outbr3akxal
Established
I've been looking around for a metered M.
But unfortunately, the M6 is currently out of my budget for now.
So I've been reading up on the tiny awesome Leica CL.
Nice small camera. Metered.
What are your thoughts?
Has anyone used a 35 lens on it?
Thanks all!
But unfortunately, the M6 is currently out of my budget for now.
So I've been reading up on the tiny awesome Leica CL.
Nice small camera. Metered.
What are your thoughts?
Has anyone used a 35 lens on it?
Thanks all!
santino
FSU gear head
why not a Minolta CLE?
It seems to accept more lenses (no metering arm)
It seems to accept more lenses (no metering arm)
Dan Daniel
Well-known
It isn't an M. Lighter, flimsier construction. The shutter noise is, well, different? The viewfinder is smaller. The meter is prone to not working, a combination of age and design.
And except for one thing, I would still be using one as my main 35mm camera- You can't add a diopter to the viewfinder. Wonderful size and design for me, but my eyes need a diopter for viewfinders.
But it isn't an M..... Consider it on its own merits and flaws, not as a 'sort of ' M. The Bessas are probably a better 'sort of' M?
And except for one thing, I would still be using one as my main 35mm camera- You can't add a diopter to the viewfinder. Wonderful size and design for me, but my eyes need a diopter for viewfinders.
But it isn't an M..... Consider it on its own merits and flaws, not as a 'sort of ' M. The Bessas are probably a better 'sort of' M?
Chris Bail
Regular Guy
It is a nice camera, and easier to use a 35mm lens on than it's cousin the Minolta CLE, in my opinion, though I do like the Auto Exposure of the CLE. The CL can mount and shoot a 35 mm with no problem. Just keep in mind that you'll see the 40mm frame lines and have to look a little beyond them to imagine your field of view. It's not difficult.
Meter reliability is a major weak point of the CL. Make sure you find one from a reputable place that has a return policy if you find that the meter no longer works or is inaccurate. There are a couple for sale in the classifieds here...Including mine that has a complete overhaul and meter replacement.
A CLA and replacing the meter will cost you as much as a nice CL body. I learned this the hard way....do yourself a favor and buy one that has already been replaced, or that you can return if it doesn't work quite right.
Meter reliability is a major weak point of the CL. Make sure you find one from a reputable place that has a return policy if you find that the meter no longer works or is inaccurate. There are a couple for sale in the classifieds here...Including mine that has a complete overhaul and meter replacement.
A CLA and replacing the meter will cost you as much as a nice CL body. I learned this the hard way....do yourself a favor and buy one that has already been replaced, or that you can return if it doesn't work quite right.
Dave Jenkins
Loose Canon
Lots of people like them, but I've owned two and consider the CL the most inconvenient camera I've ever used.
burancap
Veteran
I did not care much for it either! Admittedly the size was nice, but I found the finder very difficult. If the OP really wants an M mount and a meter, then save up and wait for an affordable M6 -there will be no regrets.
anjoca76
Well-known
They are outstanding cameras. As mentioned above, get one with a good working meter--I much prefer the needle meter in the CL to the one in my M6.
It's a lot like the M5 (same era, not coincidentally)--those who have had good working copies and actually USED one tend to really like them. If what you really want is an M6, then you may never be satisfied. But if you give it a chance, you just may love it.
It's a lot like the M5 (same era, not coincidentally)--those who have had good working copies and actually USED one tend to really like them. If what you really want is an M6, then you may never be satisfied. But if you give it a chance, you just may love it.
kbg32
neo-romanticist
I would look for a used Bessa M-mount than a CL or a CLE. CL are hardly robust. CLE are nearing the end of their lifespan due to aging electronics and available parts to fix them.
