joel_matherson

<p><em>"It could be argued the VC is a best buy.. but better optics than the Leica? Sounds like a crock to me. So why should I purchase anything off Rockwell's site? So that he can continue his barrage of half truths and outright falsehoods? I've used the 21 screwmount and while it's a very good lens, it can't match the optics of any of the recent vintage Leica lenses I've owned."</em><br>

<em>-<br /> </em><br>

Ken does have a tendency to try provoke reactions and sensationalize but "better" its a subjective thing and he pretty well emphasizes the features of the Voigtlander he prefers over the Leica 21mm ASPH. If you read closely he does make mention however how the edge performance at f4 and 5.6 is not quite up to to the Leica and this is pretty much is exactly the same conclusion that Amateur Photographer (29th Sept 2001) reached when comparing both lenses whereby it was a pretty close race. The Voigtlander even has less distortion than the Leica lens, an impressive feat for the cost but as even Ken points out this is easier to achieve with a slower lens. I dare say the new 1.4 even has a bit more over the 2.8. Given Amateur Photographer tested the screw mount version, the new M Mount version would bring the handling and build quality scores of the newer M lens even closer to Leicas. Kens point is that the compact size and and the ability to use uniform 39mm filters for his entire M mount lens range outweighs the very slight edge performance deficiency, which i must say (one of the few times) I agree with him. Size and the ability to use 39mm filters were the deciding factor for me regardless of price. Not all Voigtlander lenses come within spitting distance of their Leica counterparts but the 21mm Voigtlander is certainly one of them.</p>

<p>Someone once mentioned a Sean Reid review to me ( I dont subscribe myself because his reviews are M8 crop factored specific) whereby he claimed that the M mount version was sharper than the screw mount version. But could not find out if he put it down to sample variation or what? Given they are supposed to have the same optics I have always been puzzled by this??</p>

<p>I was thinking along the lines of operating outside the meters Ev range, its certainly not unlimited.<br>

I respectfully take partial issue to the notion that the CLE's metering system is buggy or unreliable in the sense that they had always been like that which is somethimes claimed by many non users. If a mechanical Leica wore out a part after 20years would you call it unreliable or just in need of service? Very few CLE's have ever been serviced in their lifetime, they wear out just like any other camera. The meter LEDs do go haywire from build up on the contacts under the shutter dial, had the cameras been serviced regularly this probably wouldnt happen but the electronics like any mechanical parts do wear out, they arent designed to operate forever. The electronics were perfectly reliable within the expected life of the cameras. Its only because they are such great little cameras which never were replaced or upgraded we try to keep them going as long as we can.</p>

 

<p>How low light are we talking about here?</p>

<p>This new M mount lens seems to provoke alot of derision simply because they upgraded it for rangefinder coupling. Their new Zoom Finder with crop factor adjustments for both M8 and Epson RD-1 show that they are targeting the digital market as well. Are any of the 18 and 21mm lenses out there from any brand not rangefinder coupled? Certainly they too could be focused without coupling as well but they arent. It seems perfectly logical if your upgrading a lens to couple it at the same time to cater for the new crop factored market. I remember when the Zeiss 15 came out people were saying for that kind of money they should have coupled it! I never in my wildest dreams expected the gripes to flow the other way. It is fair however to be concerned with the move away from LTM but I think there will be a good used market of the screw mount version with some (not all) switching to the M mount version.<br>

I think this new lens will be a winner, I always found the LTM 15 had a bit lower barrel quality than the later lenses they made. With excellent optics and a new more solid barrel and now able to add common 52mm filters I think its worth a bit more. I sold my 15mm with the announcement of the WATE but wasnt expecting the price, woops :-), so I seriously will consider getting the new M version.</p>

 

<p ><em><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=627549">"Rob Spoon</a> , Feb 26, 2009; 02:11 p.m.</em></p>

 

<p><em>Both top and bottom look and feel like black chrome metal to me. Like used on the M4-2 and later.<br /> In any case, very very strong!</em></p>

 

 

<p ><em><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=912852">Alan Clayton</a> <a href="../member-status-icons"><img title="Frequent poster" src="http://static.photo.net/v3graphics/member-status-icons/1roll.gif" alt="" title="Frequent poster" /> </a> , Feb 26, 2009; 04:34 p.m.</em></p>

 

<p><em>The top of my CLE is metal; it has small edge nicks & some token scratches, but still looks fine."</em><br>

<em>.</em><br>

Sorry but your both mistaken. Here is a photo of new CLE top and bottom covers from my new parts bin. You can see the grey resin colour when you look underneath them. You can also see many moulding circles and lines. One in particular is arrowed and points to where the actual injection took place and the excess has gone white where it was broken off and removed like model kits. So too if you look at the hinge points you can see they are hollow to cover the actual hinge screws attached to the camera back this is so fine and awkward in shape it could not be pressed by metal.<br>

