Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/01/07
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Andras Iklody-Szabo, Many thanks for the backgrounder on the CL & CLE. I've never had any problem with the CL, other than its over-precision -- which Leitz remedied quickly, The semaphore element jammed because it had been adjusted too tightly. That done the CL works like a charm. It's mechanically independent; it shares that with the M's. I have no doubt that Solms will produce a CL2 based on both the CL and CLE. I never had illusions that the CL/CLE design would replace the M Leicas. And I never felt that the M Leica should go electronic to the degree that the CLE did. The CL is more innovative that the CLE in physical design. But it took getting used to. The M3 is still my benchmark for all Leicas and all 35mm optics. I have no doubt that the new M6 comes even closer to the M3. So Solms has got it together in that department. It knows where it's going. I can't speak for the R8. For some reason I was never drawn to Leica reflexes. I standardized on Nikons, and they've never disappointed me. Certain of their lenses have come close to Leica performance. Oddly enough, the Nikon 43~86mm zoom is such a lens. I have no idea how Nikon did that. Probably neither do they. It's one of those great vintages. The Minox GT, the fast pocket Leica, goes its own way. Which is my way. Bob