gliderbee
Well-known
Apparently, you assume he's asking about the Hexar AF; I, OTOH, assumed he was asking about the Hexar RF, and that's a very different animal (among others the fastest top shutter speed of all).
Stefan.
To CL or not to CL...
- Thread starter jaimiepeeters
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 36
- Views 4K
Apparently, you assume he's asking about the Hexar AF; I, OTOH, assumed he was asking about the Hexar RF, and that's a very different animal (among others the fastest top shutter speed of all).
Stefan.
Meakin
Established
Correct - figured he was referring to my second post, and I am also not sure that one could find a Hexar RF body + lens within his budget.
If so - another good choice.
/Meakin
jaimiepeeters
Well-known
after reading everything and looking up all possible information, I decided to go for the Konica Hexar AF... and I can get it tomorrow for a friendly 250€ (black version) in mint condition.
Biggles
My cup runneth amok.
A Hexar AF? Probably a good move, in some ways. I used CLs exclusively for street from 2005 to just before Xmas, and while the size and performance and unscariness of them never gave me regrets, the reliability has been just horrid. I've been through six of them, and have only one working example left. Had one photo vacation completely ruined by one that decided to stop advancing film. Had another's meter die the day I unpacked it to begin a 7-day visit to New York. Fewer servicepersons are interested in fixing them every year, and the waits can be long, for major problems.
Others have gotten years of trouble-free use out of CLs, and that's fine. I'm just not one of them.
I'm buying Zeiss Ikon ZMs, now. They're like big CLs with autoexposure, not too heavy, either, and they're supported by an active parts and service pipeline. When my last CL finally sh*ts the bed, it'll be replaced by a second ZI the same week.
Others have gotten years of trouble-free use out of CLs, and that's fine. I'm just not one of them.
I'm buying Zeiss Ikon ZMs, now. They're like big CLs with autoexposure, not too heavy, either, and they're supported by an active parts and service pipeline. When my last CL finally sh*ts the bed, it'll be replaced by a second ZI the same week.
gliderbee
Well-known
250 € for one in mint condition is a fine deal.
It might be a good idea to ask the seller if "silent mode" (one of the unique features of the Hexar AF) is enabled. I think most models of the Hexar AF can have it enabled by a sequence of keypresses that can be found on the internet; if you don't find it, let us know. I know I have it stored away somewhere.
Just writing this answer makes me reaching for my Hexar AF again, just to hear it wizz once more 😛
Stefan.
Dave Jenkins
Loose Canon
- Local time
- 12:02 PM
- Joined
- May 21, 2010
- Messages
- 661
YMMV, of course, but for myself I consider the CL to be one of the most inconvenient to use cameras I've ever owned.
vrgard
Well-known
Dave, I in no way mean to challenge your personal experience particularly since we all have different perspectives and experiences with things. But simply for the benefit of other possible users of this camera, I would like to state that my experience is apparently not the same as yours. I find the CL to be more convenient in some respects than using most regular M cameras. Not only do I find it convenient to be able to see one's selected shutter speed shown in the viewfinder but I also like the shutter speed dial arrangement/location which more easily allows changing the shutter speed using one's index finger while continuing to look through the viewfinder. Perhaps you were thinking of other aspects with which I might agree but otherwise, again, find the CL to be a very nice camera to use.
-Randy
Dave Jenkins
Loose Canon
- Local time
- 12:02 PM
- Joined
- May 21, 2010
- Messages
- 661
As I said up front, Randy, YMMV.🙂
tapesonthefloor
Well-known
If I had found this thread sooner, I would have recommended one of two cheaper street machines that I've had recent experience with.
The first would have been the Minolta CLE with its 40mm lens. I borrowed this combo for a few weeks once.
The second would've been the Minolta Hexar AF. I bought one of these a few months ago and it has hardly left my hand since.
Here are some shots.
Anyway, I'm late to the thread so there's no point recommending this camera, but I highly recommend this camera. The AF is as quick as any, and focuses in complete darkness by infrared. This will be slightly slower in some circumstances than a Leica M, but once you're used to the camera's pace you won't even notice a problem. You'll also get used to the 1/250s shutter speed. It's not a handicap.
