XY/CL design vs TL design

[miro]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

First press photo 

 

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[miro]

[miro]

[lct]

CL is smaller than the XE3...

 

I'm afraid not, unless you refer to the film CL.

1. Leica Film CL: 120 x 76 x 32 mm

2. Fuji X-E3: 121 x 74 x 43 mm

3. Leica Digital CL: 131 x 78 x 45 mm

[earleygallery]

It definitely looks better in black. Still odd though.

[frame-it]

would anyone buy the TL2 and the CL ? strange specs seem to overlap

It definitely looks better in black. Still odd though.

[helged]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

would anyone buy the TL2 and the CL ? strange specs seem to overlap

 

 

Certainly, the CL is made for those preferring shooting with the body to the eye/face (like me   ). The TL2 is more for the cell-phone addicts, I believe. So I doubt the majority of users will have both TL2 and CL (not to forget that both bodies are on the expensive side compared to similar offerings).

[Belle123]

Certainly, the CL is made for those preferring shooting with the body to the eye/face (like me   ). The TL2 is more for the cell-phone addicts, I believe. So I doubt the majority of users will have both TL2 and CL (not to forget that both bodies are on the expensive side compared to similar offerings).

Funny, I am not a cell phone addict. Rarely carry and turn on the one I have. Maybe every few months when needed. Love the T design so please don’t lump us all in the same boat.

 

For the price, will pass on the CL. No need for it. But I will be keeping an eye out for used TL2s!

[viramati]

Somewhat misleading email (IMO) from Leica forum

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

as it is an APS-C sensor and as such really can't be called a Q with interchangeable lens

Edited November 21, 2017 by viramati

[jaapv]

True, on the other hand, the differences between APS-C and full format are, in practical use, relatively small.

[jmahto]

True, on the other hand, the differences between APS-C and full format are, in practical use, relatively small.

Kind off. In terms of sensor performance yes. For DOF, no.

 

On a side note, I wonder whether there is advantage in size/weight when it comes to AF lens (for CL) and equivalent M lenses. 18mm pancake is certainly way lighter than 28mm f/2.8 M. Don't know about the rest.

[jmahto]

BTW, I liked the CL design better than TL. They could have done a better job with view finder physical design though. 

[jaapv]

Yes, but even with DOF, one or two steps forward, or a faster lens, and the difference evens out pretty soon. Shallow DOF is overhyped anyway IMO (with a few striking exceptions, though).

[scott kirkpatrick]

....

 

On a side note, I wonder whether there is advantage in size/weight when it comes to AF lens (for CL) and equivalent M lenses. 18mm pancake is certainly way lighter than 28mm f/2.8 M. Don't know about the rest.

Just compare the SL zooms with the CL zooms.  Of course an extra factor is that Leica went all out, designed in house for the SL's.  But the CL's designed with Leica involvement, manufactured in Japan by XXXXX, are at least 3X smaller.  And very sharp.

[jaapv]

Indeed, where did I see that design before....? It gained a mm and a bit of image circle, I guess...

 

 

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[rchrd]

The TL2 is more for the cell-phone addicts, I believe. 

 

 

I think this very common comment on the t design downplays the advantage of not being tempted to always shoot from eye level. Cinematographers don't use a viewfinder pressed up against their eye. I like viewfinders for the the focus they provide, but I also like exploring many viewpoints too, which the tl2 design naturally tempts you into.

[jmahto]

Yes, but even with DOF, one or two steps forward, or a faster lens, and the difference evens out pretty soon. Shallow DOF is overhyped anyway IMO (with a few striking exceptions, though).

Agree. APS-C is "almost" equivalent to FF in most practical usage. Does it mean FF is getting irrelevant? (See X1D). I am sure enough has been discussed already.

[lct]

Agree. APS-C is "almost" equivalent to FF in most practical usage. Does it mean FF is getting irrelevant? (See X1D). I am sure enough has been discussed already.

 

Sure reminds me some earlier discussions when comparing M8 to M9 here. Matter of taste and practice as usual. For me APS-C is certainly interesting but as different to FF as FF to MF more or less. Apples vs oranges so to speak. YMMV.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[LocalHero1953]

I'm disappointed they haven't kept the TL2 touchscreen for menus - after a couple of months, I find it much quicker than the traditional page and scrollable list system. It's basically three touches to get to anywhere you want: touch 1 to pick the page, touch 2 to pick the function and touch 3 to set it. It seems Leica has lost confidence in this area where they were genuinely (and usefully) innovative.

 

Incidentally, denigrating it by calling it a smartphone interface, as if real photographers don't use smartphones, forgets that the touchscreen and icon interface has been accepted with enthusiasm by billions of device users - I find it puzzling that some photographers don't like it.

[fsprow]

Personally, I like the looks of the new CL better than any of the digital M's - only the film M's look better.  The functionality seems fine too.  I will definitely get one.