Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'leica cl'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type

Leica Forum

  • International User Forum
    • Leica M System
    • Leica L-Mount
    • Leica Q
    • Leica X
    • Leica D-Lux / Digilux / V-Lux
    • Leica R System
    • Leica S System
    • Leica Collectors & Historica
    • Photo Forum
    • Leica & General Discussions
    • Leica Forum Discussions
    • LHSA Member Forum
    • Events & Member Meetings
  • Deutsches Leica Forum
    • Leica M-System
    • Leica L-Mount
    • Leica Q
    • Leica X
    • Leica D-Lux / Digilux / V-Lux Forum
    • Leica R System
    • Leica S System
    • Leica Sammler & Historica
    • Foto-Forum
    • Leica & Allgemeine Diskussionen
    • Leica Forum Diskussionen
  • Challenges / Wettbewerbe
    • Digi - Lux Challenge
    • Leica X Challenge
    • Leica Mini Challenge
    • Leica One Challenge
    • Barnack Challenge


  • Leica Q
  • Leica M (Typ 240)
  • Leica SL (Typ 601)


  • Leica Q
  • Leica M (Typ 240)
  • Leica M Monochrom (Typ 246)
  • Leica SL (Typ 601)


  • Leica M System
    • Leica M Cameras
    • Leica M Lenses
    • Leica M Accessories
    • Leica M Wanted
  • Leica L-Mount
  • Leica S System
  • Leica Q
  • Leica X
  • Leica D-LUX / V-LUX / DIGILUX
  • Historica
    • Leica R System
    • Screwmount Leica
  • Misc

