M3 vs CL plus 40/2

[borismach]

Hi guys,
I'm given oppuntunty to take either an user's M3 or user's CL plus 40mm/2.8 at similar cost. I currently use M6 Classic plus lenses of 21, 35, 50 & 90. I like 0.91X of M3 for my 50/90s, and also like the compactness of CL plus 40mm and it makes a compact outfit together with my 21. Can't make the decision right the wa:bang:y😕
Grateful if you would what advise what would you pick, if you were me.😱
Thanks-Boris

 

[terrafirmanada]

If the CL has the 2.8; the lense is a collectors item, and it might have a very nice resale value.

 

[Biggles]

If you're used to in-camera meters, and already have a metered M body as a spare, the CL is a no-brainer. With a Leitz or Rokkor 40 on it, it's small and light enough to not leave at home, ever.

And yes, if that 40mm lens is in fact an f/2.8 and not an f/2.0, it's a rarity, due to the very small quantities produced.

The 40mm f/2.0 Summicron is a common but absolutely stellar lens. Even though I consider it to be a mild wide-angle and I have 50mm eyes, I wouldn't want to be without one anymore.

 

[borismach]

Sorry that I made a mistake in my description of the lens with CL. It is a 40/2 summicron.😛😛

 

[Xmas]

If you are a 50 mm person and never use 35mm the M3 is it, otherwise you will have a body that you cannot use the 35mm on without a finder.

Noel

 

[thafred]

that 40/2 cron makes a nice combo with the M6 too! otoh the m3 is an ethernal piece of art 😀

 

[borismach]

that 40/2 cron makes a nice combo with the M6 too! otoh the m3 is an ethernal piece of art 😀

Areyou suggesting me to get both? 😕 I wish I could!:bang:
BM

 

[JohnM]

I have both and love both.

If you already have an M6, I think you would really enjoy the CL. It's so compact compared to the M3 or M6 - it's a joy to carry around and makes a great compliment to the other two.

I use mine more for wide angles - the outer borders of the viewfinder approximate the 35mm FOV (so sayeth the CL user's manual), so I use it for the 40, 35 and 21.

 

[summaron]

I use a 40mm with my M3 by masking off the frameline illumination window and using the whole viewfinder area. The image is nice and clear and big and you feel well engaged with your subject, but it's tricky because you have to make sure the rangefinder patch is dead center when you compose.

The CL has a smaller--is it .58--viewfinder and its framelines are not as clean as those of a M-2 or unmasked M-3--as I remember--but they're tailored for the 40mm.

I would love to have a CL for days I when I can't quite face up to the size and weight of the M3.

 

[Ken Ford]

I'm going to be the contrarian here.

I tried a CL for use with my 40 and 90, but just couldn't adapt to it! IMO it just doesn't feel like an M and the VF is not my cup of tea. They're quirky little cameras that are good in their own right, but (again, IMO) they don't make a good second body to an M.

I'm seriously considering (read saving for) a nice late DS M3 to dedicate to my 40 and 90. I'll continue using my M6 with 28, 35 and 75.

 

[raid]

If you have not used an M3 before then you need to get one.

Raid

 

[JoeFriday]

I have both the M3 and a mint CL with 40/2.. my opinion is that the M3 is the best 50/90mm body you can find, with the possible competition from the Zeiss Ikon, which I've never held

but if you prefer to stay with wider lenses, you're better off keeping your M2 and not bothering with the M3

the CL is a great 'convenience' M-body.. the built in meter and small size make it a great choice for carrying around during those times when an unmetered M2 or M3 is awkward.. however, the shorter EBL and smaller patch make it slower to use compared to its Leica siblings.. I reach for my CL only when I want the built in meter.. or when I prefer a black camera compared to my silver M3

that being said, I don't know which I'd recommend for you.. if the price is right, you'll never go wrong with an M3.. but it's not likely you'd see much additional value over your M2.. and the CL is a great 'little' camera, but generally not the pleasure to use that your current M2 is

