I've been studying the whole M line in order to figure out which is best for me, (I want to shoot with ONLY a 75mm lens--probably the Voightlander to start--and from what I can tell, I want the M4-P for the 75mm framelines, but with the M3's 'higher-magnification' finder...which is my question, I guess: can I do that..change the M4-P's finder to the M3's and still have the 75mm framelines). Some some of the things I keep coming across are the following (from cameraquest) and I don't really understand the basics of finders/baselines/magnification/etc...the 'rangerfinder' part of rangefinders:

>>"M3: Much longer and therefore more accurate rangefinder

>>"If you like to shoot the 50/1 Noctilux or the 75/1.4 Summilux, M3's focus them more accurately than any other M with the longest effective rangefinder base length and focusing accuracy in the M series. M3's can focus 25% MORE ACCURATELY than the M4/M5/M4-2/M4-P and M6 due to longer effective baselength rangefinder

>>"M4-P: The M4-P [adds] a six position finder for 28/35/50/75/90/135 lenses.

As I say, I want to shoot with a 75mm as my standard and only lens. Somewhere on the cameraquest site, I've read that you can change the finders between M cameras.

I don't want to use an auxilliary attachment to see the 75mm focal length (it seems a real pain...especially for my only lens), and so what I want is the best 75mm set-up I can get on a non-collecor (read: affordable) M camera.

Am I thinking correctly? M4-P + M3 finder? or am I not quite understanding how this all works yet?

Thanks sincerely, shawn

-- shawn (shawngibson_prophoto@yahoo.com), September 25, 2000

Answers

Shawn

The only official changes I know of is that the original M4 and M4-2 can be updated by Leica to have the M4P/M6 frames. I do not think you can convert the M4P to be equivalent to the M3 - or I am not sure it would be easy. Someone might be able to black out your 50mm framelines so that all you saw was the 75mm, which would seem more straightforward. Not that this would help with the focussing accuracy issue.

What you really want perhaps is someone to add the 75mm framelines to an M3. Or you could get a .85 M6 to get near-M3 accuracy.

-- Robin Smith (rsmith@springer-ny.com), September 25, 2000.

I can see no merit in a 75mm NON Leica lens of very ordinary aperture,f2.5 being made as main lens.I think you would be better with a 50mm Summicron and slight crop.I frame with 90mm frame for portraits BUT use the 50mmm !I have a much sharper lens,wide aperture if needed and a wider angle than 75/90,if used normally.You can add M6 frames to M2/4 NOT the M3.Again we see the "slr idea" of fitting any lens to a Leica RNGFDR.One of the best photographs I`ve ever taken was using this method at a political demonstration.The 75mm Summilux is a special lens offering TWO more apertures than the V-lens.....

-- jason gold (jason1155234@webtv.net), September 25, 2000.

Thanks so far. Jason, I understand the non-Leica lens issue (why buy a Leica, right?); but I want to shoot the 75 f1.4, don't worry. I am going to get the Voightlander til I can afford the Leica (a tremendous difference in price, and no doubt, performance), that's all.

It sounds, so far, like the best answer is to have 75mm frame put into an M3?

-- shawn (shawngibson_prophoto@yahoo.com), September 25, 2000.

If you have enough money, you can do anything, however, as you are starting with the Cosina/Voigtlander lens because of budget constraints, this indicates that it is unlikely you can afford very much custom work. I have friends with a M3 finder in a M6, retaining full meter function, M4-2s with M3 finders and M4s with the 0.85x finder. To install an M3 finder in a later camera is expensive as you need a donor camera with a good finder and the body will require a significant amount of precision machining. Also to put a 75mm frame in a M3 would be very expensive as well as it would have to be custom made. After all this bad news, here is what I would recommend. Buy a M4-P and the Cosina lens, then use them until you can afford the 75/1.4. After that you can have the M4-P finder replaced, completely, with a 0.85x finder if you feel that is necessary. The standard 0.72x finder is fine for focusing the 75/1.4. The cost of changing finders is about $700US to $900US.

-- John Collier (jbcollier@home.com), September 25, 2000.

>>Buy a M4-P and the Cosina lens, then use them until you can afford the 75/1.4. After that you can have the M4-P finder replaced, completely, with a 0.85x finder if you feel that is necessary

Thanks John. This is pretty much what I've been thinking as for 'price/purchasing' ability. Not many people think like I do in regards to buying (piecemeal/moving up slowly). Thanks for the probably-unintentional vote of confidence.

As for the .85, I guess this is theoretical meanering on my part, and you are probably right, I may do fine without it.

I am probably going to forego the Toronto scene (from what I've seen and heard, it's not that great for Leica), since I have to get Voightlander through the US anyways, and I'll keep my eyes open on EBay for a M4-P.

Thanks a lot for all your help.

-- shawn (shawngibson_prophoto@yahoo.com), September 25, 2000.

