Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/12/20
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]> >> My opinion is straightforward : if you want a leica in order to "shoot" >> jazz musicians, avoid the cl which is in my opinion a dog, manufactured by >> Minolta.Try to find a "true" Leica M. >> >> Dominique Pellissier > B.D. Colen wrote : >I, too, have owned CLs - a pair of them which I purchased used in the >mid-70s. I used them with a 35 Summicron and 90 Elmarit....I was young, my >eyes were good, and the results were terrific. > >Yes, a CL you purchase now is a good 25 years old - but a IIIc that you >purchase now could be 50 years old! > >If you can't afford an M, this is a good way to get into Leica photography. >With all due respect, Dominique, the attitude that the CL "is a dog" >manufactured by Minolta and is not a "true M" and should be avoided, is the >reason the attitude that will inevitably send Leica down the tubes and into >history. The company would do far better, and capture far more customers, if >it would manufacture a range of rangefinder bodies, from the Ms to something >like the CL, or like the Japanese screw mount that we are told is coming out >shortly. If Leica did that, they would attract more, young, users who don't >have the money to make the M plunge, but want to try rangefinder photography >and Leica. > >B. D. > |||||||||| I agree with you on that point : the CL, designed by Leica but made by Minolta, would have been a good "first leica" for young people. But, in the seventies, the reflex camera was so attractive...and less costly. When I was young, I dreamed about a leica M and... I bought a Ricoh singlex. I remember a leica ad in french cinemas : "one day, you'll get a Leica too". It was in 1979 for the R3. A dream is costless.An used camera which needs a CLA is a real nightmare.I still remember when I received from Leica France the estimate of the CLA for my CL. Dominique >