Minolta CLE or Leica M5

janoow10 said:
Don't want to spark any controversy, but what are people's thoughts on the Minolta CLE? Aside from the usual aspects about it not being serviced and difficult to repair, what do people think of it as compared to the M5.
Click to expand...

If you're in LA you can check out my CLE, and M5 (once DAG sends it back to me)
 
That sure is an unusual comparison. Something like comparing a Cadillac to an MG. I mean, an M5 is big. I always liked my Bessa R2A. Really neat camera w/ lots of features. The shutter noise is not so bad if you put it in a half case. Great meter, very reliable.
 
David Hughes said:
Hi,

But no one knew about them when it was introduced. We know with the benefit of hindsight and, perhaps, the internet but the internet tends to magnify things.

And there were only a handful of lenses that could not be used. People knew about them because of the note in the manual or a special supplement. These days people don't seem to read things or may not have them to hand. Judging by a lot of adverts, these days most cameras are sold without them.

Regards, David
Click to expand...

I agree David, nothing to add here on my side 😉
 
And, FWIW, I think the main problem with the M5 was that it came out just as the Japanese were getting their act together and introducing cameras like the revolutionary Olympus OM-1 and all the others that followed. The OM-1 was a hard act to follow and the poor old CRF's with their restrictions didn't really stand a chance. I reckon the CL saved Leica as it offered something no one else had offered.

So you could have a seriously good SLR and a delightful compact camera as well, making a nice pairing...

Regards, David
 
With the CL Leitz themselves created competition to their own M5. It was the stupidest move they could make, commercially. We all know the results.

However, even Cartier-Bresson had an CL, so there must have been something good in that little thing.

Erik.
 
My solution was that of buying overtime both cameras
No need to put one against the other. With digital compressing prices of film cameras more and more it is a viable solution
 
I have owned almost any rangefinder you can think of and imho the cle is the best camera that Leica never made.
Pictures with the 40mm Rokkor give you the idea there is nothing left to wish for.
Regards,
Frank
 
Erik van Straten said:
With the CL Leitz themselves created competition to their own M5. It was the stupidest move they could make, commercially. We all know the results.

However, even Cartier-Bresson had an CL, so there must have been something good in that little thing.

Erik.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, well, I'd say that in those days* it would make sense to have a serious SLR for work as the lenses were quite brilliant and a smaller one with a decent lens for weekends. That knocks out the M5 but the CL fits in nicely. (And the small SLR would have been a sensible move for the Rollei and tripod tribe.)

There were alternatives but most of them were cameras with fixed lenses and the CL gave you a useful 90m lens to add to the 40mm and making a very usable two lens outfit without the weight of a (say) SLR and three or four lenses. Also I wouldn't dream of taking (say) a standard f/1.2 or f/1.4 lens away for a break or longer holiday when I could take something as good but a lot cheaper.

Then, later on, that was knocked on the head by the smaller P&S's like the AF ones and some very nice 28 to 85 or 90mm zooms that you could put in your shirt pocket (and drop out easily.. ).

Anyway, there it is FWIW...

Regards, David

* And long before then as Kodak were pushing the VPK for the same reason about 100 years ago or longer.
 
Actually there is a rather strong argument for having, as an introduction to the world of film rangefinder cameras with a biult-in exposure meter, a Kiev III or Kiev 4 with 50mm f2 Jupiter 8.
£40 / $50 for a decent example with guarantee...

Decent lens performance; simple to use; very long r/f base for accurate focusing and if the OP decides r/f film is not his thing then no serious money will have been wasted in the experiment...

Pip.
 
Paul T. said:
Worth pointing out that, contrary to that blog posting, he used a CL, not a CLE.
Click to expand...

Actually he used both.

Erik.

hcb.jpg
 
David Hughes said:
And, FWIW, I think the main problem with the M5 was that it came out just as the Japanese were getting their act together and introducing cameras like the revolutionary Olympus OM-1 and all the others that followed. The OM-1 was a hard act to follow and the poor old CRF's with their restrictions didn't really stand a chance. I reckon the CL saved Leica as it offered something no one else had offered.
Regards, David
Click to expand...

