Jump to content
Learner

OK, CL owners... What's your verdict?

Recommended Posts

Actually, the battery door is very similar to the one in the X series and many better Panasonics. I have never heard of a broken one - maybe it is better than users think? Anyway, it saves 260 Euro for a Leicatime baseplate on the M cameras

.

 

The CL is better put together than any of the Panasonics. It feels more premium. So whereas that door on a GX8 feels appropriate the same thing on the $4000 CL cheapens the product just a bit. The same door in a better material would have been quite easy.

 

Gordon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest VVJ

Sharing batteries, I would have guessed the Q and CL also share the same door. 

 

The one from the Q feels slightly less flimsy.  I personally would probably not call it robust either though... 

 

Please also note that you insert the memory card differently... with the Q the front of the memory card should be inserted towards the front of the camera, with the CL the opposite...

 

These little inconsistencies tend to drive me insane...

Edited by JorisV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest VVJ

I still have my TL2 and will sell it. (Anyone interested?). I prefer the TL2 styling, build quality and feel.  

 

Are you keeping your original T? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, the battery door is very similar to the one in the X series and many better Panasonics. I have never heard of a broken one - maybe it is better than users think? Anyway, it saves 260 Euro for a Leicatime baseplate on the M cameras

.

 

Yes seems to be lots of complaints about something that hasn't been a issue 'yet?'

 

OH and 

 

Yes

No

No - I had a T tho and am selling it

Edited by mmanda

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, no, no.

 

Shot the CL over the holiday quite a lot. I really like its image grain structure, it's lovely. Very filmic, and does wonderful things in post-processing.

 

My only issue is mine never wants to switch from the EVF. I suppose I should get it fixed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a menu setting. Main menu --> Display settings --> EVF-LCD -->EVF Extended.

Then put EVF-LCD under the Fn button.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've already given my short answers, but here's a slightly extended one........

I've used the CL almost exclusively since buying it at launch and, now that I have simplified the options to just one function per button and wheel, my muscle memory is kicking in, mostly.

I am off to southern Spain for a week or so shortly, and I will be taking the M240: the extra size and weight are not a big issue for me for travel, and the AF and EVF which have been great for family and party shots are less needed for travel - and I prefer FF.

 

Checking out the M in preparation, I am reminded again how simple and obvious the interface is, a simplicity which is at risk of being lost in the CL because of the inflexibility of the latter. I am not worried by the extra functions and settings of the CL - these come with the AF/EVF territory. But, as I and others have said before, I am worried that the CL introduces a new interface, different from both the M and SL with which it forms a (more or less) continuous system, and it is difficult to customise the interface to align with the other bodies. Even after my simplification of the CL's interface there are two features I can't get over and which cause me to make mistakes:

- inability to assign shutter speed, aperture and exposure compensation to wheels of your choice, to match the SL.

- dials with buttons in the centre, as opposed to a dial you press on the edge, as on the SL - I keep pressing the CL dial edge to change mode.

 

Others may find my grumbles irrelevant, or have their own, and I can live with these. Nevertheless, I feel Leica needs to reel in its independent design teams and spell out to them that with the CL, T/TL, M and SL all being part of a single interchangeable lens system, they ought to have consistent interfaces, or at least interfaces that the user can closely align.

 

So: does the CL live up to/exceed my expectations? yes, it exceeds them in some ways (I never expected Leica to fit an EVF into a TL-size body), but in other ways it needs correcting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, as somebody who does not know the SL, coming from the M240, I find the system quite intuitive - I have not needed to refer to the manual  once.

I agree that as much consistency  as possible across model lines is desirable.

Even if one regards this as a new-style interface, I would not be surprised if the SL and M series would be the ones to fall in line in the future. The T will always be a case apart, to differentiate it from the CL.

If I put the CL next to any Sony, Fuji or Panasonic it is a miracle of simplicity...

But then, I have been switching between M, R, and other brands all my photographic life. Nothing could be more different than a M6 and a R8, for instance. Not to mention some automated Japanese SLR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[...] I feel Leica needs to reel in its independent design teams and spell out to them that with the CL, T/TL, M and SL all being part of a single interchangeable lens system, they ought to have consistent interfaces, or at least interfaces that the user can closely align [...]

 

If you mean alignment on the CL's interface i don't mind it at all as i like much its FN, Favorites and Customize controls menus, the top LCD and the two well thought "wheels" of this smart little body. But aligning the CL on earlier M and/or SL bodies? Thanks no thanks with respect. I don't want another retro camera and the buttons and joystick of the SL are not my cup of tea. I have no experience enough to elaborate about the SL but the CL's interface could usefully inspire that of a modern M if it ever comes to life in spite of the retro trend prevailing at Wetzlar. YMMV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I'm more concerned about alignment per se than alignment with any one body. I switch from one to the other (day to day rather than minute to minute), and I don't find it a seamless switch. Consistency is what I would like, rather than one interface in particular.

 

(I would choose the TL2 as my preferred interface, given a choice! And it is hardly part of a retro trend.)

Edited by LocalHero1953

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the CL controls are an attempt to make an electronically controlled, AF camera behave like an M, but simpler.  The menu structure feels M-like (and I could probably count the few differences simply by printing out the two menus and putting them side by side).  When I shoot in an M-like fashion, with one function at most per button, it works just great.  But trying to reconfigure things while in the middle of shooting is daunting.  The reviewer who singled out the CL as "worst of 2017" was shown in his video getting confused, then annoyed.  I'm happy that he hasn't tried the SL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the CL controls are an attempt to make an electronically controlled, AF camera behave like an M, but simpler.  The menu structure feels M-like (and I could probably count the few differences simply by printing out the two menus and putting them side by side).  When I shoot in an M-like fashion, with one function at most per button, it works just great.  But trying to reconfigure things while in the middle of shooting is daunting.  The reviewer who singled out the CL as "worst of 2017" was shown in his video getting confused, then annoyed.  I'm happy that he hasn't tried the SL.

They (Camera Store TV) did 'review' the SL and voted it as the second worst camera of 2015, AFAIK. I think they have been confused for quite a long while ;-).

 

Does it live up to / exceed your expectations? YES
Any regrets about your purchase? NO
(Do you wish you had opted for (or not sold) the TL2?) NO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The one from the Q feels slightly less flimsy.  I personally would probably not call it robust either though... 

 

Please also note that you insert the memory card differently... with the Q the front of the memory card should be inserted towards the front of the camera, with the CL the opposite...

 

These little inconsistencies tend to drive me insane...

 

 

Yes - it surprised me, too. As all my other Leicas (short of the S2) are like the way the SD cards get inserted into the Q.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[...]

 

Others may find my grumbles irrelevant, or have their own, and I can live with these. Nevertheless, I feel Leica needs to reel in its independent design teams and spell out to them that with the CL, T/TL, M and SL all being part of a single interchangeable lens system, they ought to have consistent interfaces, or at least interfaces that the user can closely align.

 

[...]

 

 

I see your point. I never understood why Olympus "rotated" the functionality of their right hand buttons between the E-M1 and the E-M5.2. The interfaces there feels identical, but does different things (the lower right button e.g. triggers a different action).

 

If cameras are reasonably different, however, I guess I am less confused. In other words: I do not care about, that my vintage S2 has a different user interface, because my muscle memory has different memory banks for different feels 

 . Now I am not entirely sure how I'd see it with a TL2 and the two wheels without a center button.

 

The other point I want to make: Yes - consistency between tools is a precious good, where it makes sense. On the other hand I am quite happy to see innovations coming through - the natural enemy of always identical user interfaces. For me, the CL did it well enough. Brought in a new idea (the center button of the control wheels) but kept the menu structure from the Q and the M10 (more or less). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

....

- dials with buttons in the centre, as opposed to a dial you press on the edge, as on the SL - I keep pressing the CL dial edge to change mode.

 

Actually, pushing the top of the left button of the CL and pushing in the back wheel on the SL to get to the PASM selector feel like the same concept to me.  I find it a little easier with the CL than with the SL, because I don't have to keep pressing the CL button while I rotate the wheel to select a mode.

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...