May I ask a 40/2 Rokkor question? How necessary is the rubber hood? Last week I gave my 40 its first workout, and loved the compactness. But my fingers were a little pressed for space against the hood when working the aperture ring. Are there alternative hoods? Can I go without?
R
RML
Guest
Rover, the M-Rokkor has the easily available 40.5 thread for the hood so you should be able to find hoods and filters galore. To be fair my Rokkor is in terrific shape and so is the hood. I use it always as it it is easy to unroll, prevents me from sticking my fingers in the lens, and prevents flare even when I don't expect flare to happen. Whether you really really need the hood... I don't know. But it's there. I agree with you about the room for using the rings. I had some initial problems with it too but I got over it very quickly. I use the CL and 40 every day, take it to work, schlepp it to outings, and generally make myself a nuisance with it. I love this cam. 
I think the CL's lenses, Summicron-C and the Rokkor equivalent (Rokkor-C?) had an odd filter thread, 40mm? Something different anyway. The later Minolta M-Rokkor for the CLE has a 40.5mm filter thread and multi-coating, and perhaps a tweaking of the optics.
I've always used the folding rubber lens shade, so don't know what happens when I don't.
Oscar's concern over the longevity of the electronics in the CLE is shared by many. When reading about it again, I admit to a twinge of worry too.
But in reality, my camera has survived and worked perfectly for 22 years. Well, 4 years ago the shutter speed diodes in the viewfinder started to give either false readings or accurately indicated wildly wrong shutter speeds. It turned out to need some electrical contacts cleaned.
And I'm reminded that electronic solid-state components are most likely to fail very soon after entering service, or last a very long time. I think I can deal with an occasional cleaning of switches, and plan to enjoy my CLE "forever"!
I've always used the folding rubber lens shade, so don't know what happens when I don't.
Oscar's concern over the longevity of the electronics in the CLE is shared by many. When reading about it again, I admit to a twinge of worry too.
But in reality, my camera has survived and worked perfectly for 22 years. Well, 4 years ago the shutter speed diodes in the viewfinder started to give either false readings or accurately indicated wildly wrong shutter speeds. It turned out to need some electrical contacts cleaned.
And I'm reminded that electronic solid-state components are most likely to fail very soon after entering service, or last a very long time. I think I can deal with an occasional cleaning of switches, and plan to enjoy my CLE "forever"!
The Summicron C lenses have 39mm filter rings while the Rokkor CLEs have 40.5. I have the folding rubber hood, and will keep working with it. The issue is my fat fingers, not the lens of course.
Oh, just the standard Leica 39mm size, then! Thanks rover...
GeneW
Veteran
Almost standard 39mm. The Summicron C lenses use the oddball series 5.5 filters. You can attach 39mm filters but the thread size is not the same so you can only *just* insert it so it stays on. This works but you have to be careful not to strip the threads.rover said:
Gene
Last edited:
Flinor
Well-known
I'm sorry to be so late to this thread but I find it very interesting. I've only got two cameras with a "complete" lens set, the CLE with 28, 40 and 90, and the Canon P with a 35, 50, 100 and 135. My other 35's are either fixed lens with 40, 45 or 50's and my two medium format rangefinders (there are no other kinds) are 40 and 45 equivalents. I had to think very hard to remember the last time I had anything longer than a 50 on and it's very, very unusual. When I'm out with any of the fixed lens cameras I don't feel any lack. I'd like to keep my 28, but I would do just fine with just a 50.
Gerry
Gerry
back alley
IMAGES
gerry,
can you spare a story or two about your canon p?
as you may have read i'm waiting on the arrival of mine, i have the canon 50/1.8 waiting here with me.
joe
can you spare a story or two about your canon p?
as you may have read i'm waiting on the arrival of mine, i have the canon 50/1.8 waiting here with me.
joe
Follow up on the Ebay Low-Bid wins; The $21 Canon 135mm F3.5, late version in black, described as severe coating separation, was actually a cemented pair that had come undone. Elements 2/3 to be exact. Took about an hour and ten set-screws to get to them. I used 99%isopropyl alchohol to take the Canadian Balsam off as the lenses were already split. They are clear now, and as an experiment I am going to use some index-matching gel to see how it affects reflections. The lens looks clear, and given the retaining ring that pushed the elements together, I will bet it works. Otherwise, I will re-glue them. You have to heat the elements to 300F for the glue to work, I am not ready for that yet, and would practice with junk lenses first. For $21 I figured the focus mount alone was worth the price.
BUT: Extreme haze, severe coating separation is probably the cemented elements going. The coatings were perfect.
BUT: Extreme haze, severe coating separation is probably the cemented elements going. The coatings were perfect.
Flinor
Well-known
Joe,
I don't really have any stories. It's a very nice camera, feels very good in the hands with good build quality and smooth controls. The viewfinder is better than you'd expect for it's age with the only bad mark being that all the framelines show all the time and the 35 is tough to see with glasses. But if you've never used a life size viewfinder, you're in for a real treat. The 50 1.8 (I have black one) is very good optically, small and very well built. The infinity lock can be pain but they're common on lenses of that vintage. The 100 3.5, which I don't use nearly enough, is a real gem. If that's a focal length that suits you I'd pick one up as soon as I could. Very often I'll put an M adaptor on it and carry it in preference to the 90 M Rokkor from the CLE and I always carry it with the M5. My conceit with the P, and also my S2, for which I only have a 50, is to load them with Scala and go out without a meter. I win some and I lose some but it's a lot of fun.
Gerry
I don't really have any stories. It's a very nice camera, feels very good in the hands with good build quality and smooth controls. The viewfinder is better than you'd expect for it's age with the only bad mark being that all the framelines show all the time and the 35 is tough to see with glasses. But if you've never used a life size viewfinder, you're in for a real treat. The 50 1.8 (I have black one) is very good optically, small and very well built. The infinity lock can be pain but they're common on lenses of that vintage. The 100 3.5, which I don't use nearly enough, is a real gem. If that's a focal length that suits you I'd pick one up as soon as I could. Very often I'll put an M adaptor on it and carry it in preference to the 90 M Rokkor from the CLE and I always carry it with the M5. My conceit with the P, and also my S2, for which I only have a 50, is to load them with Scala and go out without a meter. I win some and I lose some but it's a lot of fun.
Gerry
back alley
IMAGES
thanks gerry, i appreciate the info.
i was feeling sorry for myself, having to wait on the mail system to deliver my p.
i am very much looking forward to using the p and i have a sneaky feeling that it may quickly become my main camera -relegating the bessa r to back up. if that happens then i would like to get another p body and the 100 lens also.
i have the 35/75 combo for the r and i think the 35 would stay on the r as it's a good fit and i can see the framelines ok, with my glasses even.
thanks again,
joe
i was feeling sorry for myself, having to wait on the mail system to deliver my p.
i am very much looking forward to using the p and i have a sneaky feeling that it may quickly become my main camera -relegating the bessa r to back up. if that happens then i would like to get another p body and the 100 lens also.
i have the 35/75 combo for the r and i think the 35 would stay on the r as it's a good fit and i can see the framelines ok, with my glasses even.
thanks again,
joe