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL










Your Leica Products / Deine Leica Produkte


Found 73 results

  1. well not much from my part so far, but I want desperately to be able to change the direction of the right wheel (aparture), so that all my Leicas turn to the same side
  2. Hey All! I just published a review of the Leica CL on my website, and shotkit.com http://www.romeobravophoto.com/leica-cl-review/ I'm really enjoying this little gem!
  3. Hi all, I have recently sold my Leica Q in order to buy something with interchangeable lenses. I am really struggling to chose between buying a new Leica CL, Summicron 23mm (and I will probably down the road buy the adapter and some M-lenses), or a used Leica M 240 along with a used Leica M lens (probably 50 mm Summicron). In the end both options will do the same damage to my wallet For info, I do currently not own any Leica lenses. I am not a professional, merely a happy amateur. My photography is concentrated around portraits (bokeh!!), family, travel, social activities, landscape, architecture. My heart is leaning towards the M, while my brain (and wife, even though she is not negative for the M) towards the CL. I am a bit afraid of the rangefinder, and if I will be able to focus as quick as I want to. The CL have AF on TL-lenses and focus-peaking on M-glass through the EVF (I know the M240 have focus-peaking on the screen and the optional viewfinder, but then the point of the RF is kinda gone?). After all the CL might just be a pit-stop to the M(?). I am not interested in sports- or action photography (even though we do have a eager and young dog), but it would be awful to miss a moment due to lacking focus. My question is; which option would you buy, and why? PS: I have in the process already passed on Sony and Fujifilm due to their overly-complex nature...
  4. I find the rendition of CL DNG images using the standard embedded profile on Lightroom for the CL rather garish and more suitable for a picture postcard. I am using a 2016 (Touchbar) 15" Macbook Pro with a calibrated screen. This is particularly the case if using a polarising filter. They are not quite so bright after conversion to JPEG's but still not quite to my taste. Capture One is somewhat better using the DNG file neutral profile but if for example I use the SL profile, it goes garish again (Phase One in their usual fashion have no CL profile at present for C1 V10 - I don't know about V.11 as I have not bought it). Hopefully this is something Leica might improve on a firmware update. See example below taken in Speightstown pier and fishmarket in Barbados, three weeks ago, I think probably with polarising filter (Hoya Fusion MC 52mm Circular Pola filter). Wilson
  5. I did what I thought was an interesting "shoot out" this past Sunday in my back garden. I compared the following: Leica CL with 18-56 TL zoom set to 22mm, f/4 Leica CL with 21mm Summilux-M, f/4 Leica CL with 21mm Super Elmar M, f/4 Leica CL with 11-23 TL zoom set to 22mm, f/4.4 (wide open at this focal length) Leica M10 with 35mm Summilux M FLE, f/5.6 Leica SL with 24-90mm Vario Elmar set to 34mm, f/5.6 Cameras were tripod mounted. A shutter delay of 2s was used to reduce the chances of blur from camera movement. Image stabilization was turned off with the SL. ISO was set to base value. Same point of focus was used in all cases. The objective was to see whether there were any obvious differences in image quality on a real, three dimensional subject when shooting under optimum conditions. The focal ratios chosen were to provide optimum image quality for the lens and to ensure depth of field differences between formats were minimized. The lighting varied slightly from minute to minute since those was outdoors, but all images were shot at approximately the same time under overcast conditions. I repeated the experiment from a slightly longer subject distance to get essentially the same framing with a different focal length: Leica CL with 18-56 TL zoom set to 35mm, f/4.9 (wide open at this focal length) Leica CL with 35mm Summilux-M FLE, f/4 Leica CL with 35mm Summilux TL, f/4 Leica M10 with 50mm APO Summicron M, f/5.6 Leica SL with 24-90mm Vario Elmar set to 50mm, f/5.6 End result? At optimum aperture and when one's technique is good, I really couldn't find a consistent difference among any of these lenses. Frankly, the biggest challenge was in getting the point of focus the same in all images such that depth of field was distributed evenly in front of and behind the point of focus. In one case in particular, I simply missed focus a bit (despite it being an AF lens--probably wasn't careful enough in my selection point). Some lenses had slightly different field curvature characteristics. There were very slight differences in edge of field sharpness. Very slight differences in color separation on fine details. That's about it. Could I tell the difference in noise characteristics between the two full frame cameras and the APS-C camera? Not at base ISO I couldn't. Maybe if there had been some sky in the field of view or some other really smooth surface I could have. Maybe not. What about dynamic range? Not under overcast conditions where all three cameras were capable of capturing the entire range of tones without any clipping. Were there differences in how out-of-focus areas were rendered? Sure, but it would be nearly impossible to pick "winners" and "losers" with the particular garden scene I was using--no bokeh balls or specular highlights for evaluation. What about color cast or saturation? Well, I've already got my M10 dialed in the way I want it, and the SL and CL were actually closely matched, so the colors came out very nearly identical with the largest factor being the slightly variable lighting conditions. Certainly, I wouldn't be able to pick out a lens/camera combo that had "better" or even "different" colors. Of course, I wasn't pushing any boundaries here. The comparison was at optimum aperture for each lens or very nearly so. The lighting and dynamic range were easy to handle. There was ample light for shooting at base ISO. The tripod minimized or eliminated camera blur. The subject was static. I was taking my time so that focus wouldn't be an issue (and even so, I missed one slightly--just enough to be visible at 100% magnification on my 5K monitor). What does this tell me? Nothing shocking, really. I would choose my lens and camera based on size/weight, field of view needed, control over depth of field needed, available light, need for autofocus, and need for image stabilization. All the combinations above are equally capable if you aren't pushing the edges too much. We all worry more than we probably need to about image quality, lens rendering, sharpness, and similar factors. Frankly, the worst image I created from a technical perspective was using one of the best lenses--the 35mm Summilux TL. Even when I was trying to be careful and really nail the "technique" for any factors that could impact image quality, a small difference in focus point was the single largest factor in sharpness! I'd post the images, but frankly there is no point. At web sizes and with JPG compression, they are identical.
  6. A longish press on the FN button produces the following list: · Self-Timer ... the factory default, according to page 23 of the manual · Exposure Metering · Exposure Compensation · White Balance · Photo File Format · Scene Mode · User Profile · WLAN A longish press on the right setting-wheel button produces the following list: · Exposure Bracketing · Self-Timer ... repeated function · Exposure Metering ... repeated function · ISO ... the factory default, according to page 23, top-right · White Balance ... repeated function · Photo File Format ... repeated function · Scene Mode ... repeated function · User Profile ... repeated function Question: Why are 6 functions repeated? Should not all functions be unique? Now, let’s look at calling the functions: a) Via the FN button Method: Calling each of the FN functions after a long press on the FN button to show the list, followed by a tap on the center-button of the directional pad to confirm the desired setting, followed by another tap on the FN button to bring the desired function to the screen... Only the following functions appeared: · Self-Timer · Exposure Compensation · Photo File Format · Scene Mode · WLAN What happened to the other three functions? Via the right setting-wheel button... Same method... Only Exposure Bracketing showed up... What happened to the other seven functions? What am I getting wrong? What am I not understanding? It would be really useful to be able to call up 16 (8+8) functions using these 2 buttons.
  7. I'm taking a 7-night trip to Vancouver, BC and was all ready to take my SL kit with the 24-90, 50 F/1.4 Summilux and 90-280 + accessories - all 20 pounds worth, load it into my Think Tank backpack and travel 3100 miles with it. I mean, I would get phenomenal photos, but I'm not renting a car and will be hiking, biking and taking public transportation. I thought about it, then I thought about it again, and I bit the bullet - I finally broke down. I just bought a CL with the 18-56 Vario Elmar zoom, the 23mm Summicron, and a grip and I get throw it, a few batteries and a small flash and charger into my Billingham Hadley Small Pro and feel like a tourist and not a "pack mule" Yea, I'm probably going to give up a bit in the way of image quality, but I should still be in pretty good shape with this kit, right? -Brad
  8. Greetings, If you'd be buying a CL over again, would you buy the "Handgrip CL" for it, or not? As well, would you chose the "EP-CL Thumbs Up Grip" for it, or the "handgrip"? If you could only get one of those two extra items.
  9. I posted this elsewhere last evening, but thought others here might enjoy it and might respond with some interesting comments. As always, there's no intent on my part to push any buttons, but I'm sure we'll disagree on something! — The Leica CL ... my first impressions: Made it up to Leica Store San Francisco on Tuesday and had a good long look at the CL there. I asked and was given the opportunity to reset it, fit my lenses, and make test exposures with my card. My primary desire for this camera is to use it for copy work, table-top plus other niche uses like long telephoto work, etc. I intend it to be my TTL viewing body for the value of that in precision focusing and digitizing negatives. I'm not too concerned with AF or many of the other convenience features of the CL; what motivates me is that Leica supports all my R and M lenses on it, and it will work with all of my existing accessories. That said, I do expect that any camera I own will get used for some general purpose photography as well—I'll just be using my existing manual M