Shawn,

I am not saying that the M3 can't be modified, but every book that I have on Leica Ms states just the opposite. They say any M series camera EXCEPT the M3 can be modified to the M4P / M6 finder. The M2 has a bit of a higher magnification in its original form, but the housing will accept the modification.

Essentially, the frame is simply etched onto a screen that projects an illuminated line into the viewfinder path... for the lens attached. In theory, (and that is a big "in theory"), 75mm frame lines could be added, but it would be a scary proposition to possibly ruin a great camera. I couldn't imagine being drunk enough to even think of attempting to have this surgery performed. It would be a total freelance type of thing... Lieca won't do it.

If you are married to the 75mm lens as you primary lens, I would get a new .85 M6. The M3 has a .91 magnification... in the real world, you would not suffer much focusing in accuracy. Tony uses his f1 Noctilux on a classic M6, and his shots look great wide open.

I do agree that the use of the Voigtlander 75mm lens is acceptable until you can save up for the Summilux. They are different, but not so much that the Voigtlander is poor... it is just that the Leica is so good. Many hardcore Leica users in the LUG have embraced the Voigtlander... and are admonishing Lieca to bring out a mid level lens of a similar spec.

This might be too techno' to read through, but I am attaching a web site in which Leica Guru, Erwin Puts has investigated the accuracy of rangefinders... including the new .58, and shows the maximum allowable f-stop for specific focal lengths. In a few words, any leica camera can focus the 75 f1.4 accurately... now the frame may be too small on some models, but they will focus no problem.

http://www.imx.nl/photosite/leica/technics/rfaccuracy.html

-- Al Smith (smith58@msn.com), September 25, 2000.

Thanks Al.

I printed that page off. Your comments were very helpful, especially "In a few words, any leica camera can focus the 75 f1.4 accurately... now the frame may be too small on some models, but they will focus no problem".

...I guess what you're saying is, the focus is physically accurate, but just occuring over such a small region of the frame to make it difficult for the human eye to 'see' if it is or isn't truly in focus.

I agree that the 'perfect' camera is probably the M6, with the framelines for 75mm, and the .85 magnification (I don't yet understand how the lens's aperture determines anything on a rangefinder, except maybe, after what you've said, for giving a brighter--and therefore more easily seen--image in the viewfinder.

However That would mean I have to wait until December before I can buy. I don't know 'bout that!!!

-- shawn (shawngibson_prophoto@yahoo.com), September 25, 2000.

Shawn

What Al means is that the frame for the 75mm is small in the viewfinder. The wideangles subtend a larger angle so are larger. It has no affect on the rangefinder spot size, but a smaller frame size makes it harder to visualize the final result. Kind of like seeing the shot through the wrong end of telescope versus on a movie screen.

Look through any M and you will understand.

-- Robin Smith (rsmith@springer-ny.com), September 25, 2000.

Yah, that's kinda what I was **trying** to say. Pardon my words. I know the rangefinder image is constant, and that the 75mm line will be quite small, especially on a finder that goes from 28-135; not actually having looked through an M4-P (only an M4 and various fixed- lens RFs), I imagine the 75 will take up fairly less than half the viewfinder? ...So trying to line up verticals/horizontals in that small area is **probably** going to be like using the 'rangefinder' on a nikon SLR...that little useless split-circle...?

-- shawn (shawngibson_prophoto@yahoo.com), September 25, 2000.

Shawn,

As far as the importance of the f-stop regarding the focusing ability / accuracy... It is related to the lens' depth of field. Take for example the 50mm lenses for the M Leica. There is a f2.8 and an f1.0. The combination of the viewfinder magnification and the rangefinder base determines the accuracy... However, you can be a bit sloppy when focusing the f2.8 lens, but you need to be absolutely critical for the f1.0. In other word, the extended depth of field of the slower lens will allow some deviation before the lens is considered "out of focus".

The opposite is true as you start getting into wide angle lenses. An SLR is harder to focus a 21mm lens than when using the rangefinder, because the extreme DOF of the wide-angle makes it harder for you eye to determine IN FOCUS / OUT OF FOCUS... it is a judgment, but the RF camera takes none of that in consideration. The 21 and the 90 focus with the same ease. Even using that split image in the SLR is sort of a rangefinder... but with a tiny base. I've seen an in-writing test saying that for a 50mm lens, the RF is 6 times more accurate than the SLR. Since none of us have a problem focusing an SLR with a fifty, you can imagine the rangefinder is pretty good... good enough for an f1.0 lens.

-- Al Smith (smith58@msn.com), September 25, 2000.

Depending upon what you using the 75 Summilux for, you may consider use the Voightlander 75mm viewfinder on a M3. It is, of course, not an ideal combination but may help for both focus and frame accuracy. I have been using the combination of M5 (with 75 frame line added) and 75 Summilux and I am very satisfied with it. The majority of shoots with 75 Summilux are open f-stops. I don't really feel 0.72 finder compromises the focus accuracy for using 75 Summilux wide open.

