What to choose? CL or R

[Chuck A]

Hi All,

This is my first post here. I have used rangefinders off and on for 30 years, but I am currently without a rangefinder and miss it desperately. (I should have never sold that M2). I am ready to get another and am overwhelmed by the choices. While I have mainly switched to digital and do like it, I find myself shooting more and more film. Mostly B&W. I have considered the R-D1 but I am not impressed with it. It is alo too expensive at this time. I will wait until a later example and I win the lottery to buy one. I was recently using a Pan LC1 but the lack of a RAW buffer, the EVF and the AF lag was driving me nuts so I sold it. I did take some nice shots with it though.

I am on a moderate budget for this purchase and I am leaning toward the L/M CL/CLE or the Bessa R line. I used a CL many years ago and have always been fascinated by it. Is there anything about the CL/CLE to look out for when buying used? I will probably stick with a 40mm lens for now and was wondering if the new 40mm f/1.4 Nokton will work on the CL? In the R line a 35mm or 50mm will get me started unless I get the R3a and can use a 40mm.

It has been a looong time since I have seen a CL and I have no way of seeing these cameras together to compare them. How do the viewfinders compare in brightness? The CL/CLE has the advantage in size and weight but is its age going to be a problem? The R series are a newer design and is that an advantage? The R seems to get lots of praise on these forums and that is a real plus for it. This would be a user camera, I don't collect and I carry a camera with me always.

Anyway, any help would be most appreciated. Look at my gallery to get some idea of how I use a rangefinder. I just posted a few for examples.

 

[RayPA]

I don't know the CL. I have the CLE and the R2. I'm not sure which I like better. Each has its pluses and minuses. They are both a blast to shoot with. Lately, however, I've been leaning toward the CLE. I like that it is small and quiet(er). Both have great viewfinders. I think you are on the right track with your choices and the price range. I think the R is going to be cheaper. I think the CLE will run you about $500-$600 with a lens, while CameraQuest has the R packaged with a lens for $425. The R2 is over $500 for the body alone, IIRC. If you can get a CLE for a decent price, it gets my vote. I can't see where you can make a wrong decision, however. 🙂

 

[Chuck A]

I think the R is going to be cheaper. I think the CLE will run you about $500-$600 with a lens, while CameraQuest has the R packaged with a lens for $425.

The R price is very enticing. Thanks for the info, it is nice to hear from someone who has both. BTW, how much quieter is the CLE shutter?

 

[einolu]

I think there is an R being sold with a 35mm Color Skopar for $350 in the classified. Always check the classifies over here, there are some great deals but you have to be fast, heh.

as for you choice, LTM is much cheaper to get into than M mount, or do you have some M lenses left over from your M2?

 

[Huck Finn]

Hi All,

I will probably stick with a 40mm lens for now and was wondering if the new 40mm f/1.4 Nokton will work on the CL? In the R line a 35mm or 50mm will get me started unless I get the R3a and can use a 40mm.

Chuck, since you're interested in a 40 mm lens, you might also want to consider the Rollei 35 RF, essentially a Bessa R2, but with closer minimum focus distance & with 40/50/80 frame lines. In my experience, it is much more usable with a 40 mm lens than the R3A.

If you're not familiar with Stephen Gandy's website, check it at www.cameraquest.com & consult the "Leica M User's Buyer's Guide" under "Classic Camera Profiles" for what to look for when buying a Leica CL.

 

[RayPA]

...BTW, how much quieter is the CLE shutter?

I just did a quick test, and I was surprised how close they actually are! The sounds are different, though, which is maybe why I preceive the R2 as louder. The R2 is a more metallic and crunchier, while the CLE is more like a thud (if that makes sense). I would say the CLE is a little quieter, and definitely a more pleasing sound. Stephen Gandy at CameraQuest offers some good comparisons on the Bessa models. I think he talks about the sound of the shutters as well. The R may even be a little louder than the R2, because of the plastic body.

 

[Chuck A]

A 40mm lens is not a must. I just figured that because the CL takes it I might want to try the new 40mm Nokton on a CL/CLE. I will have to look at the Rollei. I didn't give it much thought.

I only had a 50mm summicron with my M2 and I sold it with it. Why I sold it is a mystery to me. How dumb can you get. If I got the Bessa R the SM lenses shouldn't be a problem. I don't change lenses that often in mid stream. I usually put one lens on and go from there. A 50 or 35 would be fine on that camera.

 

[einolu]

I should be getting my R by next week, I can let you know how cool it is 😀

 

[RML]

I have both the CL and the R. I use both side by side. The R mostly with my Jupiter-8, the CL with either the Rokkor 40 or the CV 25/4. Both have their specific uses and advantages. The R is my main shooter, especially when I don't worry much about the metalic shutter noise. The CL I usually for a bit more inauspicious photography, hipshots or when I want to travel very light. I prefer neither, loving to use both.

 

[Little Prince]

I recently bought a CLE and I guess my lines of reasoning were quite similar to yours. I don't have/ have never had an R or CL. From my research, it seemed to me that the CLE was in almost all ways preferable to the CL. The one exception being lack of metering in the manual mode. Otherwise you get AE and longer rangefinder baselength. The CL seems to have a poor spec in that area. If you want to use longer lenses, it might give you trouble. Besides there have been reliability concerns raised about both the CL and CLE by many people. Disregarding all that I did get a CLE. Now I have a problem with the film advance stuck and the shutter not firing (one is related to the other). Therefore, I would urge you to get one from a place with that guarantees their equipment for a few months or get one that is as close to new in condition as possible.

In the short space that I handled the CLE (read a week) and the single roll I shot, I have already taken a strong liking to the camera. My guess is that if you like it, you will really like it.