Dave Jenkins
Loose Canon
I did indeed actually use one (two, in fact), and extensively. And the results were fine. But I still say the CL is the most inconvenient to operate camera I've ever used.
burancap
Veteran
My copy was excellent and worked great. It got a lot of use...
whited3
Well-known
Have you considered reaching out to some of the better known leica repair people and waiting it out? Let them know you're looking for a user M6 and check in every month or so. That's how I got my M3 on the cheap when the auction site wasn't panning out.
I also got my M6 for what I consider to be a great deal on the 'bay of all places (but more importantly), sold by a used leica guy in NYC. PM incoming on his contact info - partially on the chance he can do a repeat performance for you, and partially because he was so nice to work with I owe him a reference or two.
Aw hell - let's just say I got the M6 for under $800 but more than $700 & it works perfectly. Is that in your price range?
saturnales
Established
Just bougt one. Great camera.
Dez
Bodger Extraordinaire
The CL is a beautiful little camera, and in my opinion, a joy to use. They tend to be a bit fragile. It is unusual to find one that doesn't have dents, as the thin brass top is not happy about being dropped. The meter reliability issue is not as bad as many people think. The weak link is actually a sliding contact point on the printed circuit board that houses the adjustment pots for the meter circuit. Almost exactly the same arrangement is to be found in the M5- the difference is that accessing the contacts to clean them is considerably more difficult in the CL than it is in the M5, but it is a job I have done successfully.
You need to check the slow speeds as well. The slow speed escapement is built into a vertically-mounted frame much like the slow speed movement in a Barnack Leica, but the mounting can be jarred out of place if the camera is dropped.
I just sold a near-mint CL in the RFF Classifieds. I really liked the camera, but I liked my CV Bessa 3A a bit better. You should have a good look at the Bessa 2's and 3's as they are a good alternative to the CL.
Cheers,
Dez
You need to check the slow speeds as well. The slow speed escapement is built into a vertically-mounted frame much like the slow speed movement in a Barnack Leica, but the mounting can be jarred out of place if the camera is dropped.
I just sold a near-mint CL in the RFF Classifieds. I really liked the camera, but I liked my CV Bessa 3A a bit better. You should have a good look at the Bessa 2's and 3's as they are a good alternative to the CL.
Cheers,
Dez
Steve Bellayr
Veteran
Parts for repair are difficult to find. If you can not afford an M6 why not an M2 or M3 and download a free lightmeter app to your smart phone?
filmtwit
Desperate but not serious
Have you looked into Hexar RF?
http://www.cameraquest.com/konicam.htm
The CL and CLE and R2 all have tighter RF baselenth if I remember.
While the Hexar has the SAME rangefinder baselength: 69.2 mm as the Leica M
http://www.cameraquest.com/konicam.htm
The CL and CLE and R2 all have tighter RF baselenth if I remember.
While the Hexar has the SAME rangefinder baselength: 69.2 mm as the Leica M
kbg32
neo-romanticist
I have owned 3 CLs and 2 CLEs. Lovely cameras. Never again. Save your money and get what you really want. You won't regret it. The CL was my first M. It is nothing like the real thing.
Takkun
Ian M.
Haven't owned one, but used one. Agreed on its level of inconvenience; the RF base is too short and the shutter speed is in a very odd place. I much prefer the M5's. It also just doesn't have the same solidity an M does, which is why I ended up buying a real M.
The Bessas are solid cameras and are going to get you a bright finder and a longer baseline, particularly the R3. The Hexar is also a good bet, if you want a RF with a motor drive. Stephen can elaborate further, but here are the various finders compared in a nutshell from his site.
The CL made a lot of sense when it was produced, but not so much these days, with a great selection of compact bodies since produced.
The Bessas are solid cameras and are going to get you a bright finder and a longer baseline, particularly the R3. The Hexar is also a good bet, if you want a RF with a motor drive. Stephen can elaborate further, but here are the various finders compared in a nutshell from his site.
The CL made a lot of sense when it was produced, but not so much these days, with a great selection of compact bodies since produced.