I guess it depends on the price, and how easily you can afford one of them

 

[Mazurka]

Hi guys,
I'm given oppuntunty to take either an user's M3 or user's CL plus 40mm/2.8 at similar cost. I currently use M6 Classic plus lenses of 21, 35, 50 & 90. I like 0.91X of M3 for my 50/90s, and also like the compactness of CL plus 40mm and it makes a compact outfit together with my 21. Can't make the decision right the wa:bang:y😕
Grateful if you would what advise what would you pick, if you were me.😱
Thanks-Boris

Get a finder magnifier, Leica or otherwise, for the M6.

You may already know about the CL's requirement of Hg battery or modification AND possibly dead/inaccurate metering cell. Hence my suggestion is to buy the 40 Cron separately. If you need a compact body to match, find a Bessa.

You could also get a Canonet QL17 GIII with a 40/1.7 lens for next to nothing. Although it too uses an Hg battery, it synchronizes with flash 10 times as fast as your M6. 😀

 

[Matthew Runkel]

I think the M3 is a perfect second body for someone who, like you, already has an M6 for those times when a metered body or a 35mm lens is desired. The M3 is tremendous with a 50mm or 90mm, and it can be liberating and a nice change to shoot with an unmetered body. If you trust your ambient meter, it can be faster as well.

You already have a 35mm and a 50mm, so you don't really need a 40mm.

I use an M5 as my primary camera, yet I have never been attracted by the CL, which is similar in some ways. I have never understood why I would want to give up the effective rangefinder baselength (EBL) of an M for the much shorter EBL of the CL. The EBL of the M3 is more than three times that of the CL (about 64mm vs. 19mm). Even when using the many lenses that the CL can focus with sufficient accuracy, why would you not want the superior accuracy of an M? I picked up an M3 with a bright finder as my second Leica body and love it.

 

[MadMan2k]

You're comparing that plastic piece of crap/disgrace to the brand... with an M3? 😱

 

[wlewisiii]

You're comparing that plastic piece of crap/disgrace to the brand... with an M3? 😱

Eh? (looks at stats, esp age, under avatar) Ah. Understood. I was that silly then too. These days I have a CL & intend that the next Leica body I buy will be a M5. This should make my long hair socialist blue collar truck driver personality somewhat explicable...

My CL is a very reliable bit of mechanical M mount camera. That is it's strength and it's weakness. The M3 was as glorious in it's moment as the Contax II was in it's. Both have long since been as totally superceeded. If I have my CL's meter repaired then there is no doubt that it is a better real world camera than the M3 for me. When you are jumping through your as* to get a shot, you'll take anything that helps get that shot.

If $$$$ were no object, I'd have a ZI & new Sonnar 50/1.5 in hand but that isn't how it usually plays out. So? No matter what else happens - hell, I could have won that $250 milliion dollar powerball tonight but the simple reality is that i have a truck load of doors I have promised to pick up at 16:00 on Monday to have at the receving store by 07:00 Tuesday. That leaves little room for silliness. But, if accomplished, it ensures that food is on my son's plate & film is in my cameras. There is almost nothing in this world that is more important than those two facts.

William

 

[40oz]

I really like my CL. Sure, it has limitations. But so does the M3, and all the other Leica bodies. I can't see how someone would call the CL cheap after using one. I picked the CL over an M3 for a number of reasons, and money wasn't one of them.

 

[Al Patterson]

CL plastic? It's better built than my AE-1, and I got 20 years out of that piece of plastic...

Sure, I'd rather have an M3 or M6, but I don't have the cash.

 

[MadMan2k]

I was only being partly serious, by the way... sarcasm doesn't work too well on the internet.

 

[back alley]

is there plastic in the cl?

as great as the m3 is and for how much it is adored, it really is best with a 50, so it has it's limitations also. i know it has 90/135 frame lines but i think most use it commonly with the 50.