaller and more capable than the M3, the M3 feels simpler and solid and *cool*, and that means something. My taste of sunny 16/handheld metering, the first time I've done that with a RF (I did it all the time with TLR and slide film and had great sucesss) suggests that's the direction I want to head into.

The 40mm is going, too. In part because i didn't want to sell the CL without it...they belong together as a unified machine. In part because I think I can be real happy with the J-8, or the Summicron collapsible that comes back from DAG soon. Thanks all for the spirited discussion.

The M3 might be gone soon too. not sure how to justifv it to the missus!

cheers
doug
 
Fast! Tell the Missues that you sold the Leica and paste "Kodak Digital" over the Leitz engraving.
 
If it was either the M3 or the missus for me, I'd have no qualms tossing out the latter. :D
 
hoot said:
I wonder why Cosina doesn't built a finderless Bessa for wideangle, à la Bessa L or T, that's as narrow as the CL. The width of the Leica M series makes sense when you consider the RF baseline, and more stable handholding, but both of these considerations are irrelevant when shooting wideangle. Chop the top off a CL, add a centered accessory shoe, and there you go.
Click to expand...

Because it does not make sense economically - don't forget: the Bessa series is only as cheap as it is because it is based on an old SLR series that Cosina has been manufacturing for other companies (Konica, Nikon, Olympus, Contax and others) for a very long time (at least 15 to 20 years) - they simply left away the mirror box, put a rangefinder on top, did some cosmetic work on the exterior and called it the Bessa R (or did not even put the RF there, and called it the L); what you are proposing would mean a totally new construction, new machines and tools for the production line, etc. - which would cost a whole lot more than simply making more money out of a somewhat dated SLR design...

Roman
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom