Jump to content
LUF Admin

Poll: Will you buy a Leica CL?

Will you buy a Leica CL?  

324 members have voted

  1. 1. Will you buy a Leica CL?

    • Definitely - where’s the pre-order form?
      75
    • I'm Interested, but I’ll wait for tests and reviews
      95
    • Would like to have one but too expensive
      31
    • No thanks, for me only full format or bigger
      57
    • No thanks, I don’t like design/handling
      13
    • Simply not interested
      53


Recommended Posts

I am at the top of the queue at my dealer and have pre-paid to secure my place there. He is hoping to get a few (very few) deliveries in December. I will also buy the 11-23 TL wide zoom as well as the standard zoom 18-56. I am not sure why some folks felt the kit would be later than the body, as the standard zoom lens is already in full time production for the T series cameras, as is the wide zoom. They may have been thinking of the kit with the new 18mm pancake lens. I have cancelled my pre-order for the 16-35 SL zoom. For longer distances, I will use my 80-200/f4 R lens, as I am selling the 90-280SL lens, which I have found too heavy, now being rather feeble. I may buy an R to SL/TL adapter, as I just don't like stacking the R to M with the M to SL/TL, although it does seem to work. 

 

Does anyone know if these TL lenses are the usual Leica "near optical perfection" or the more modern concept of permitting those distortions/aberrations, which can be well corrected in camera like the Q lens?  .....or a halfway house? 

 

Wilson

I should hope that the lenses are of the modern hybrid design; the extra freedom digital corrections introduce allows the designer to get the image quality to a higher level than optical corrections alone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too expensive at this stage for me.

The concept I like, not having seen any more than the blurb and Jono's review.

Right now "Paula" is all I need.

Maybe when the prices settle a bit, maybe.

Gary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have been shooting 17-40 and 16-35 mm and should get the 11-23 lens, however the kit 18-58 has a $450 discount bundled and now will have shoot like my 24-70 lens

Why is the 11-23 mm lens not offered as a Kit?

I also read in a review that the 18-58 mm lens is not made by Leica? Van any one verify.

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The kit with the 28mm-e looks amazing and I would definitely dive in the system if Leica introduces a 40mm-e or better yet 50-55mm-e that's almost the same size, i.e. pancake. Imagine that...it'd be an irresistable two-pancake lens travel kit.

 

I look at TL 35mm summilux now and am put off by it's seeming out-of-place size and weight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I would buy one, but I'll wait about a year to find a good offer in the second hand market. At this moment is really expensive for me. My budget is around 3.500 and I need at least two lenses, I hope an interesting year dreaming with my next cam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mine is ordered, I'm going for it now while I have the resources to pay for it. I will buy into the lens system later but for now I will use it with my M tri-elmar 28/35/50 & the Q 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't afford one at present - scratching and clawing to pay for my trip to Mongolia next August. 

 

Once that is accomplished, my next purchases will be a 50 Summicron (non-APO) and then a Monochrom 246. 

 

After those, maybe a CL if I'm not dead of old age before then...

Edited by Herr Barnack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find the L system interesting.

 

The SL is all singing and dancing - full frame sensor, sensor cleaning video, GPS, WiFi all wrapped up in Leica’s idea of what a camera for photography should be - no PDAF or IBS, thank you very much ...

 

The TL is the groovy, pocketable APS-C version, with good capability, but acknowledging that it is “pocketable”, and the CL is the built in EVF version. But, has anyone else noticed that is has slightly fewer features than the TL2? I haven’t done a comparison, as I already have the TL2 and I’m happy with it, but the EVF has less resolution (not sure if this really matters), no GPS, no in camera charging, HDMI or USB ports ... I’m not knocking the CL, but I get the sense that is has got a bit less out of the goody bag from Leica, and the pricing seems to reflect this.

 

This raises an interesting philosophical question - the CL will still be a fabulous camera, but is there still a space some want filled between the TL2 and the SL, and what would it be? Full frame or APS-C? I don’t fully understand this, as I would have expected the CL and TL2 to be just different options of the same camera (and fundamentally they are).

 

It’s almost as if someone running Leica’s overall product strategy has let each design team go their own way. I would have expected the button layouts, batteries, menu philosophies to all be the same - consistent, and coherent. This camera just doesn’t seem that way - the CL has a more X like feel than the TL2, which is on its own, and the SL which seems to bridge the gap between the S and the M.

 

Maybe I’m just over-analysing all this, but my first reaction when I saw the CL was that it was a parts bin camera. I know this is uncharitable, and I apologise to those who are excited about this new camera, but it just seems as if the design team got to a point and ran out of budget for the battery mechanism from the TL2 and SL and all the other things that make Leicas such beautifully conceived and finished cameras ...

Edited by IkarusJohn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I have read, it seems the CL is the TL2 dressed up in 'different clothing'?  Aside from the interface and buttons and menus, is there a performance difference that anyone can point to?

 

Is AF any faster?

 

Is the EVF any better?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I have read, it seems the CL is the TL2 dressed up in 'different clothing'?  Aside from the interface and buttons and menus, is there a performance difference that anyone can point to?

