lx1713 Posted November 21, 2017 Share #41 Posted November 21, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) Actually, that people who like the TL dislike the XY and vica versa shows that Leica got it just right. They want to sell both lines and not have one eat into the other. Right way to properly segment a market. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 21, 2017 Posted November 21, 2017 Hi lx1713, Take a look here New Leica XY/CL. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jmahto Posted November 21, 2017 Share #42 Posted November 21, 2017 I would be willing fork some cash If they did sensor stabilization. It is certainly appealing to me next to M though (I use Sony APS-C as 2nd camera right now). Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted November 21, 2017 Share #43 Posted November 21, 2017 According to Sean Reid, one advantage of the CL vs non Leica mirrorless cameras seems to be auto image magnification when focusing M lenses on it. I feared than an M mount was necessary for that but it seems that the L mount can do is as well. I have no idea how it works though. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
imants Posted November 21, 2017 Share #44 Posted November 21, 2017 (edited) Leica got this right the CL is well in the hipsters budget and has that retro vintage appeal that is loved by this segment of the consumer market. It will also appeal to the disgruntled Fuji XE2 owners. Except for the 35mm the lenses are a tad slow a couple of f1.2 lenses would make the whole CL line very desirable Edited November 21, 2017 by imants Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bencychin Posted November 22, 2017 Share #45 Posted November 22, 2017 According to Sean Reid, one advantage of the CL vs non Leica mirrorless cameras seems to be auto image magnification when focusing M lenses on it. I feared than an M mount was necessary for that but it seems that the L mount can do is as well. I have no idea how it works though. If true, this will be an important advantage since I would like to use many older m lens through L adapter. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmahto Posted November 22, 2017 Share #46 Posted November 22, 2017 (edited) If true, this will be an important advantage since I would like to use many older m lens through L adapter. Frankly speaking I don't like auto zoom (in M240 LV mode). I like to focus first with full view and then If needed zoom focus. For me real advantage will be detecting (or manually recognizing) lens that allows good auto ISO and stamping EXIF. Edited November 22, 2017 by jmahto Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted November 22, 2017 Share #47 Posted November 22, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) Frankly speaking I don't like auto zoom (in M240 LV mode). I like to focus first with full view and then If needed zoom focus. [...] Matter of taste and practice i guess but fast focusing is essential for me. It is the only significant flaw of my A7s mod with M lenses, let alone my M240 which has auto image magnification but is too slow a camera in LV mode otherwise. Hence my interest for the CL although i feel concerned about the half-second blackout time noticed by Sein Reid in low light. Seems like the CL is more an improved TL than a mini SL from this standpoint. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einst_Stein Posted November 22, 2017 Share #48 Posted November 22, 2017 As much as I like my T system, I always felt T is a backup system, a secondary choice under the shadow of M and SL. But with CL, it appears to me this is as main stream as M and even more so. The first time the size (APSC) does not matter. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted November 22, 2017 Share #49 Posted November 22, 2017 If true, this will be an important advantage since I would like to use many older m lens through L adapter. I believe it only works with the M. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted November 22, 2017 Share #50 Posted November 22, 2017 According to Sean Reid, one advantage of the CL vs non Leica mirrorless cameras seems to be auto image magnification when focusing M lenses on it. I feared than an M mount was necessary for that but it seems that the L mount can do is as well. I have no idea how it works though. No sorry i was mistaken here. With M lenses, the top right dial must be turned to trigger image magnification. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted November 22, 2017 Share #51 Posted November 22, 2017 (edited) But with CL, it appears to me this is as main stream as M and even more so. The first time the size (APSC) does not matter. It certainly doesn't matter with the native lenses. I'm not into the whole "DOF" thing so an 18mm/F2.8 on this camera is as good for me as a 28mm/F2.8 on an M. However, I don't think I care much for the crop when using M lenses (the only lenses that I have). I had been thinking that this CL might be a reasonable body for the occasions when I might want to use digital with my Leica lenses and I thought that the combination of the CL and my 28 Summaron-M might make for a nice compact "35mm". I also have a nice 35mm accessory viewfinder which would mean I wouldn't have to use the EVF for framing. However, I have since realised that I was thinking M8-crop and this thing crops even more. The 28 M lens becomes a 42mm and that's just too narrow a field of view for my taste. The CL could still work for me at the longer end as the only other lens I am using of late is the 90 Macro-Elmar and I could happily live with "135mm" and EVF focussing for photographs of butterflies and flowers but if I'm going to need to buy a new lens at the wider end, the cost involved (CL + M adaptor + say 18 TL lens + 28 external VF so I can avoid the EVF) would buy me an M240. I don't want an M240 so I'm not sure why I'm thinking I might want a CL . I'm curious enough that I will certainly try out the CL in the new year but I think the 1.5x crop will make it untenable for me. Edited November 22, 2017 by wattsy Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 22, 2017 Share #52 Posted November 22, 2017 Using full-frame lenses on an APS-C camera has an advantage too, especially with older ones. The often lesser corners get cut off. This is particularly true with the Summicron-C 40 mm, which has a very good centre rendering, turning it into a high-level 60 mm equivalent. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted November 22, 2017 Share #53 Posted November 22, 2017 (edited) Using full-frame lenses on an APS-C camera has an advantage too, especially with older ones. The often lesser corners get cut off. This is particularly true with the Summicron-C 40 mm, which has a very good centre rendering, turning it into a high-level 60 mm equivalent. Yes, but it also turns perfectly good wide angle lenses into (often expensive) standard lenses. It was ok to chop off the corners ten years ago when the M8 was the only digital option for M lenses but I think those days are behind us. The CL with native lenses like the 18mm and 23mm looks like an attractive system camera and if I liked digital more than I do and could live with EVFs more than I can I'd probably be keen to put in an order. However, as a body for M lenses I think I will give it a miss. Edited November 22, 2017 by wattsy 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted November 22, 2017 Share #54 Posted November 22, 2017 (edited) Although it may be sacrilege, I do compare new Leica cameras to what I consider to be competitors (my 2 cents of course) The Leica X1, Q and M originally, and still do, offer something no one in the rest of the market had However, other systems such as the SL, S or CL, have direct market competitors and therefore purchase decisions are more nuanced. Of course in terms of build quality, simple menus and ownership enjoyment Leica continues to be a market leader. For this point alone the CL will satisfy some people's requirements. I actually really liked the T. The biggest issue with the T for me is the lack of bright lenses and the silly cost of the lenses. The later point may seem surprising for someone coming from Leica M lens land, but that is a unique system with unique advantages and unique resale values. On the other hand most people seeing a A7Rii + 50mm 1.4 lens less then a TL + 35mm f1.4 lens will have much pause for thought. whatever you think about beauty or workflow these two camera systems. One of them is simply not is the same league as the other for IQ or functionality. Leica would have sold a whole batch more of Ts and TLs if they had made the lens prices "expensive" but at least on planet earth ... particularly as they are made in the far east. So back to the CL. In some ways its what I always wanted, an exchangeable lens camera in the X-vario format. For Leica to make this a success it must work on better prices for the lenses and more variation for people who shoot bright primes. For the moment my X-T20 + lens range is staying but who knows about the future ... Edited November 22, 2017 by colonel Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