and R lenses via the adapters rather than buying new lenses for the camera. Picking up the body for the first time, the CL is light and small yet feels solid. The controls all move with the smoothness I expect from Leica gear, and the sense of precision in their click-settings is there. The camera is nicely spare and lean on number of buttons, etc. It looks like a "mini" Leica M. After resetting the body, then setting the file output types to JPEG+raw, I fitted my Color Skopar 28mm to the M Adapter L, and set the lens profile for the Leica 28mm Summaron-M. This was always one of my favorites when shooting with the Ricoh GXR, although I got it somewhat late in that game, and is that sweet "wide-normal" with an FoV equivalent of about 42mm on the APS-C format. A few moments fussing about to figure how to set the ISO and EV compensation, then brought the camera to my eye. While not the "state of the art" of the SL, the EVF on the CL is very nice. I turned on focus peaking, it worked as expected. I stepped up the magnification and it worked as expected. No problems. One press on the center button on the four way pad and all info is there, another press and it's a clean view. Nice. Down to f/5.6, I had no difficulty seeing the 28mm lens go in and out of focus as I turned the focusing ring. Below that, I found magnification became necessary for precision. I didn't have the time to try to evaluate how accurate the distance scale was on this camera with the mount adapter, but I expect it to be slightly off (allowing one to focus slightly past infinity) if it's like all the other bodies I've tried this adapter on. I tend to forget just how good a lens this little 28mm really is. It's simply terrific, and the Summaron-M 28mm f/5.6 lens profile seems to suit it perfectly on APS-C. Next I fitted the Tri-Elmar-M 16-18-21mm f/4 ASPH, the WATE. I took four or five exposures at each of the primary focal length settings, both at 6-8' distance and from a close up position. If the Super-Vario-Elmar-T 11-23mm f/3.5-4.5 ASPH is actually a better performer than this one, it's probably beyond my ability to see the difference: The WATE produces just awesome image quality... And that's hand held, without the benefit of a tripod to really make it sing. It's just an amazing lens, IMO, and I'm very happy I sprang for the big bucks to get it. Of course, the 11-33mm zoom has a wider range, but with the WATE if I want wider still I can always just switch to the M body. I'd lose the framing/focusing precision of the CL, particularly in the extended close-up range, but since I don't normally use an ultrawide for extreme close-up work or copy work where such things matter most, I don't think that's much of a loss for me. Finally I did a series of exposures with the Macro-Elmarit-R 60mm and the APO-Macro-Elmarit-TL 60mm: my standard reference shot, a number of close ups, some tests shooting a tape measure to check the magnification indication on the barrel of the R lens, a couple of portraits of the sales person who was helping me. Both of these lenses are a bit bulky, but they both balance beautifully on the camera IMO ... not too large, not too heavy, not too light. The TL lens obviously has AF and focuses very quickly and surely. The R lens also focuses quickly but manually. Neither is any problem to focus with extreme accuracy even at f/8, without so much as either peaking or magnification turned on. Notice I haven't said much about the CL's controls? There's a reason for that: the little beastie was fitted with firmware v2, I'd quickly set up the dials and buttons based on my reading the manual before I got here, and everything about it worked exactly as it was designed to ... and very nicely for me. The only ergonomic niggle, for me, is that like with most small digital cameras, there's not enough space to fit my mitts comfortably on the naked body (of course, that doesn't matter at all for copystand and tripod use). I tried the grip and it made a big "Meh." sound in my head. I tried the half case and that does the job of thickening and making the camera just a hair taller, with a bit more room for my thumbs, etc. So for walking around picture taking, I'll need the half case (or Protector, as Leica likes to call it). I'm pleased that they put a magnetically closed trap door in the bottom so you can access the SD card and swap the battery without taking it off. I thanked the salesperson for her time, told her I'd be in touch, and left for home. Once there, I moved all the DNG + JPEG files into Lightroom v6.14. Everything opened right up and looks great right at the DNG defaults. The 28 and the WATE both shine beautifully on this body; all of the Color Skopar 28's typical color shifting at the edges are outside of the sensor area, it seems, and the Summaron-M 28 lens profile cleans up a tiny bit of barrel distortion in this part of the lens's FoV. The truly interesting comparison, to me, is the Macro-Elmarit-R 60 vs the APO Macro-Elmarit-TL 60: With the R-lens being cropped to APS-C, I imagined that it might look a bit shuttered or confined since Leica has always put a lot of effort into tuning their lenses for the 35mm film format. Well, nothing to fear with this one. It is hard to see any difference whatever between the TL and R lenses, and both are just superb performers on this body. From 1:2 to a half-length portrait, the images couldn't be too much more similar without saying that they're the same optics just in a different lens mount, although I know that's not the case. Of course, I don't touch on AF or many of the cameras' other features yet. They're all niceties that I expect are of value to someone, but my primary notion was to examine the quality of the viewfinder, the control layout, and the imaging performance with my intended lenses. I think I'm going to be well satisfied with the Leica CL as both an adjunct for my niche needs and as a peer sibling to my M-D. — End game: After studying the manual carefully and then evaluating, handling the Leica CL in person, I've decided to obtain one. I should have it by the weekend. ... One more short trip on the Hamster Wheel of Progress.
