Shot a roll with m new CLE... wondering about the M6

[gregarpp]

I shot a roll with my new (to me) CLE.
Using mostly the 90mm Rokkor outdoors. Photos of my son.

I was also doing some reading on the M6 M7 cameras..

How does the M6 compare to my CLE...

Maybe I do need to try one of those.

 

[sf]

Yeah, what the hey, try it, buy it, whatever. . . . Leicas are good cameras. Might as well pick one up.

😉

 

[Doug]

How does the M6 compare to my CLE...

One nice thing about the CLE is how small and inconspicuous it is. The M6 is larger and doesn't have AE. 🙂 Also the M6 is not ideal for the 40mm lens, and the CLE's 28mm framelines are easier to see. OTOH, the CLE has no 75mm framelines, and an M with .72x finder is easier with the 90mm. Though I've had my M2 longer, the CLE has been my favorite 35mm RF since 1982...

 

[gregarpp]

If I like and will use longer lenses... Then a M6 with .85
I don't plan on using a 28mm lens much.

50mm 75mm 90mm Which I currently own.

 

[krimple]

Depends...

Depends...

Well, I have a CL, an R-D1 and now an M6-TTL. Some observations:

The CL (like the CLE) has the portability factor. The meter is pretty good, and it is easy to load. And since it's a light-tight box, for everyday shooting there really isn't much difference in good light.

The finder is small. I find myself really having a hard time doing any shooting in low light. I think the rangefinder base is pretty narrow, which means focusing at 50mm f/1.5 is about the best it will do. Also, I find the CL only focuses down to 3 feet, and my Voigtlander lenses (at least the 28mm Ultron and the 35 Pan II) focus a little closer, so you lose that part of the range.

The M6 has a larger baseline, meaning it will focus in lower light, make it more obvious when the focus is 'in', and will support more lens combinations without an external finder (i have the .72 finder, so I can shoot with 28, 35, 50, 75 and 90 lenses this way). If you were looking for shooting more narrow focal lengths, the .85 finder is better (I think it shows a 135mm frameline). The M6 supports focusing down to the minimums on my lenses. And it allows you to switch the framelines for previewing the framing of a shot. The meter is also not mechanical, so I think it will be less likely to fail with heavy use of the camera.

I like the framing on the M6 for the 35mm lens--most of the viewfinder area, and easily visible to me (I don't wear glasses). The M6 .72 finder's 28mm framelines are hard to see completely even for me, so I figure it's anything in the viewfinder and I'm good.

If you shoot a lot in low light, want an easier to use viewfinder, and don't mind a slightly larger camera, the M6 could be a good choice. If pocketability is your main concern, the CLE is perfect. Especially with that nice 40mm lens! It's a beaut and takes great pictures.

FWIW, compared to the others, the R-D1 is a great camera, albeit it is currently pretty darn expensive. It's main advantage is digital capture. Think of it as a Bessa with a digital back. Of the three, the rangefinder patch is the brightest, but it just doesn't pop into / out of focus like the M6 in lower light. I love shooting with it though, and it will still have a place in my bag since it's about the size of the M6.

Ken

 

[Doug]

Ken, you make a good point about RF baselength. Though the CLE baselength is longer than the CL's, it's still short compared to a Leica M. It might not be too far different from a Bessa's but I don't have an R/R2/R3 to compare. Even the higher magnification of the Bessa-T doesn't fully compensate for its short baseline, as I found in comparing focusing ease among the T, CLE, M2, and Kiev bodies. A longer baseline means more relative movement in the RF patch that gives that greater "snap" and focusing confidence.

 

[rover]

Here is a chart listing the EBL of a number of cameras

http://cameraquest.com/leica.htm

The new Bessa R2a/R3a and Zeiss Ikon are not on the list.

The R2a is equivalent with the other Bessas while the R3a has an EBL of 37mm. The ZI is roughly equivalent to the .85 mag Leicas.

If you like the CLE, longer lenses, and the automation that camera offers, the R3a and ZI are worth consideration too. The ZI is actually very usable with all lenses from 28mm on up and without sacrificing focusing performance as it has a very long base length finder.

 

[Michiel Fokkema]

I've had two CLE's and liked them very much.
I did sell them because in the end I always come back to the M6. It is just much more versatile. In the end it is not that much bigger.

Cheers,

Michiel Fokkema

 

[wtl]

An M6 and a CLE were with me when I travelled in Peru and Bolivia. After the trip, I sold the CLE and bought another M6.

It's a bit too small even I don't have big hands, being an Asian. And the meter only on Auto mode drove me nuts a few times, considering I am not the one who uses in-camera meter all the time.

Though if I did not have the experience with a real M, I probably would keep it and be happy.

Translation to all this writing is: It is a great camera. but compared to an M, it is not.

 

[gregarpp]

I am going to try one out.. M6 or maybe M7

 

[MP/CLE]

If you like the ae of the CLE, but want the versatility of the M, you need the M7. I prefer my MP to the M6. I travel with the CLE and the MP.