Leica CL Leica CL as main camera

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well you wrote « Pretty much fact that in good light there will be almost nothing between TL2, CL, SL and M10 from a sensor standpoint » so i reacted to this as it see lot of differences between my FF and APS bodies but i'm not much interested in resolution personally so i rely on you in this.

[jaapv]

DOF depends on

1. Subject distance

2. Aperture

3. Sensor size

4. Lens design

5. Frequency of the subject

6. Contrast of the subject

7. Print size

8. Viewing distance

9. Personal perception of the viewer

 

 

Linking it to only the sensor size makes no sense.

[Advertisement]

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

[lct]

Who said only?

DoF is based on focal length, aperture, subject distance and circle of confusion, the latter being determined by the size of the sensor.

[jaapv]

To be precise, DOF is based on the inability of our eyes and brain to detect smaller detail than 2º. Only 2º because the brain is able to interpolate scanning, comparable to pixel shifting.

 

Although the theoretical resolution of our viewing system is over 550 MP, optical and biological limitations reduce this number to the equivalence of a 7 MP sensor.

 

Add this to the acceptance by the individual viewer of unsharpness depending on the subject, and you will see that he technical formulas, based on objective parameters, only tell part of the story.

 

The sensor size is only part of the equation, minor unless we are talking about large differences, not something like APS-C to Full Frame, or Full Frame to Mini-MF (Leica S) but for instance a Cell Phone or small compact, or full digital backs, etc.

[lct]

Just common knowledge AFAIK. To get the CoC value of your APS camera, for instance, take that of an FF camera, divide it by the diagonal of the FF sensor and multiply it by the diagional of your APS sensor. All DoF calculators are based on that.

[jaapv]

Yes - and all DOF calculators are no more than a crutch. The experience and preference of the photographer are what counts.

I might add that the COC is calculated from 1930-ies film (thick emulsion) and 6x9 prints.

For modern photography you need to halve the COC - at least.

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Not sure what you are trying to demonstrate here. CoC values are the only way to explain why DoF is different on APS, FF, MF or LF cameras.

[jaapv]

Err, no. COC values are a derived mathematical parameter for approximately calculating this subjective phenomenon. The differences one can see are because of the different magnification throughout the imaging chain.

For instance, if you don't change the distance between the subject and the camera, the DOF will be the same on any size sensor. You will be changing the angle of view, though.

If you change the distance between camera and subject to maintain the field of view on the differently sized sensor, the DOF will be different.

If you change the size of the print and maintain the viewing distance, DOF will be different. If you view the same print at different distances, DOF will be different.

COC does not come into it.

 

In the final analysis, DOF is a function of perspective. If the size of the projection of the dots in front or back of the plane of focus drops below the resolving power or the eye it is perceived as sharp. That depends entirely on the angle generated by the projection of the dots and the relevant distances (angle and distance make size). The gear in between is only relevant as far as it modifies that angle.

[lct]

One of us doesn't get it Jaap but i'm not sure it is me with respect. CoC takes all you say into account, aside from perspective which is another story. CoC depends on factors like viewing distance, magnification, visual acuity and probably others i don't recall but also on the size of film or sensor. This is the reason why size matters. In fact, size is determinant.

Edited June 14, 2018 by lct

[jaapv]

My point is that the change of DOF between APS and Full Frame is relatively small and outweighed by many other factors. 

[mpmckenzie]

now I'm confused ! with all this DOF posts .can we still  zone focus ?

[jaapv]

If that is your preferred way of working, of course you can As long as you realise that zone focussing is about managing the zone of unsharpness.

[ehecatl]

To go back to the original question (sorry, been off the forum for months), I recently purchased a CL, thinking it would serve as a backup body to my (very used, but much loved) M9. Soon after receiving it (and the 18-56 lens) I left for South America with both cameras. My thought was to keep the zoom lens on the CL and the Voigtlander lenses I brought (12mm, 28 mm, 50mm f/1.1) for the M9. But recently discovering the joys of focus peaking with the manual lenses (the 12mm has always been tricky on my M9 as the lens isn’t RF coupled) I’m finding that I’m shooting more with the CL.

[ramarren]

I don't know whether I buy into the "my main camera" notion ... I don't have a "main camera"; I have different cameras that I like to use either due to the caprice of the moment, to see what I can get with them, or that I use for specific purposes because of their particular capabilities. 

 

The two digital cameras I've used the most for the past year are my Leica M-D typ 262 and my Light L16. I've had the SL since November 2015 and for a time I used it the most.

 

My life has changed dramatically since then. I was ill for a bit, I retired, and then I found that I have different motivations and goals for my photography in my retirement than I thought I might. I returned to my preferred life of riding bicycles and motorcycles, both for transportation and for pleasure. One thing has become patently clear in that return is that I no longer want to carry anything bulky or heavy on a regular basis, and certainly not when riding either of my two wheelers. So the SL slowly became relegated to "the camera I pulled out when I needed to do macro, copy work, or use a very long lens" ... And there just isn't enough of such work in my current motivation and need to warrant the capabilities and value of the SL sitting on the shelf so much of the time. 