 

[phototone]

Probably an R2a or an R3a is a more economical choice, plus, if you purchase new, you get a warranty. You also get a camera with no wear on it, and the standard Copal Electronic shutter, which is used in millions of cameras, and with the new R2a, and R3a you can get auto exposure if you choose to use it. The CL is a match-needle camera only, is quieter, due to having a cloth focal plane shutter, and is very old now, and not built to the same high mechanical standards as the Leica "M" cameras, although it is built well. It was built to be sold at lower end cost, you know than the "M" cameras.

At the time of the CL introduction, I believe Leica claimed that there were issues with using some "M" mount lenses. Don't know if this was resolved. Probably just hype.

You are not thinking about the older Bessa R, are you? You know it is a LTM camera? The R2, and the Roelli are "M" mount, as well as the new R2a and R3a. The 40mm f/1.4 Nokton will not fit on a Bessa R, as the 40mm Nokton is a fixed "M" mount lens. The 50mm Nokton is a LTM mount, wich is used with an "M" mount adaptor on "M" mount cameras.

 

[nwcanonman]

Quote - "You are not thinking about the older Bessa R, are you? You know it is a LTM camera?"
..............................
You make that sounds like a liability. I love my Bessa R, it's low price with great features, and it's ability to use inexpensive sharp FSU lenses. Hoorah for the R.
~ ; - )

 

[Roman]

On the other hand, with an adapter, all those screwmount lenses can be used on an M-bayonet mount camera, but not the other way round...

Roman

 

[John Robertson]

I have Leica CL and Bessa R2, the trouble with the CL is now their age, the youngest are 30+ years old. The meter on mine is now a bit tempermental and also remember they use a now obsolete battery. Mine is converted to LR44 batteries.
Personally I find that the Bessa R2 R/F and V/F are brighter and easier to use. The meter is more accurate. OK the Leica is quieter, but it is also a bit more fiddly to load. I haven't used the CLE that might be better than a CL. The 40mm Summicron is excellent as is the 90 Elmarit -C. Leica will still service the CL if you have that sort of bank balance!!!

 

[Chuck A]

Age is probably my biggest concern with the CL/CLE. I am reading some stories of problems and while I like the size of the CL, this is causing me to lean toward the Bessas. The R series can be gotten new with a warranty and that is a real plus for them. Like I said before, I don't have a problem using LSM lenses so I am seriously considering the R.

Well, this leads me to another question. If I decide on the R series, are the R2a and R3a worth spending the extra cash on. The are over double the price of the R. I have read all of the specs and I know the differences but what are your opinions on this.

 

[phototone]

Quote - "You are not thinking about the older Bessa R, are you? You know it is a LTM camera?"
..............................
You make that sounds like a liability. I love my Bessa R, it's low price with great features, and it's ability to use inexpensive sharp FSU lenses. Hoorah for the R.
~ ; - )

Well, I have a Bessa R also, so I was not trying to make out like a Bessa R LTM camera was a liability, but It is more appropriate to compare an "M" mount camera to an "M" mount camera, specifically if the CV Nokton 40mm is a lens considered, since it is a fixed "M" mount lens, and bears direct comparison to the Summicron 40mm f/2. I have quite a few LTM cameras, as well as "M" cameras, each have their strong points. To sum up, if you purchase an "M" mount camera you are not giving up any LTM lens, as all are useable (except for a rare few) with reasonably priced adaptors. If you purchase a LTM mount camera, then you are giving up the ability to use "M" mount lenses. There seems to be a trend in going towards "M" mount for all brands now. I think the Bessa LTM cameras are now discontinued, due to the Copal mechanical shutter being discontinued. What is offered for sale now is existing stock.

 

[aizan]

Assuming the meter isn't broken, a CL should be just as reliable as a Bessa. And while an M-mount isn't absolutely necessary, it's nice to keep your options open. You never know what lenses might come your way. I'd definitely go for an R2/2a/3a over the R.

 

[Huck Finn]

Chuck, one item you don't normally find in the specs of the Bessa R & R2 is the close focus distance, which is 0.9 meters (about 3 feet). This was improved for the Rollei 35 RF, the R2A, & the R3A to the more standard 0.7 m (about 27 inches). Most - if not all - M-mount lenses & many/most LTM lenses have a minimum focus distance of 0.7 m, which means that they can't be used to their full capability in this regard on the Bessa R.

The film advance mechanism was improved for the R2/3A with the addition of ball bearings to make for a smoother, more reliable mechanism.

Add to these the all-metal body, M-mount, & AE, and yes, it would be worth it to me.

Huck

 

[John Robertson]

I loved my Bessa R, the reason I replaced it with the R2 was simply to give me more options on lens choice, one thing I can use my CL lenses on it. Now I've made the change the R2 just feels that bit more solid, though I wasn't sure about the green body colour at first its grown on me!! I've not seen an R2/3a yet so I cant judge them

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Chuck: something to consider...

The shop I get my gear from has a Leica CL and the 40mm Summicron-C for $695 in very good condition (with carrying pouch, btw). I've looked at it (first time ever I've seen a CL) and it's not a bad camera at all. It is compact; I was surprised how small it was; it's not tiny, but it is small, and definitively lighter than, say, the M6.

A used R4 and a 50mm Summicron 3-cam, both in good condition would be about $750-800.

They both have their pros and cons. The CL has, as far as I know, the same kind of metering design as the M5. You may want to find the mercury batteries for the CL or the "adaptor" contraption that can be had for about $30-50 I think (others know exactly what and where); the R4 takes two LR-44 or one 1/N3? (forgot exact type) readily-available batteries. An outweighing concern with the R4: must check the light seal in the back.