Jump to content
rchrd

XY/CL design vs TL design

Recommended Posts

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Somewhat misleading email (IMO) from Leica forum

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

Edited by viramati

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

....

 

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

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...