"When the Leitz/Minolta CL had been out for a few years, you couldn't
give them away on the used market. They were derided as what they were,
cheap rangefinders -- like the RD -- with Leica's name put on them to
try and compete in the growing P&S category. Now, these CL's are
bringing between $400 and $1000 dollars on the used market. Go figure."
Uh... the Leica CL wasn't a P&S camera. If it was competing with
anything, it was the Rollei 35. And the CL was hardly cheap -- it was
over $400, which, 25 years ago, was pretty expensive. You could buy a
Nikon F for not much more.
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.
The poster complained that Olympus products were going the way of the
Leica -- used cameras were overpriced. The only positive spin I can put
on this sad state of affairs is that it is largely because Olympus is a
company with a long track record of unusual, unique designs.
< 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 >
|