BTW, putting 75mm frame line in the M3 is not very practical at all. Not many experienced Leica repair specialists would want to do it even if cost is an objective.

Cing-Dao Kan

-- Cing-Dao Kan (cdkan@yahoo.com), September 25, 2000.

"; not actually having looked through an M4-P" Shawn, I'm going to offer a bit of advise that may save you a lot of trouble that I went through. Go to a used camera show or find a nearby large store that carries a good selection of used Leica cameras, and get your hands on a some of this stuff in person. Put a 75mm lens on the camera and see if that is really what you want to hang on your neck. I made the mistake of reading all kinds of stuff at Cameraquest and other sites, and figured out theoretically the perfect camera for me. I bought an M6HM TTL with 35mm aspherical Summicron for a huge chunk of change mail order without ever even holding one in my hands (I am an M3 shooter). When the camera arrived, to my surprise, I hated it. I hated the finder with all the lines in my face. The range finder patch was whiteing out on me. I didn't like the cheesy winding feel (compared to the M3), I couldn't hardly see the 35mm lines, etc. Don't get me wrong, for what it is ,the M6 HM TTL is an exceptional camera, but in my mind, I had convinced myself without ever seeing one it was going to be an M3 with a built in meter. IT ISN"T! Luckily I sold the stuff on e-bay for about what I paid for it, but it taught me to get my hands on the stuff I'm interested in instead of spending too much time reading and talking about it.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), September 25, 2000.

Andrew I took your advice and went all over the place last night, 'feeling' Liecas. I could not find an M4-P, but I played with an M6 .72, an M4 'Midland" (or something like that); an M3 (very briefly), and a CL.

I found all the Ms to be very similar in 'body feel' to my old F3. They were awkward. But the viewfinder in the M6 was marvelous. I could live with the 75mm framelines on that, no problem. But I also, as I say, tried the CL. It was a beater, something I would never buy. And I've heard things which 'in theory' should leave me put off of them compared to a true M, or even a Voightlander for that matter.

But I loved the feel of the CL. It felt...made for me. This worries me. I keep seeing myself buying this camera on EBay and trying to put the Vgtldr. Color Heliar on it. And staying stopped down and using small Metz on it when necessary, shooting at 3200EI otherwise in low light.

Does that sound feasible?

Also, do Leica Ms grow on you, or do you love them or hate them from the get go?

-- shawn (shawngibson_prophoto@yahoo.com), September 27, 2000.

ps the 'Voigtlander double accessory shoe', apparently, 'has no hot shoe'. Does this mean I can't put the 75mm finder and a flash on a CL at the same time (or any other camera for that matter)?

Sorry for all these q's in one post, but I don't wanna clog up the dbase with too much info during these primative times...:-)

-- shawn (shawngibson_prophoto@yahoo.com), September 27, 2000.

Shawn

Double accessory shoe - you are correct. It is really designed for their meter + a viewfinder.

The CL has a nice viewfinder and it is a great little camera. But, it is also not really an M in terms of construction (much more lightweight). But it does have a Leica-quality viewfinder and of course takes M lenses. I use it with the 40mm Rokkor and a 90 modern Elmarit it makes a wonderful travel camera. The meter is a bit erratic there is no doubt about that, but does work OK - but there again you have to make sure you get one that does - many of the s/h ones need servicing.

-- Robin Smith (rsmith@springer-ny.com), September 27, 2000.

Thanks Robin.

Something I've been unable to figure out (and never checked at the store...duh): can I shoot the CL in full manual? I don't HAVE to use the meter, right?

-- shawn (shawngibson_prophoto@yahoo.com), September 27, 2000.

Absolutely. It has nothing automatic about it.

-- Robin Smith (rsmith@springer-ny.com), September 27, 2000.

Shawn,

PLEASE READ!!! I hope that my previous answer was not misleading. When I told you that "any Leica can accurately focus the 75mm f1.4"... I meant any Leica M series camera. While the CL has an M mount, it is generally not included in the series. The fastest / longest lens offered for either the CL or the Minolta derivative CLE was a 90mm f4.0. Some users are comfortable with the 90mm f2.8, but I can't even imagine the 75mm f1.4 focusing while wide open at moderately close distances. One of the trade offs for the smaller body is the reduction of the rangefinder base. Remember, there are two parts to RF accuracy, the magnification and the base... reduce either one (or both) and the accuracy goes down. This is not a problem for the normal range of lenses, but the 75mm Summilux is not normal.

If you are truly locked in to using this lens.... You need to get a true M camera. I read your responses in this and the "CAMERA EQUIPMENT" thread and it seems like you are serious about the CL. Please understand the limitations regarding the 75mm lens.

Sorry for any problems due to my post about rangefinders.

