M, CL or another Q

[Tonkerdog]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Unfortunately I had to sell my Q, but am now looking to get a Leica back. The Q took great photos, but I was limited to one lens and I found it a bit bulky.

 

I used to have a T with the 18-56 lens which I really liked, but didn’t like its photos compared to the Q.

 

So with £3,000 and remembering I’d like flexible lens selection, an M9 or a new CL?

 

I know the EVF and tech will be newer on the CL, but what’s your view?

[Shameetman]

Idk what you hope to find in your new camera?

[Advertisement]

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

[Tonkerdog]

I need a Q with interchangeable lenses, that’s what I want. But until then I need the best camera o can get with my money. Whs5 would an M9 offer over the CL to an amateur like me.

[Tobers]

I have a CL and have had an M9, M240 and M10. The CL is just lovely. Beautifully made, great to use, and simple interface. But I do not have the bond with it that I had with my M’s. But the CL is the closest I’ve come to an M but with the advantages of a built in EVF, small size, lightness, and of course autofocus.

 

As it happens I am pondering getting an M9 as a backup as I still have a 24lux, 50lux and 90cron to play with. I can use them on the CL (they work really well) though it’s a 1.5x crop so you need to get your head around that.

[schmolinski]

Hi there

 

if the Q is bulky, what is the M with a Summilux?

 

The CL is lovely. It is versatile, it can adapt the M lenses. But the CL will never replace the Leica M.

 

The EVF technique is a step towards a future M with EVF, or maybe a hybrid VF compared to the FujiX100 series.

 

The experience of a M is quite different from the CL. Handling, vision and mind.

 

So depending on your purpose you should decide what is right or better for your needs.

 

With 3ooo£ you can buy a used M240 and a pretty cool Zeiss lens or with some luck even two.

 

If you need auto focus got for the CL. It's pretty fast and much more versatile than the Q if you like and know to handle the M Lenses or equivalent.

 

My advice. If you regret the sale of the Q buy one. This camera you best know and instantly start making good images. The M is more challenging or more demanding. And we'll the CL is cool and can handle both lens types. Auto me manual focus. The cheapest way is the Q. The most expensive way it the CL or M. Why? Once infected with the Leica virus won't save you money.

 

Just my two cents...

[Ko.Fe.]

Well, just in case:

CL 5.2 x 3.1 x 1.8 in. (131 x 78 x 45 mm)

M9  5.47 x 3.15 x 1.46in. (139 x 80 x 37 mm)

 

Add huge CL lenses (except couple of pancake like) and which one is going to be more bulky? 

 

I'd rather get for M one of the several pancake lenses available in M mount and have it not bulky this way. Those lenses are next to M-mount cap in size.

Lens selection I guess is more on mirrorless CL, but, again, I'd rather get small and RF native Jupiter 50 1.5 and use it just like any RF lens on any M.

And no crop factor with M... Well, less with M8.

 

But M9 family is old. I guess, it is hard to come to the sensor this old after Q and T.... 

I think, M9 is for those who are came from or even still using film M. 

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hmmm... The M lens I use on the CL is about double the weight and considerably larger than the 18-56...

[Ko.Fe.]

255 6x6 to be exact. Not so bad for slow zoom without image stabilization. Reminds me old Canon EF-S lens from from 2003 . In 2008 purchased version of this lens with IS and it was big difference.

But, hey, Leica is consistent. It is Barnack stuffed with electronics after all.

[enboe]

I'd save a little while longer and look for an M240 + 28/2.8/ASPH-I.  The extra ISO performance and no worry about if the sensor has been swapped is worth the couple of hundred pounds more in price.

[jaapv]

Well, just in case:

CL 5.2 x 3.1 x 1.8 in. (131 x 78 x 45 mm)

M9  5.47 x 3.15 x 1.46in. (139 x 80 x 37 mm)

 

Add huge CL lenses (except couple of pancake like) and which one is going to be more bulky? 

 

I'd rather get for M one of the several pancake lenses available in M mount and have it not bulky this way. Those lenses are next to M-mount cap in size.

Lens selection I guess is more on mirrorless CL, but, again, I'd rather get small and RF native Jupiter 50 1.5 and use it just like any RF lens on any M.

And no crop factor with M... Well, less with M8.

 

But M9 family is old. I guess, it is hard to come to the sensor this old after Q and T.... 

I think, M9 is for those who are came from or even still using film M. 

Huge???? I've M lenses that are larger... My CL kit goes into the same bags that I use for my M gear - and I have more focal lengths...

[Stealth3kpl]

M240 and a nice Zeiss or Voigtlander lens

 

 

I have the Voigtlander 21 and 35mm and they are superb little lenses, but I've only used them on film, never on my M240. Perhaps someone can give their experience of their performance on the M240 using in-camera lens profiles?

 

http://gear.vogelius.se/-reviews/voigtlander-skopar-35/index.html

http://joerivanderkloet.com/the-voigtlander-214-color-skopar-review/

 

edit: I found this

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/259536-coding-voigtlander-21mm-f4-pancake-on-m240/

 

Pete

Edited March 25, 2018 by Stealth3kpl