I saw a Minolta CLE kit (with 28,40, and 90) for sale for about $1500. Stephen Gandy gives it a good write up but how does it compare to a Leica M6 - in terms of build quality as well as functionality?

-- David Killick (dalex@inet.net.nz), March 23, 2002

Answers

The CLE is not built to compete with M6. It's an entry level rangefinder system. I have a set and I really enjoy the overall system concept. Smaller and lighter weight than M6 and very comfortable to hand held.

But no AE lock on exposure. And while you switch to manual, the meter turn off. This is a design flaw. Luckily there's EV compensation but a bit slow to get to.

All three lens got the same filter size. The viewfinder/range finder is just like a 0.52x M6, clear and contrasty. Shorter base has less focusing accuracy so 90mm lens only open up to f4.

TTL capability with Minolta flash.

Lens performance wise, IMO, good but not as good as Leica M. I sometimes use mine with 35mmf2 summicron (uses its 40mm frame line) and 90mm f2.8 elmarit (bring up 90mm frame line correctly).

Overall, it's a fun system for me and offer many interesting alternative. For example, use the CLE as a backup. (much lighter than bringing another M body and when you want to go automatic) I use Rokkor 28mm on my M6. CLE got a self timer! Use a SF20 flash in the aperture mode and let CLE do ambient automatic exposure to get slow motion effect etc etc... With my CLE I have absolute zero appetite to the new M7.

Finally, beware... many people has problem on the relaibility of its electronics. Mine also went into shop once but fine afterward.

Cheers, Chi

-- Chi H (chihuang@yahoo.com), March 23, 2002.

I have both an M6 and a CLE kit. They are different cameras and I like both. The CLE is a very enjoyable camera to use, and makes a lot of sense as a system. It had aperture priority twenty years before the M7 and now is a fraction of the cost. It has TTL metering and TTL flash. It is smaller than an M6 and with the 3 lenses makes a perfect compact travel kit. It feels great in the hand. It loads far easier than an M6. It only has 28/40/90 mm framelines, but truthfully that's all you really need. The 40mm lens is very sharp. Lately I have been using my CLE with the 40mm Rokkor that came with it, plus the newer Voiglander 28 and 90mm LTM lenses with M adapters. The 28 mm Rokkor lens is an excellent lens but has a history of problems with lens coating separation, so you should have it checked. It does not have AE lock or independent manual metering. Basically if you want to use manual metering you have to take an AE reading and then switch to manual mode. Overall, I think it is a wonderful system with a few drawbacks. $1500 is a very good price. You should grab it.

-- Steve Rosenblum (stevierose@yahoo.com), March 23, 2002.

David, its a great camera although some prefer mechanical cameras but I find this no problem at all. THe more acurate shutter speeds from the electronic shutter make up for this over my CL. Not to mention its not hard to have spare batteries with you. I must disagree with a few things Chi has said. Firstly To say that the lack of metering in manual is a design flaw implies that this practise was a specific mistake to this camera. This is a 70's designed camera. Many comparison cameras of the same period do not have metered manual either. ie Olympus RD, Canon QL17, Minolta 7SII other compact rangefinders of the 70's. The fact that the CLE's electronics were based on XG1 series SLR's that didnt meter in Manual at the time meant it didnt get metered manual. If the CLE came out later when the XG-M came out maybe it would have receieved metered manual. No dispute metered manual would be nice, Period flaw maybe, design flaw no. Secondly he states the exposure compensation that generally overcomes most of the lack of metered manual problems is slow to get to, I strongly disagree, its on the shutter spead dial with a single action press a release and turn at the same time, it can be activated while still looking in the viewfinder if your proficient with the direction and feel of controls. Thirdly he states the Minolta lenses are not as good as Leicas. THe 40 and 90 are multicoated versions of the Leitz 40C and 90C and clearly their equal if not superior for their lower flare. Only the 28 which has a coating blistering problem lets the lens side down. Often people will mention servicing problems which seems to often be a problem for USA users. Here in Australia mine is really maintained by a popular camera tech. Loading is great. Its not an M, true, but thats why I bought it, it offers certain things that I preferred over the M. It does depend on what suits you best.

-- Joel Matherson (joel_2000@hotmail.com), March 23, 2002.

no one has mentioned so far the key feature of the cle -- it is the only camera in the series (cl, cle) that actually couples perfectly with the m lenses. the cam and cam arm shape differed slightly on the cl (apparently per leica's request -- you figure out why!!), making it hard to focus long m lenses on the cl accurately, especially at wide apertures. in my view, the cle is almost an ideal platform for m lenses. it may not be built to m6 standards, but the all metal build quality is VERY high. it feels like a brick in the hand. the led metering system (no matchstick as in the cl) is excellent and easy to use. the RF is as brite and clear as the finder in the m6, although it does suffer from lower mag and effective baselength. the electromagnetic release is smoother in my view than the release on the m7. the camera also has the classic horizontal travel cloth shutter that made the m series famous. (as an aside, erwin puts goes on at length in his m7 review to explain what a challenge it was for the m7 designers to build an electronic release around the leica cloth shutter [instead of going with, say, a copal shutter a la g2/hexar rf]. didn't minolta already surmount those technical probs in the cle??) finally, the camera's best feature is its SIZE. it is considerably smaller than an m7ttl, and fits in the hand (or coat pocket) in a way that the m cameras don't. i'd VERY happily forego the ae lock/dx sensor and any other upgrades on the m7 if they had just made the camera as small as the cle. AND BY THE WAY -- THE CLE HAS A SELF TIMER!! i think they are great cameras. that's why cle bodies consistently sell around the $1000 mark (tamarkin curretly has two for $1149 each, body only). but don't fiddle with the rokkor lenses (although they are quite good for the money and very compact). slap a 35 asph on the cle and really have some fun. oh yeah, one last thing, in my experience, it is the CLs that have the chronic electronics probs (although really no worse than other 40 year old match stick meters). the solid state LED system (with no moving parts) of the CLE is FAR more reliable occasionally the contacts in the speed dial need cleaning on a camera that has sat for many years (they were not gold plated), but that's usually it. good luck!!

