alex3a Posted January 1, 2018 Share #1  Posted January 1, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) I currently own an M9 which I use as my main camera. Last year I bought a brand new T (type 107) to benefit from it's low ISO capabilities compared to the M9. I usually keep the maximum ISO at 1600 with some pleasing results to my eye. Now it's time to upgrade for more dim light capabilities, however I am hesitating between upgrading to TL2 or buying the lovely TL 35/1.4 lens and benefiting from the extra speed. I currently use a summarit 35/2.5 om my T which I intend to keep on my M together with the summilux 50. Your opinions are highly appreciated. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 1, 2018 Posted January 1, 2018 Hi alex3a, Take a look here Getting TL 35/1.4 lens for good old T or upgrading to TL2?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
diddus Posted January 1, 2018 Share #2  Posted January 1, 2018 I found the TL 35mm way too large on the T body.  Can't say much about the low light ability comparison between the two though.  Generally, if the M9 is your main camera, wouldn't it make more sense to invest in M glas - and eventually an M240/ 262? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ropo54 Posted January 1, 2018 Share #3  Posted January 1, 2018 I found the TL 35mm way too large on the T body.  Can't say much about the low light ability comparison between the two though.  Generally, if the M9 is your main camera, wouldn't it make more sense to invest in M glas - and eventually an M240/ 262? I find the 35 1.4 TL to be just fine on the TL body. It is not going to be a pocketable camera and is certainly larger than the 23 f2. Photos below; you decide.  Yes, bigger for sure, but not really much of an issue if you want a terrific 50mm lens which is pretty fast.  The M lenses will be smaller, but if you want AF there's not a better option. 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! 1 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/280442-getting-tl-3514-lens-for-good-old-t-or-upgrading-to-tl2/?do=findComment&comment=3430110'>More sharing options...
Kim Dahl Posted January 1, 2018 Share #4 Â Posted January 1, 2018 (edited) Hello. I have Leica ME with Leica M 24 f 2.8, M 35 f 2.0 and M 90 f 2.0 not APO. + Leica TL2 with 35 TL f. 1.4. I say that Leica TL2 is very different from ME. You know for sure. I think TL is best with TL AF optics and I can recommend 35TL. It is bigger but without skade it is ok. If you think Leica TL with TL zoom? If you ever consider replacing your Leica M9 with M10 / SL2 with beter ISO ? The quality of 35 TL is the best. On line or maybe better than certain M optics. If it is 50 mm you neat. I think TL optics is best and I can recommend the 35TL - to go for it. I love my TL 2 and the way it works but maby skip the ME for M10 og SL(2) Edited January 1, 2018 by Kim Dahl 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
graphlex Posted January 1, 2018 Share #5 Â Posted January 1, 2018 How well does the 24 f/2.8 perform on the TL2? Â Â Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted January 1, 2018 Share #6 Â Posted January 1, 2018 M and T shooter here. The TL2 (or CL?!) will give you faster AF and better high ISO. However a AF lens with fast aparture will offer you AF and f1.4, if I had to choose I would go for the lens. If you dont caer for F a 35/1.4M could be another option. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kim Dahl Posted January 1, 2018 Share #7 Â Posted January 1, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) Very good. It's a little soft on the FF (Leica M) in the corners - but on TL2 really good. Â How well does the 24 f/2.8 perform on the TL2? Â Â Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wojtek Posted January 2, 2018 Share #8  Posted January 2, 2018 35 TL is not pocketable. The combo is still smaller than DSLRs (but heavier). It's tough question. Both changes (T to TL2; f/2.5 to f/1.4) will give you better low light performance. I think it comes down to whether AF and/or bokeh are important for you. If they are - get the 35/1.4 because you won't have any of that with 35/2.5 (you still have 50/1.4 though!). If AF doesn't matter, switching to TL2 will give you better quality and low light performance with any lens and faster performance of the camera. But please keep in mind that TL2 by any means isn't a performance monster either. But simply good enough.  But maybe it's a choice between great option (with some flaws) and other great option (with other flaws)? In that case, both choices being great and satisfying your need (better 50mm equiv performance in low light) no matter what you choose, which one would you simply prefer to buy and own? Maybe that's the right question Alex 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starwolfy Posted January 3, 2018 Share #9 Â Posted January 3, 2018 I had the same dilemna that you and I finally decided over the lenses. The T is not a fast camera and it hunts in low light but I can live with it. I may change later but my priority was the lens system over the camera itself. When you know what the T can and cannot do then there is no problem : I know it is not a low light machine so I do not try to use it as such. Nonetheless using the T with brighter lenses like the 23mm f2 or the 35mm f1.4 is liberating ans give you more room in such cases 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photon42 Posted January 3, 2018 Share #10 Â Posted January 3, 2018 I would not keep the T. Make up your mind if you want to stay on the Rangefinder route. If yes, sell both and get a CMOS M. If no, also sell both and get either a TL2 or a CL. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 3, 2018 Share #11  Posted January 3, 2018 (edited) The TL2 will lose value faster than the lens. It’s smart to maybe get the lens now, and wait for TL2 prices to drop - if you’re committed to Leica’s TL lens line - and you want an AF 50mm FOV maybe more than improved AF and overall low light capabilities (which you can get cheaper later).  That lens paints beautiful images - portraits, landscapes, stills,... The compression from the ~50mm FOV renders portraits in particular much differently than by cropping a 28 or 35mm image. That, combined with great bokeh characteristics and low light capabilities make it special.  The lens will buy you 3 stops more low light from where you are. The TL2 is good for only 2 - but it’s across every lens, including the zooms.  If you like the 50mm FOV, and can handle toggling to Manual Focus in low light (the EVF is easier to be precise at 1.4) you will love the lens, especially for shooting people.  It makes the T a special Leica picture making machine.  You don’t need the TL2 to immediately enjoy it. I love mine with my T.  I hope this is helpful. Cheers Edited January 3, 2018 by Guest Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Volbeat Posted January 4, 2018 Share #12 Â Posted January 4, 2018 Totally agree with DGP. Â I bought the 35mm to go on my T 10 months ago. I think it is the best lens in the TL portfolio. Â I have just bought a used TL2 and, honestly, I'm a bit underwhelmed. Reviews and comments on this forum lead me to expect a much more significant improvement in user experience (more responsive touchscreen, much faster autofocus, much less hunting etc.). It does have 50 % more pixels and its a wee bit better than the T in other aspects but my feeling is that the general consensus of How Bad the original T was were overly harsh and the general consensus of how good the TL2 is are overly glowing. Â Invest in the Lens. Buy the TL2 when the price is right for you. Â Cheers 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintsteve Posted January 6, 2018 Share #13 Â Posted January 6, 2018 Agreed that tl lenses are the better investment. I have all 3 zooms (11-23, 18-56, 55-135) plus the 23. All are excellent and my T body is holding up well without any issues. I would buy the 35 before upgrading to tl2. My lenses are worth what I paid for them but the T is worth less than 50% of its original price. Same will happen to the tl2. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted January 6, 2018 Share #14 Â Posted January 6, 2018 I would not keep the T. Make up your mind if you want to stay on the Rangefinder route. If yes, sell both and get a CMOS M. If no, also sell both and get either a TL2 or a CL. Â This makes most sense. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex3a Posted January 9, 2018 Author Share #15  Posted January 9, 2018 Thank you all for your replies. After reading all comments, and viewing some photos on the internet, I decided to go the 'lens way'. I will be getting the 35 summilux this weekend while it is available at the Leica store.  Alex 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starwolfy Posted January 9, 2018 Share #16 Â Posted January 9, 2018 Good decision. Enjoy this lens well and most importantly : just have fun ! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now