skwp
pritzkerphoto.com
Just curious if anyone has ever thought about doing a modification to the CLE to make it meter in manual modes.
The meter circuit is activated in A (and +/- modes) so it seems that it shouldn't be that hard to modify the wheel to activate it in all of its positions. Ideas?
The meter circuit is activated in A (and +/- modes) so it seems that it shouldn't be that hard to modify the wheel to activate it in all of its positions. Ideas?
Palaeoboy
Joel Matherson
No it cannot be done. There are no contacts to recognise what shutter speed its selecting. You would need the whole dial mechanism off a camera that does meter in manual. This in itself is possible as I have seen an X-500 dial on a CLE before although it wasnt flush with the top. But the circuit board for the CLE just wanted designed to read that information. Putting the rest of the X-500's circuits in wouldnt work either as the CLE was the only Minolta to meter off the curtain and film plane. (They sold the design to Olympus instead) As such a swap of circuitry that is often mentioned on the net is simply not possible. Its hard enough to find someone who will work on them in standard form for you I doubt anyone would take the job on even if it could be done. A metered manual CLE is a nice thought though isnt it?
monopix
Cam repairer
Interesting. I bought mine for the fact it was auto and have never had a thought to use it in manual mode. My ZM stays permanently on auto as well. For what I use rangefinders for, I don't see a need for manual. If I need that sort of control, I switch to an SLR. Of course we're not all the same but I can't think why manual would be useful.
I'm listening...
skwp
pritzkerphoto.com
Manual is useful because when your primary concern is to capture the moment, you don't want to accidentally meter against the sky and get a totally underexposed shot. If you're on manual you know when the light has changed or not but it's also useful to double check right before you click to see if the meter seems wildly off from what you thought it should be.
I shoot this way both on my leica and on my DSLR. I find the results are more predictable than leaving it to autoexposure because you may not notice that the shot you took is 2 stops off from the previous one, whereas if you're on manual you then know exactly what the previous value was.
I shoot this way both on my leica and on my DSLR. I find the results are more predictable than leaving it to autoexposure because you may not notice that the shot you took is 2 stops off from the previous one, whereas if you're on manual you then know exactly what the previous value was.
rlouzan
Well-known
Incident or spot hand held meter!
monopix
Cam repairer
By which time, the moment has gone...
Sorry, you've lost me. What has the exposure of the last shot got to do with the next?
I think the point I was making was I like auto exposure (well aperture priority anyway) and I bought both my cameras because that's what they offer. If you want manual exposure, that's fine, but I don't find it helps and, to be honest, you haven't convinced me. But, hey, we're all different.
teo
Well-known
Hmmm, trade it for a Leica CL?
Sorry if it seems rude, but I'm almost scared seeing so much people modifying vintage cameras. These (the CLE specially) are rare things, they won't be made anymore, why risk to riun them?...
Sorry if it seems rude, but I'm almost scared seeing so much people modifying vintage cameras. These (the CLE specially) are rare things, they won't be made anymore, why risk to riun them?...
Last edited:
sanmich
Veteran
VC meter...
tedwin
Established
Interesting. I bought mine for the fact it was auto and have never had a thought to use it in manual mode. My ZM stays permanently on auto as well. For what I use rangefinders for, I don't see a need for manual. If I need that sort of control, I switch to an SLR. Of course we're not all the same but I can't think why manual would be useful.
I'm listening...
AE can be just fine in many instances. But I will try and give an instance when it wouldn't, then perhaps you will understand why many don't use it.
You're wandering around a (whatever) taking snaps as you go of the (whatever) your scenes are a mix of the surroundings the subject the sky the ground etc. All is well. Suddenly you spot something that would look neat maybe from a different angle, you drop to one knee, get low and shoot up at (whatever) But. Your AE metering camera gets an eyeful of sky and meters accordingly. You now have a silhouette - wether you wanted one or not. Had you set your camera manually - been sensible and kept an eye on things as you went (barely a smidgen of your attention) all your shots so far would have been fine. Plus the one you dropped to one knee for. Again wether you wanted a silhouette or not. The only difference is that it would have been up to you, not the camera.
This covers just one of countless scenario's, but surely you get the drift?
meven
Well-known
Palaeoboy
Joel Matherson
Because the CLE offers alot more features as a trade off for metered manual. The OP may have wanted aperture priority auto, 28mm framelines, Self timer better and brighter finder, more reliable metering system, more accurate shutter speeds, easier loading. Not a bad trade off for metered manual.
Its not until you use the CLE that you realise that metered manual isnt that much of a deficit on this camera. There is 2 stops +/- exposure compensation whereby the meter still operates. If you feel you require greater compensation than that the dial turns in either direction (unlike some that cannot fully rotate) and you simply choose the required speed, its done in a second. The only drawback is going back to auto for your next exposure but with practise its all very quick. Using a VC meter and transposing would take considerably longer than metering in Auto and then rotating to the required speed. Only if you want to use a high tech spot meter for for example where the greater accuracy outweighs the longer set up time would there be an advantage to separate meter.
meven
Well-known
That will explain why, thanks for the useful info.
skwp
pritzkerphoto.com
Why I prefer CLE to CL is primarily the viewfinder which is a lot better. The CL is too cramped for me. Given that I owned both cameras I sold the CL because even though it has the manual meter the viewfinder is still my #1 priority in a camera.
As to poster who asked what one exposure has to do with the next - if the light hasn't changed and you're shooting the same subjects (say people on the street), then you want to keep your exposure the same to get their faces exposed properly regardless if you're getting a frameful of sky or a frameful of brick.
This is why set and forget manual (so you just focus and click - or even prefocus and just click) for me in these situations trumps AE which can jump around by several stops. This is what I meant when talking about manual being fastest and most accurate for consistency. With AE + exposure comp you'll be twiddling the exposure dial while the decisive moment passes you by.
As to poster who asked what one exposure has to do with the next - if the light hasn't changed and you're shooting the same subjects (say people on the street), then you want to keep your exposure the same to get their faces exposed properly regardless if you're getting a frameful of sky or a frameful of brick.
This is why set and forget manual (so you just focus and click - or even prefocus and just click) for me in these situations trumps AE which can jump around by several stops. This is what I meant when talking about manual being fastest and most accurate for consistency. With AE + exposure comp you'll be twiddling the exposure dial while the decisive moment passes you by.