-- roger michel (michel@tcn.org), March 23, 2002.

Looks like the other posters got everything covered. I'll just add my 2 cents that I think the CLE is a superb camera and one of the favorite ones I have ever owned. If mine ever breaks and I can't get it fixed, I'd be looking for another one. The 40 Rokkor is superb-- also one of the best lenes I have ever used-sharp as a pin wide open, zero distortion, nearly flare proof, annd super compact. The camera has a fast responding, very accurate shutter and meter. Very quiet and smooth operating camera. The finder is very clear, bright, and clean with no extra lines to distract. You get used to popping it off auto and on to compensation or manual in difficult lighting. Main drawback to the camera is lousy fill flash--but this is the case with the Leica M cameras as well. If Minolta re-released this camera with 21st century updates, it would still be a most appealing m camera. By the way, how hard is it to clean the contacts under the shutter speed dial?

-- Andrew Schank (aschank@flash.net), March 23, 2002.

One point about the CLE that I didn't see mention of in the other responses is that, in AE mode, it continues to meter off the film during the exposure. (At least I've been told it does. If not, I'm confident that a participant more knowledgeable than I will correct me on this.)

The advantage of this approach is that the CLE will adjust exposure mid-exposure in rapidly-changing lighting conditions, such as shooting in night clubs and such. That may also explain why it doesn't have AE lock.

-- Ralph Barker (rbarker@pacbell.net), March 23, 2002.

cleaning the contacts is not that hard, but really should not be attempted unless you are very comfortable servicing electronic cameras. a small but not insignificant amount of disassembly is required. apc camera in haverhill mass does a good job with this. the camera continues to meter during the shot. this can be a good or bad thing (usually good).

-- roger michel (michel@tcn.org), March 23, 2002.

Many thanks for your comprehsive answers. I'll check out the camera. What a shame an updated version is not still being made.

-- David Killick (dalex@inet.net.nz), March 23, 2002.

If I could find a good quality CLE with 3 lenses for $1,500 I'd buy it in a hurry. Great price for what you've found, since a first rate CLE in Tokyo (where it was made in the first place) costs $1,000 to $1,200 just for the camera body. My local camera store has the Rokkor 28mm and f/4 90mm lenses for sell at about $700 each - which I think is way overpriced. The store owner tells me that for some reason, CLE gear is now suddenly popular again and the prices reflect the revived demand for htis classis equipment.

-- Steve Brantley (superglidesport@mindspring.com), March 23, 2002.

I think of the CLE as a baby version of the new M7 minus a few features.

-- Alfie Wang (leica_phile@hotmail.com), March 23, 2002.

thanks guys I'm goimg to check out a s/h body for aboui 700.

incidently, can u put a 50 f1 on the CL?

-- ben stypel (gbstudio@optushome.com.au), March 24, 2002.

My DR won't fit on my CLE.

-- chris chen (chrischen@msn.com), March 25, 2002.

what is a DR

-- ben stypel (gbstudio@optushome.com.au), March 26, 2002.

what is a DR?

-- ben stypel (gbstudio@optushome.com.au), March 26, 2002.

DR: dual range 50mm Summicron from the early 60s, users rave about it. Re the CLE: shortly after posting this question, the camera was snapped up by an eager buyer, may be co-incidentally. Ah well, never mind, I'll stick to Leica M.

-- David Killick (dalex@inet.net.nz), March 26, 2002.

>... but how does it compare to a Leica...

Btw I babysat a mint CLE for a few months before I got the Leica rf bug a year later. Played with the camera a bit but didnt put film through it . The body was just another plasticky Minolta, like the used SLRs selling for $100 or less on Ebay. If anyone is really interested in the CLE because of the optics, why not buy the lenses and use them on their Leicas?

The CLE was built with parts from the Minolta XD1,2,3 line of electronic SLRs. Reliabiliy and build quality would be the same as those cameras while the price is way higher. Funny how the CLE gets the oohs and aahs now that it's out of production while the VC BEssa R is the poor country cousin? Both cameras are built on their respective companies line of cheap SLRs of the time. Will the Bessa R will be venerated like the CLE someday? All the arguments against buying a VC Bessa should apply to CLEs too.

-- Fred Sun (redsky3@yahoo.com), March 26, 2002.

how about the NOctilux F1 -will that haVE ANY PROBLEMS on th CLE ,chaps ??

-- ben stypel (gbstudio@optushome.com.au), March 26, 2002.

Ben, according to Stephen Gandy, the Noctilux 50mm f/1 can't be used on the CLE. See here for details on the CLE's lens-compatibility: http://www.cameraquest.com/c le.htm.

-- Hoyin Lee (leehoyin@hutchcity.com), March 26, 2002.

thanks mate you r a life saver

-- ben stypel (gbstudio@optushone.com.au), March 26, 2002.

and they sold it also~!

-- ben stypel (gbstudio@optushome.com.au), March 27, 2002.