-- Al Smith (smith58@msn.com), September 27, 2000.

Thanks Al. I am starting to understand, slowly, the virtues and limitations here. I realize (sort of...) that a CL is not going to work practically AT ALL with a 75mm 1.4 wide-open. But I can't buy that lens yet anyways...one just sold on eBay for approx. $2000US, which is simply out of my budget right now. So, I'm going to get the Vgtlndr 2.5 to start. And from the cameraquest site, it says anything from a 50mm f2 to a 90mm f4 should work fine. The 75mm f2.5 seems to fall nicely between those two extremes, so I should be alright until I can afford the Leica glass.

As for the CL, I loved the feel of it. The Ms, all of them, reminded me of my F3 in 'feel'. I'm not saying I won't buy an M. I was just saying how nicely the CLs fit. But overall, I did not in the least find them 'unruly'. I'm gonna play around a bit more with both the Ms and the CL.

.85-.91 (the M3s .91, right?) seems the best mag. for a 75mm lens. As for a separate 75mm finder, I emailed Stephen Gandy, and he thinks I should just envision witha 90, and wing it. That would open up the shoe for a small Metz as well.

See, Al, I'm really not convinced of anything yet. The CL felt really nice, but that is only part of the concern for me. I still wanna look.

-- shawn (shawngibson_prophoto@yahoo.com), September 28, 2000.

Shawn

At the risk of stating the obvious - have you looked at the Bessa-R. That has a 75mm frame and will work superbly with the v75mm. Of course it is no good for the Summilux, but the R is much cheaper. Somehow unless you are really good at visualising a 75mm frame using the existing 40/50 and 90 frames I think using a CL with a separate 75mm finder might well be a pain. I have a 135 Elmar which I use occasionally with the CL and a separate 135 viewfinder. I like it actually, but it is no good at all for action shots or when you need to be quick.

-- Robin Smith (rsmith@springer-ny.com), September 28, 2000.

Ya, I've thought about that one, too. Cheap, that's for sure, bright from what I've heard, no need for bayonet adaptor with their Color Heliar. Framelines for 75mm. Maybe I'm just being stubborn, but to buy a non-Leica lens, and a non-Leica body--I have no qualms purchasing the Voightlander lens since it will get me started, but I just know that if I were to buy a Bessa/Hexar I would end up getting antsy. OK a snob lurks within, even if he isn't the richest of snobs...But who knows, maybe sanity will kick in sometime!!!

-- shawn (shawngibson_prophoto@yahoo.com), September 28, 2000.

ps It kind of bothers me that I didn't naturally gravitate to the Ms...and that the CL felt so right to me...I am very small framed/small-handed, and maybe that accounts for it, who knows...another reason I am leary of buying the Bessa from the States (they're not sold in Canada...).

-- shawn (shawngibson_prophoto@yahoo.com), September 28, 2000.

Shawn,

The purchase of an M series Leica is never a casual thing... unless you have way too much money. Take your time and be absolutely certain since mistakes are expensive. I still feel the best advice is to try somehow to borrow or rent a camera, and run at least 10 rolls of film through it. You will either know that this is the camera for you, or that your search continues. Leicas are romanticized in the photographic press, but not everyone gets along with RF cameras. The good thing is, that unlike all of the "wonderplastic" out there, when you've made your decision... the cameras will be there.

As far as your lens choice, is it the focal length or the lens speed that has drawn you to the 75mm summilux? If it is the focal length, a 90mm Elmarit M simply can't be beat when you factor in the cost to the performance. They are readily available for under 1000 Dollars. At only 15mm over the 75, you won't notice the difference in most situations. If the speed is your goal, the 50mm Summilux will get you the speed at a more affordable price and smaller package. The difference from the 75mm lens is only a couple of steps forward. Again, there is great savings on the price of this lens over the 75.

Just don't be impulsive. With your monetary situation, your move has to be the right one. You also have the benefit of a couple of hundred years of experience in this forum, so don't hesitate to ask for help. Just remember everyone is different, so weigh any advise against your personality and desires.

-- Al Smith (smith58@msn.com), September 28, 2000.

>>As far as your lens choice, is it the focal length or the lens speed that has drawn you to the 75mm summilux? If it is the focal length, a 90mm Elmarit M simply can't be beat when you factor in the cost to the performance. They are readily available for under 1000 Dollars. At only 15mm over the 75, you won't notice the difference in most situations. If the speed is your goal, the 50mm Summilux will get you the speed at a more affordable price and smaller package. The difference from the 75mm lens is only a couple of steps forward. Again, there is great savings on the price of this lens over the 75.

...Thanks again Al. Great advice in all.

As for the focal length, I am ASSUMING something grand here: I generally shoot with a standard and a tele lens, but I really want just one lens. And given that choice, since I shoot people and 'like' the telescopic perspective/distance (and the benefits of not cropping-in on a 35-50mm lens), I have been, as I say, assuming the 75 is the best bridge for one lens to a 50-90mm shooter.

