I am considering a Leica CL as an everyday carry camera. For those who owned and used this. How would you rate it. Thanks again for your input.

-- edgaddi (edgaddi@msn.com), May 24, 2002

Answers

I would say Leica CL with 40mm Summicron.

-- edgaddi (edgaddi@msn.com), May 24, 2002.

The camera is prone to meter problems and to do a good repair on the meter can be very expensive. Other than that, it is a nice compact camera and the lens is outstanding.

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), May 24, 2002.

The meter is really it's only failing. I guess if you wanted to use long fast lenses you might be annoyed at the short RF base. But for the 40/2 you will love it. I use mine with the 40, a 90/4, and a voigtlander 25.

-- Josh Root (rootj@att.net), May 24, 2002.

I hate to say it... maybe consider a Bessa R2

Not the same quirky frames, and just a wee bit larger (not much). Meter is good though, and the RF base is slightly larger. And the price is about the same give or take.

-- Charles (cbarcellona@telocity.com), May 24, 2002.

I had a Leitz Minolta CL (Same as leica CL) and never had a problem with either the 40m or the 90mm. guess I was Lucky! I'd say, they are excellent cameras. If the meter goes, who needs a meter? I use thread mount units now and never use a meter. Learning to estimate light/exposure values is very easy with some practice..."humm, this seems to be a 5.6 day!"

-- Todd Frederick (fredrick@hotcity.com), May 24, 2002.

In theory, the CL's simple 40/90 lens combination, in house meter,and more compact body was Leica's alternative to it's M5 big brother. In practice my conditioning to the classic M2/3/4 body size,shape and viewfinder turned me off the CL .Today, personally, I'm still not comfortable with the CL but have acclimatized to the M5's size and shape.

-- Sheridan Zantis (albada60@hotmail.com), May 25, 2002.

Hello edgaddi

The CL is a nice camera. I recently bought one because I could no find a Voigtlander Bessa R second hand. Have a look at http://www.cameraquest.com/leicacl.htm

To me, the Bessa is sturdier, the CL might look fragile in everyday's use.

Another idea is owning a Minox 35GTE, I have one often in my pocket and it delivers nice pictures. However the 40mm of the CL has less geometric aberrations.

The CL needs to be overhauled for using the non mercury PX625. Cheers.

-- Xavier d'Alfort (hot_billexf@hotmail.com), May 25, 2002.

IMO, the battery and meter issues are the big shortfall of the CL, hence my own decision in favor of the CLE. Great meter, compatible with many M lenses and has a very functional AE! But the AE is either on or no meter, and there is no AE lock, which is the big shortfall of the CLE, IMO. At least the meter and the AE are very good and work very well with print films. For slides however, I find I have to get into the habit of using exposure compensation with it.

Just a thought,

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), May 25, 2002.

My CL was with me regularly at one time. A career in tv news and video production has filled my image-gathering needs, I speak from past experience, still legitimate.

I worked with one film primarily, Tri X, and knew it well. I had little problem estimating exposure and produced my best stuff with the CL, I can't overestimate how much I love this camera. A problematic meter isn't desirable but could make an otherwise fine CL very available. If candids or street work are your interest, you can't do better than the CL, it's just about perfect IMHO. Any other photo work will be done better by other equipment.

-- Mike Barber (hax@htc.net), May 25, 2002.

My local store has a lovely CL with a dead meter for about $450...I like the compact size and the viewfinder plays nicely with my eyeglasses. But when I could get a new R2 from Stephen G for $75-100 more, I'm sorry but I'd do the R2...

-- C.L.Zeni (sal3060@yahoo.com), May 25, 2002.

It is a wonderful little camera, use it with the 40mm 1:2 lens and have fun!

-- Haim Toeg (haimtoeg@hotmail.com), May 27, 2002.

I got my CL new in about 1978, with the 40 & 90mm lenses. Between then and now I also had a Nikon FA for a wile. The CL has been my preferred camera all along. Never had problems with the light meter, and my exposures with the CL were always better than the Nikon's.

Both lenses are outstanding for sharpness in use, though the 90 at f4 is a bit slow. Recently I managed to get hold of a beautiful M4, and I use the CL with 90mm lens as a spot meter when I need one.

The rangefinder on the M4 came as a levelation to me; with the longer base it is far easier to focus than the CL, and it you may find focusing the CL a bit finicky if you are used to the M series.

But on the whole I have had great results with the CL.

Louis Reynolds

-- Louis Reynolds (reynolds@ich.uct.ac.za), May 28, 2002.