I would like to buy a CL to use with the current Summicron 50. Is there any problem using this lens and body combination? Anything to watch out for when buting a CL? What about the CLE?

I looked at a CL in my local dealer recently and noticed a problem, the rangefinder patch was very dim - very hard to focus! I also notices that the camera had a fairly good dent on the upper right side which could be the cause. Any experiences with dim rangefinder patches on CL's?

Thanks very much in advance,

Nick Hillyer

-- Nick Hillyer (nhillyer@fhcrc.org), January 23, 2002

Answers

Nick, I don't think you'll have a problem using the 50. I would try the combination in the store, though. The dim rangefinder patch is of more concern. The CL rangefinder impresses me as bright and easy to use. If it's dim, I would also wonder whether the force of the blow that dented the camera may have jarred something out of alignment. Is the rangefinder accurate? That should tell you something. If it's accurate then maybe it just needs cleaning-- though I'm not accustomed to my M cameras growing dim from age, and I have two that are older than any CL.

Frankly, this example sounds like a can of worms. If it were me, I would say, "thank you," hand it back, and wait for the right one to come my way. BTW, when it comes to a CL, I'm still waiting for that day. I've turned down three.

There are two CL's available from KEH in Atlanta, as of this moment. Prices could be better.

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), January 23, 2002.

Nick, I have had a couple of CL's (now currently being used by my daughters). One had a dim rangefinder which is the result of the rangefinder prism de-silvering. It needed replacement and cost a fair sum of money--$175 just for the prism alone about seven years ago. On another, the clip on the take-up spool had broken and needed replacement. I have heard that the meters fail after a period of time--although this has not happened to either of mine. Also, the meter circuitry is designed to take a mercury battery, although an adaptor for a silver cell is available.

-- Henry Chu (heninden@yahoo.com), January 23, 2002.

Dear Nick,

I've had a CL since 1984. It has been a good friend over the years, though these days it's mostly housebound. I would not worry about using the current Summicron 50/2 or 50/1.4 on it. (The old 50/1.4 was a problem because its lens shade blocked the focusing window: a problem easily overcome by changing lens shades.) Leica did warn not to use regular Leitz lens on it. While in bench tests something might show up, I've had no practical problems with using my various 50mm's, my Summilx 35/1.4, Elmarit 28/2.8 and other lenses.

My worry is two-fold. That dent might mean something is damaged inside. It might only become apparent after you've used it. I'd pass this particular CL up. Also, CLs have metering problems. Might, in the last 5 years or so, has become inconsistant, sometimes measuring light acurately and sometimes underexposing by 3 or more stops. It is especially bad in low light. The problem may be that the meter was originally made for mercury batteries, which are now banned. Present day batteries are apparently more powerful and throw the meter off. This can be adjusted, I'm told. Whatever the case, the problem is there. My case is not atypical.

The rangefinder is small and not as bright as Leica Ms. I've used a Canon 50/1.4 and 1.2 on it at open apature. But focusing requires a lot of effort at those apatures. The CL you are considering may have a dimmer finder becasuse of dirt or damage (as one respondent said). I have not had major troubles focusing mine, unless there was lens shade blockage. If you are having trouble focusing this CL and you want to use a 50mm lens on it, I'd say pass it up.

All the foregoing aside, I think the CL has many virtues. It is small and very quiet--its shutter is slightly quieter than regular Leica Ms in my view, which is saying a lot. You can put a lot of odd lens on it. It accepts the old Leica 35/2 and 34/1.4 lens, which the CLE and Bessa T do not. While it does not have 35mm frame lines, you can easily imagine 35mm outside the 40mm frame. Even relatively heavy lenses balance nicely on it. And its shutter is mechanical, so it will work without batteries

If you decide on a CL, I would not use 50's over f2 or 90 over 3.5. (Do as I say; don't do as I do.) I would also use an auxiliary meter with it, either hand-held or the Voightlander hotshoe mounted meter.

To my mind the CL should be used as a secondary, not primary camera, though all that is a matter of personal needs. In spite of its limitations, I can recommend the CL for its portability, its very quiet shutter, and its pleasant balance. Just don't buy that dented one. Shop around.

-- Alex Shishin (shishin@suma.kobe-wu.ac.jp), January 23, 2002.

I used to have a CL with a pre-ASPH 35 Summilux but got a M3 instead. Most, but not all M lenses will fit, but the finder - which is smaller than an M - has frames only for 40, 50, and 90. The 21, I gather, pokes too far back into the body and would hit the exposed meter cell. The 50 will fit, but make sure it's a black one, otherwise a silver lens on a black body is an acquired taste. The rangefinder base is short, so focusing a 90 is not so easy. Yes, it's a compact camera but to me, at least, the CL lacks the same indefinable feel of an M.

-- David Killick (dalex@inet.net.nz), January 24, 2002.

Look at this site. Under CL review it lists the few lenses that are not compatible with the CL.

http://www.cameraquest.com/index.html

-- John Sonewald (jsonewald@aol.com), January 24, 2002.

If you are a glasses owner the CL and 50mm is actually a better match than the 40mm in my opinion

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), January 25, 2002.