[90mm lenses (well, to be honest in my case a couple of 85mm lenses, Contax and Nikon), just seem a little long in a lot of indoor situations, especially when you want more than 3/4s of a human body.]

However, given the price of a 40mm lens (40 Rokkor esp.), and a 90 (the old 2.8 seems great?), I know it might be better to bite the bullet and go with 2 lenses.

But there is a romance to a single 75mm lens that I can't explain away. I wish I could try all this stuff before purchasing, I mean really try it as you say, for a few rolls of film, not just try all these bodies and some 50mm lens I'll never buy...in the store.

The 75 might end up being fancy like Keats' Nightingale...and the 40- 90 combo might be as timeless as his Urn...the latter is obviously much more practical in real-time shooting...for once I'm not going to be impulsive. Not with a body, and not with my choice of glass...

As for the 1.4 of the 75mm Leica, that's pretty much pure romance and material lust...I shoot in bars quite often/in homes as well, but I prefer to use EF in these cases, because I LOVE as much DoF as possible. I've never really like shallow DoF except when explicitly in order for the scene at hand...

-- shawn (shawngibson_prophoto@yahoo.com), September 28, 2000.

Leica Historic Society of America will have its annual gathering this year from October 12-15 in Boston (http://www.lhsa.org/years.html). It will have a trade show during the event. If you live in east coast in US, you may consider attending that where you could try many Leica M items, as well as talking to users.

-- Cing-Dao Kan (cdkan@yahoo.com), September 29, 2000.

Thanks, CDK. I live in Canada :-). But you have given me a good idea. I'm gonna phone around and find out when/where the trades shows are here in Toronto. Thanks again.

I can't get the CL out of my head. I found another one for sale, and I'm gonna go look at it tonight; Stephen Gandy also said he can get me one with a lens for $750US. A 40 Rokkor and the M 90 f2.8 (which in good shape is around $1000Cdn) are quite possibly going to be the purchase...But I'm still not buying for a couple of weeks because I want to be absolutely sure.

I would really like to wait until I can play with an M4P. There is nothing worse than having to consider so many cameras which are almost perfect...

-- shawn (shawngibson_prophoto@yahoo.com), September 29, 2000.

Make sure you check the meters of CL(s) carefully, as they are very venerable. It is quite costly to get them repaired/replaced. In term of mechanical reliability and durability, any M body is better built than CL body. As one of the most experienced Leica repair specialists told me: "CL is a good camera, but it is not an M." If you plan to invest in the Leica for long term, it will be much better to get an M body first.

Please let us know what you decide. Enjoy your dilemma in the meantime.

-- Cing-Dao Kan (cdkan@yahoo.com), September 29, 2000.

Hi Shawn,

Just finished reading your camera trial. Interesting dilema. I've been shooting Leicas for close to thirty years now. 14 of 'em at full-time at daily papers. Currently own a black M4 (favorite!), m4-2/P, and an M6 (one of the best 'in' camera meters I've ever had) and the accompaning lenses (but not a 75).

I recently considered picking up a CL myself for use out on the water. IE, a disposable, if necessary leica. I was convinced otherwise by several different sources, including my repair shops, reason being (as Cing-Dao notes) mechanical breakdowns. I can't remember all the details now but the meter was definately one of the problems. Several of the models I looked at had poor brightness in the rangefinder, and several listed on ebay mentioned this finder problem also. Beware! Basically this is not a professional (daily use) camera.

If you want a Leica do it right. You really should go with an M package, and you should buy it over a counter so you can hold it and look through it first. There's lots to go wrong!

Leica is a different world. Framing is ambiguous. Focus is slow and critical. Yeah, it can be easier to see those two rectangles in low light, but that's it babe! Remember, you don't have a ground glass to fall back on. With a long lens in low light you're asking for the chance of some really beautiful pictures and a lot of soft negative frustration.

Focus starts becoming so critical at 1.4 when you're in tight on somebody that you will have to keep that rectangle on their face or whatever, then reframe, oops they moved, refocus, reframe...over and over...spontaneity, framing, and smooth shooting are comprosmised. This is the world of Leica (or any rangefinder).

You are entering a new world here and I encourage you with many blessings. If I were to make a recommendation I would suggest either the Bessar outfit with the matching 75, because they were designed to work together, or a Leica M with a 50. You can shoot anything with a 50, and make a 50 do anything. Go to the Photo Library and look at the greats. Not too may 75&90 shots in there. Lots of 50s!

A Leica 50 is affordable, along with an M body you'd be all the way in the family, and in my opinion this is "the best" street package going.

Remember, new camera-new world.

Final comments:

I'd shy away from the M4-2's, as well as the CL, I think they both represent weak moments in Leica history.