willeica Posted November 22, 2017 Share #55 Posted November 22, 2017 Yes, but it also turns perfectly good wide angle lenses into (often expensive) standard lenses. It was ok to chop off the corners ten years ago when the M8 was the only digital option for M lenses but I think those days are behind us. The CL with native lenses like the 18mm and 23mm looks like an attractive system camera and if I liked digital more than I do and could live with EVFs more than I can I'd probably be keen to put in an order. However, as a body for M lenses I think I will give it a miss. The other issue is that focus peaking is not yet the 'real deal' and, in my experience, is inferior for accuracy to a finely tuned rangefinder. I won't be buying this camera until I am either convinced that focus peaking works as well as a rangefinder or that I feel the need to acquire an L lens. Neither the TL nor the SL were of any interest to me. This looks like a nice camera even if it involves a bit too much button pressing and wheel turning for my taste. This will be a 'wait and see' item for me. William 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted November 22, 2017 Share #56 Posted November 22, 2017 Although it may be sacrilege, I do compare new Leica cameras to what I consider to be competitors (my 2 cents of course) Nothing sacrilegious about comparing Leica cameras to Fuji and Sony cameras, just common sense IMO. My take on the CL is that it will be popular with the existing Leica faithful (of whom I include myself). It is reasonably priced by Leica standards of late and, at least with the 18mm and 23mm lenses, is IMO more "Leicalike" in size than behemoths like the SL/24-90/50 'kits'. However, outside the faithful, I'm not sure there is a huge appetite for an APS-C system camera at this price point. Sure, it will bring in some new customers to Leica but I think it will mainly sell (like the SL and S) to existing Leica users. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted November 22, 2017 Share #57 Posted November 22, 2017 (edited) Nothing sacrilegious about comparing Leica cameras to Fuji and Sony cameras, just common sense IMO. My take on the CL is that it will be popular with the existing Leica faithful (of whom I include myself). It is reasonably priced by Leica standards of late and, at least with the 18mm and 23mm lenses, is IMO more "Leicalike" in size than behemoths like the SL/24-90/50 'kits'. However, outside the faithful, I'm not sure there is a huge appetite for an APS-C system camera at this price point. Sure, it will bring in some new customers to Leica but I think it will mainly sell (like the SL and S) to existing Leica users. It will be interesting to see who it sells to. There's good reason for new cameras selling well to existing brand owners: they know what to expect in terms of quality, functionality and usability. I spent very little time with the CL yesterday - I spent much more with the original T (before deciding not to buy), less with the TL2 (then buying) and little with the CL, just checking the aspects which I was unsure about: size, AF speed and (to a lesser extent) EVF. The rest I could take for granted. The Q sold well to non-Leica owners, and I don't see why the CL shouldn't do the same. Sure, it's not full frame, but it has interchangeable lenses and with a zoom it will sell for a bit less than the Q. It may depend on how users get on with Leica's new minimalist interface of dials and buttons without labels and no PASM dial in sight. By contrast the Q was visually comprehensible to those brought up on traditional camera controls. Edited November 22, 2017 by LocalHero1953 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
imants Posted November 22, 2017 Share #58 Posted November 22, 2017 (edited) Wattsy I'm not into the whole "DOF" thing so an 18mm/F2.8 on this camera is as good for me as a 28mm/F2.8 on an M. However, I don't think I care much for the crop when using M lenses (the only lenses that I have). A f1.4 18mm beats a f2.8 lens any day in gathering light The DOF is not always the sole reason to use a f1.4 on a cropped sensor camera Edited November 22, 2017 by imants Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 22, 2017 Share #59 Posted November 22, 2017 The other issue is that focus peaking is not yet the 'real deal' and, in my experience, is inferior for accuracy to a finely tuned rangefinder. I won't be buying this camera until I am either convinced that focus peaking works as well as a rangefinder or that I feel the need to acquire an L lens. Neither the TL nor the SL were of any interest to me. This looks like a nice camera even if it involves a bit too much button pressing and wheel turning for my taste. This will be a 'wait and see' item for me. William Focus peaking is often unnecessary with a good EVF, certainly with wide angle lenses; the accuracy of the Leica implementation in general is quite good compared to for instance Sony in my experience. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted November 22, 2017 Share #60 Posted November 22, 2017 Wattsy A f1.4 18mm beats a f2.8 lens any day in gathering light The DOF is not always the sole reason to use a f1.4 on a cropped sensor camera Yes, but that wasn't the point I was making. I was addressing the often heard complaint that an APS sensor makes it harder to obtain a narrow depth of field. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.