Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/09/30
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 07:09 30/09/96 +0100, you wrote: > >These various messages about the CL have made me curious. I've never >handled one so I obviously don't know what i'm missing, but so far I >don't really understand the attraction. They won't allow collapsible >lenses to be collapsed into the body, so I assume, perhaps wrongly?- >that they are no more pocketable than an M with a collapsible lens on >it. Or are they? I can see that with a 35 Summicron it would be no >deeper than the same lens mounted on an M6, which is about the same >depth as it is with a collapsible 50mm on it. Are they really tiny in >comparison to an M? Can anybody explain to me what the attraction is? >-- >joe b. > The M5 and CL(not Minolta CLE) has an arm which holds the light sensor. This arm swings out of the way, when the shutter is tripped. Since it sits between the shutter and the lens mount, a collapsable lens will hit it if collapsed. Leica recommended putting dymo tape around the lenses, if used on the CL or M5. THe flange to film plane distance is the same as the M series and you can use most M lenses and screw mounts with falnge adaptors. The size of the camera is I feel substantailly smaller than the M series (about the same size as the G-1) and with the 40mm in the er case, I carry mine in my coat jacket pocket or computer briefcase most of the time. One advantage, I have found, is that when I use it, I don't tend to draw onlookers to me who want to relate their experiences with Leicas or start asking photo questions (there is a time and place for everything). I do get approached by other Leica users who recognize the camera. To others, I think, it looks like a p&s. I have medium sized hands and the body feels better to me than the M series, especially the M5; more akin to the screw mount bodies, I think. Brian Levy, J.D. Toronto, Ont. dlevy@worldy.com