Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/08/09

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Leica Second Body
From: frank theriault <knarf.theriault@sympatico.ca>
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2003 15:55:43 -0400
References: <861E7358-C9EC-11D7-8195-000393802534@mac.com> <008001c35e07$17a6df60$87d86c18@gv.shawcable.net> <003201c35e28$cec44d60$fbfea8c0@DHHZSZ11> <004201c35e7d$51159e00$87d86c18@gv.shawcable.net> <003201c35e99$12f41860$fbfea8c0@DHHZSZ11> <000e01c35e9d$73dac760$bb5bf7a5@mindspring.com>

Hi, Gary,

If you have trouble focusing a CL with lenses longer than 50mm, you'll have the
same problem with the Minolta CLE.  It is a teeny bit larger than the CL, but
I'd think that it has the same size rangefinder, so the same caveats about
focusing longer lenses would apply.

And, you're right, CLE parts are virtually non-existant, and due to it's
electronic shutter, it's hard to fix without those parts.

cheers,
frank

Gary Williams wrote:

> I am new to Leica this year---after 25 years with Contax---and use an M7 as
> my main RF body.  I am delighted with the M7.  I'm struggling on a second
> body, however.  I have tried M2, M3, M5 and CL, and have sold or am in the
> process of selling all of them.  The M3 is terrific, except I find I can't
> live without the 35mm frame lines.  The M5 is just too big.  The CL is too
> difficult to focus with a lens longer than 50mm, doesn't seem that well
> made, why not use a friggin' P&S instead.  But I want an interchangeable
> lens body.  I see no advantage in an M4 over an M2.  I don't need the M4 28
> or 135mm frame lines, in fact I like the uncluttered M2 finder.  An M4 is
> more expensive anyway.  An M6 is very pricey for a second body for me.
>
> The M2 is leading the pack so far, but I wonder about the one I haven't
> tried---the CLE.  (Hexar RF is out, too many issues with M compatibly and
> now Konica USA is pulling the plug on it.  The Voigtlander Bessa shutter is
> too noisy).  I would prefer a smaller body, and in black---but can't afford
> a black M2.  I feel too conspicuous with a chrome body.  My bad?  Anyway,
> the specs on the CLE are intriguing, however, potential repairs, even a CLA
> for a CLE (say it 10 times) is a concern.  On his website, Stephen Gandy is
> practically begging for CLE spare parts.  Thoughts?
>
> Gary
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

- --
"The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist
fears it is true." -J. Robert
Oppenheimer


- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

In reply to: Message from Martin Howard <mvhoward@mac.com> (Re: [Leica] Photographic reaction time)
Message from Ted Grant <tedgrant@shaw.ca> (Re: [Leica] Photographic reaction time)
Message from "Ted Bayer" <tedbayer@charter.net> (Re: [Leica] Photographic reaction time)
Message from Ted Grant <tedgrant@shaw.ca> (Re: [Leica] Photographic reaction time)
Message from "Ted Bayer" <tedbayer@charter.net> (Re: [Leica] Photographic reaction time)
Message from "Gary Williams" <nasmformyzombie@mindspring.com> ([Leica] Leica Second Body)