This link contains some pretty good information on the camera's use, and there's a lengthy photo.net thread somewhere that compiles all the hacky programming that can open up hidden modes if they aren't already available.
I've been through all this very recently, so feel free to PM me if you have any questions about this beast. Best of luck, and share your shots with us!
raytoei@gmail.com
Veteran
besides price which is always a consideration, there are other points as well:
a. framelines are different. The CL has a permanent 40mm shown, regardless of whether u use the 50mm or 90mm (in addition to the respective framelines). To most, this is okay, I find it very irritating.
b. There are only 3 framelines, 40, 50 and 90mm. The popular 35mm frameline does not exist but the 40mm lens is quite excellent, whether it is the Summicron-C or the M-Rokker. Portraits lens on the CL would be the 90mm unless attach an external viewfinder.
c. The size is small, but so is the finder magnification of 0.6, compared to the M4-P's 0.72x.
d. The sound of the shutter isn't as silky smooth as compared to the other Ms. Isn't really an issue but if you have tried the Leica M-bodies, the difference is very real.
e. The exposure meter will die eventually. The repairs are costly and usually not worth the $$$. I usually use Sunny-16 or I use an handheld meter.
Having spelt out the issues, I will say that I like the CL very much. It works best with the 40mm or with an ultrawide lens like the Cosina Voigtlander 15/4.5 or the 25/4 lens with an external viewfinder. I also use the Collapsible 50/f1.9 canon lens on the CL with no problems too.
The Leica CL is one of those bodies where I have bought and sold about four times, i currently own 2, both bought 2nd hand for under 300 usd each. (the 2nd body was 500 usd with the 40mm lens thrown in).
raytoei
a. framelines are different. The CL has a permanent 40mm shown, regardless of whether u use the 50mm or 90mm (in addition to the respective framelines). To most, this is okay, I find it very irritating.
b. There are only 3 framelines, 40, 50 and 90mm. The popular 35mm frameline does not exist but the 40mm lens is quite excellent, whether it is the Summicron-C or the M-Rokker. Portraits lens on the CL would be the 90mm unless attach an external viewfinder.
c. The size is small, but so is the finder magnification of 0.6, compared to the M4-P's 0.72x.
d. The sound of the shutter isn't as silky smooth as compared to the other Ms. Isn't really an issue but if you have tried the Leica M-bodies, the difference is very real.
e. The exposure meter will die eventually. The repairs are costly and usually not worth the $$$. I usually use Sunny-16 or I use an handheld meter.
Having spelt out the issues, I will say that I like the CL very much. It works best with the 40mm or with an ultrawide lens like the Cosina Voigtlander 15/4.5 or the 25/4 lens with an external viewfinder. I also use the Collapsible 50/f1.9 canon lens on the CL with no problems too.
The Leica CL is one of those bodies where I have bought and sold about four times, i currently own 2, both bought 2nd hand for under 300 usd each. (the 2nd body was 500 usd with the 40mm lens thrown in).
raytoei
vrgard
Well-known
canetsbe
Well-known
the hexar AF might be a good choice for you, really. small and (relatively) cheap, and if you start to dig the rangefinder-ish shooting you can always opt to step up to a CL and M lens.
Meakin
Established
@jaimiepeeters
IMHO A good choice in your situation - For the life of me, I can't remember anybody regretting getting one unless they couldn't live with the 35mm focal length. I do remember many regretting selling one later and turning around to purchase one again.
As others have mentioned - that price seems fair, and if you feel the need you can always look at the others some time in the future (Hexar AF's seem to hold there value as well)
Again congrats, now go out and shoot and please post some images here on RFF if you feel for it.
Cheers,
/Meakin
IMHO A good choice in your situation - For the life of me, I can't remember anybody regretting getting one unless they couldn't live with the 35mm focal length. I do remember many regretting selling one later and turning around to purchase one again.
