I have purchased a CL body at a good price and would like a lens to go with it. Several things I have been considering. 40mm f2 Summicron, 50mm f2 Summicron or 50 f2.8 elmar (later style), the 40mm gets quite good reviews, is this just because its good value or is it optically a regular leica lens, is it the match of the 50mm f2 claimed to reach 100lpm res? Recently i have read about the Elmar 50 on threads here aparently a great Leica lens. If you could please give your thoughts preferences and experience with these lenses on the CL. Thanks from a newbie. (Hope this isnt too lame a question)

-- James Collier (james.c@mis.net.au), May 03, 2002

Answers

See http://www.cameraquest.com/cle.htm#Minolta%20CL%20and%20CLE%20Lenses

The 40mm Summicron is not multi-coated and is much harder to find than the numerous 50mm Summicrons (both single- and multi-coated.) However, I myself prefer a 40mm since its coverage is bigger without being an obvious wide-angle. The Minolta version is multi-coated but also rarer than 50 'Crons.

IMHO, the Elmar is designed for minimum size and retro-look. It's very slow for a normal lens.

-- Andrew (mazurka@rocketmail.com), May 03, 2002.

James

The 40mm Rokkor (later one for the CLE) is a superb lens and a bargain. This is multicoated, unlike the original CL Summicron/Rokkor. It is a lovely focal length. The Elmarit 50mm retracts into the body so is not a wise choice for the CL as it will interact with the metering arm. A 50mm Summicron would work fine and as you can see around the frame in the viewfinder is perhaps even nicer to actually use (particularly if you wear glasses). So it is down to really whether you prefer a 40mm or 50mm focal length. I think in terms of performance you will not really notice much difference. The 40mms are much cheaper and it is a really useful focal length. But you need to decide what is important to you - cost, focal length, and how you feel about the v/f frames.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), May 03, 2002.

The 40 is the way to go. More compact, and just as good optically as any of the Summicrons.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), May 03, 2002.

While the 40mm CL lens is only single coated, it is an excellent lens. Considering that it is also inexpensive, it would be my first choice for a CL camera.

-- John Collier (jbcollier@shaw.ca), May 03, 2002.

Great lens, very sharp, have one for sale if anyone wants it. Contact me privately.

-- nick franco (nickfranco@hotmail.com), May 03, 2002.

Uh, should read, 40mm for sale. (Typing under the influence of to much mountain dew.)

-- nick franco (nickfranc@hotmail.com), May 03, 2002.

I've never owned a Leica CL, but isn't there something about the "C" lenses being dedicated to the CL and the "M" lenses being not quite right on the CL? Sure, they can be used, but don't the "C" lenses mate up with the focusing cam better? It seems to me that I read lens tests of the 40mm 'cron and it was right up there with the 35 & 50 'crons. I'd get the 40 & 90 original Leica lenses.

-- Frank Horn (owlhoot45@hotmail.com), May 03, 2002.

Also, aren't some of the collapsible lenses, such as the current Elmar-M, going to interfere with the metering arm of the CL? I believe Leica says you have to put some Dymo tape around the lens barrel, to keep it from entering too far into the camera body.

-- Frank Horn (owlhoot45@hotmail.com), May 03, 2002.

IMO: The 40 CLE is a very good lens and I would rank it about equal to the 50 'Cron in terms of resolution. (In truth my 40 is not quite as sharp in the center, but is better in the corners than my 50 'Cron was -- yet I am talking very small differences here. However, to be completely fair, I feel the 40 should probably be compared with the latest pre-asph 35 'Cron and not the 50.) I feel the big advantage of the 40 over the 50's is its size; it is almost the same size as a pre-asph 35 'Cron. For me, the biggest downside of the 40 is it uses 40.5mm filters. So I bought a 40.5 < 46 step-up ring to use standard filters with it, but I have thick fingers and this setup interferes with the aperture ring somewhat.

Cheers,

-- J Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), May 03, 2002.

The CL 40 uses an odd filter size. Can't remember what series, but people on other list have mentioned that the standard 39mm will work, but not quite a 100% perfect fit.

I have the CLE with the Rokkor 40 for it. It is very sharp. The 50 sumicron is slightly better. But I actually like the aspect ratio of the 40 much better. The CLE lense filter size is 40.5. Had to special order any filters for it, since not all dealers stock this size.

-- (garylhuie@netscape.net), May 03, 2002.

Something completely different: an M series 35 like a Summilux or Summicron fits fine on a CL, but you have to use the whole finder and ignore the framelines. Just another option.

-- David Killick (dalex@inet.net.nz), May 04, 2002.

Thankyou for your responses so far. Seems an overall preference for the 40mm lens. I was actually expecting the 50 f2 Summicron to get the most support so your view have been most helpfull.I was hoping to stick with either the 40 or 50 rather than 35 basically due to frame lines. I have aquired a couple of copies of Tests done on CL and CLE as mentioned on the camera quest site. (thanks to Joel for them). Interestingly in the CLE review the 40mm is said to be slightly above average for its focal length but the CLE's 28 and 90 are rated high above average. I know tests are subjective but users on LUG seem to have reverse experiences with the 40 being a great lens and the 28 and 90's being average. I guess thats a good advocate of try it yourself rather than read reports. I am interested in anyone who has tried the 50 elmars on the camera as well. Thanks again

-- James Collier (james.c@mis.net.au), May 05, 2002.

James

One of the reasons the 28mm and 90mm Rokkors fare not so well I wager is simply that there is a lot of Leica competition in those focal lengths, whereas there is only one available Leica competitor and it is essentially the same for the 40s. The 28mm and 90mm Rokkors are both good but lack the perceived cachet of the Leicas. The 28mm is not thought to be any better than the 3rd version 28mm Elmarit and it is prone to edge coating issues. The 90mm is pretty good, but is comparatively slow.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), May 07, 2002.