 

So ... I've sent the SL system off on consignment to be sold. The body and the two SL zooms are still worth quite a lot of money so I'll be able to pocket a good deal of it for other endeavors. However, I do have the occasional need for the aforementioned macro, etc, work, and I retained the lenses and attachments needed to do that work with my Leicaflex SL. The CL will do as well as the SL for that work ... better in certain situations ... and I expect that once the SL system is sold, I'll subtract from my returns enough to buy a CL body. I've retained the R Adapter M and M Adapter L, so all of my Leica lenses and accessories will be useable on the CL. 

 

And who knows? Maybe I'll find myself using the CL with my Summilux 35mm v2 lens quite a lot...

 

Main camera? I have no idea.

[scott kirkpatrick]

I hope you get your funds freed up soon, as the CL would make a lot of sense for you, and you seem to greatly enjoy  exploring what a new camera is capable of.  Any hypothetical CM seems to be at least a year in the future.  A CL, the 11-23, and the CL 35 in a shock-proof case rather than slung on you, would also seem to be a perfect long distance motorcycle traveling kit.

 

But what has become of your Mercedes SLK?

[ramarren]

I hope you get your funds freed up soon, as the CL would make a lot of sense for you, and you seem to greatly enjoy  exploring what a new camera is capable of.  Any hypothetical CM seems to be at least a year in the future.  A CL, the 11-23, and the CL 35 in a shock-proof case rather than slung on you, would also seem to be a perfect long distance motorcycle traveling kit.

 

But what has become of your Mercedes SLK?

 

 

The SLK is quite happily ensconced in the garage still and gets used when I need it.

It does need a good wash; I'll be driving it to San Luis Obispo and back on Monday... 

 

I rarely wait on equipment once I know what's going to work. I have very specific uses for the CL in mind: its TTL viewfinder and my existing lenses will do what I need well. The CM, if it had been what all the chatter was saying it might be, would have been good too but its no big deal. 

 

For my more serious travel photography purposes, little has proven more to my liking than the Leica M-D and a couple of lenses. For traveling and more casual photography with motorcycle or bicycle, the Light L16 is very nearly as good as it gets for me. There are lots of options, and the CL with the tiny Color Skopar 28/3.5 lens might work beautifully as a one-cam, one lens kit too. 

 

I'm in no rush. It's not like there's any deficit of equipment in my closet..!

[Don Morley]

This thread seems to have lost its way a little! The original question was more about if the CL was or was not good enough to be ones main camera to which my own answer would have to remain as a maybe! Why?  Well it so much depends on whatever is your own more usual interests and subject matter, so for instance the CL is brilliant as a landscape camera turning out quality to rival any full frame system, however it is not in my view the best choice for such as candid portraits, and it is most definately not great for any form of serious high speed action photography.

 

As a spectacle wearer I also find the CL also sadly suffers badly (as every mirrorless camera I have so far) with viewfinder darkening and glare problems whenever I try to shoot into the light in very sunlight, which incidentally is one area the Fuji X-Pro2 scores over the C as it also has a 'M' like direct viewfinder in addition to the EVF, anyway I happen to be lucky enough to also own M Leica's and full frame Canon and Fuji X-Pro2 systems and thus my own overall oppinion after much use and experimentation is the CL is more than adequate, indeed superb for perhaps 90% of whatever subjects I take. HOWEVER. As as the other 10% of subjects I do need to be able to capture well are also often THE most important ones to me. It does mean I for one could not manage via my only using my otherwise much loved  CL. Don

[Gerardjan]

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. 

 

Sold everything I owned (Nikon, Fuji, other Leica) Never looked back. Expect I never will. (CL+18-56)

[Gerardjan]

Yes. I like those mentioned. But we have to decide if they are minor tools rather than primary tools and if they can be worked around. And if we are willing to give up its utility.

Leica has their own idea what primary tools should be 

 

If you have fractions of seconds to decide, they might get in the way. Just go to any event and watch the photographers at work. The more they have to do to switch to a change in scenario the slower they are in responding to capturing the moment.

 

Angefangen mit einer Nikon F2. Nix automat. Nach vielen Jahren die F3 gekauft(unter Vorbehalt weil "Automat")Eingestellt wurden ASA, Diafragma. Wunderbar. Jetzt mit CL: Dazu Autofocus. Klasse weil Augen immer schlechter. Als Fotograf braucht man nicht mehr (Angenommen man kennt die Prinzipien der Fotografie)

Edited August 28, 2018 by Gerardjan

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Don Morley]

If that is your preferred way of working, of course you can As long as you realise that zone focussing is about managing the zone of unsharpness.

 

Many years ago in the early 1950's as a then full time student of photography and lens design etc we had a wonderful textbook by LeClerk and called 'Photography In Theory And Practice' which was sponsored by film makers Ilford, seems to me too many of today's photographers miss out a lot by not learning such as the optical theories and relying instead on the modern day camera manufacturers to cover the the eventual camera users knowledge failings via automation. Suggest several of our fellow Forum readers could do themselves a real favor by getting hold of and studying a copy of LeClerk's tome, but meanwhile thank you Jaap you are doing well!