I used to have an older 90 Summicrom that had bug eyes to aid in focusing and framing. Get a set of these bugeyes from some junker 90, cut 'em off, figure out a way to hold 'em on the camera (black gaffers always being a favorite) and go shoot your brains out with that 75!

Let us know how it goes!

-- Dennis Lee (captdennislee@earthlink.net), October 01, 2000.

As a response to Dennis' points about the CL, this is a common view held by many Leicaphiles and in fact was mine until I bought one. There is no particular problem with the viewfinder - but all r/f can get out of alignment. It is very bright and clear. The "problem" with the meter is that the CdS cell eventually no longer works. This happens with the M5 too. You can get Leica to install a new one and generally bring the camera up to specification. It should last for at least 20 years. In low light the meter is a bit erratic as it is not so sensitive. They state that sensitivity is 1/2s at f2 at ISO100. This is pretty well accurate and accords with my experience.

It was a very successful camera, actually, much outselling the M5 and the M4 (and the M4-2). It works very well with the 40/50 or 90mm lenses (f2.8 yes, with care, f2.0 not really) and would be a great body for the wideangles with a separate viewfinder. There are also shutter speeds visible in the viewfinder.

However, the meter is not as sensitive as the M6 meter, nor is the camera as heavily constructed, not does it fit in the hands as well as an M3-M6. But remember this camera is small...You never get something for nothing. The shutter is a vertical running, metal one and so is not the venerable M shutter. In terms of quality of finish it resembles more the Bessa-R rather than an M6, but it remains much smaller and the viewfinder is a joy. If you are aware of these factors it is still a great camera. For me it is perfect as I have an R Leica, so I use it as a small-take-anywhere camera.

It does seem to me that many CLs have got to the age when they need an overhaul - this accounts for a lot of the negative attitude they get from other M-users. Non-Leica repair shops do have problems with them as they need to be able to get replacement cells and they cannot do this with ease. Hence their often negative comments about the camera, in comparison with say an M3 which has no meter circuits to worry about.

The history of Leica is interesting because many of the new cameras that have been launched by the company have not been well liked by the afficionados, who still hark back in many ways to the M3-M2-M4 triumvirate. And yet we still have a constant (often quite radical) suggestions for a putative M7. One now knows why Leica GmBh progresses so slowly....

-- Robin Smith (rsmith@springer-ny.com), October 02, 2000.

Well, I spent the weekend going over all cameras I could get my hands on. 2 stood out to me, a mint CL for $750, and a CLE which was good and came with the 40 f2. I can NOT get the Ms to feel right. There is a major commonality b/t my Nikon F3 and the Ms; and between my Contax S2, Oly 35SP, and the CL/E. The CL fits me. I hate to say it. I also hate to say it, but I would never buy a 'real' Leica just for collector/mystical value, not on this salary, anyways. OTOH, I did make the jump for the lenses, and as it stands I have decided on the CL 40, and the old 2.8 90 Leica. I might, in the meantime, get the Vghlndr 75 as a standard when I don't want to carry anything but a camera and a lens.

The meter doesn't work at all in the CL I considered, but I put a post-dated cheque for full on it, pending the results of the film I ran through it on Saturday. I shot a number of exposures varying the low-speed shutter and aperture to give me what should be equivalent exposures for the whole roll. If I get differing densities frame to frame, I'll get my cheque back and keep searching.

I'm not worried about the meter.

-- shawn (shawngibson_prophoto@yahoo.com), October 02, 2000.

ps, Robin and all, on low-light sensitivity, i don't trust meters nowise in low light, not even the L508. I just open up and shoot at the minimum shutter I'm comfortable with that night, depending on nerves, coffee, alcohol, etc. But in all honesty, I much prefer to use bounced flash in these situations. I like the DoF.

I am really worried about getting a finder, if I find I need one, and a flash on a CL at the same time...As noted, the Voigtlander double accessory shoe is not hot.

-- shawn (shawngibson_prophoto@yahoo.com), October 02, 2000.

Shawn

If you don't care about the meter, then the CL will be fine. The CLE is a great camera, but I never really like auto shutters (I prefer auto apertures), so it is not for me. I like the 0.58 view of the CLE though. You are right about low light - bracketing works best anyway, unless you take a relevant incident reading.

Leica charged me $400 (!!!) to get my CL up to spec. I paid and grumbled, but it works wonderfully now. If you don't care about the meter, then you are onto a much better deal.

-- Robin Smith (rsmith@springer-ny.com), October 02, 2000.

...yep, and I also hate the possibility of having a dead camera. Don't like batteries or 25 year old electronics at all.

FWIW, this is my purchasing order for lenses: first, the 75 Colour Heliar; second, the 40mm f2; third, the 90mm f2.8 M. I may or may not keep the Voigtlander at purchasing the 90...who knows. It's amazing that it is even possible to get into Leica given my budget, but I am happy to say, over a few months, I'll have a basic system. At that point, I can decide on whether I really need an M, or whether even just another CL backup will suffice.