  10. ... page 24, right side... top line ambiguity: "up to 8 menu items" ... All at once, or one by one ?? ====== What and where are those functions mentioned under the second bullet (right-pointing arrow): -- "edit Right Wheel Push in Live View" ? and -- "Edit Rear FN Button in Live View" ? Rear FN button ?? What is that ?? === Sorry to be so thick... I just don't get it. Does anyone?
  11. Has anyone used the Wasabi BP-DC12 replacement batteries available from Amazon in their CL? My experience with them in the past has been good in other cameras, and they're sure a heck of a lot less expensive than the OEM Leica battery. The CL is getting a reasonable number of exposures per charge given the small battery capacity. But the capacity is a bit low, so I figure having a few extras on hand might be a good thing. I have two OEM batteries, don't really feel like paying another $200 to get two more if I can get away with a less expensive alternative. thanks in advance.
  12. Hello everyone, I was wondering if someone else is having a problemi with the new flash and wireless controller. My Leica CL doesn't fire the flash. It doesn't work it TTL more neither in manual. The SC1 has the same issue. What is your experience with the flash? Thanks for the help.
  13. Well - it's a long time since a love affair was so brief. I've been interested in working with the CL, but after a month or so of playing I've come to the conclusion it's not for me. I've tried the TL 23 18-55 and 55-135, but in the end didn't really enjoy them. I can see how some will love them, but they just don't meet my needs. Part of the issue is that the camera with lenses mounted ends up being BULKIER than my Ms. OK I know they're mostly zooms so you have many FLs in one lens, but even the 23mm (especially with a hood on) feels huge compared with the M10 + 35 summicron asph. The other issue is that compared with full frame I just wasn't subjectively satisfied with the image results from APS-C. High ISO was no where near what I can get with the M10 and I wasn't happy with the results I was seeing on screen or paper. Good, but not quite good enough. After experimenting, I also didn't feel there was any point in putting M lenses on the CL - it seemed beside the point, and if I need EVF focusing I use either LV or the Visoflex 020. If I want longer I'll use the R 80-200 f4 or I'll use my Canon system. So, current plan is they're all going off to Ffordes and I'm getting a used Canon 70-300 f4-f5.6 (£760!!) to go with the 5D3 for those occasions when I know I'll need reach and IS. Bye-bye CL forum - back to the M10
  14. I've had great results with the new Profoto A1, which is an event shooter's dream flash, beautiful light, massive capacity, and instantaneous flash recycling. I realize there are many Profoto haters out there, but for my event shooting, I've been extremely pleased with the A1 on a Canon as well as on a flash bracket using a Profoto Sony trigger. I'm using a Leica CL as a backup (small, light, wonderful quality TL lenses, excellent higher ISO performance) and wanted to see how the Profoto A1 would work (in manual mode, of course) on the CL. According to Profoto, all you need is a flash shoe/foot with a single center pin, which the CL has. But no matter what configuration I try (and, yes, with the manual switch on the A1 turned on), the flash will not fire. Leica's regular SF40 and 60 flashes work just fine, so I know that flash functionality isn't a problem. Any one have any suggestions?
  15. sieh da: https://www.fotointern.ch/archiv/2018/01/06/die-leica-cl-im-harten-praxisvergleich-mit-der-sl/
  16. Interested to note that the DNGS available to download from here: http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/leica_cl_review show up as over 43MB files. This compares with the M10 files which show as around 22MB. I also note that the CL files are 6000x4000 and the M10 files are 5976x3922. Given the APS-C camera's smaller sensor, naively I thought that it would produce a smaller file than the M10 despite having the same nominal resolution. Is anyone able to explain? Having looked at the image quality of the RAW I've taken the plunge and managed to buy the last CL body that Manchester Leica Centre had in stock. I look forward to playing with it over the next few weeks and will post back to the forum.
  17. Hallo, habe mir neulich für meine Cl den sf 20 blitz zugelegt. Ich kenne mich Null in der Blitzfotografie aus. Kann ich mit meiner Cl auch im Automatikmodus blitzen? Die cl hat ja glaube nur einen Kontakt am blitzschuh. Was muss ich sonst beachten und einstellen? Danke für die Antworten! Richard
  18. Leonhard Stute

