Re: CL AND CLE questions.

[Stephen Gandy <cameras@jetlink.net>]

John Irvin Buford wrote:
> 
> I have a couple of questions about the CL and CLE cameras.
> I have heard differing opinions about exactly where the CL's were made.
> I have one that is marked Made in Wetzler, but I've been told that they
> were all made in Japan.  Which is true.
> 

CL bodies  were marked either Leitz Wetzler, Leitz Minolta, or Minolta. 
ALL were made in Japan by Minolta.


> My other questions involve the Minolta CLE.  I have the 28F2.8
> Minolta in Leica bayonet mount, I was wondering if anyone had had any
> experience with this lens. 

A good, but not great lens. the late 28 Elmarit is better, but the
Rokkor is still a bargain for the price.  For some reason, this
particular lens has a strong tendency to 
lose edge black at the edges of the elements, resulting in little white
spots as you look through the lens.   

 The other question had to do with the flash
> exposure using the CLE.  Is it trully TTL or does it just set the shutter
> speed and f-stop. 

The Flash is true TTL off the film plane.  You set the Aperture, the
little flash does its best to meet your demands.

 
The following compares CL and CLE features from a previous post:


The CLE best features are: 
        
        1) The only M Mount camera to date which offers Aperture
priority
		exposure 
        2) the only M Mount camera to date which offers TTL flash with M
lenses
                Note that the CLE's flash is rather small.  The larger
Minolta
                TTL flashes would probably work fine on the CLE, but I
have not
                had this confirmed by Minolta.
        3) the BEST and largest built in 28 mm finder 
                (yes, much better and easier to see than the M4P/M6)
        4) the best RF/VF system in any 35, excepting the M series
        5) to date one of only four cameras (M5,CL,CLE,M6) which offers
TTL
        6) the second smallest size of any M mount camera (after the CL)
        7) an excellent metering system reading off the shutter curtain
or film
		plane
        8) a set of three great multicoated lenses, although the 28 is
not as
		good as the 28 Elmarit
        9) framelines for the 28/40/90
        10) the only M mount camera which has a swing open back
        11) the only M mount camera with the accuracy of an electronic
shutter

The CLE's chief problems are
        1) no meter when the camera is set on manual 
        2) dead batteries mean a dead camera
        3) an awkwardly placed on/off switch.  a switch placed around
the 
                shutter speed dial or release would have been much
better.

The CL's better features include: 
        1) smallest and lightest M mount camera
        2) to date one of only four cameras (M5,CL,CLE,M6) which offers
TTL
        3) a working shutter even if the batteries die
        4) a good, but not great, RF/VF
        5) framelines for the 40/50/90

The CL's main problem seems to be its reliability, although there are
definitely conflicting reports.   I have never had any trouble with the
shutter or metering, but lots of people have.   I know from a former
Leica tech that the camera when through six internal design changes in
its short life.  The various editions may well account for the different
reliability reports.

CL/CLE/M Lenses & Compatibility

CL Lenses were made with a different type of focusing cam than
traditional Leica M Lenses.   Traditional lenses have a cam which moves
PARALLEL to the film plane as it moves back and forth from its near and
far focusing distances.   CL lenses, in contrast, have a slanted cam
which mates with the RF follower.  

At the time of manufacture, Leica made a big deal out of saying that the
CL lenses "MAY NOT WORK PROPERLY" on the M cameras due the differences
of the cams. Recently a lot of people have been suspecting that the CL
lenses work just fine on the other M cameras, and that the warning at
the time was just marketing.  I know that in the several dozen CL lenses
I have tried, they all focus to the same distance whether they are
mounted on a CL or on a M camera.   This issue is a matter of hot
dispute, depending a lot upon how much you trust father Leitz.  

CLE lenses, in contrast to the CL lenses, have the traditional Leica
type focusing cam and will work fine on any M mount camera. 

How to tell the difference between Minolta CL and CLE Lenses?
        1) the above mentioned focusing cam
        2) the 28 was made ONLY for the CLE
        3) CLE lenses are labeled "M-Rokkor"    
Note that the CLE lenses are multi-coated, while the CL lenses are not

Most M lenses work fine on the CL and CLE, the main exceptions being
        1) the earlier 21's and 28's with the large rear elements
        2) don't collapse a lens into the CL or CLE body 
        3) the 35/50/135's with eyes block portions of the smaller
camera RF/VF
	   windows

In use, I find both the CL or CLE to be a pleasure.  If you are
searching for a small M body or a less expensive TTL camera than the
M6,  either of these cameras are fine choices as far as I am concerned,
though admittedly the CLE is the more advanced camera.  
Its worth noting that both the CL and CLE had relatively low
productions.  The Leica Pocket book tells us that the allocated CL
production was 65,000  BUT that production was lower.  Based upon how
often I see the CLE, I would guess production was only about 1/4 of the
CL.

You can read the test of the CLE in the  June of 1981 issue of Modern
Photo.  The CL is covered by Modern in a test on 11/73, inside
construction on 8/74, and the Minolta CL on 8/77.   Shutterbug ran an
article on the CL in 2/84.

The rarest CL is the 50th Anniversary model, of which 3,500 were made. 
The rarest CLE is the GOLD model, whose production was probably in the
hundreds.

This is in contrast to the over 225,000 M3's made.

Stephen Gandy