On 8/6/05, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > While many lenses will physically fit on the camera, not all will work > well. Due to the shorter rangefinder effective base length, using many > lenses at wider apertures makes accurate focusing difficult. You'll note > that the lenses designed for the CL(E) are usually quite a bit slower > (smaller aperture) than the lenses made for the standard Leicas. That > doesn't negate the value of a CL(E), but it doesn't seem the ideal camera > upon which to base a Leica ~system~. Plus there are no frame lines for a > lot of Leica lenses.
I agree with everything you say, Shel. One wouldn't really want to got much longer than 90mm, due to the shorther RF base length, and the 90mm Elmar C is f4.0, due to that fact. AFAIK, Leica made only two lenses specifically for that body, the 40mm Summicron C (f2.0) and the 90mm Elmar C. The Elmar C is another highly regarded lens, but as you say, slowish. The 40mm Summicron C is fast enough at f2.0. One certainly wouldn't want to put a Nocti on it! But, I didn't say (or didn't mean to say) that the CL system was a good base for a Leica system, but rather a relatively inexpensive way to get into Leica M-mount. Get the body, both lenses designed for it, maybe one or two others that work with it (between, say 24mm and 90mm, and not too fast for reasons you mention), then at least you'll have several good lenses when you decide on that M-series body. That's all I meant. cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
