RayPA
Ignore It (It'll go away)
sepiareverb said:
I'll defer to Gandy's page on the CLE:
http://cameraquest.com/cle.htm
read toward the bottom under the Weaknesses heading.
.
leif e
-
Miss the CLE
Miss the CLE
You´ve already said most of what´s to say. Still; Many years ago, when the CLE was fairly new, I traded almost all my other gear for two CLE bodies and three lenses (28, 40, 90). It was a perfect set up - especially for hikes and jobs out in some kind of woods, mountains and so on. One body for color, one for b&w; one camera with lens in each breast pocket of my Fjellräven jacket (early 80s, this!) and the 90 in a side pocket, packed in a pouch. I went skiing like that in -25 Celcius (and that´s cold). No trouble. Miss those things every time I see one in the classifieds.
Had a CL as well for a while, but never really warmed to it. Probably my fault ...
Miss the CLE
You´ve already said most of what´s to say. Still; Many years ago, when the CLE was fairly new, I traded almost all my other gear for two CLE bodies and three lenses (28, 40, 90). It was a perfect set up - especially for hikes and jobs out in some kind of woods, mountains and so on. One body for color, one for b&w; one camera with lens in each breast pocket of my Fjellräven jacket (early 80s, this!) and the 90 in a side pocket, packed in a pouch. I went skiing like that in -25 Celcius (and that´s cold). No trouble. Miss those things every time I see one in the classifieds.
Had a CL as well for a while, but never really warmed to it. Probably my fault ...
Palaeoboy
Joel Matherson
Feature and performance the CLE is definitely the better camera. Longer effective baselength, much better finder, clearer and brighter rangefinder patch, 28mm framelines, TTL flash, Aperture priority Auto, self timer, easier loading easier to obtain batteries M type focusing cam. The only areas you would consider a CL over a CLE is purely if you have a preference for mechanical cameras or if you use 50mm lenses or like a more narrower metering angle. Ideally the CL makes a perfect 2nd body.
To address some of the comments above to which Pablito has on other occasions also complained about the battery cover. At no point can the battery cover come off the base unless it has been broken. It slides open and it is tensioned in the closed position by the batteries pressing against it. If it is loose simply lift the batter terminals slightly and that will tension the batteries harder against the cover. I have never seen a loose cover only ones that people have broken off trying to lift them rather than slide them to one side.
The top and bottom covers are foiled covered polycarbonate but they are so thick they are stronger than that of the metal CL covers. CL covers are very easily dented while the CLE's are not. The black chrome finish of the CLE also wears far better than a CL even some early black chrome M's.
Its true that the CLE has no metered manual but the dial rotates in both directions so you meter in auto and then turn the dial to the required manual shutter speed. Its pretty simple and thats only if you need to go beyond the 2 stop exposure compensation that the CLE offers in its auto mode anyways.
The often stated myth that the electronics are interchangeable with XG-1's is false. The CLE is the only Minolta that meters off the curtains. Its meter cell is located in the lens chamber because of this. The meter cell and circuit board are all integrated as one piece. The way in which it meters and alters exposure when the shutter is actually open mean that the board and even the chips are not interchangeable with any other camera. The CLE actually predates the X-700 and was the first Minolta ever to have TTL flash metering.
Biggest myth of all and I have even seen it written in books but the L in CL and CLE does NOT stand for Leica. The Leica CL is not Leica Compact Leica (thats silly). Its Leica Compact Lightmetering. and the CLE is Compact Lightmetering Electronic.
To address some of the comments above to which Pablito has on other occasions also complained about the battery cover. At no point can the battery cover come off the base unless it has been broken. It slides open and it is tensioned in the closed position by the batteries pressing against it. If it is loose simply lift the batter terminals slightly and that will tension the batteries harder against the cover. I have never seen a loose cover only ones that people have broken off trying to lift them rather than slide them to one side.
The top and bottom covers are foiled covered polycarbonate but they are so thick they are stronger than that of the metal CL covers. CL covers are very easily dented while the CLE's are not. The black chrome finish of the CLE also wears far better than a CL even some early black chrome M's.
Its true that the CLE has no metered manual but the dial rotates in both directions so you meter in auto and then turn the dial to the required manual shutter speed. Its pretty simple and thats only if you need to go beyond the 2 stop exposure compensation that the CLE offers in its auto mode anyways.
The often stated myth that the electronics are interchangeable with XG-1's is false. The CLE is the only Minolta that meters off the curtains. Its meter cell is located in the lens chamber because of this. The meter cell and circuit board are all integrated as one piece. The way in which it meters and alters exposure when the shutter is actually open mean that the board and even the chips are not interchangeable with any other camera. The CLE actually predates the X-700 and was the first Minolta ever to have TTL flash metering.
