Re: [Leica] Leica Second Body

[Jerry Lehrer <jerryleh@pacbell.net>]

Don

As much as I loved my CL, I have to agree with you on the M2 and M3.
Though I wish I had kept the 40mm Summicron from the CL.  I hope that
my 35mm Summicron will be as good!

Jerry

Don Dory wrote:

> Just one persons opinion, but, unless you want to pay Sherri a CLA, stay
> away from a CL.  Old technology that isn't classic. I am specifically
> referring to the meter mechanism and the shutter.  There are issues with
> this mechanism.  A quality tech can keep them running so if you find a
> CL for $300 then the $200 for a CLA is just dandy.
>
> The CLE is aperture priority only.  Manual is just that, no meter.
> These cameras are hitting the end of their life.  You might get a good
> one, you might get one that dies thirty days after you buy one.  If you
> can get a deal on two of them then maybe this model will be attractive.
>
> I have already spoken my piece on the M2.  If you don't need a meter
> then this camera will outlast your grandkids.  Simply beautiful finder,
> wonderful action, parts upgrade to latest whatever you want possible,
> see Rei's comments about his M3.  Not really bigger than a CL but far
> more capable.
>
> About that old technology comment: the Leica shutter and rangefinder are
> relatively fully developed with no real improvements in forty years from
> the M3 era.  Some would say the finders have gone backward in the last
> 25 years or so.  The M5 and the CL represented Leica trying to break new
> ground.  Unfortunately for them, most users felt the earlier product
> better suited their needs.  Yes, I have owned two CL', I sold them as
> soon as I had my M3 again.
>
> Don
> dorysrus@mindspring.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Gary
> Williams
> Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2003 12:41 PM
> To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> Subject: [Leica] Leica Second Body
>
> 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
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

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