RE: CLE Observations

[Vince Lamberti <106623.3440@compuserve.com>]

Kent,

I was recently corresponding with Guenter Wehrmann (co-author of a Leica =
M
lens evaluation report with Carsten Bockermann) on a similar topic.  Here=
's
Guenter's feedback :

Vince,
I have a Leica CL, which I don't use anymore. The camera which I bought
second hand in the late seventies came with a Leitz Summicron-C 1:2/40mm
and a Leitz Elmar-C 1:4/90mm.  The slides taken with the 40mm Summicron o=
n
the CL don't seem to be quite as crisp as those taken with the 35mm
Summicron on the M6. I haven't done any rigoros testing. This is just my
subjective impression.  I am not sure whether the Summicron-C 1:2/40 mm a=
nd
the Rokkor 2/40mm are identical lenses. I just checked Jim Lager's Leica
Lenses book. He only refers to the two 90 mm lenses as being identical. =

The article you referred to was written by Carsten Bockermann and myself
way back in 1993 or early 1994. He has since updated the text, since he
purchased additional lenses.
Hope this helps,
Guenter
Bonn/Germany


Incidentally, I've also recently invested in a CLE and Rokkor 40/2.0.  It=

is my intention to grow the outfit with Leica M glass.  My first
procurement will likely be an Elmarit 28/2.8, followed by a Summicron
50/2.0.  I've gone for a CLE despite adverse comments in recent
correspondence regarding repairability.  The key decision drivers were th=
e
superb design/compactness and functionality, and also cost.  I already ha=
ve
a reasonable investment in R series gear, and wanted a lighter weight
travel outfit.  Cost is also important since I am currently travelling
extensively, increasingly to precarious environments.  Also, the money I
save in buying a CLE over an M6 body (>US$1000) will contribue to the cos=
t
of clean/second hand glass.

Cheers,

Vince Lamberti
The Hague, The Netherlands
Email: 106623.3440@compuserve.com

- -----Original Message-----
From:   INTERNET:leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us =

Sent:   Saturday, 30 August 1997 0:19
To:     "leica user group"
Subject:        CLE Observations

Sender: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Received: from mejac.palo-alto.ca.us (mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
[192.147.236.1])
        by dub-img-10.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.5) with ESMTP id
SAA17961;
        Fri, 29 Aug 1997 18:19:22 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from  by mejac.palo-alto.ca.us (5.65/KJV)
          id AA28245for Williamsonimages@compuserve.com; Fri, 29 Aug 97
15:08:24 -0700
Received: from kim.teleport.com by mejac.palo-alto.ca.us (5.65/KJV)
          id AA28239for /usr/local/lib/majordomo/wrapper resend -C
/usr/local/lib/majordomo/config.mejac/majordomo.cf -l leica-users -h
mejac.palo-alto.ca.us leica-users-outgoing@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us; Fri, 29=

Aug 97 15:08:20 -0700
Received: from toshiba (ip-pdx02-16.teleport.com [206.163.123.49]) by
kim.teleport.com (8.8.7/8.7.3) with ESMTP id PAA23255 for
<leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>; Fri, 29 Aug 1997 15:08:16 -0700 (PDT=
)
Message-Id: <199708292208.PAA23255@kim.teleport.com>
From: "Kent  Smith" <unipac@teleport.com>
To: "leica user group" <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Subject: CLE Observations
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 1997 15:03:02 -0700
X-Msmail-Priority: Normal
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1161
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3DISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us

Hi,

I recently picked up a CLE with the 40mm f/2 Rokkor-M and have some
questions and comments.

Does anyone have any feedback on the 40mm lens as to its performance?  Ho=
w
does it compare to the 35mm f/2 Summicron (1976 - Second Version)?  Is it=
 a
keeper?

I'm curious in any event as to why the 40mm focal length was selected for=

this camera and the CL.  Was there perhaps the thought that this would
eliminate any sales competition between the 50mm and 35mm Leitz lenses an=
d
the Minolta produced lenses for the CL?  Was this an attempt to come up
with a more "natural" perspective for a "normal" lens.  (We had a detaile=
d
and interesting discussion here recently regarding what exactly a "normal=
"
focal length is.  In my view it is a personal matter and depends upon wha=
t
the photographer feels works best foe their style and approach.  I have
seen other discussions however regarding the 40mm to 45mm focal length as=

optimum for a "normal" lens.  Was this an attempt in that direction?)

I find that the 35mm Summicron doesn't activate the frame (40) in the
viewfinder and that the 50mm LTM-to-Bayonet adapter does activate the
frame.  I also notice that if I rotate the lens just slightly past the lo=
ck
point the frame does come up.  Now I normally use the 35 on my M3 with a
SBLOO finder and I can go this way on the CLE but I can see the advantage=

of using the (40) frame in the viewfinder and fudging for a quick shot. =

Too bad they didn't make the CLE with (35) and (50) frames.

There was a posting here a day or so ago about the ergonomics of the Leic=
a
II's and III's.  Unfortunately I deleted the posting but the point was we=
ll
taken that these small, old cameras are still a joy to use.  The CLE fits=

into this idea very nicely.  It is smaller and significantly lighter than=

the M and fits my ideal of what a the 35mm format should be better than t=
he
M3.  (I'm talking about the ergonomics of the camera, I'd prefer to have
the option to use manual TTL metering over full auto and would prefer the=

M6 in that regards.)  =


When I see the size of most of the 35mm cameras today I have to shake my
head.  Look at an R8, an F5, or one of my old F1's and then look at the
actual size of the 35mm negative.  This format was originally conceived f=
or
 a small and inconspicuous camera, one that could be easily carried. =

Believe me, a complete F1 outfit is does not meet any of these criteria. =

An M outfit is a huge step in the right direction but even though an M3 o=
r
M6 is smaller than an SLR I feel they could use a further reduction in
size.

I would love to see a new Leica CL3.

Well I've gone on for too long, fortunately there is nothing in the user
group guidelines about following your subject thread.   (I hope!)

Kent Smith
unipac@teleport.com