kutitta
Well-known
I just need to remind how thegman responded to one of your earlier comments:
"The only blanket statement that ever seems to hold true is that blanket statements are never correct."
You came up with another blank statement which is not correct again. The M3, one of the most praised Leica cameras ever produced, does have framelines for 50, 90 and 135mm lenses. So if we apply your thinking to M3, it is not a true Leica, because it doesn't have the frameline for 35mm lenses. Funny, isn't it?
Also you are mixing up the issues. The problem was not whether CLE has a better meter than CL, but whether Leica CL is a Leica camera.
A lot of people who thinks some Panasonic cameras are Leicas are as wrong as you who think that Leica CL is not a Leica.
Leigh Youdale
Well-known
I think this discussion got a little out of hand and isn't going to be much help to the OP.
For what it's worth I had numerous older cameras including a folding Kodak Retina 1a, two Leica IIIf's and a Voigtlander Vitessa L (barn door model) and all were superb cameras in their day but age, ergonomics and modern features rendered them a little less user-friendly than some others. I came to the decision that my photography needed to be about getting the image and less about fondling old cameras. Others make different decisions.
I bought a Voigtlander Bessa R3A and subsequently an R4A as I like wide angle. Not being able to afford new Leica glass I bought Voigtlander lenses which have proven to be perfectly adequate - better in fact than some older Leica glass that I tried.
Thinking I should try an M-series Leica before I died I bought an excellent M6for $1500 and sold the R3A. Yes, the Leica is a nice camera and feels nice to use but it's very heavy by comparison with the Bessas and it lacks two things that made the Bessa more user-friendly. They have a small window that reveals what film you have loaded and they have a shutter lock that prevents unintended exposures.
So I'd say don't discount the option of buying a second hand Bessa R2M or A in good condition along with some Voigtlander glass, and don't blindly leap into Leica ownership thinking they are the ultimate, because the M6 might not have all the features you expect.
Examine the details and the specs carefully.
You'll like either, I expect, as I do. But there are differences which in actual usage may become important to you
For what it's worth I had numerous older cameras including a folding Kodak Retina 1a, two Leica IIIf's and a Voigtlander Vitessa L (barn door model) and all were superb cameras in their day but age, ergonomics and modern features rendered them a little less user-friendly than some others. I came to the decision that my photography needed to be about getting the image and less about fondling old cameras. Others make different decisions.
I bought a Voigtlander Bessa R3A and subsequently an R4A as I like wide angle. Not being able to afford new Leica glass I bought Voigtlander lenses which have proven to be perfectly adequate - better in fact than some older Leica glass that I tried.
Thinking I should try an M-series Leica before I died I bought an excellent M6for $1500 and sold the R3A. Yes, the Leica is a nice camera and feels nice to use but it's very heavy by comparison with the Bessas and it lacks two things that made the Bessa more user-friendly. They have a small window that reveals what film you have loaded and they have a shutter lock that prevents unintended exposures.
So I'd say don't discount the option of buying a second hand Bessa R2M or A in good condition along with some Voigtlander glass, and don't blindly leap into Leica ownership thinking they are the ultimate, because the M6 might not have all the features you expect.
Examine the details and the specs carefully.
You'll like either, I expect, as I do. But there are differences which in actual usage may become important to you
danielv10
Newbie
Thanks again for all the suggestions. I welcome all views and opinions but let's keep things friendly 
Thanks Leigh. I had considered the Bessa R2M as well but the for the price difference, I figured I could live without some of the features of the Bessa and try out with the Leica. At the end of the day, as shallow/silly as it may sound, I would always want to experience a Leica.
I was thinking of getting the voigtlander nokton classic 35 f/1.4 to go with the M6 as it'd be a more affordable lens for me. Would this be a good conbination?
Thanks Leigh. I had considered the Bessa R2M as well but the for the price difference, I figured I could live without some of the features of the Bessa and try out with the Leica. At the end of the day, as shallow/silly as it may sound, I would always want to experience a Leica.
I was thinking of getting the voigtlander nokton classic 35 f/1.4 to go with the M6 as it'd be a more affordable lens for me. Would this be a good conbination?
Puggie
Established
I say go for the Leica. I was in similar shoes looking for a second hand Bessa R3m as it seemed to fit the bill and budget, then an M3 came along just for just a little more and I though what the hell and bought it. I really wanted a Leica but was happy to settle on the Bessa, I'm now happy I bought the Leica. My M3 doesn't meter (Weston meters are cheap enough), there are no frame lines below 50mm (If I want wide I'd probably go 15mm heliar anyway), and it is heavy (tbh this isn't really an issue). I say if you can afford the M6 and its what you want then go for it, if you find you don;t get on with it, providing you paid sensible money you won't lose anything selling it on.
I'm running Voigtlander glass too, the 50mm f1.5 Nokton, not shot much with it yet but I'm seeing no problems with the quality so far!
