Jump to content

What lenses to travel with CL if also taking Q camera

Recommended Posts

I think this will be a bit difficult, as many advantages of the Q are duplicated in the CL. The only things remaining over the  CL that the Q offers is a marginal i9ncrease in image quality, a bit more narrow DOF (but what value is this on a wideangle?) and lens speed over the zooms.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The 11-23mm (16-35mm equivalent) + the 35mm Summilux (50mm equivalent).


So you're covered for, the full frame equivalents of: 


— 16-35mm for landscape/cityscape work

— a great 28mm prime for people + close-ups

— 50mm for portraits and as a longer lens for landscape/cityscape photography


For my type of photography, this cover pretty much 80%+ of the photos I take. Also, this can go comfortably in a small messenger bag, with still a lot of empty space for other stuff.

Edited by carlosgavina
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, to be a bit more constructive

Having the two or three zooms and the Q is fairly similar to my standard kit, i.e. 18-56, 55-135 and Summilux M 24. Tome that is an ideal travel kit.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I may be a bit retro, but why do you need to carry the Q if you have the CL and a full kit of lenses? Seems an excess of equipment for no really good reason.


My holiday trip went beautifully with just the Leica M-D and 35/50 lenses. I did landscape, city scenes, people, faces, abstracts, etc. Nothing else needed, why carry it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am currently in Japan, coming to the end of the trip. I have thoroughly enjoyed travelling with the CL. It is small, light and has wonderful IQ with the TL lenses. 


I am a bit of a pack rat, and tend to throw heaps into the travel pack but then take a smaller lens selection as the day/mood takes me. On this trip, I brought the 11-23, 18-56, 18 Elmarit, 35 Summilux-M ASPH and 60 Macro Elmarit. 


The zooms have been great, and the workhorses. The Summilux-M is fantastic for walking around at night, taking shots in restaurants and so on. The 18 pancake has been great to give me a "camera in a jacket pocket" to walk around with. The 60 Macro is an indulgence, but such a brilliant lens and has opened up some lovely detail shots of craftsmanship (knives, woodworking, guitars etc) and food. 


While not a choice that immediately jumps out at you, I think the Q and the CL could work very well as companion cameras. After all, the Q costs less than a Summilux-M and with it and a CL you get a backup camera that has great synergy due to the matching batteries. In my use case the Q would replace the 35 Lux for a nighttime walk-around setup (in fact, wider may be more versatile, especially with the viewfinder crop modes in camera), with the bonus that it has some macro ability (1:4 repro ratio) so can also replace the 60 Macro for food and detail shots. It also potentially replaces the 18 pancake, as it is a pretty compact package in its own right. 


So back to the OP, I would probably use the CL for the versatility of the zooms and rely on the Q as a backup body, for nighttime duties and for some limited macro. Of course, the CL also opens up the world of Leica lenses for you, so that if you're going somewhere with wildlife you can throw the 90-280 SL in, or you can take your favourite lens of the moment or what you think will be perfect for a particular planned shot on your trip... such a versatile camera. 


Incidentally, on this trip I have absolutely loved the form factor and weight of the CL and I have not missed the SL or the M. The CL has allowed me to indulge in photography without getting in the way of a family holiday lugging a large setup around. And although the wife and kids can all focus an M, being able to hand the CL to a stranger for a rare photo with me in it has also been fun. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the thoughts, very helpful. I am inclined to be like Alistair, take everything and decide on the day what to carry. The Q for me I think will get a lot of use and will save a lot of lens changes as a second body.

I am thinking a great city walkaround grouping at least during the day is the Q and the CL with the 18-56 if I didn’t want to change lenses at all. At night might take the the Q and the CL with the 35 1.4 (50mm equivalent)

I currently have the 11-23 and the 18-56 zooms. I got the 60mm to get a longer reach and the lens reviews looked great.

I haven’t bought the 55-135.

What do you find the minimum shutter speed you can use handheld with the 55-135. I had the Canon 70-200 which was a lot heavier but was stabilized so I found I could hold it at 1/125 or faster. Not sure could do the same at 200mm without OIS.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Handholding the 55-135 at longer speeds is a bit of a challenge, especially with the pixel density of an APS-C 24 MP sensor and the light weight of the combo.

Even if I do specialize in handholding long lenses, I would not expect a 100% success rate at 1/125th @ 135 (200) mm. In fact, far from it. I need all tricks,like leaning against a wall, sitting down and using arms an knees to make a triangle, or resting my elbows on a table, etc. to shoot with any degree of confidence. I have taken to carrying a light shoulder pod in my bag.

Leica really missed a trick by omitting stabilization.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just bought a Q and have the CL with most of the TL lenses. I travel a lot, main interest is landscape and street/city photography. What TL lenses would you take considering I am also taking the Q camera with me. 

 Make a pile of the cameras/lenses that you think you will definitely need and can't live without.


Be absolutely ruthless and choose only HALF of what is in the pile.


I bet you will still not use some of what you take .... 


I have never yet been on a trip where I missed a lens I had left behind ...... but have almost always regretted carrying around stuff I never used .....

Edited by thighslapper
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think with just the Q and the zooms I am missing a lens for portrait or does anyone think the Q is ok for that

I suppose it depends if you need a dedicated portrait lens... your 35 Lux would be a nice substitute, and give you some speed at a longer photo length and with the hood off it's fairly small.  


For reference, a picture of what I am travelling with in Japan. It shows that the 60 Macro is indeed large. The 18 pancake is tiny and fits into any crevice in the bag. The 35 Lux is remarkably small for a lens of its quality and speed, even with the M adapter attached. 


Edited by Alistairm
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what I am taking on a two-week skiing holiday next week:



The X2 is for backup and skiing in rough conditions, I have a nice holster for it.



And this is for six weeks Central Africa in October, including two weeks Safari:




I might add the Tele-Elmar 135 as long lens backup on the GX8, though.

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.

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.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Create New...