Jump to content

Image Quality--CL vs SL vs M10

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

.... and the answer to most of these questions is actually in the forum posts ...... it just takes some finding ..... many of us have posted comparisons, usually with examples. 


as has been often pointed out, for 'normal' use and at 'normal' rendition sizes the actual output of all these cameras is pretty close and would be hard to differentiate ... certainly as web sized posts.


it's only at the extremes that they start to differ significantly ...... and more importantly the mechanics and ergonomics involved in using the actual camera system .... which then comes down to personal preference. 


I use the SL and CL interchangeably depending on what I need ....... SL for serious landscapes and long exposures, interiors and low light, CL for general photography or when I need to travel light. There is an image difference, but we at talking about the difference between an excellent red wine and premier cru ... subtle ...... but there is a tonal smoothness if you look for it ...... which is also evident when you move from FF to Medium Format or higher. There are also less artefacts generated when sharpening and other more aggressive processing...... and again a bigger sensor like MF seems to offer more leeway. 


I had the TL2 and the image quality is identical to the CL. 


We're in 'dancing on the head of a pin' territory .... and basically these days if you find yourself dissatisfied with your photos it's the mug behind the viewfinder who needs changing, not the equipment they are using ..... 

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting to see this thread come up again. 


I sold my SL and its two zoom lenses, and acquired the CL to use with my R and M lenses. The notion was that the M-D typ 262 does most of what I want for day to day shooting, but there are some uses (copy work, negative digitizing, tabletop, and long lenses) that it simply isn't well suited for given that it has no TTL capability and not even an LCD to view what you've captured on without moving the file to something with a display. There is also the fact that I already had a complete set of R lenses and an excellent set of R macro equipment (bellows, extension tubes, two macro lenses, etc). 


I haven't done such detailed, individual image comparisons between the M-D and the CL as was done at the top of this thread, but I've capriciously swapped the same lenses back and forth between the two bodies in all kinds of situations and compared the results: 

  • I'm impressed that the CL and M-D generate very nearly the same results on cases of almost matching FoV. 
  • The smaller CL format nets more usefulness for macro work than the SL, given that I can achieve 1.5x more magnification @ 24 Mpixel at the same optical settings.
  • The CL feels so right to use with the R lenses and a little awkward with the M lenses, for me. 
  • All of the lenses I've used on the CL render well.
  • The M-D proves nicer to use in bright daylight because of the viewfinder; the CL proves nicer to use in more variable and indoor, low light circumstances because of the viewfinder. 
  • I can achieve equally good, critical, accurate focus with either.

The CL proves to be too nice to use and too versatile to lock it into just the niche uses I had planned for it. And the M-D proves to remain too nice to use and too good a performer to let go of. I have very nearly my ideal lens kit for both between my M and R lenses. I have not a moment's hesitation saying that the CL and the M-D produce equal results, even out to a pretty high stress factor kind of shooting. Job done, I've got what I need for the projects I have in mind ...


Because of the strength of this kit, I've finally realized that I personally lost the desire for a Hasselblad X1D... That saves me a bundle!

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the M10, Q and CL.  Among the 3, I most enjoy using the CL and cannot tell any quality difference in the final RW image.  I use M and R lenses on the CL, and get great results with focus peaking and magnification used to compose and focus.  My CL came with the TL 18-56mm zoom lens and I find it as sharp as my Q or M.

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.

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.


  • Similar Content

    • By thegman
      Hi, I've just bought my cl. Can someone explain how top right wheel is used for magnifying the evf image. Thanks
    • By raadoo
      Playing around yesterday, I discovered this weird flare pattern when pointing at the sun. Images are at f/8 and f/5.6.
      Is this ... normal? I’ve never seen anything like it.
      Setup was:
      Leica CL M-Adapter-L Voigtlander 40mm f/1.2 Voigtlander 75mm f/1.5 No filters on any lens, either, so not sure what could be causing it.

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content. Hallo Gast! Du willst die Bilder sehen? Einfach registrieren oder anmelden!
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content. Hallo Gast! Du willst die Bilder sehen? Einfach registrieren oder anmelden!
    • By simonCL
      Hi all! 
      Apologies in advance for the length of this post! 
      I was wondering if you all are able to give me some advice or words of wisdom on whether I should get a Rangefinder Leica. 
      At the moment I’m currently using and enjoying my Leica CL & 23mm f2 Summicron. Purchased in Oct 2018. I absolutely love shooting with the CL and for me it was the upgrade I was always wanting. I even adapt some rare and unique vintage m42 lenses to it and get some amazing results. 
      Now I’m no professional photographer, just a hobby shooter but the Leica CL I have had really developed my love and passion for photography. At the time of purchasing the CL I was using a Nikon D7500 which I still have (but never use) so for me, at the time the CL was the next step up, and I never thought of going for a rangefinder (couldn’t afford the m10 and lenses anyway lol). 
      But now having visited the Sydney Leica store on many occasions to try out the M10 and the rangefinder systems, I’ve grown more interest for a Rangefinder. 
      I’m interested in the M240, maybe the M262. I like the appeal of a brassing body though (a bit of individualism I’d say). But honestly I’m not sure which system to go for (and I don’t have the money for a new M10). 
      What are the PROS and CONS for each system? What makes you want to stay with that system? (if you have one) what would you recommend I do or go for? 
      Now I’ve done heaps of research and reviews on both systems but I really want to hear from everyday people who use them. 
    • By max.mlzr
      ich bin gerade dabei mir für einen längeren Auslandsaufenthalt in Neuseeland eine Leica M zuzulegen, der Body wird wahrscheinlich eine M2 (ca. 500€) von Meiers Fotobörse, da ich mir die dort noch leisten kann (bin noch Schüler).
      Mir fehlt dann nur noch ein Objektiv, am Besten ein 50mm oder ein 35mm Objektiv. Auch hier ist mein Budget eher niedrig (~300€ +-), daher hatte ich an ein 7Artisans 35mm f/2 (nichts für Puristen), ein Voigtländer Color Skopar 35mm f/2,5 (ein bisschen über dem Budget), Summicron 40mm f/2 (passt gerade so mit den Framelines) oder sogar ein Jupiter 8 50mm f/2 mit Adapter gedacht (damit hatte ich schlechte Erfahrungen bisher).
      Welche Linse bietet sich da am Besten an? Habt ihr noch andere Vorschläge? Ich bin kein Purist, also ist mir die Marke egal.
      Ist es vielleicht sogar am Besten, wenn ich nur bei 40mm bleibe, mir eine Leica CL trotz der geringen Messucherbasis zuzulegen?
      Oder macht das überhaupt gar keinen Sinn hier bei einem solchen Budget zu investieren?
      Danke für eure Hilfe!
      P.S. Ich habe zwar bereits eine Fm2n, die will ich verkaufen, da mir die Ergonomie und der Stil einer Leica besser gefällt und diese kompakter ist? Ich hatte sogar schon an eine Pen FT gedacht, da sie vom Design her einer Leica ebenbürtig ist und ich die kreativen Möglichkeiten sowie die 72 Bilder pro Film sehr ansprechen finde, anderseits ist Halbformat eben sehr klein..
    • By Sjz
      I am in the fortunate position of travelling to South Africa (near Cape Town).  Photography is not the purpose of the trip but it would be ‘rude’ not to take a camera.
      I have a cl, which I am excited about.  It is a recent purchase with the kit 18mm lens.  It replaces my Fuji x100t which I really enjoyed but I wanted to be able to change lens’ and I preferred the cl to Fuji x-pro 3.
      i just like having a camera in my jacket pocket, hence the 18mm.  Physical, it makes the cl very similar to the X-100 series.
      Now for the questions:
      Is the 23 Summicron significantly better quality than the 18mm (I cant find the physical length lens so will pop into shop to see)? Is the APO-VARIO-ELMAR-TL 55-135MM considered to have a ‘good’ IQ? Should I be looking at other L-Mount lens?  I have a SL2 and the 35mm Summicron, the 24-90 and an underused Sigma 14-24, but I would rather travel with something more compact and in line with the cl. The photography I like is mainly landscape but of course, a bit of street and social photography too.
      Thank you for your help in advance.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue., Read more about our Privacy Policy