[Leica] CL & M5...Surely You Jest!

[jls at runbox.com (Jeffery Smith)]

I thought that it was on a par with a Konica Auto-S3 (but probably a tad
better in construction). Being left-eyed eliminated it for me. I
couldn't meter the thing while using the viewfinder. Took good pics,
though.

Jeffery Smith
New Orleans, LA
http://www.400tx.com




-----Original Message-----
From: lug-bounces+jls=runbox.com@leica-users.org
[mailto:lug-bounces+jls=runbox.com@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of Buzz
Hausner
Sent: Monday, May 30, 2005 2:46 PM
To: 'Leica Users Group'
Subject: [Leica] CL & M5...Surely You Jest!


I must demur.  I bought a new Leica CL in 1974 and tried my very best to
love it.  For many reasons one can find in the archives, I ended up
hating it.  It must be said, however, that the build of the CL was not
even remotely close to the build of M series Leicas.  The CL was prone
to collect dust and moisture on the interior because it was not well
sealed.  The shutter speed dial was an exceptionally bad design and was
poorly placed.  Generally, the CL just isn't built like a Leica and,
while it does resemble the M5 in concept, it isn't remotely in the same
league.

        Buzz Hausner

-----Original Message-----
From: lug-bounces+buzz.hausner=verizon.net@leica-users.org
[mailto:lug-bounces+buzz.hausner=verizon.net@leica-users.org] On Behalf
Of Afterswift@aol.com
Sent: Monday, May 30, 2005 3:20 PM
To: lug@leica-users.org
Subject: [Leica] Leica CL vs CLE


Minolta probably made both cameras; but the level of precision in the CL
is 
remarkably high. Leitz distributed the CL. Minolta marketed the CLE.
IMHO 
they're different designs and the CL belongs to the M5 generation.
Nothing to do 
with the Minolta CLE. 

Bob     


_______________________________________________
Leica Users Group.
See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information



_______________________________________________
Leica Users Group.
See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information