Jump to content
rosuna

New Leica XY/CL

Recommended Posts

The DOF difference is about a two-step-forward one at five meters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

IMHO 1.5x crop is more in the mindset. I have gone out with 28 cron on my Nex-6 and shot whole day without feeling constrained (FF 40mm is closer to 35mm FOV than 50). And came back with beautiful pictures even in low light. CL will be even better. I think 28 Elmarit (no need for cron due to better high ISO) with CL will be very good lightweight combo that you can shoot the entire day.

Edited by jmahto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think a 28mm wide being cropped to a 42mm view is a question of mindset if you want a wide view. It reminds me of when I bought an RD-1 and I was using my 24mm Elmarit as a surrogate "35mm". It wasn't great then and it feels like a real step back to do that now. The CL looks like an attractive camera (especially in combination with the 18mm lens) but I'm far from convinced by it as a platform for M lenses in 2017.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think a 28mm wide being cropped to a 42mm view is a question of mindset if you want a wide view. It reminds me of when I bought an RD-1 and I was using my 24mm Elmarit as a surrogate "35mm". It wasn't great then and it feels like a real step back to do that now. The CL looks like an attractive camera (especially in combination with the 18mm lens) but I'm far from convinced by it as a platform for M lenses in 2017.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

i do not think the CL is supposed to be a 'platform for M lenses" i think M lens compatibility is an added bonus to the CL?T or TL line.... Leica needed compatibility for the SL.   Someone either in this thread or another nailed it:  The M line will not be the focus of future R&D.   The TL/SL/CL line will be the mainstream going forward with some one off's (Q and the Pana-Leica's). Just my opinion-  yours may differ and as my wife tells me i am wrong all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... Just my opinion-  yours may differ and as my wife tells me i am wrong all the time.

Perhaps your response to your dear lady wife might be:

 

"Yes, Dear, you're right and I'm wrong as you usually are."

 

Pete.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I don't think a 28mm wide being cropped to a 42mm view is a question of mindset if you want a wide view. It reminds me of when I bought an RD-1 and I was using my 24mm Elmarit as a surrogate "35mm". It wasn't great then and it feels like a real step back to do that now. The CL looks like an attractive camera (especially in combination with the 18mm lens) but I'm far from convinced by it as a platform for M lenses in 2017.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But on the other side - a good cropped sensor is a very useful platform for long lenses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But on the other side - a good cropped sensor is a very useful platform for long lenses.

I agree Jaap.... but (there has to be a but

).... but without sensor stabilization it is less attractive for legacy lens. I don't want to use heavy modern tele lens with OIS. This is why Sony a6500 (or any other micro 4/3) is attractive for long lens. Only problem is that I am in minority. Most users want AF with tele lenses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think a 28mm wide being cropped to a 42mm view is a question of mindset if you want a wide view. It reminds me of when I bought an RD-1 and I was using my 24mm Elmarit as a surrogate "35mm". It wasn't great then and it feels like a real step back to do that now. The CL looks like an attractive camera (especially in combination with the 18mm lens) but I'm far from convinced by it as a platform for M lenses in 2017.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What I wanted to say was that once you are shooting, the FOV you see is what matters (not the actual FL). If the results are excellent (as I take for granted in case of CL+M lens) then it is all good. If you want to go wider then choose appropriate FL. Smaller sensor will always be limiting compared to bigger sensor for wides, and as Jaap pointed out, vice versa is true too. Smaller sensor has advantage in longer lens if one is concerned with package size/weight.

Edited by jmahto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The DOF difference is about a two-step-forward one at five meters.

  That is a heck of a lot in a room in a desert not a problem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

With a  f1.4  lens you have the option of using  f2.8  it just makes for a better lens.  Then again it really doesn't matter  close enough is good  enough as the CL  is a short life camera  as the APS market continues  to diminish but the CL  is an important potential cash cow. As I stated elsewhere  with some fast lenses the CL would have placed itself in a different league  above and beyond other manufacturers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think a 28mm wide being cropped to a 42mm view is a question of mindset if you want a wide view ... The CL looks like an attractive camera (especially in combination with the 18mm lens) but I'm far from convinced by it as a platform for M lenses in 2017.

 

 

I'm not sure I get why the CL isn't a platform for M lenses in 2017, Ian.  Why not?  Sure, all our respective lenses become half a focal length longer and the smaller sensor increases depth of field, but that comes with the territory.

 

Like you, I prefer wides, but I am finding the 28 Summaron-M on the TL2 a useful and attractive proposition.  The 42mm field of view is interesting, but as Jayant says, you deal with what you see through the viewfinder.  Sure, it's a failing that the widest Leica can currently achieve with the APS-C format cameras is 16mm (using the wide zoom), but it's still a very useful camera.  If I can't be bothered taking an M and lenses (28 & 50 at a minimum), for less weight and not much more bulk, I can take the 11-23 zoom, 28 Summaron (and adapter) and the 35 Summilux-TL, which gives me all I could ever want from 18-52mm in a light and compact form, with one fast prime, a pocketable prime and a wide zoom.

 

It's a useful digital alternative to an M.

Edited by IkarusJohn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  That is a heck of a lot in a room in a desert not a problem

True...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure I get why the CL isn't a platform for M lenses in 2017, Ian.  Why not?  Sure, all our respective lenses become half a focal length longer and the smaller sensor increases depth of field, but that comes with the territory.

 

I guess it comes down to how you want to use your lenses, John. During this year I have only really used two lenses – the 28 Summaron and the 90 Macro-Elmar. I could use the 90mm cropped as a "135" (in fact, it might suit what I use that lens for) but I use the Summaron as a 28mm. It's my primary lens and it isn't much use to me as a "42mm". To obtain the wide view that I desire I would have to buy the 18mm TL or an 18mm in M mount which will have entirely different imaging characteristics to the Summaron that I like. As I wrote in an earlier post, it is similar to when I bought an RD-1 in 2003 and my 24 Elmarit became a "36" or in 2006 when my 28 Summicron became a "37". To get a properly wide view, I needed a 21mm or shorter lens. I didn't bother buying one and muddled on with "37" as my wide lens. That was fine back then but I'm not sure I want to do that again.

 

I will certainly try out the CL (as I did the T – twice) but it will be with a view to using the camera for a specific purpose not as a general digital alternative to my film cameras.

Edited by wattsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said, Ian - the impact on focal length is part and parcel of the sensor. I have found the 11-23mm useful in that regard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said, Ian - the impact on focal length is part and parcel of the sensor.

 

 

Yes, I know. I'm not quite sure why you keep telling me that. I don't have a problem that Leica chose an APS sensor for this camera. With the native primes – at least the 18mm and 23mm (the 35mm and 60mm are too large for my taste) – the CL looks like an attractive digital camera and I will certainly try one out at some point. However, being an APS-C camera, it doesn't have the same appeal to me as a general digital alternative for my own limited set of M lenses. I appreciate other people will feel differently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, this one appeals to me, the T and SL cameras don't

 

I'm just wondering jaapv how you feel the CL compares to the Panasonic GX8 that I believe you own and use.

Same sensor format, right?......And I personally feel the MFT mount is more versatile.

You could get three GX8's for the price of one CL I think.

Share this post


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.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...