Thanks you so much everybody for helping me enter this forbidding Leican Universe so...almost gracefully.

:-)

shawn

ps I'll keep you posted on results etc.

-- shawn (shawngibson_prophoto@yahoo.com), October 02, 2000.

Suggestion on the 75mm framelines for the CL:

Why not rig a set of frames for in front of the viewfinder, flush up against the camera? Trial and error with a roll of clip test film and you should be able to make SOMETHING which works. I'd try very thin sheet plastic sprayed black cut with an Xacto knife, and a generous supply of gaffer's to hold it in place top, bottom, and side.

(I don't really understand why one would choose a CL over a $400 Bessa from England, but I like my F3 and M3, so what do I know...)

-- John O'Connell (boywonderiloveyou@hotmail.com), October 02, 2000.

Great idea, John. I will try that.

As for choosing a CL, honestly, it feels right, so what is wrong with that? I know, it's not an M, it's not particularly reliable in some areas, it's rangefinder leaves a little to be desired (compared to an M or a Bessa...but sure as hell not compared to my 35SP...which works even still).

I have gone through so many cameras in the last while, the last thing I want to do is order a Bessa from out of the country, only to get it here and find it fits (or doesn't fit, I guess) like the Ms and so many other cameras.

The CL fits, awful as that may seem to Leica fans. Indeed, the more I play with it (and drive the store guys nuts!), the more perfect it feels. It will be mine pending the test film I'll be developing tonight.

As an analogue, I owned a Yamaha FZ750, the same year they started producing both the FZ750 and the FZR750 (87, if I recall, or 86?). The FZR was superior bike by all technical counts. But the FZ was one hell of a bike to me, and for me to have disliked it just because of the 'higher-tech' and higher-priced FZR would have been pointless.

More importantly, I also tried the FZR750, and decided to stick with my FZ, because the FZ felt right, and the FZR did not.

I hope I don't sound defensive here, just stating my case...:-)

-- shawn (shawngibson_prophoto@yahoo.com), October 03, 2000.

Last Q for the thread...promise:-) :

From here, the cameraquest site and elsewhere, I've got "50mm overload". I am definitely going the Leica lens route with the CL, with the 90 2.8 M, and not a 40mm but instead...a 50mm.

In the realm of approx. $4-500US, what are my best 50mm performance options for f2.8-ish and up...?

-- shawn (shawngibson_prophoto@yahoo.com), October 05, 2000.

Shawn,

If I was going to absolutely limit myself to two lenses... a 90 and 1 other... I would want to justify the effort of changing lenses. In dozens of classic Leica books, the 35 and 90 combo is praised as the dynamic duo. If I were going the CL /CLE route, I'd go for the 40mm, simply because of the spread... just over 2 to 1.

That said, fifty millimeter Leica M mount lenses are both the most common and highest performing lenses. In the Leica world, they offer some of the best performance for the lowest price. Using the smaller CL rangefinder, I'd ignore the f1.4, and go with a later generation Summicron. It is simply a great lens, readily available, and capable of rendering outstanding image quality. I have used all versions of the M mount Summicron, and while there is potential for sample variations, I found that my favorite is the next to last, with both the focusing tab, and detachable hood. I am just too reliant on the tab to go without it... it speeds up focusing for me, but some others feel different.

You can really economize, by going old... but Leica really started to get the science of coating down in the black lenses. Haze and fungus are things to watch out for. I have a personal prejudice against the older collapsible fifties, all of mine developed wobble in the tube... and I'm not 100% sure, but the CL's swinging meter arm, could interfere with collapsing the lenses.

I don't think you can go wrong with a 50mm Summicron.

-- Al Smith (smith58@msn.com), October 05, 2000.

Thanks Al. I'll start looking for one of the Summicrons. I'm sure they're fairly abundant...

as for the 35-90 combo, thought of that, but I'd rather see what that new Voigtlander 28 is going to be like, a nicer spread, if I choose, 28-50-90.

It's funny how recognition of the real world always seems to make idealizations (1 75mm lens only) go away after a little bit of thought...

-- shawn (shawngibson_prophoto@yahoo.com), October 06, 2000.

OK now I'm confused:

C+ 50/2.0 SUMMICRON LEICA M 0366106 $399.99 C+ 50/2.0 SUMMICRON M 0916302 $599.99 C+ 50/2.0 SUMMICRON-M 0828804 $699.99

...from the same page, all the same rating, all differently priced?

how many of these things are there? mama mia...

-- shawn (shawngibson_prophoto@yahoo.com), October 06, 2000.

forgot the paragraph markers, sorry everyone :-(

-- shawn (shawngibson_prophoto@yahoo.com), October 06, 2000.

