Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1996/04/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]You wrote: > >I do not own a CLE, but have heard good things about it. It is probably what >the CL2 should have been! Is it as strongly built as the Leica? I do not have >good vibes about a Minolta, but may be I am in error. Anyway, if the CLE is >so good, why are they no longer in production? I have never seen one. > >Best regards, > >Chris Fortunko > The CLE was/is a great camera with a superb RF/VF which rivals the M's. It died in the marketplace for two reasons: 1) it was too expensive for a Minolta 2) Leica people would generally pass it by because it did not have he Leica name on it. Snobbery does have a force in the marketplace. IF it had the Leica name on it, it would probably still be in production. It's the currently the only way to get aperture priority automation with Leica lenses. It has an accurate electronic shutter and metering system which..alas..does not work when the batteries die. It's only design fault is that the meter does not function when the camera is switched off AE priority. For glasses users, the CLE 28 frameline is usually much easier to see than the one in the M's. Stephen Gandy