    Leica CL

    Hallo, ich möchte meine Leica CL reaktivieren. Dabei musste ich feststellen, dass die Verschlusszeiten nicht mehr richtig funktionieren. Wer hat einen Tipp? Wer kennt jemanden, der so etwas vernünftig und günstig repariert? Danke!
  19. pmarkham

    Harley Chrome

    Leica CL Summarit M 50mm f5.6 Kodak B&W 400 Enjoy!
  20. Hallo zusammen, ich bin gestern unverhofft in den Besitz einer Leica CL gekommen. War mir davor überhaupt kein Begriff, aber ich habe mich mittlerweile etwas durch Internetrecherche schlau gemacht und bin so auch auf dieses Forum gestossen. Da der Batterietest negativ ausfiel, bin ich heute erstmal los und habe eine neue Batterie (die Selbe, die drin war - 1,5 V allerdings) gekauft. Nun habe ich gelesen, dass es 1,35 V sein sollten??? Ist das zwingend notwendig? Der Batterietest (mit dem kleinen Knopf links unten neben dem Objektiv) fällt nun jedenfalls positiv aus... Zum Verhalten des Belichtungsmessers: Ich habe die Kamera heute draussen bei besten Lichtverhältnissen getestet. 1. Die Einstellung der Blende hat auf den Belichtungsmesser keinerlei Einfluß. Dies ist bei beiden Objektiven (Summicron 2/40 und Elmar 4/90) der Fall. 2. Vielmehr bewegt sich die Nadel immer nach gleichem Muster rein mechanisch bei Veränderung der Belichtungszeit. Bei 1/250 ist in dem Rechteck am oberen Ende der Belichtungsmesserskala ein von rechts kommender Balken zu sehen, der in der Mitte des oberen (!) Rechtecks steht. Die Nadel ist zusätzlich in der oberen Hälfte der Skala zu sehen. 3. Das Erhöhen der Belichtungszeit bewirkt ein Senken der Nadel (egal bei welchen Lichtverhältnissen) in immer gleichen Abständen und bei 1/2 Sek. steht die Nadel im in der Mitte liegenden Rechteck (nie ganz mittig, sondern manchmal am oberen oder unteren Ende). Gleichzeitig ist immer (!) die rote Warnfarbe bei dieser Belichtungszeit zu sehen. 4. Beim Aufziehen des Films bewegt sich die Nadel mit verschiedenem Ausschlag. Wenn ich vor dem Auslösen den Aufziehhahn etwas bewege, so verschiebt sich auch die Nadel (allerdings unregelmäßig, manchmal mehr, manchmal weniger). Das sind also die "Symptome". Ich hoffe, es liegt an der Batterie! Allerdings habe ich hier schon gelesen, dass die Belichtungsmesser relativ anfällig seien... Vielen Dank für die Hilfe im voraus und einen schönen Abend!
  21. Hallo, gibt es jemanden, der Erfahrungen mit dem 50 mm aus der neuen Summarit-Familie an einer CL gesammelt hat? Ich bin mit dem Summicron-C 40 mm der CL nur mittelmäßig zufrieden und würde mich gerne (preisbewusst) weiterentwickeln. Schon im Voraus vielen Dank für alle Hinweise. Herzliche Grüße, Ulf.
  22. hans_kohler

    Leica CL - Batterien dazu ??

    wer weiß, wo man aktuell die Batterien für die Leica CL beziehen kann ?? Danke für Tips und Hinweise - eine ergänzende Frage: hatte mal welche übers Internet besorgt, aber mußte feststellen, daß diese blitzartig leer waren - lag das an den Batterien oder kann auch die Kamera was haben ?