 

Is AF any faster?

 

Is the EVF any better?

It's a pity that my TL2 met my CL only as one went out the door as the other came in - my comments are based on recollection rather than direct comparison.

 

I am sure the CL's AF is faster/snappier.

 

I have a feeling that its colours are slightly better: both stronger and more accurate SOOC. This must be a firmware iteration rather than hardware, so it should be translatable to the TL2. I could be wrong here, and will bow to anyone who can do a direct comparison. At the very least the embedded LR profile is excellent.

 

Another 'feeling' is that the CL is slightly more responsive to the shutter button. I took a couple of shots of people in shop doorways in St Pancras Station, trying to catch reflections. I found it easy to respond to the needs of the scene.

 

These are small things and may not prove true when real comparisons are done. The general performance is pretty close to that of the TL2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One other change (for better or worse): focus peaking seems much stronger on the CL than the TL2. It's red, but I haven't checked if you can change the colour*.

 

Edit. You can.

Edited by LocalHero1953

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

....

 

The TL is the groovy, pocketable APS-C version, with good capability, but acknowledging that it is “pocketable”, and the CL is the built in EVF version. But, has anyone else noticed that is has slightly fewer features than the TL2? I haven’t done a comparison, as I already have the TL2 and I’m happy with it, but the EVF has less resolution (not sure if this really matters), no GPS, no in camera charging, HDMI or USB ports ... I’m not knocking the CL, but I get the sense that is has got a bit less out of the goody bag from Leica, and the pricing seems to reflect this.

 

Maybe I’m just over-analysing all this, but my first reaction when I saw the CL was that it was a parts bin camera. I know this is uncharitable, and I apologise to those who are excited about this new camera, but it just seems as if the design team got to a point and ran out of budget for the battery mechanism from the TL2 and SL and all the other things that make Leicas such beautifully conceived and finished cameras ...

 

My reaction to the CL was different.  For once "essentials" seem to include using a battery that is generically available so that the purchasers won't have to pay $200 for each one, and the product manager won't get stuck with an inventory of unique batteries with no other use if they guess wrong.  (In the laptop business, special batteries switch from being highly profitable to being big profit destroyers in the blink of an eye.)

 

Similarly, the Q's battery and chip pocket seems more water-resistant than the T's, and the removal of the side door housing the chip, USB, and HDMI connectors also helps.  My theory is that someone counted just how many people were using those interfaces and decided that the energy and thermal budget that the CL can support simply did not justify them.  That part of the budget could then be spent on improvements to the EVF and the AF.  But then, I cheered when the M10 was announced as a video-free product... 

Edited by scott kirkpatrick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the digital Leica I have been waiting for.  No Panasonic or Fujifilm wannabes.  I ordered it before it was officially announced and returned my week old Fujifilm X-E3 the same day.  Merry Christmas indeed!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find the L system interesting.

 

The SL is all singing and dancing - full frame sensor, sensor cleaning video, GPS, WiFi all wrapped up in Leica’s idea of what a camera for photography should be - no PDAF or IBS, thank you very much ...

 

The TL is the groovy, pocketable APS-C version, with good capability, but acknowledging that it is “pocketable”, and the CL is the built in EVF version. But, has anyone else noticed that is has slightly fewer features than the TL2? I haven’t done a comparison, as I already have the TL2 and I’m happy with it, but the EVF has less resolution (not sure if this really matters), no GPS, no in camera charging, HDMI or USB ports ... I’m not knocking the CL, but I get the sense that is has got a bit less out of the goody bag from Leica, and the pricing seems to reflect this.

 

This raises an interesting philosophical question - the CL will still be a fabulous camera, but is there still a space some want filled between the TL2 and the SL, and what would it be? Full frame or APS-C? I don’t fully understand this, as I would have expected the CL and TL2 to be just different options of the same camera (and fundamentally they are).

 

It’s almost as if someone running Leica’s overall product strategy has let each design team go their own way. I would have expected the button layouts, batteries, menu philosophies to all be the same - consistent, and coherent. This camera just doesn’t seem that way - the CL has a more X like feel than the TL2, which is on its own, and the SL which seems to bridge the gap between the S and the M.

 

Maybe I’m just over-analysing all this, but my first reaction when I saw the CL was that it was a parts bin camera. I know this is uncharitable, and I apologise to those who are excited about this new camera, but it just seems as if the design team got to a point and ran out of budget for the battery mechanism from the TL2 and SL and all the other things that make Leicas such beautifully conceived and finished cameras ...

I was told, some time ago, that this is exactly what is happening. Mind you, it has its good sides as well, as competing design teams will be pushed to excel to get their design approved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought the TL when it became available as i wanted a pocket-able camera with FLASH, and since they have chosen to remove the flash from both the upgraded TL-2 model and omitted it on the new CL, this new CL model has no value to me over my M camera's.

I only use a flash when i am out of the house and working and I need a grab n go camera for quick reference photo's, but the flash option has allowed me to use my TL, which is often in a dark warehouse environment.

So No-Thanks to the CL although i do think it is a handsome addition to the product line.

Edited by roverover

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...