Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/04/19
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 12:12 AM 4/20/96 -0600, you wrote: >I don't know first hand about the CL, but have heard that it, too, is a fine >camera. So, let us know where you heard this rumor about the M5 being fragile? All the pros I know who have used the CL will tell you the metering arm breaks very easily, and since it's essentially the same mechanism as in the M5, that translates (not to mention M5 owners complaining) to M5 fragility. I hear it on Compuserve, and on Genie (when I used to be there) and other places. I'm not really knocking the M5. I've used them too in journalism school. And there are some features I like on it, like the shutter speed dial, the ability to hang the camera sidways on the strap, and the sensitivity of the meter, and the additional metering information in the viewfinder. BUT, compared to the M6, those things aren't worth it when considering a new camera. The M6 is a much better camera for another reason you mention. M5s are becoming collectibles. Maybe if we bad-mouth them more they won't appreciate so much? <g> And to say it has a spot meter os stretching it a bit? No Leica camera has ever had a true spot meter. Selective metering is a better description. And the M6 is close enough. Eric Welch Grants Pass Daily Courier