Jump to content
Guest VVJ

Leica CL as main camera

Recommended Posts

Guest VVJ

I am personally not there yet but I was wondering whether anyone is using the Leica CL as their only or main camera and what they were shooting before.  

 

Also, whether you are missing anything from your previous platform.  Or the areas in which you feel the CL is still severely lacking. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest VVJ

I bought it as a second camera to my Leica M system, but it seems to have taken over...

 

New cameras tend to do that... The question is whether it is permanently or temporarily...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given that it is sitting in the middle of my web of camera systems - sharing M and R lenses with the M9 and DMR, a superior EVF, like my Panasonic GX8, sharing batteries with the Panasonic - I think the position might be rather enduring, especially as the image quality rivals my M240 (now sold) and is for all practical purposes rather similar to SL and M!0 (yes, I know all about the pixel-peeping differences

).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too early to say in my case.  But it's my hope that the CL (with a simple mix of MF and AF lenses) alongside my Q will replace a hodge-podge of Fuji X-based solutions.  I find aps-c more than adequate for what I do, based on Fuji X use.  MF Leica lenses on the CL make aps-c even more attractive.  If Leica were to offer TL AF versions of a f/1.4-1.7 24-28 prime, a f/1.4-2 75-90 prime, and a f/2.8-4 70-200, I could be happy using only a CL, I think.

 

Interesting question.  The CL has brought me back to Leica.  I was just about ready to sell my little inventory of M glass, after selling my M bodies earlier due to disuse, and keep only my fav Q. 

Edited by mctuomey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like Jaap I am very close to selling all of my M equipment in favour of the CL not least as I am 100% happy with the CL's output quality which is as close to that of my MP240 as makes no difference and then also for me the CL scores way above the 'M' system in being so much lighter and with it having auto focus. So to answer your question 'Would I use it as my main (or sole) camera' ? Well no I will not actually as for all of the CL's plus points I just do not like its control dials or menu setting system.

 

HOWEVER. I will very happily use the CL as my 'Co' main camera in conjunction with my Fuji X-Pro 2  which for such poor Leica menu reasons makes the Fuji more versatile and usable for me despite it not quite having the equal of the CL's superb image quality.  Don Morley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had used a few years ago M body and lenses but had sold the body and have now sold the glass. I had been using the Fuji X-T1 with fuji lenses before getting the CL. My wife now has the Fuji, her choice, but the IQ doesn’t compare. I truly believe it is the lenses and not the body that makes the big difference. So the CL has become my primary use camera and I think the lens that will get the most walk around use will be the 18-56. The primes as outstanding in my view.

For me the Fuji dials are extreme in the sense that I am happy controlling a lot of the camera functions with the favourites menu and don’t need a dial for everything as Fuji seems to design.

Like it so much my second body is another CL to avoid too many lens changes when traveling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest VVJ

Too early to say in my case.  But it's my hope that the CL (with a simple mix of MF and AF lenses) alongside my Q will replace a hodge-podge of Fuji X-based solutions.  I find aps-c more than adequate for what I do, based on Fuji X use.  MF Leica lenses on the CL make aps-c even more attractive.  If Leica were to offer TL AF versions of a f/1.4-1.7 24-28 prime, a f/1.4-2 75-90 prime, and a f/2.8-4 70-200, I could be happy using only a CL, I think.

 

Interesting question.  The CL has brought me back to Leica.  I was just about ready to sell my little inventory of M glass, after selling my M bodies earlier due to disuse, and keep only my fav Q. 

 

I actually just sold my Leica Q this morning.  After acquiring the SL and the CL (including its T-predecessors) it simply wasn't getting enough use anymore.  The compact 18mm was probably the nail in the coffin I guess...

 

I would also like to see more lenses, in my particular case I love the 35mm but I usually shoot wider so I would applaud a 23mm or 18mm (preferably 23mm though) reference lens with similar image quality as the 35mm.

 

Also, a second version of the 18-56 (or better 16-56) with higher image quality and OIS, basically an equivalent of the 24-90 on the SL.  

 

Your phrase starting with "If Leica were to..." says it all though.  No roadmap, no transparency into what is coming... hopefully we start hearing rumors soon...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It makes good pictures. Be happy. Look to the classic photojournalist's photos. Their cameras had far less technical ability but delivered. You have a camera of the future with so many advantages. Use it, enjoy, do not worry.

.

Edited by pico

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great little camera indeed but it doesn't play in the same league as my FF bodies. I mean with M lenses as TL ones are not my cup of tea. I will keep using the CL when i need compactness though and using my favorite 35's as equiv. 50's has always been a pleasure for me.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am personally not there yet but I was wondering whether anyone is using the Leica CL as their only or main camera and what they were shooting before.  