About 226,000 M3's were sold, 83,000 M2's and 59,000 M4's. The M5 managed about 34,000. Even with Pro's going to SLRs, the resurrected M4 reincarnated as the M4-2 and M4-P sold about 40,000. The RF concept was dying for pros but the M5 was never a hit.
 
I have both an M5 and a CLE — as well as an M3 and M2, and LTM Leicas etc. Yes, the M5 is larger than an M2/3, but even in my relatively small hands it is not unwieldy. I like the shutter dial that overhangs the body for easy one-finger turning, and the left/right movement of the shutter speed and f/stop indicators in the viewfinder make it easy to get a correct exposure easily — or to alter it as you wish. I appreciate being able to meter a spot in an image that I would want at Zone V/VI and then alter that exposure as I see fit. I like the three lugs allowing vertical hang.

The CLE is noticably smaller, and the Minolta lenses are great — fully merit being used on a Leica body. The 28mm can have spot issues around the edge of the front element, but examples without spots can be found. Given that the CLE meter does not work in manual mode, I wanted to use the +/- over/underexposure settings on the shutter speed dial, but found that the fact that the dial locked at “0” in the -2/-1/0/+1/+2 sequence. So I had DAG remove the small ball bearing that caused the dial to lock, so now I can meter and then one-finger move the dial to change the exposure setting as I wish.

Neither camera will ever be the limiting factor in your development as a photographer.
 
pippy said:
I think the option of a film SLR is out because the OP definitely seems to want to start-out on his filmic quest by using a rangefinder camera.



I'd still like to know which criteria your friends were considering when they suggested the two cameras under discussion. I'm not going to say anything negative (pun) about either but they are a slightly odd selection.

I'd also like to ask the OP if he is sure about the economics of the choices. I'm no expert on s/h prices of the CLE and M5 but from a quick google an M5 with 50mm (Leitz) lens seems to be about double the price of a CLE with 40mm Rokkor (for cameras in a similar condition) and if the OP is considering stretching the budget to the level of an M5 + 50mm Leitz I'd STILL suggest he would be better-off saving up just a little bit more cash and going for an M6...

YMMV, of course.

Pip.
Click to expand...

For the prices I'm seeing, the M6 is a whole lot more expensive than the M5. The price difference between the M5 and CLE that I'm seeing here in Hong Kong is about 100 USD. The criteria my friends were considering - well basically had told them that I wanted to get started in film using a with a RF camera, and start off cheap. I would say that the price heavily impacted my (and their) opinion(s). Having heard people's opinions and gathering more info and knowledge about lenses (and their prices), I'm swaying more towards the CLE now..
 
KoNickon said:
Minolta used its electronics and SLR experience in developing the metering system for the CLE. The Leica "semaphore stick" meter for the M5 and CL is kind of quaint, when you think of it. By the time the M6 came along, Leica had a more modern metering system (maybe as a result of its collaboration with Minolta?).

I hope the OP hasn't thrown up his hands in despair at the length of this thread!
Click to expand...

Wasn't expecting the discussion to get this long...but equally interesting to hear everyone's opinions. Might be wracking my brain with all the points raised, but I'm swaying towards a CLE purely budget-wise at the moment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

gzisis69
Question about Minolta CLE repair options
Replies
12
Views
3K
ThomasN
T
M
Flash Advice for Minolta CLE
Replies
19
Views
2K
matteo29103
M
V
First Rangefinder Suggestions
2 3 4
Replies
78
Views
6K
Godfrey
Godfrey
J
  • Article Article
The Mysterious Leica M5 of 1992: We now know more, but not all!Wetzlar made 20 M5s 17 years after it ceased production, but why?
2 3
Replies
43
Views
3K
38Deardorff
38Deardorff
tortellini_man
first M mount film body
2 3
Replies
56
Views
5K
JohnGellings
J
Back
Top Bottom