.<br>

The long wearing nature of the top cover is due to a unique process Minolta did with its polycarbonate covers. They coated them in a fine layer of copper and then adhered the black chrome like finish on top of that. When the corners wear, particularly on the pentaprisms of the Black bodied SLR's like the X-700 you can see the orange copper colour on the corners. CLE covers are actually slightly thicker than the SLR versions though which makes them that little bit tougher.</p>

<div></div>

<p>The 45mm G lens has a fearsome reputation and with the ZM being a bit more modern than the Hexanon I am not surprised by the results. If you test the 28's you will see the G lens even further ahead. It has the least distortion of any 28mm lens made, it will be hard to beat by the ZM and Hexanon equivalents</p>

<p>The CLE's top and bottom covers are plastic but they are the impact resistant polycarbonate which dents less than the metal covers of the CL.<br>

Sherry has her roots with the CL but by no means the CLE. Cleaning the lens haze really wouldnt require a specialized person so the choice of repairers would depends on what country your in. If you let us know where you located someone in your area will be able to give you the best tip<br>

PS Did my email in regards to your other thread come through?</p>

<p><em>"The Nikon F2 had soem early issues too; torn shutters."</em></p>

<p>I was working in retail photographics during this period and have been an avid Nikon collector every since, The F2 use the same Titanium foil design of the Nikon F, and I have never heard of a torn Titanium Shutter from the SP to the F3 straight out of the box. Are you sure its not a EM or FG that may have had that problem?</p>

<p>Actually I replied to the email address on your letter and it bounced back so you may need to give me an alternate email address.</p>

<p>The CLE vertical adjustment isnt like a CL so its not done with screws. As has been described its done with a knurled ring that surrounds one of the rangefinder prisms.<br>

Darius, Ive just read you email and will post a diagram to your email address so you will know what to look for.</p>

 

<p><em>"If you are going to use a 90 on a CL or CLE the 90/4.0 is the one to use. Its cam system is specifically designed for use on the short-base rangefinder."</em><br>

Sorry but thats incorrect. The CLE lens and the CLE for which its designed have completely conventional M cams. Only the Elmar C and Leitz Minolta CL 90's have a steep cam design, not the lens referred to by the OP.</p>

"My point was that the later manufactured camera branded 'Minolta' is supposedly the more reliable. I've read it here and heard same directly in a phone conversation with the very reputable Leica repair person Sherry Krautner."

 

Sherry does say this but unfortunately she is partially wrong. The Leitz Minolta CL was sold from the very start in 73 and it too received the upgrades as certain inherent problems manifested themselves. It was sold in Japan under the Leitz Minolta brand and the Leica version was sold everywhere else. When the Leica CL was discontinued Minolta then expanded sales to other markets around the world such as the USA and as such people like Sherry mistakenly believes thats when they were first produced. Since Leitz Minolta CL's were made in greater numbers after the Leica version was discontinued one could say you are more likely to get a CL with the enhancements by going for the Leitz Minolta version. BUT in truth decades have passed and virtually any CL that is still working today will have most likely been updated at some point in its life and if it hasnt ever been serviced then it didnt need the upgrades cause the camera has already lasted over 30 years! So at the end of the day buy whichever one is fully working at the best price.

"The shutter actually seems to stay open forever, I am pretty sure it is the same setup as the OM-2."

 

"Yesterday I noticed the 1/1000 speed acting up. It would sometimes behave like B, and stay open as long as the shutter was pressed. I guess it will need to be repaired."

 

The Olympus, who actually bought the patent off Minolta for their shutter metering system, has a greater EV range and will stay open longer, but the Minoltas do not when the electronics are operating perfectly and has been serviced properly. When the shutter starts staying open for longer periods as you describe then its suggest a greater problem. The 1000th staying open like its the B setting is further evidence of this.

 

Joe has made a good suggestion in that is it doing these strange things with a film in it? Keeping in mind that the camera have an evaluating metering system that alters exposure as it meters off the film itself when the shutter is open. Without a film in it the camera just sees a black pressure plate and adjusts itself accordingly thinking its pitch black. So it may indicate a certain shutter reading off the curtain but then forced to change the actual speed it chooses when it reads nothing but the black pressure plate.

1/ As others have suggested you need to rotate the shutter dial back and forth briskly to help clear the build up off the contacts. One thing you may like to do is to change the batteries for fresh ones. You cant be sure how long they have been in the camera and also if they are A76 then change them for Silver Oxide 76 batteries instead as the Alkaline ones can get erratic when then get low. If it still occurs then time for a competent technician to clean it.