Brian Levy
Established
I bought my CL outfit back in the late '80s or very early '90s. It, at the time had a little finicky meter movement. Sent it off to be serviced by Leica and the speeds were right on, the metering contacts were cleaned, viewfinder cleaned and had an option to replace the top cover that had the slightest infamous CL indent. The service was done in early '91. Thereafter it served as my only 35mm system camera along with a Minox ML that gave up the ghost decades ago and my MF system.
It was used to teach courses, weekly Saturday shoots, daily walkaround, vacations and everything in between with no, none, consideration as to it being supposively fragile. To set things straight. 1) it is no less robust than almost any other camera; no not built to hammer nails like the LTM and M models but easily as robust as most everything else and better than many. Weakest point is the metering is not as dust proof as the M.
The denting seems to really require some serious hitting right at the edge. Mine has been banged about and there has been no additional indenting and I am not particularly careful and with other cameras I have used equally as hard, have incurred more visable damage.
The plastic sprocket issue seems mostly related to not understanding completely how to load the leader, it is opposite of most cameras and if done improperly, stresses the tabs. Reading the manual does matter with the CL.
Some comments about the finicky metering I have found when working with new owners often is more related to not understanding the metering than the mechanism. It is a semi-spot, closer to spot metering and hence with only a minor movement the meter can react quite a bit. The metering spot is about the size of the spot in the center of the viewfinder, think 12 degrees. At the time, it was the only camera with t5his type of metering including the Pentax "Spotmatic" that has a much wider metering area. The M5 also has this. Hence, those used to the more common averaging metering pattern of thl metering seem to intially fond iot a bit finicky. Years ago in discussing this issue with Leica, I was told modre than 2/3rds of the CLs returned with reported metering issues were in fact within all specs but they as a routine cleaned the circuits, anyway.
The Summicron-C is IMHO about as good a lens as made that I have used and has that distinctive Leica glow. I used to summit slides in competition and at the time the only regular Leica user. There were a couple of really old timers who had for years used Leica rangefinders before moving to an SLR and these guys almost 100% could pick out the Summicron-C 40 and Rokkor-M 90mm lenses as Leicas. Others noted there was some difference but not sure why. At times in shooting assignments were shot the same subject at the same effective fl, lighting, settings and film to do some lens comparisons in these slide competitions.
There is a difference of opinion by Elmar-C 90MM lenses vs the later Rokkor-M version. Some who have both say the Rokkor is noticably better. I have never had the Elmar so can not comment but when I bought the system from someone whom I well respected he had the Rokkor and said it was the better and though it required a different set of filters, the difference was worth the added costs.
I sort of got the CL by mistake. I was not looking for it, just helped a friend in financial need and had a Leica on my short list but not the CL. Since then it has been a most reliable user and though I have had chances to buy other M flanged bodies at decent prices all feel too large and unweildy now. It also killed any desire for an SLR other than my MF.
The other big adjustment that makes the camera seem to difficult or nonintuitive to work with is the speed setting dial and metering movement. The meter moves down when overexposed and vice versa. This coupled with the speed adjustment dial that is reversed of most and on the front can drive an occasional user totally nuts. Reading the manual again helps. After reading it and thinking about the design it is evident it makes more sense in use than the conventional systems but, one needs to practice and not shuffle between cameras to really get used to it and use it as intuitively as with the more conventional systems. I have more problems when using other cameras in this regard as the CL is used maybe as much as 90%
of my 35mm shooting.