As others have mentioned - that price seems fair, and if you feel the need you can always look at the others some time in the future (Hexar AF's seem to hold there value as well)
Again congrats, now go out and shoot and please post some images here on RFF if you feel for it.
Cheers,
/Meakin
jaimiepeeters
Well-known
I would love to post my results here. But am I still a valid member of the range finder community, since the Hexar is not a Rangefinder.. 😱
Meakin
Established
Brian Levy
Established
Sorry I did not read this earlier. I've had my CL for 20+ years and had it serviced for a sticky meter when I got it. SInce that serive it has been a reliable traveling companion in heat and cold, sun, rain and snow and NEVER left me haning nor delivered other than 1st rate results. No it is not a hammer like a Leica M body nor a Asahi S1a but it will take the same level of abuse as pretty much anything else. I'll never understand why persons love to dice the camera as if it were delicate yet fawn over cameras less robust.
The kit with the 40 and 90 makes for a nice street shooter. A 28 using the complete viewfinder is also a nice addition. Not as quiet as the M2, M3 or M4 bodies but from a foot or so no one will notice so knocking the shutter noise is also a little odd as it is quieter than almost anything I've run into including leaf shutters and the likes of the Rolleiflex that is so loved for street photography.
The CL with its 40mm can slip into many coat pockets, though not as small as say a Rollei 35. I use the Leica shoulder bag that holds the camera, 40 and 90mm lenses as can hold a small flash and extra film. The complete kit weighs no more then something like the M6 with the Summicron 50; a plus. It makes the M 1 lens kit feel like a brick after awhile.
The CL is about the size of the LTM cameras and when in use is not nearly as noticable as the M seies body. Plus it looks like so many of the later auto something cameras from makers that it is less likely to capture the attention of those who like to collect other persons things without paying for them.
I'm not knocking other makes or moels but felt I needed to come to the defense of what appears to be a very unfair attack on it. As for the CLE, I agree it is a reasonable alternative but sadly these are seemingly at their end of electronics life and repair parts far less plentiful than for the CL. Mechanically, the CL is not too dissimilar to some of the Minolta slrs from the same period so there are donor units available for a number of parts if your repair person can not find the needed CL parts. Also, the CL was the most produced Leica camera by far so donor units are available and selling for quite reasonable prices. No different than any other camera make or model for most of the popular vintage cameras from Nikon, Canon and so on.
The kit with the 40 and 90 makes for a nice street shooter. A 28 using the complete viewfinder is also a nice addition. Not as quiet as the M2, M3 or M4 bodies but from a foot or so no one will notice so knocking the shutter noise is also a little odd as it is quieter than almost anything I've run into including leaf shutters and the likes of the Rolleiflex that is so loved for street photography.
The CL with its 40mm can slip into many coat pockets, though not as small as say a Rollei 35. I use the Leica shoulder bag that holds the camera, 40 and 90mm lenses as can hold a small flash and extra film. The complete kit weighs no more then something like the M6 with the Summicron 50; a plus. It makes the M 1 lens kit feel like a brick after awhile.
The CL is about the size of the LTM cameras and when in use is not nearly as noticable as the M seies body. Plus it looks like so many of the later auto something cameras from makers that it is less likely to capture the attention of those who like to collect other persons things without paying for them.
I'm not knocking other makes or moels but felt I needed to come to the defense of what appears to be a very unfair attack on it. As for the CLE, I agree it is a reasonable alternative but sadly these are seemingly at their end of electronics life and repair parts far less plentiful than for the CL. Mechanically, the CL is not too dissimilar to some of the Minolta slrs from the same period so there are donor units available for a number of parts if your repair person can not find the needed CL parts. Also, the CL was the most produced Leica camera by far so donor units are available and selling for quite reasonable prices. No different than any other camera make or model for most of the popular vintage cameras from Nikon, Canon and so on.
Creagerj
Incidental Artist
Do yourself a favor and buy an M2. The CL is OK, but that's about it. The finder is nowhere near as nice and the build quality is inferior. It has its place as a light weight carry around. I use mine as a backup body since it is small and light. An M2 is a life long investment, a CL not so much.
