Roger is, of course, correct in all of his points. If fixed lens rangefinders werent such an inexpensive way to get a taste of rangefinder photography, I wouldn't make the recommendation. Some people just don't like rangefinders though, and I would hate for anyone to shell out that kind of cash just to find they dont like it and then have to take a hit on a resale. FLRFs are pretty much all inferior to M's or Nikon/Contax RFs, but since you can buy one in good working order for fifty bucks, put ten or twenty or fifty rolls through it, and then sell it for fifty bucks, it is essentially win-win. Also, Roger is right that most leicas don't need a CLA, but in my mind, even a frivolous CLA is worth the money. You wouldn't buy a used porsche if you didnt know how long it had been since it had a tuneup, and the analogy extends to leica cameras. if you were buying a mint black m4 that had never been opened, and you were buying it to collect, a cla would be nuts, but for a camera that you want to take shooting, the peace of mind that comes from knowing for sure that it is well lubed and adjusted is worth the money, especially when you are spending that much money on the camera and lenses in the first place.
again, roger is right that if you ask any four photographers a question, you will get at least five different answers. both points of view are perfectly valid, but some are more valid for some people than others, you just need to ask yourself what makes sense for you. this is an INCREDIBLY informative forum, and there are loads of people that make me feel like an idiot on a daily basis (in a good way). you picked a good place to make your inquiries.
