1970s Leica CL- still usable?

[MarkS]

I've been around photography since the early '70s. During my college years, the only Leicas for sale new were the CLs. Then, I thought "Interesting camera, limited use, expensive, so no." A teacher of mine at the time, Charles Harbutt of Magnum, used several and liked them- although he complained of their unreliability. Eventually I bought a 1959 M3 and began a long professional career.... 49 years later, I visit my local camera store, and they have a pristine Leica CL for sale, I picked it up, first time I'd even seen one since the '70s, and was quite impressed. That camera was collector-grade, and sold quickly. But it got me to thinking- is a 1970's Leica CL a practical user's camera today? Can they still be serviced?
Of course I know of the Minolta CLE, but that's different topic.
I'd like to hear opinions only from those who both own and use a Leica CL.

 

[eli griggs]

I have a CL and it's just as usable as my Canon QL 17 GIII's.

The meter does not work but I use pocket meters on a regular basics, or the Sunny 11 rule of thumb and do not feel deprived in any way or the need to have the camera meter worked on.

It could be you old teacher had a lemon, Minolta made, and remember, even German Leicas can be badly made and need returning to the factory, on occasion.

Use the camera with confidence, chances are you'll not suffer bad results compared to other similar aged cameras, but be aware there are lenses you should not use.


Cheers.

 

[GregY]

Mark I had a couple of CLs in the '70s and dragged them around Alaska and the Alps on climbing expeditions. Lately I've had two more. One was a 50th Anniversary. The meter died and Don Goldberg (DAG) replaced the meter cell. In our phone conversation he opined that the CL was much more sturdy than they're given credit for. He also said he had parts for them.
Once the meter cell was replaced...it commanded a high price and i sold it easily. Then a colleague of mine gave me one with both the 40mm & 90mm. That camera had been around the world as far as the Karakorum and never serviced. The meter still works. I had the viewfinder window broken in an overhead compartment when someone stuffed their bag on top of mine. Gary Clennan (LensmedicYYC) was able to source an NOS window and take the dent out of the top. Works like a charm now. They're small, discreet. & reliable. Love them!

 

[MattKing]

I sold them when new. They presented well to potential customers - particularly those who were deciding between the much larger M5 and the CL.
They "feel" like a Leica in the hand .......

 

[craigclu]

I got one w/o a working meter at a very good price some years back. I rationalized it because I tend to be an incident user anyway. When I sent it to DAG for a CLA, he discovered a simple fix for the meter and it is now completely functional. It's in a "go" bag with a couple of lenses and small flash and I believe I use it more than my more serious M gear because it's always at the ready. I got a 1.4 V'Lander 40mm for it and they pair quite well. The V'Lander lens hood interferes with the CL's rf so I actually use one with a straighter profile than the pictured original.

After posting, I realized that I had a picture with the hood I use and the Mr Zhou case that makes the tiny camera more comfortable to hold for me.

 

[GregY]

I agree with Craig. The CL handles better when it hangs horizontally. The inexpensive Chinese cases are well made and work like a charm.

Pardon Our Interruption...

 

[Pieter12]

Fits in a pocket, doesn't need to bounce around on your chest. Only shortcoming (pun maybe intended) is the short distance between rangefinder windows (the EBL is about 19mm compared to the M6 at 62mm), leading to less accurate focusing. I wouldn't necessarily recommend using a 90mm lens. I usually scale focus anyway.

 

[GregY]

Fits in a pocket, doesn't need to bounce around on your chest. Only shortcoming (pun maybe intended) is the short distance between rangefinder windows (the EBL is about 19mm compared to the M6 at 62mm), leading to less accurate focusing. I wouldn't necessarily recommend using a 90mm lens. I usually scale focus anyway.

P12, When i'm travelling, the camera is out.... (it doesn't take good photos in the pocket) & in many years of using the CL I've never missed focus with the 90. Although it does have a short rangefinder base, i've never had it affect any photos.

 

[MarkS]

That's good news, everyone! Thanks. I'll keep my eyes open for one...

 

[Bruce Butterfield]

It’s a great travel camera; I use mine all the time with the Minolta 40mm and Voigtlander 28mm lenses (latter with an aux finder.) I’ve never had problems with focusing and (fingers crossed) the meter works fine. To me it’s kind of the Barnack of M cameras, simple and light. Plus you see the shutter speed in the finder — how cool is that?

 

[Pieter12]

It’s a great travel camera; I use mine all the time with the Minolta 40mm and Voigtlander 28mm lenses (latter with an aux finder.) I’ve never had problems with focusing and (fingers crossed) the meter works fine. To me it’s kind of the Barnack of M cameras, simple and light. Plus you see the shutter speed in the finder — how cool is that?

The rangefinder does fine with wide and normal lenses. It can be more problematic with a longer lens because of the shallow depth of field.

 

[Bruce Butterfield]

The rangefinder does fine with wide and normal lenses. It can be more problematic with a longer lens because of the shallow depth of field.

If I want to use a longer lens I haul out one of my SLRs; I’ve never thought rangefinders as being useful for focal lengths > 90mm or so. IMHO.

 

[GregY]

It’s a great travel camera; I use mine all the time with the Minolta 40mm and Voigtlander 28mm lenses (latter with an aux finder.) I’ve never had problems with focusing and (fingers crossed) the meter works fine. To me it’s kind of the Barnack of M cameras, simple and light. Plus you see the shutter speed in the finder — how cool is that?

"the Barnack of M cameras".......aptly put.