Biggest myth of all and I have even seen it written in books but the L in CL and CLE does NOT stand for Leica. The Leica CL is not Leica Compact Leica (thats silly). Its Leica Compact Lightmetering. and the CLE is Compact Lightmetering Electronic.
vrgard
Well-known
Wow, we've gone well beyond the original poster's question. But as a result, some great information and user experiences have been shared in this thread. And not surprisingly, some seem to prefer the CL while others seem to prefer the CLE. Regardless, it seems pretty clear that folks have a passion about these cameras. Nothing further to add other than my thanks to all who contributed.
-Randy
-Randy
RayPA
Ignore It (It'll go away)
Doug said:
Doug, I picked up a HRF about 6 months ago. I'm still trying it out too. Nice camera, but so far for me it doesn't have the same CLE magic. Yup! The CLE with the CV 28/3.5 or any of the 40s is a great walk-around kit, and small enough to add the 90, like Leif suggests and still feel unburdened.
Palaeoboy said:
You're right about the X700, my bad. I meant the XG series. I thought it was the XG series top panel electronics (shutter dial, etc.) that was compatible with the CLE, not the metering system(?).
.
Yes, a significant part of the CLE magic (and the CL's too I expect) is the 40mm framelines. The 40's field of view has come to feel so natural and useful that I have three different ones: The CLE's original Rokkor, the 40 Nokton, and the 43mm Pentax-L. That last has a 53° angle of view vs 56° for the Nokton, so I have to be a bit looser in framing when using the Pentax lens. After 25 years I'm so committed to ~40mm that I began to worry where I'd be if the CLE quit, so I bought a second one.RayPA said:
And the generous 28mm frames make for such a natural combination with the 40's view... I didn't have a 28 for a long time, until the 28 Skopar. Nice as it is, that turned out to be too slow for my office-interiors project, so out of appreciation and respect for the CLE I "gifted" it with a 28 Summicron. Ahhh, that's nice!
For the 35 & 50mm there are the other M bodies, and the HRF is my only one sporting 75mm frames, so the 75 Heliar might get more exercise now! Hope you're enjoying your HRF too, Ray; seems to me sort of a cross between an M7 and a Contax G2...
Oh, and my database records the assertion that the XG-5 and XG-7 share some electronics parts with the CLE... maybe untrue or only partly true?
Last edited:
Palaeoboy
Joel Matherson
Again, (and I certainly wish it wasnt so as it would mean readily available spares) the CLE's circuit board is unique. I have attached a photo of a new one that I still have. Firstly no XG camera had TTL flash, the CLE was the first Minolta ever to have this so by this fact alone its top board of the circuit by nature is different to accommodate this feature. Secondly the meter assembly is all one piece integrated into the whole circuit board. When you replace the board you replace the meter. The CLE is the only Minolta that meters off the film plane so its circuits even if they were able to fit in another camera they dont work in the same way. Minolta actually patented this design and sold it to Olympus but never put it into another camera themselves. Thirdly if you look at the top board to the left of the photo, in an SLR the board would have to pierce the reflex prism for it to fit. The location of cable the release socket is also extended on an additional arm as its in a completely different spot on the CLE. Sorry but your wasting your money stocking up on old XG's to make your CLE's live again.
Attachments
sepiareverb
genius and moron
Palaeoboy said:
Drat? Well that means I could get a CLE and not spend money on several XG's... A camera I might consider for the compactness w/aperture priority.
RayPA
Ignore It (It'll go away)
Doug said:...
And the generous 28mm frames make for such a natural combination with the 40's view... I didn't have a 28 for a long time, until the 28 Skopar. Nice as it is, that turned out to be too slow for my office-interiors project, so out of appreciation and respect for the CLE I "gifted" it with a 28 Summicron. Ahhh, that's nice!
that is nice! I know what you mean about the slowness of the Skopar, but that's the trade-off for the size I guess. You would need at least f2 for your environmental protrait work, so that's a good choice. I'd love to get a faster 28. That's the good think about the CLE (as Roland stated), you can go fast! I use my 40/1.4, but my fastest 28 is my Hex 28/2.8.
Palaeoboy said:
Sad news indeed, but thanks for contributing to this thread (You definitely know your cameras). It's always great to learn something new, even if it does crush that little glimmer of hope that the mighty CLE can live forever.
I'll just have to appreciate it that much more everytime I use it. Palaeoboy
Joel Matherson
Yes I do have a CLE repair and spare parts manual actually. Its awkwardly set out and difficult to find things in it but give me a few days and I will see what I can come up with.
Palaeoboy
Joel Matherson
Before I started looking into it I did indeed purchased an XG-1 for that purpose but then was offered a whole heaps of new CLE parts, shutter, rangefinder, top and bottom plates, and other parts and laid them all out in front of me with the innards of the XG-1 I discovered just how different the CLE's internals really are
I really wish it wasn't the case, I just want to save people from the same disappointment. Its a great camera though. If you need spares, try get another CLE with a different fault. They do appear on Ebay from time to time. The last CLE I purchased 18 months ago was fully operational but the body was scuffed for $250 so prices are coming down with Bessas and Ikons out there.