Decided on a CL

[Marac]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

So after my trip up the road with the Q only I have a lust for light travel and I think I will trade in my loyal M9 and get myself a CL to use initially with my M lenses. I am a whirlwind of ideas lately even considering the Fuji GFX50s but in reality, they are way too big and the sell-on value drops quicker than the pound. I then considered getting the X-Vario but it didn't last too long

 

After much looking, reading etc I have decided the CL would really suit my new way of thinking. Also it takes the same batteries as my Q, Yippee on that one

 

Heading to town this weekend to go play with one hopefully, and pretty much 95% decided I'm going to get one. I will talk to my mentor and saviour and try to work a nice deal out with trading in my M9 and accessories... BIG step for me, I've always had an M of sorts and I am kind of nervous this could render my SL dormant... Might even consider trading the SL for some new glass for the CL....

 

Bad case of GAS maybe senokot can help.... Excited!!!! 

[wattsy]

Sounds like a recipe for having to do some more gear trading in a year or so's time to buy another M. If you feel the CL offers things that your M9 doesn't (live view, etc.) why not go straight to an M240 type body? There are quite a few deals around at the moment. If the CL is anything like the T (i.e. bigger and heavier than it looks in the marketing literature) I'm not sure the weight/size savings versus an M body are worth the trouble (sensor crop, shuffling lenses, etc.). I will check out the CL myself at some point but I think it will be to judge it as a camera to use with TL lenses (especially the 18mm) rather than with M lenses.

[Advertisement]

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

[Marac]

I have had the M240, in fact 3 of them, every one i had showed a fault shooting at ISO 640 there was a red line somewhere on the image, dont ask why I have no idea, 640 is one of my favourite ISO to shoot. Also, my eyes are getting tired and I am finding it harder to focus RF especially with my lux 50. Shooting with native glass on the CL is something I will consider when I get some more funds free.

 

Thanks for your input though Wattsy, always appreciate advice. 

[microview]

Well I have been playing around with my M10 with/without EVF this week (caught up, inevitably, in the GAS-inducing CL forum!) and find the rangefinder, fitted with appropriate diopter, faster and more accurate. Now 82 I am reaching a point where specs for outdoors as well as close work would be advised!

Spent time last night collating weight options of TL2 or CL (both c.400g) + M lenses, and generally the Q was lighter. I also found this week that the Zeiss 35 1.4ZM I was so pleased with is actually no better than the Q with crop to 35mm fov…..

One wonders how the optics of the 18mm pancake lens would compare with the Q's 28/1.7. We have yet to see anyone making this comparison.

[tom0511]

what do you gain compared to the M9 if you plan to only use M lenses?

I really like the CL but I would not buy it to use it just with M lenses, in this case Iwould rather use a M camera. just curious what are your reasons?

[Marac]

I struggle with RF focusing a bit now to be honest.. and when finances allow I will certainly invest in the lens system, until such time I will use it with my m lenses.. I would like the 11-23 first I think.

[tom0511]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The 11-23 is a great lens and my favorite.