If there is a pain with the camera, it involves the issue of the battery. It is inboard where the film loads so, make sure it is up to snuff as replacing it when there is a roll installed presents a problem. It is compounded now with the problem that the 625 is no longer available as it is a mercury battery. One solution is to send it to someone like Sherry in the US or Kindermann in Canada and have the metering adjusted to use a modern battery that can be done, use an air cell or an adaptor such as the C.H.R.I.S. Getting the adjustment is maybe the best idea, as at the same time the camera can be cleaned and speeds checked, etc. Remember any camera of this age possibly can stand some hospital time. 2nd is the adaptor as it does not have the disadvantage of the air cell while not costing as much as having the metering adjusted. The air cell is probably 3rd. Once activated it begins to die pretty quickly whether used or not and usually within couple of months is too gone to have sufficient voltage and current for the metering to work. This is a problem when there is a roll of film in the camera as previously discussed. I use the adaptors as I have meters and another camera that used the 625 and the CL works fine. Metering is dead on with the adaptor when checked against my Weston Ranger and Metrawatt meters that all meter about the same angle as the Leica. The Ranger a couple of years ago was checked and found to be dead on well, within 1/8th stop of the standard it was tested against so, all seems good.
There is a caution as to using some of the collapsing lenses as the backs can hit the metering lever. Leica published a list of these and recommended if they were going to be used, the easiest thing to do would be to wrap around the barrel a length of the 1/4" plastic DYMO tape that then was so common. Other fixed lenses with long backs were also listed.
The rangefinder is shorter than the other M flanged bodies and 90mm is the longest practical focal length. That said I have mounted a Canon SM 135 mm with the LTM to M adaptor on the camera and used the aux viewfinder than comes with the lens with success. Stopping the lens down helps in the rangefinder. It is not shorter than the Voightlander and a black rangerfinders I have and I have used all 3 with success with the CL. I am not as comfortable the front of the camera is sufficiently strong enough to handle the weight of the lens as it is very heavy. The 90mm is fine for almost all use so, not a significant matter. Also, and maybe the weirdest is my use of the Visioflex on the CL. I have a LTM version and with the M adaptor can close it and the shutter with the same finger. I all works as well as on an M or LTM body and just as weird to use. A real Rube Goldberg special by Leica and when I used it and persons were around, an instant way to have an instant crowd with their Nikon and Contax cameras wrapped around their neck.
I am not sure if compared to others I am one of the longest owners of the CL system responding or not but after all these years with mine going as strong as ever since the "overhaul" that in the end was all but not needed other than the contact cleaning, I figure my experience may carry some assurance that it is an excellent camera.
In closing, love the idea of the CL, the controls, the metering, the size, the concept, the reliability and, the associated lenses.
It was used to teach courses, weekly Saturday shoots, daily walkaround, vacations and everything in between with no, none, consideration as to it being supposively fragile. To set things straight. 1) it is no less robust than almost any other camera; no not built to hammer nails like the LTM and M models but easily as robust as most everything else and better than many. Weakest point is the metering is not as dust proof as the M.
The denting seems to really require some serious hitting right at the edge. Mine has been banged about and there has been no additional indenting and I am not particularly careful and with other cameras I have used equally as hard, have incurred more visable damage.
The plastic sprocket issue seems mostly related to not understanding completely how to load the leader, it is opposite of most cameras and if done improperly, stresses the tabs. Reading the manual does matter with the CL.
Some comments about the finicky metering I have found when working with new owners often is more related to not understanding the metering than the mechanism. It is a semi-spot, closer to spot metering and hence with only a minor movement the meter can react quite a bit. The metering spot is about the size of the spot in the center of the viewfinder, think 12 degrees. At the time, it was the only camera with t5his type of metering including the Pentax "Spotmatic" that has a much wider metering area. The M5 also has this. Hence, those used to the more common averaging metering pattern of thl metering seem to intially fond iot a bit finicky. Years ago in discussing this issue with Leica, I was told modre than 2/3rds of the CLs returned with reported metering issues were in fact within all specs but they as a routine cleaned the circuits, anyway.
The Summicron-C is IMHO about as good a lens as made that I have used and has that distinctive Leica glow. I used to summit slides in competition and at the time the only regular Leica user. There were a couple of really old timers who had for years used Leica rangefinders before moving to an SLR and these guys almost 100% could pick out the Summicron-C 40 and Rokkor-M 90mm lenses as Leicas. Others noted there was some difference but not sure why. At times in shooting assignments were shot the same subject at the same effective fl, lighting, settings and film to do some lens comparisons in these slide competitions.
