I have been reading a lot about the Leica CM. I have been thinking about carrying a point and shoot 35mm with me. Now I know it is exspensive no matter if it has the fixed focal length or the zoom lens, but I have to admit I would be buying it for the glass. If there is anyone who has one I would be grateful if they would share their experince and thoughts on one. I know there are many other possiblites here. First of all for the price you can have a DSLR, but at this point not what I am after. I have considered that, but the truth is I am just not interested at this point in time. My goal at some point will to have a 35mm Leica M camera and digital, but that is a ways off. I figure the dynamic range of digital will be there within three years. Cameras like the Sony DSC-R1 are changeing things and DSLRs are only going to get better. So I do have a plan. At this time I just want a 35mm point and shoot I would be happy with. The CM meets some of the specs I want in that type camera. Monte Johnson.
As with their digital cams, Leica doesn't make their point and shoot cameras, or the lenses for them.
The CL's were made by Minolta, except for a very,very few made at Wetzler.
Nor did they make the R3 through R7 SLR's, the 16 fisheye,
the 70>210, 35>70 Original F3.4, the 28>70, the 500 mirror.
Sigma made the 28>70 and Minolta the rest, including the
R3 through the R7. Angeneaux also made a couple of their zooms.
The best 28 mm M lens made was the one made for the Minolta
CLE. I originally bought the entire system new and when I sold my 28, I got more for it than for what I paid for the entire system,new.
Leica glass is nice in general, but they have had some real dog's along the way. My first Leica was a 3F black dial and my last an M6 and a R7 and a R6.2 with a multitude of lenses.
I do realize they are not made by leica. I just like the look the glass gives. So did I hear you right that you had an M6 and didn't like it. The M6 is one I always wanted. The CLs can still be had for a pretty good price. I just want a 35mm to carry with me. THe CM would work for me.. Monte Johnson,
Yes, I did have an M6. It was a pretty good one. The very first ones were very buggy. They had electronic problems--the meters shorted out and fried themselves. Leica just did not have the electronic expertise of the Japanese. That is one of the reasons Minolta took over the complete productionof the early R cameras. At first, Minolta just made the main castings, but later on they did the whole thing.The Lietz designers were good with the mechanics, but don't give them a wiring job. The first R3's were partially made in Japan and "finished" in Portugal. By the time the R3 Mot came out they were all made in Japan. They tried again with the R4's, but the QC was miserable and again Minolta had to bail them out. The last Minolta series were the R6/7 series. The R8/9's are all Wetzler.
Thanks Dave that is interesting. I have thought about getting an R8, but have heard the early ones had some problems. That kind of held me off. It is just a good thing I talk more than I buy. Other wise I would be in trouble. Monte Johnson.
I have been using the Leica CM for about 2 months now as a carry everywhere camera when I don't want to carry my Nikon F100 outfit. I love this camera! It is solid, easy to use, and the lens in magnificent! You will be pleased with this fine camera. email@example.com
Thank you for the iinput on this camera. I have stuggled with knowing what to do. I use medium format for all my images right now but miss 35mm for various reasons. I have searched for the right cmaera for me and it is not easy when you set standards for lens quality high. I have used a Contax camera in the past before I went with the Fuji 645ZI. I like the sharpness and contrast from Zeiss glass. It does not leave me with a lot of chioces for 35mm. The G2, Leica M Zeiss Ikon or Bessa cameras. The G2 was my first choice but I no longer feel comforable with service from Contax. The Leica M I will always desire but just is to much money for my buget even used. I just can do not get the feeling I would like the Bessa even though I am sure it is a fine camera. The Zeiss Ikon has not been out and proven yet. I am not willing to give up my medium format yet so I wanted a camera that would do the shots I did not want to do with medium format. The CM has a lot of what I want. Good build from what I here. Good quality lens and some control over exposure. What i would like to know is how good is the lens when it comes to flare situations. Not being able to use filters has made me hesitate there but I know SK Grimes will make a hood for me for the camera. Many have been hard on the reviews of this camera because of the cost but all who has really used it has great things to say about it. I feel if the quality of the lens and the camera is good then it is worth the price to me. The three year protection helps. If you could I would be grateful if you could post a photo taken with the CM. I have seen very few taken with this camera but the ones I have saw are very good. I shoot mainly BW. Thanks for responding here. Monte Johnson.
I've been away for awhile, but thought I would answer your questions. The CM best suits your needs if you want a well built and easy to use camera with a superb lens that you can take anywere. It will not do what an SLR or large format camera is meant to do