William Sommerwerck wrote:
>
> The CL was distinctive on two counts. First, it had interchangeable
> lenses. This made it attractive to people who wanted a small, versatile
> RF camera but couldn't afford an M Leica.
>
> Second, it was the first Leica RF with a behind-the-lens meter. (I
> _think_... Someone correct me if I'm wrong. But I don't think the M5 had
> shown up at that point.) The meter was literally behind the lens, on a
> little arm. It took a spot reading of the central area of the scene. You
> had to make sure you didn't accidentally point the camera at the Sun for
> an extended period.
>
> Was the CL a "good" camera -- well-designed and sturdy, with good
> lenses? I don't know. Is it worth $1000 used? I don't know. But it was
> definitely _not_ a cheap P&S camera.
And let's not forget that the Minolta CLE (not sure about the Leica)
has OTF! In fact, for any Olympus adict wanting to use Leica M
lenses the CLE must be the way to go... ;-).
Frank Wijsmuller.
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|