There is a difference of opinion by Elmar-C 90MM lenses vs the later Rokkor-M version. Some who have both say the Rokkor is noticably better. I have never had the Elmar so can not comment but when I bought the system from someone whom I well respected he had the Rokkor and said it was the better and though it required a different set of filters, the difference was worth the added costs.
I sort of got the CL by mistake. I was not looking for it, just helped a friend in financial need and had a Leica on my short list but not the CL. Since then it has been a most reliable user and though I have had chances to buy other M flanged bodies at decent prices all feel too large and unweildy now. It also killed any desire for an SLR other than my MF.
The other big adjustment that makes the camera seem to difficult or nonintuitive to work with is the speed setting dial and metering movement. The meter moves down when overexposed and vice versa. This coupled with the speed adjustment dial that is reversed of most and on the front can drive an occasional user totally nuts. Reading the manual again helps. After reading it and thinking about the design it is evident it makes more sense in use than the conventional systems but, one needs to practice and not shuffle between cameras to really get used to it and use it as intuitively as with the more conventional systems. I have more problems when using other cameras in this regard as the CL is used maybe as much as 90%
of my 35mm shooting.
If there is a pain with the camera, it involves the issue of the battery. It is inboard where the film loads so, make sure it is up to snuff as replacing it when there is a roll installed presents a problem. It is compounded now with the problem that the 625 is no longer available as it is a mercury battery. One solution is to send it to someone like Sherry in the US or Kindermann in Canada and have the metering adjusted to use a modern battery that can be done, use an air cell or an adaptor such as the C.H.R.I.S. Getting the adjustment is maybe the best idea, as at the same time the camera can be cleaned and speeds checked, etc. Remember any camera of this age possibly can stand some hospital time. 2nd is the adaptor as it does not have the disadvantage of the air cell while not costing as much as having the metering adjusted. The air cell is probably 3rd. Once activated it begins to die pretty quickly whether used or not and usually within couple of months is too gone to have sufficient voltage and current for the metering to work. This is a problem when there is a roll of film in the camera as previously discussed. I use the adaptors as I have meters and another camera that used the 625 and the CL works fine. Metering is dead on with the adaptor when checked against my Weston Ranger and Metrawatt meters that all meter about the same angle as the Leica. The Ranger a couple of years ago was checked and found to be dead on well, within 1/8th stop of the standard it was tested against so, all seems good.
There is a caution as to using some of the collapsing lenses as the backs can hit the metering lever. Leica published a list of these and recommended if they were going to be used, the easiest thing to do would be to wrap around the barrel a length of the 1/4" plastic DYMO tape that then was so common. Other fixed lenses with long backs were also listed.
The rangefinder is shorter than the other M flanged bodies and 90mm is the longest practical focal length. That said I have mounted a Canon SM 135 mm with the LTM to M adaptor on the camera and used the aux viewfinder than comes with the lens with success. Stopping the lens down helps in the rangefinder. It is not shorter than the Voightlander and a black rangerfinders I have and I have used all 3 with success with the CL. I am not as comfortable the front of the camera is sufficiently strong enough to handle the weight of the lens as it is very heavy. The 90mm is fine for almost all use so, not a significant matter. Also, and maybe the weirdest is my use of the Visioflex on the CL. I have a LTM version and with the M adaptor can close it and the shutter with the same finger. I all works as well as on an M or LTM body and just as weird to use. A real Rube Goldberg special by Leica and when I used it and persons were around, an instant way to have an instant crowd with their Nikon and Contax cameras wrapped around their neck.
I am not sure if compared to others I am one of the longest owners of the CL system responding or not but after all these years with mine going as strong as ever since the "overhaul" that in the end was all but not needed other than the contact cleaning, I figure my experience may carry some assurance that it is an excellent camera.
