CL over an M body?

Discussion in 'Rangefinder Forum' started by puketronic, May 25, 2013.

  1. puketronic

    puketronic Member

    Messages:
    199
    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2011
    Shooter:
    35mm
    I'm thinking of selling some of my M gear for a CL.

    I have two M's and have never handled a CL. I use my Rollei 35 the most in this format because it is relatively light, very compact, and of high-enough build quality. I want a rangefinder with reduced weight/bulk and I prefer 40mm over 50mm (and hence no collapsibles) and so a CL + 40 cron seems like a natural choice.

    I will probably try to get my hands on one first but I am wondering if anyone prefers the CL over the M.
     
  2. loman

    loman Subscriber

    Messages:
    574
    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2006
    Location:
    Denmark
    Shooter:
    35mm
    I would get the CLE which is a much nicer camera than the CL.
     
  3. darkosaric

    darkosaric Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,160
    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2008
    Location:
    Hamburg, DE
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
  4. Newt_on_Swings

    Newt_on_Swings Member

    Messages:
    2,132
    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2011
    Location:
    NYC
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    You should ask yourself what lenses you shoot with, and how wide of an aperture you routinely use. The much shorter base lengths of the CL/CLE are not as accurate as the larger M bodies. Also there are a few lenses that will not fit on the CL/CLE because of the funky flip up metering cell.
     
  5. Steve Bellayr

    Steve Bellayr Member

    Messages:
    106
    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2006
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Getting a CL/CLE repaired may be difficult as parts for those cameras are no longer in production.
     
  6. Richard S. (rich815)

    Richard S. (rich815) Subscriber

    Messages:
    4,954
    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    I have an MP, an M2 and a CL. Thought of selling the CL as I use the others more but when a quick pocketable camera is what I want the CL with the 40mm f/2 Summicron is hard to beat. That said also consider a Konica Hexar AF. I just got one at a great price and its a terrific performer for the 35mm f/2 range. AF and metering has been spot on. Great camera for the street or for shooting my kids in the playground. And sometimes I like an a non-interchangeable lens camera. No choice of lenses to worry about which is sometimes a good thing.
     
  7. jochen

    jochen Member

    Messages:
    351
    Joined:
    May 13, 2008
    Location:
    Germany
    Shooter:
    35mm
    Hello,
    the CLE does not have the flipping up measuring cell, it measures the reflected light from the shutter. Furthermore I think the CLE does not have the mercury problem.
     
  8. Newt_on_Swings

    Newt_on_Swings Member

    Messages:
    2,132
    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2011
    Location:
    NYC
    Shooter:
    Multi Format
    You are right the CL is the only one with the moving meter cell.
     
  9. jochen

    jochen Member

    Messages:
    351
    Joined:
    May 13, 2008
    Location:
    Germany
    Shooter:
    35mm
    ...."the only one with the moving meter cell" with except of the Leica M 5.
     
  10. ArthurP

    ArthurP Member

    Messages:
    1
    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2012
    Location:
    Quebec
    Shooter:
    Medium Format
    Having used the CL but not the CLE I tend to think that the later camera by Minolta (who built both, anyways) might be the better choice for the various reasons stated above. Cosina-Voigtlander makes more recent 40mm lens compatible rangefinders that may interest you and you can always fit the Summicron f2 to them if you don't like the C-V lens line. Probably none of these have the build quality or smoothness of the M bodies if that is a concern.