Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/04/27

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

Subject: [Leica] CL vs. CLE
From: buzz.hausner at verizon.net (buzz.hausner@verizon.net)
Date: Wed Apr 27 05:28:20 2005

It is interesting to say that, "The CLE is one of the best cameras EVER 
made...," and then follow on by citing its reliability failure and lens 
separation.

Buzz


>From: Alastair Firkin <firkin@ncable.net.au>
>Date: Wed Apr 27 07:35:02 CDT 2005
>To: Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org>
>Subject: Re: [Leica] CL vs. CLE

>The CLE is one of the best cameras EVER made, BUT Minolta deserted it 
>and it has issues of reliablility: I had the complete set. Camera, 
>lenses, leather case. Best camera I ever had TILL it began to fail: 
>exposure meter problems and Minolta disowned it. The 28 mm lens also 
>had a habit of "separation": but the images were still great. I hated 
>Minolta for not backing the camera. I will not buy Minolta.
>
>Cheers

Replies: Reply from firkin at balhpl01.ncable.net.au (firkin) ([Leica] Re: CL vs. CLE)