 

Also, whether you are missing anything from your previous platform.  Or the areas in which you feel the CL is still severely lacking. 

 

 

As my only camera?  No.  There are still things I can do with the M10 and/or SL that I just can't with the CL.  As my most commonly used camera?  Already there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am personally not there yet but I was wondering whether anyone is using the Leica CL as their only or main camera and what they were shooting before.  

 

Also, whether you are missing anything from your previous platform.  Or the areas in which you feel the CL is still severely lacking. 

Great camera. Anything missing from my previous platform? Not enough lenses to make it a system. Especially Long Lenses - primes and zooms. Tilt shift lenses

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought it as a second camera to my Leica M system, but it seems to have taken over...

I’m in the same boat.

 

Bought at a companion to my M10 but I’ve loved it so much it’s now with my pretty much 100% of the time.

 

To be honest I’m getting as good quality from the CL as I was from the M10.

 

My style of shooting also fits well with the slightly cropped sensor as I tend to shoot down at f8 but when I do shoot at f1.4 or f0.95 then it’s equally a magnificent camera.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It makes good pictures. Be happy. Look to the classic photojournalist's photos. Their cameras had far less technical ability but delivered. You have a camera of the future with so many advantages. Use it, enjoy, do not worry.

.

 

I agree, in general.

 

Of course if you are a sports or bird photographer then speed of focus, high ISO performance, DR, etc. are crucial. Otherwise, chasing the technical aspects of a camera, IMO, is just running away from the most difficult thing to do in photography; i.e. get the interesting, well-composed, involving shot that hasn't already been "done to death". THAT'S what's difficult about photography.

 

Now I have an M10 and, frankly, not great eyes (I just had one eye done for cataracts, will have the second one done soon), but I am in love with this camera. It makes me feel like a "real" photographer. I will NOT give it up, regardless of how many slightly OOF shots I produce (but I keep practicing with the RF). Despite this, I am trialing a CL because I know there are times when AF will be very helpful. With both (actually, with all four of my bodies), I spend the bulk of my time just walking around trying to visualize shots, trying to mingle with people and talk them into letting me take their picture, etc. It's very difficult but I know that when my focus (!) is on  getting a great shot I won't care if there is some noise, or perhaps a blown highlight or a deep shadow or, for that matter if it's a bit OOF. I chose the CL because I like its simplicity, the way its controls work, and its feel in my hands, not because of DxO mark (not that there's anything wrong with DxO) or its technical specifications.

 

In short, get involved in producing great shots and you won't obsess over the absolute excruciating technical qualities of the camera. I mean, I recall seeing a YouTube video in which Robert Frank took pictures on a bus with a Polaroid (or similar instant camera).

Edited by nlk10010

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, in general.

 

Of course if you are a sports or bird photographer then speed of focus, high ISO performance, DR, etc. are crucial. Otherwise, chasing the technical aspects of a camera, IMO, is just running away from the most difficult thing to do in photography; i.e. get the interesting, well-composed, involving shot that hasn't already been "done to death". THAT'S what's difficult about photography.

 

Now I have an M10 and, frankly, not great eyes (I just had one eye done for cataracts, will have the second one done soon), but I am in love with this camera. It makes me feel like a "real" photographer. I will NOT give it up, regardless of how many slightly OOF shots I produce (but I keep practicing with the RF). Despite this, I am trialing a CL because I know there are times when AF will be very helpful. With both (actually, with all four of my bodies), I spend the bulk of my time just walking around trying to visualize shots, trying to mingle with people and talk them into letting me take their picture, etc. It's very difficult but I know that when my focus (!) is on  getting a great shot I won't care if there is some noise, or perhaps a blown highlight or a deep shadow or, for that matter if it's a bit OOF. I chose the CL because I like its simplicity, the way its controls work, and its feel in my hands, not because of DxO mark (not that there's anything wrong with DxO) or its technical specifications.

 

In short, get involved in producing great shots and you won't obsess over the absolute excruciating technical qualities of the camera. I mean, I recall seeing a YouTube video in which Robert Frank took pictures on a bus with a Polaroid (or similar instant camera).

 

had my cataracts done two years ago, in about a month when both eyes are done and healed you will be amazed at the return of your vision and color sense.....best thing that a doctor every told me to do ... good luck with ... doesn't take away from a CL vs M or whatever, just making a vision point 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest VVJ

Great camera. Anything missing from my previous platform? Not enough lenses to make it a system. Especially Long Lenses - primes and zooms. Tilt shift lenses

 

+1.  I fully agree.  I hope the success of the CL will lead to more lenses: primes (both smaller convenient ones and larger high quality reference ones) and zooms (with OIS please).  Not too optimistic about TS lenses though...

Edited by JorisV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×