Jump to content

Most Compact Film Body


Recommended Posts

Also not a Leica, but descended from one (sort of), the Minolta CLE is a fine camera if you like 28 & 40mm. Great viewfinder for 28mm and metering is pretty comparable to M7. I much prefer these to the Leica CL.  But they do sometimes have electrical issues and are hard to find parts for.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be the CL (the old CL of course, not the new CL!). How compact do you need a film body to be?

 

All M's are pretty much the same size. The M6TTL is a bit taller, the M5 is overall larger. Another option is Voigtlander who made M mount bodies. Similar in size but lighter in weight.

 

I guess I should have added 'that takes M lenses and rangefinder coupled'.
I didn't realize there were that miny options.

Matt

Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be the CL (the old CL of course, not the new CL!). How compact do you need a film body to be?

 

All M's are pretty much the same size. The M6TTL and the M7 are is a bit taller, the M5 is overall larger. Another option is Voigtlander who made M mount bodies. Similar in size but lighter in weight.

At least that's how I remember it; and from what I recall the M6 TTL and the M7 have the same height.

Edited by Lukas F.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Another option is Voigtlander who made M mount bodies. Similar in size but lighter in weight.

 

R_M series might be lighter in weight, but they are slightly tall comparing to M. 

https://www.filmshooterscollective.com/analog-film-photography-blog/leica-m6-or-voigltander-bessa-r4m-film-camera-review-2-16

 

T is small and light, M mount, but no go without eVF.

 

25883929958_92983dd385_z.jpg

 

I sold it after few weeks. I don't like like new cameras getting hot shoe loose within few weeks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Earley,

The M4-P comment was in response to " how compact did I want". I probably shouldn't quoted.

Yes, I did read the responses. Is the CL all manual? I guess I somehow got it in my head that it was electronically controlled. I read a couple places where the meters were problematic. Any truth in that in general? I don't care if I have a meter, but if its there, I'd like it to work.

 

Thanks,

Matt

Link to post
Share on other sites

Although interesting enough, I'll pass on the O replica. I have an old working Argus A2B that has odd apertures. I had to make a little chart so I don't figure what aperture to use the wrong direction.

I might like to have the O, but not as a second body.

 

Matt

Link to post
Share on other sites

Matt,

 

 

Another M is the best second body IMHO.

 

Form factor (for M user of course) is best as I have also CLE and Hexar RF (nice "M mount bodies" but full of electronic).

 

If budget is small, Leica MD or MDa without viewfinder can be candidate to have for wide angle use for example.

With a little more money, M4-2 is another good choice if you don't use 28mm lens on it.

 

Then you have plenty of choices in M range and why not just another M4-P :p.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Barnacks are all screw mount bodies, so they don't meet your stated criteria of being able to use M lenses. That said, if you acquired one and used it, you could use the screwmount lenses on your M body with a simple and readily available adapter ring. I and many others have been doing that for years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...