Product Description SKU Price CAD

USED LEICA M 50 F2 SUMMICRON 8+ UU04414 8+ $ 949.99

USED LEICA M 50 F2 SUMMICRON 9 UU04414 9 $ 849.99

USED LEICA M 50 F2 SUMMICRON COL.8+ UU07916 8+ $ 899.99

...more than double the price for the same lens from 2 stores just around the corner from each other? I'm missing something I think...

-- shawn (shawngibson_prophoto@yahoo.com), October 06, 2000.

Shawn,

The M mount 50mm Summicron has a long history, and therefore a lot of variations. I looked at your post, and the codes are not corresponding to any of my collectors guides. I will give you a fast and dirty guide... very rudimentary to possibly help. If you need any other advise, please feel free to e-mail me of post to ask anything.

1954-1957 Collapsable Summicron serial number 11xxxxx - 15xxxxx 1954-1968 Rigid Chrome Summicron serial number 11xxxxx - 23xxxxx 1956-1968 Duel range rigid Chrome** serial number 13xxxxx - 23xxxxx 1969-1979 Black rigid serial number 23xxxxx - 30xxxxx 1980-1993 Black W/ Focus Tab serial number 30xxxxx - ?????? 1993- Black W/O Tab, B/I Hood serial number ???????????????

In terms of desirability for actually taking pictures, it is subjective. My choice is the 1980 version. I also have the 1969 version which is very close optically, but the focusing tab on the later model makes focusing very quick, thus faster overall operation during picture making. In more than one book, it has been stated that the duel range Summicron is one of the best... again, this is subjective. (**re-read the CL information about using DR Summicrons... there are limitations.). Optically the 1980 and the 1993 models are the same, but the focusing tab is removed from the later lens, as well as a built in hood being added... some users feel both of these were a mistake, (I do!), which in my opinion makes the 1980-1993 version the most useful for me. Short of finding that version, I'd go with the 1969-1979 model. The Chrome models, while very good are getting pretty old, and there has been much improvement in the area of coating of the glass... I'd stick with black, 1969 and up.

As for pricing, you can get a brand new one for about 1000 Dollars (US), so a cosmetically ugly model that is mechanically good should not break the 400-500 Dollar range. I bought two for 300 Dollars before, and got two more as part of a body / lens combo in the 800 Dollar range. Always confirm the inclusion of hoods and caps... Leica part are as expensive as everything else... hoods can go for 50 Dollars!

The serial numbers in my guide books stopped in 1989, so I used question marks. I'm sure when I post this, others will give their opinions as to the best... so you can have multiple ideas to ponder.

Please e-mail me direct if you have any questions.

-- Al Smith (smith58@msn.com), October 07, 2000.

>>I'd go with the 1969-1979 model. The Chrome models, while very good are getting pretty old, and there has been much improvement in the area of coating of the glass... I'd stick with black, 1969 and up.

Thanks again Al. I got your email with the columns lined up. I was hoping for chrome, because I think a chrome lens on a black body is kinda 'trick' (like in motorcycle lingo), but I'm obviously most interested in optic/price. I'll keep my eyes open for black 69-79. I have a focusing tab on my li'l Oly., and I've fallen in love with the speed it gives me...

I do have a new dilemma. A salesman-friend at one of my main stores has lent me his Rollei 3.5F (which I owned for a while), because he wants me to wait and save for an M3 or M4-P, instead of a CL at another store. I love the .91 magnification, vs. what I think is .6 for the CL. I'm just worried about ergonomics. Decisions, indecision, decisions...:-)

It also assures me the possibility of buying Leica glass right from the start (read: no Voigtlanders for now...until the 28 comes out prob'ly), 50mm and 90mm Leica glass...cuz I can have fun with the Rollei and the Oly. in the meantime...ugh.

I've never been so inspired to shoot, like I've come out of a year and a half depression or something, the lights went on, the (uh-hum) Alaskan sun has risen from the dead...and summer is coming...late.

-- shawn (shawngibson_prophoto@yahoo.com), October 10, 2000.

Shawn

As a contribution to your Summicron thinking, I too basically prefer the look of chrome and they can indeed be picked up cheaper. I also do not find the focussing tab so useful on the 50mm as the lens is larger and easier to grip. On 35mm lenses they are very useful as the lenses are so small.

However, I also would always pick a lens with a built in lens hood over one that doesn't. If you are the kind of person who can live with either 1) not putting a front cap on when you remove a lens and put it in your bag, or 2) do not mind taking the hood off and reversing it over the lens and then putting the lens cap on then you will prefer the separate hood arrangement. Personally, I dislike changing lenses so try and keep the economy of movement to a maximum - so a later Summicron with the built in hood would be my choice assuming money no object - all you have to do is collapse the hood and put on the cap in one easy action.

The dual range Summicron is a real beauty-but its special (desirable) feature needs the goggles and they are no good for the CL, so I would not get one of them.

-- Robin Smith (rsmith@springer-ny.com), October 27, 2000.