Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/04/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]FortunkoC@aol.com wrote: >I do not own a CLE, but have heard good things about it. It is probably what >the CL2 should have been! Is it as strongly built as the Leica? I do You living in a time warp? :-) The CL2 isn't out yet! Nobody but Leica knows what it's going to be like. > good vibes about a Minolta, but may be I am in error. Anyway, if the CLE is > so good, why are they no longer in production? I have never seen one. They are not in production because they didn't sell. People just don't get the rangefinder concept (for another reason). The CLE had some problems. Like it's not nearly as rugged as the M6. It's built like most good Japanese cameras, not as good as Leica. You also lose the meter in manual mode. Advantage of aperture preferred metering. The TTL flash was supposed to be very good. And the lenses were slow compared to Leica lenses. Like F/4? Give me a break. Rangefinder's forte is fast lenses. (Which is why I'll never own a Mamiya 6 or 7.) And the focuing base is shorter than M camreas, thus fast lenses can't be focused as accurately. I knew a guy in journalism school (who went to a paper in Tulsa) who used one and loved it. So with all its problems, there isn't much competition for that price range and capabilties. At least until the CL2 shows up. The G1 sure didn't give the M6 a run. -- Eric Welch Grants Pass, OR