In closing, love the idea of the CL, the controls, the metering, the size, the concept, the reliability and, the associated lenses.
mani
Well-known
The truly awesome CL
The truly awesome CL
I genuinely don't understand a lot of the complaints. I've been very reluctantly considering whether to sell my CL (for non-photographic reasons), and clicked on this thread expecting a chorus of enthusiastic posts: it's such a great - almost cult - camera I thought everyone loved it!
’Odd shutter noise?’ My CL makes an almost inaudible ’snick’ when I take a picture.
’Dents easily if you drop it?’ I'd say a rangefinder camera has more problems than just a dent if you go around dropping it. For that matter, I can definitely say I've never, ever dropped a camera my entire life.
I'm not really sure how to respond to ’inconvenient’ - especially when this vague and subjective term comes without any explanation? There are a couple of things that are mildly irritating to me about the CL: the fact the back needs to be taken off to change the metering battery (so it can't be done mid-roll), and (this really is just a personal thing) I always like the reassurance of seeing the film visibly winding forwards when I cock the shutter and the fact you have to turn the CL upside down to double-check that the rewinder is rotating... well I'm clutching at straws really to find fault and appear unbiased.
In my view, the only way to criticize the CL is by actually comparing it directly with a Leica M: the viewfinder isn't as crystal clear as a perfect M6, M7 or MP - but then again, it’s very much better than any Canon P or Canon 7 I've tried. And naturally it's not built like an M6 either, but it's always felt really solid and heftily compact in my hands.
I've found it to be a wonderful and totally reliable camera, and the 40mm Summicron lens that came with mine has transformed my photography: it convinced me to abandon the vast majority of fast lenses (mostly Summilux 35s and 50s) of which I was formerly so enamored and settle on a trio of Summicrons (35, 40 and 50) for pretty much all my 35mm photography. Amazingly sharp subject and pleasing out-of-focus bokeh, and a great focal length, especially for the sort of ’environmental portrait' type images that are 95% of what I do these days.
In a way all the negativity in the thread has made me think twice about selling - I'd hate the camera to go to someone who just wanted to find fault with it.
The truly awesome CL
I genuinely don't understand a lot of the complaints. I've been very reluctantly considering whether to sell my CL (for non-photographic reasons), and clicked on this thread expecting a chorus of enthusiastic posts: it's such a great - almost cult - camera I thought everyone loved it!
’Odd shutter noise?’ My CL makes an almost inaudible ’snick’ when I take a picture.
’Dents easily if you drop it?’ I'd say a rangefinder camera has more problems than just a dent if you go around dropping it. For that matter, I can definitely say I've never, ever dropped a camera my entire life.
I'm not really sure how to respond to ’inconvenient’ - especially when this vague and subjective term comes without any explanation? There are a couple of things that are mildly irritating to me about the CL: the fact the back needs to be taken off to change the metering battery (so it can't be done mid-roll), and (this really is just a personal thing) I always like the reassurance of seeing the film visibly winding forwards when I cock the shutter and the fact you have to turn the CL upside down to double-check that the rewinder is rotating... well I'm clutching at straws really to find fault and appear unbiased.
In my view, the only way to criticize the CL is by actually comparing it directly with a Leica M: the viewfinder isn't as crystal clear as a perfect M6, M7 or MP - but then again, it’s very much better than any Canon P or Canon 7 I've tried. And naturally it's not built like an M6 either, but it's always felt really solid and heftily compact in my hands.
I've found it to be a wonderful and totally reliable camera, and the 40mm Summicron lens that came with mine has transformed my photography: it convinced me to abandon the vast majority of fast lenses (mostly Summilux 35s and 50s) of which I was formerly so enamored and settle on a trio of Summicrons (35, 40 and 50) for pretty much all my 35mm photography. Amazingly sharp subject and pleasing out-of-focus bokeh, and a great focal length, especially for the sort of ’environmental portrait' type images that are 95% of what I do these days.
In a way all the negativity in the thread has made me think twice about selling - I'd hate the camera to go to someone who just wanted to find fault with it.