I'm running Voigtlander glass too, the 50mm f1.5 Nokton, not shot much with it yet but I'm seeing no problems with the quality so far!
denizg7
-
gosh why can't you read my comments carefully. I said ''FIRST 50mm" then SECOND "35mm" yours has neither gosh
denizg7
-
Thanks again for all the suggestions. I welcome all views and opinions but let's keep things friendly
Thanks Leigh. I had considered the Bessa R2M as well but the for the price difference, I figured I could live without some of the features of the Bessa and try out with the Leica. At the end of the day, as shallow/silly as it may sound, I would always want to experience a Leica.
I was thinking of getting the voigtlander nokton classic 35 f/1.4 to go with the M6 as it'd be a more affordable lens for me. Would this be a good conbination?
no , why get a cheap lens on an expensive camera. zeiss ikon bessa's these are all better choices. I personally would recommend getting a minolta cle and try the 40mm framelines for it. Very small , fun to shoot , great metering like a mini m7.. Before all this rent an m6 and see. I think you are getting too hyped up about a leica and the service costs so much..for someoen who doesnt know much about rangefinders and film camera's you won't apperciate a leica until you own several more useful film cameras
i had so many reliability issues on my m6 and this is my last repair on it , after this if it breaks im cla ing it and putting it on ebay for 600
MISH
Well-known
not that it makes any difference but the Cl does have 50mm frame lines.....
in my case, my CL has a 35mm summicron (made in Canada) on it and I love shooting with it.
My advice would be get the M6. If you can afford it why not. As noted here many times it won't really depreciate on you (unless you drop it)
The worst thing is that like many of us you might find that after buying one you suddenly feel like you need more. If you have not already I recommend you read the Leica for one year post on The Online Photographer
http://theonlinephotographer.typepa...grapher/2009/05/why-it-has-to-be-a-leica.html
kutitta
Well-known
As MISH has already pointed out the CL has 50mm framelines, it's a Leica then even by your weird criteria!
Scheelings
Well-known
Love your work. It's obvious that you really can 'think' in B&W. Those shots are perfectly framed and the composition is beautiful.
I'm in Awe.
danielv10
Newbie
I agree. They are fantastic!
I can see where you are coming from denizg7. I have done some homework and shopping around before but I just keep coming back to the Leica. The CLE was actually my initial choice. But for the price difference, I will happily pay that bit more and try the M6, and if I don't like it, it's no big loss for me. Not that have wads of money to throw, but I believe in buying what you are happy to keep rather than reselling and losing more money that way.
I wish you luck with your M6. Hope it comes back problem-free and ready for a long service.
denizg7
-
As MISH has already pointed out the CL has 50mm framelines, it's a Leica then even by your weird criteria!
yours is 40mm first pal! and always gosh........
kutitta
Well-known
What is first anyway? It has 40, 50, and 90mm framelines, and there is no hierarchy between them. Leica M3 doesn't have 35mm frameline, so it is not a true Leica then. If it is, and again under your weird criteria, Leica CL is also a Leica, because it lacks the 35mm frameline like M3, but has the frameline for 50mm, right? Also you can mount a 35mm lens and use it without a viewfinder, as the CL's entire viewfinder gives almost accurate view of 35mm..
You are wrong and I see that you don't want to accept it. But don't worry, there are a lot of people who find it difficult to accept the fact that they can be wrong at times.
Jubb Jubb
Well-known
@denizg7 & kititta - who bloody cares. stop hijacking the OP's thread.
kutitta
Well-known
You are perfectly right, I do apologize! This is not the first time him saying Leica CL is not a Leica camera and I just got so annoyed with his attitude.
But you are right really, I'm stopping here with apologies!
denizg7
-
how about we come to the conclusion of calling it a Minolta Leica CL
denizg7
-
so we finally came to an agreement to calling it the Minolta Leitz CL. Cannot stress enough how much i appreciate him coming into terms with me , maybe the minolta leitz cl is a leica after all , considering made in canada leica's are certainly leicas
having said that i would really appericate you changing your signature from "Leica CL" to "Minolta Leitz CL" thanks mate!
having said that i would really appericate you changing your signature from "Leica CL" to "Minolta Leitz CL" thanks mate!
Jubb Jubb
Well-known
How about he can call his camera whatever he wants...
Koolzakukumba
Real men use B+W
It's not too important which rangefinder you go for. The important thing is that you shoot some film. Everything about shooting, processing and printing film is so different from digital. It's a much more creatively satisfying type of photography. I gave up digial a year ago and have absolutely no regrets. My D700 has been sitting unused since then.
Return to film - a year on.
Return to film - a year on.
danielv10
Newbie
That was an insightful article. I think I will be happy going to film and developing my own.
I thought about staying digital and buying a X100, but I think I'd be happier learning a deeper form of photography. The photos I've seen on this site are great examples of shots I am aiming to emulate.
Inspiring stuff folks.
P.S. Its good to get away from the megapixels chatter
denizg7
-
zeiss ikon's viewfinder beats any leica hands down