Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,974   Posts: 1,558,732   Online: 843
      
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 35 of 35
  1. #31

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Ogden, Utah USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,154
    Quote Originally Posted by puketronic View Post
    Thank you all for your advice.

    Actually, Leica LTM's bodies are bit smaller, but now i'm having some doubts. I'm mostly interested in shaving of the thickness/depth, but the difference isn't that much:

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/holgergrosz/5445235071/

    I'm still interested in the lenses, however.
    If you want something to use regularly, and want it to complement the M system you seem to already have, you should go no farther than the Leica CL -- I have one purchased in 1974 and it is my constant travel camera -- I've used my Leicaflex SL2 for travel as well, and it is a joy, but for quick street shooting action the CL is hard to beat -- the meter is a spot meter, quick and easy to use, the lenses are small and wonderful, and in addition to the 40 it came with it can use a wide range of Leica, Canon and modern Voigtlander lenses -- the Voigtlander lenses including the 15 and 25 super-wides will work on it nicely and make an extremely flat and compact unit.

    The only usage considerations are lenses that poke back too far into the camera and interfer with the meter cell which is on a little flag that pokes in front of the film plane -- the earlier 21mm super angulons and collapsible lenses that work fine except you can't collapse them.

    Worth serious consideration, they go for around $400 and are a lot newer than any LTM you come across.

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Montgomery, Il/USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,161
    If you have the M camera find a ltm to M adapter.
    Heavily sedated for your protection.

  3. #33
    carbon_dragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Marietta, GA
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    12
    The CL was my travel camera for years. The only issue with the CL is the oldstyle battery which needs some kind of replacement like a zinc air or a "converter". If you can overcome that, there isn't a better "no compromises" machine. The Minolta CL is the same camera and the CLE is an improved model.

  4. #34
    mhcfires's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    El Cajon, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    556
    I have a IIIa from 1935, I have been using a Summar 50/2.0 collapsible lens. It doesn't match the Summicrons, but it has its own personality. I really like it. I have started using it on my M2 of late, just something different and fun.
    Michael Cienfuegos


    If you don't want to stand behind our troops, please feel free to stand in front of them.

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Ogden, Utah USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,154
    Quote Originally Posted by carbon_dragon View Post
    The CL was my travel camera for years. The only issue with the CL is the oldstyle battery which needs some kind of replacement like a zinc air or a "converter". If you can overcome that, there isn't a better "no compromises" machine. The Minolta CL is the same camera and the CLE is an improved model.
    never ran into that problem -- i buy the battery with the proper number at radio shack --675 i think it is -- I did have meter adjusted so it doesn't need mercury batteries. That would be part of a regular service anyway, and ur CL needs one of those every decade or so. The current battery I am using is an alkaline and it is doing just fine.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin