Thorsten Overgaard and the TL2

[RickP]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In case you are not aware of Thorsten Overgaard and his photography site, here is a link to his TL2 review.  He is the best reviewer out there as far as I am concerned.. lots of information, not too much favoritism, and  not bogged down in pixel counting. 

 

http://www.overgaard.dk/Leica-TL-mirrorless-digital-camera-review-and-user-report.html

 

 

I enjoy his newsletter also.

 

http://www.overgaard.dk/sign-up-for-the-thorsten-overgaard-free-newsletter.html

 

 

Rick

 

 

[Xerxes2539]

Thanks for posting this Rick. I agree, I really enjoy watching his Youtube channel. He has a real passion and realistic approach to photography.

[Advertisement]

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

[microview]

One of the remarks made in his overview is that lenses produced for the T-TL2 etc are optically superior. My question is, do you find them preferable to M lenses of comparable focal lengths, with adapter and manual focus? I don't know if anyone agrees but I am finding exposures of circa 1/60s can actually look blurry at 100% enlargement on-screen (LR). The much heavier M10 allows shorter exposures without camera movement when depressing the shutter. Anyone else found that?

[RickP]

Microview,

 

I don’t recall him saying that, but I can’t imagine he meant “superior to M lenses” i would guess “superior to lenses in general.”

 

My own experience is that the Leica T lenses yield IQ that is close to M lenses as well as the Zeiss ZMs that I use. Zooms will of course give up a bit of IQ in order to cover multiple focal lengths. Keep in mind the T lenses were designed specifically for the T system.. that gives them a bit of an edge in the first place.. plus distortions are minimized through firmware. Leica has been quoted to say ..’The T lenses are of the highest quality’.

 

Rick

Edited February 19, 2018 by RickP

[microview]

Hi Rick,

What he actually wrote was "With increased resolution of sensors, Leica Camera AG seems to have decided some time ago to make it possible for even more resolution. For many reasons, one could hope we get spared for 100MP sensors in “full frame” (24 x 36mm) cameras, because the human eye will usually be able to resolve just up to 18MP, so anything above that is just need for more computer power and storage space in order to process the images. What lens designer Peter Karbe and his team of optical designers decided was to increase resolution of the Leica lenses and resolve, from the usual 40 lines per mm (1,000 lines per inch) which is the usual resolution for Leica M lenses, to 60 lines per mm (1,500 lines per inch) on Leica L mount lenses, as well as the Leica Q, so as to make cropping possible. In the Leica L lenses, the increased resolution has resulted in some ridiculously sharp and detailed photographs that makes the Leica TL look like a medium format camera. That is if you look at the images and not the specifications." Perhaps I read too much into this, thinking that the M lenses might be less good than the autofocus ones on the TL2. But when the SL came out Jonathan Slack definitely held the view that M lenses were better on M cameras!

Regards

Christopher 

[LichtUndDunkelheit]

Well, uh-hu. That depends upon how you define "better" in this context. If your goal is just getting 60 lpm, sure.

 

But thats really like saying your iPhone has the better optics because these optics had to be created with extremely small tolerances due to the tiny sensor and tiny pixels. Why yes, they do. But if you created your regular, large optics with these extremely high tolerances, it would be much, much more expensive to make and you wouldnt actually see the difference, because the pixels in your sensor are much bigger than those in the iPhone. We can know this for sure because in production of electronics, these kind of super optics are actually created and their costs millions. See for example this behemoth: https://diglloyd.com/blog/2015/20150913_2304-VisitToZeiss.html - second image from top.

 

And I really, really would NOT define medium format to be merely of higher resolution. In fact a medium format image might as well have less resolution than one from a smaller sensor and still look better. Thats because of better signal to noise, lower diffraction, higher tolerances, and easier lens construction (prime lenses can be f2.8 or f4, which makes it much easier to create really high performing lenses).

[RickP]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi Rick,

What he actually wrote was "With increased resolution of sensors, Leica Camera AG seems to have decided some time ago to make it possible for even more resolution. For many reasons, one could hope we get spared for 100MP sensors in “full frame” (24 x 36mm) cameras, because the human eye will usually be able to resolve just up to 18MP, so anything above that is just need for more computer power and storage space in order to process the images. What lens designer Peter Karbe and his team of optical designers decided was to increase resolution of the Leica lenses and resolve, from the usual 40 lines per mm (1,000 lines per inch) which is the usual resolution for Leica M lenses, to 60 lines per mm (1,500 lines per inch) on Leica L mount lenses, as well as the Leica Q, so as to make cropping possible. In the Leica L lenses, the increased resolution has resulted in some ridiculously sharp and detailed photographs that makes the Leica TL look like a medium format camera. That is if you look at the images and not the specifications." Perhaps I read too much into this, thinking that the M lenses might be less good than the autofocus ones on the TL2. But when the SL came out Jonathan Slack definitely held the view that M lenses were better on M cameras!

Regards

Christopher 

 

Yes, That makes sense to me. 

 

Meanwhile, Leica used to claim 60 lines per mm on  my old Leica X Vario zoom.  The photos from that camera were definitely sharper than any other 16 meg camera that I have ever had.  I do wish they would make that X Vario lens in a T mount.  Yes it was big and slow, but it took one heck of a picture.

 

Rick

Edited February 19, 2018 by RickP

[Guest VVJ]

I thought the 18-56 was very similar to the X-Vario lens?

[RickP]

I thought the 18-56 was very similar to the X-Vario lens?

Similar in focal length coverage, but not in IQ ...( IMO .. but I might ad - others agree with me on this.)

 

That being said, the 18-56 is my most used lens on either my T or TL2 .. it really does have great color and is very sharp, fast focus also. Overall a wonderful lens in favorable conditions.

 

Rick

Edited February 19, 2018 by RickP

[robert blu]

Interesting review.I would like to buy one for my wife who likes to take pictures but is too intimidated by the menu of her D-109 (with the hope she allows me to use it sometimes  ) .

By the way I already have the EVF (I use sometimes on the M10).

 

robert

[miro]

Latest news from Overgaard :

 

"Recently I simplified my lineup of Leica gear I travel with. I sold off my two 35mm lenses (a 35mm FLE and a 35mm AA), I left my Leica TL2 in Denmark, my Leica Q in Hong Kong and sold the Leica CL. I now just travel with two Leica M9 cameras and two Leica M10 cameras with 50mm Summilux, 50mm APO, 50mm Noctilux, a 28mm Summilux and a 90mm APO-Summicron."

 

http://www.overgaard.dk/leica-M9-digital-rangefinder-camera-page-20-Leica-M9-Instant-Success.html

[Guest VVJ]

Latest news from Overgaard :

 

"Recently I simplified my lineup of Leica gear I travel with. I sold off my two 35mm lenses (a 35mm FLE and a 35mm AA), I left my Leica TL2 in Denmark, my Leica Q in Hong Kong and sold the Leica CL. I now just travel with two Leica M9 cameras and two Leica M10 cameras with 50mm Summilux, 50mm APO, 50mm Noctilux, a 28mm Summilux and a 90mm APO-Summicron."

 

http://www.overgaard.dk/leica-M9-digital-rangefinder-camera-page-20-Leica-M9-Instant-Success.html

 

I like the use of the word "just"...  Besides that, I still have the M9 as well, if you get it right it is wonderful.

Edited February 25, 2018 by JorisV

[miro]

I like the use of the word "just"...  Besides that, I still have the M9 as well, if you get it right it is wonderful.

 

 

I think this is considered traveling light for a Professional .

I like Mr. Overgaards photography but while some may call the M9 rendering Classic or Timeless , it's looking a little dated .

[Belle123]

Latest news from Overgaard :

 

"Recently I simplified my lineup of Leica gear I travel with. I sold off my two 35mm lenses (a 35mm FLE and a 35mm AA), I left my Leica TL2 in Denmark, my Leica Q in Hong Kong and sold the Leica CL. I now just travel with two Leica M9 cameras and two Leica M10 cameras with 50mm Summilux, 50mm APO, 50mm Noctilux, a 28mm Summilux and a 90mm APO-Summicron."[/size]

 

http://www.overgaard.dk/leica-M9-digital-rangefinder-camera-page-20-Leica-M9-Instant-Success.html[/size]

What is more interesting is the fact sold CL, already, but hanging onto the TL2 and Q.

[Starwolfy]

 

I don't really like his stuff in fact.

 

To me he is just one of this guy who made a website at the right moment and dragued people at him from using the most exotic Leica stuff. He sells stuff to people because his readers think he is a specialist which he is not in my opinion.

 

I much prefer Ming Thien blog for example. And there is just no comparison possible between the two about the expertise they provide.

 

 

Just my opinion by the way.

[robert blu]

What is more interesting is the fact sold CL, already, but hanging onto the TL2 and Q.

It would be interesting to know why the TL2 + visoflex instead of the Cl, ergonomic or ...

robert

PS: maybe just because he like it!

Edited March 2, 2018 by robert blu

[miro]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QUJWT7KAoM

[miro]

It would be interesting to know why the TL2 + visoflex instead of the Cl, ergonomic or ...

robert

PS: maybe just because he like it!

 

Here:

http://www.overgaard.dk/Leica-CL-mirrorless-digital-camera-review-Page-2.html

[ropo54]

It would be interesting to know why the TL2 + visoflex instead of the Cl, ergonomic or ...

robert

PS: maybe just because he like it!

 

From my perspective: the CL outperforms the TL2 w Visoflex in terms of faster AF and better EVF, but the TL2 is more pleasant to hold in hand and is more stunning in looks.  Some may prefer the simplicity of the TL2 menu system.

 

I think T.O. has a valid gripe, though, about the lack of uniformity in user interface amongst the many Leica cameras.  It makes no sense: if there is a simplicity in interface that is successful, why not stay with it?

Edited March 5, 2018 by ropo54

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[colonel]

IMHO, reading between the lines, Thorsten likes the TL2 more then the CL

 

This is something I have heard from a number of reviewers, although its subtle as its technically not the politically correct opinion

 

The CL is more mixed, many are positive, including Amateur Photography in the UK, which is a good review mag. On the other hand, folk like the Camera Store which I also respect, are quite negative

 

The original T reviews were very positive, despite it being not that popular. The one that I really liked was Thom Hogan's, still relevant and worth reading today

 

The TL2 is really more then the sum of its parts. The chamfering of the edges, the speed, the silent shutter, the 4K, the price is good value (yes, I actually said that about a Leica product)