 

2/ Yes the CLE only has rangefinder coupling to 80cm but you can still focus lenses below this but you have to estimate.

 

3/ The CLE does have 50% greater effective base length than the CL as such it is capable of focusing a 90mm f2.8 wide open. Thats about its limit though a 90mm f2.0 it will struggle with. The Nokton 40mm f1.4 will work fine on a CLE as even the CL can focus this lens with its lower base length. It doesnt have 50mm framelines so this would be more annoying with a 50mm f1.4 than its ability to focus it, which it could do.

 

4/ The half second shutter speed limit referenced in the manual specifications is an EV range for a given film speed and aperture with the 40mm lens. Naturally when you think about it logically the camera is capable of opening longer as its has 1 second on the dial for its manual speeds. Most CLE's will stay open for 2 seconds in Auto and some are specced a bit differently and will open to about 5 or 6 seconds.

 

5/ It depends how great the haze is. It will eventually get to the stage where it will effect picture quality. The 40mm lenses arent that valuable by Leica standards so you have to weigh up if the cost to have it properly cleaned. Double check that its definitely haze. I have seen one instance when there was lens separation between cemented elements but this is a very rare occurrence.

"As for repair manual I dont know if one exists."

 

They definitely exist as I have one and the parts manual, however they are covered by copywrite. Also they are very large, to copy them would take hours.

"Maybe there will be more S mount Zeiss lenses in the future. Unlikely but we can hope."

 

I hope so too. A 21mm Biogon C in S mount would be nice.

Sometimes the CL wind wears a bit funny and it seems like it wont wind on or that its catching as you are winding on. To avoid this when winding on with your thumb apply pressure upwards as you wind on that sometimes helps and after a while of doing this the obstruction goes away. If this doesn't work then a service is in order, who is best would be dependant on where your located in the world before recommending a repairer.

"More interesting that Zeiss sees classic Nikons as a market for its lenses rather than a curiosity."

 

I suspect in this instance Zeiss didnt see anything. I think it was more a case that Cosina had made the mount previously with the Heliar S and was also making the ZM Sonnar C and simply asked Zeiss themselves if they could make S mount version of the lens. They took the orders well in advance so there was no risk taking.

"Sherry Krauter is an expert on the Leica CL and the Minolta CLE."

 

Sherry has a reputation of being a competent CL repairer but she is definitely not an expert on the CLE! Where are you located Karl? (People often jump straight too the USA options forgetting the forum is quite international) There are a couple of factory trained CLE technicians still around but none of them are in the USA to my knowledge. Don Goldberg would be the most competent with CLE's out of the USA choices if that's where you are located.

 

Karl, what lens are you using on the camera? With no lens on only the 28mm framelines are visible. You need a 40mm or 50mm lens to bring up the 40mm framelines. I have seen one bodgey attempt at modifying the mount on a Rokkor 40mm to bring up 35mm framelines on an M but when remounted on a CLE it wasn't filed properly and it started to engage the 40mm framelines and you could only see one top frameline.

 

It could also be the actuator in the mount is simply sticking a bit. To see if you can clear this hold your finger on the lens release button and turn the lens past its normal locking position. Do this gently dont force it hard and do this too and fro to see if it frees up the catch.

 

Failing that then some obstruction in the rangefinder is occurring or the frameline mask has dislodged and will need a competent technician to realign it.

"(I've never had a CLE, much to my regret)."

 

Prices for CLE's are at an all time low. Give one a try, im sure you will be very happy.

"File it. Perfect match for M8 (and I believe the Hex RF too). You end up with a very precise frameline for it at over 1m and it still brings up the 40mm frames on the CL/CLE. No lose scenario (unless you get filings in the helix, that is...)"

 

Sorry but for the CLE this information is incorrect. With the CL the 40mm framelines are visible all the time so it doesn't effect this camera but with the CLE its the 28mm framelines that are visible all the time and should you file the mount it will no long bring up the 40mm framelines at all and all you will see are the 28mm framelines only. So this this scenario isnt quite a no loose one for CLE's.

"I did the simple filing of the rangefinder cam so it indexes the proper 35mm frameline."

 

I think you mean the lens mount not the rangefinder cam.

I was actually more referring to why you would think the 40mm Summicron would be superior to the Rokkor? If you have the first Rokkor from the Leitz Minolta CL then it will yield identical photos. The lenses although assembled in Germany (Summicron)and Japan (Rokkor) it appears there was some parts sharing going on. If you have the CLE Rokkor then it does have slightly more contrast and warmer images than the first Rokkor and Summicron C.

"I suspect the M Rokkor may be a little softer wide open, at min focus range vs the 40 cron or Summaron f/2.8."

 

And why would you suspect that?