Leica TL TL2 Thoughts about buying a T at this point?

[DanielJr]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I knew this going in though. I will not buy the evf because every camera I ever used I used the lcd screen. Sticking with the t and then will get sl in a few months or so no regrets at all but to me if you have the q already just buy the sl if you can afford. Also lcd screen is good enough to manual focus.

[late9sound]

Is it possible to get some kind of adapter so Olympus/Panasonic m4/3 lenses can be used with the T?

[Advertisement]

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

[DanielJr]

No, its not possible. Olympus om lens can be adapted but not m43 lens.

[frame-it]

https://leicarumors.com/2018/05/28/new-leica-mirrorless-camera-to-be-announced-in-june-leica-c-m.aspx/

 

 

Is there anything else I should know?

 

many thanks.

[late9sound]

No, its not possible. Olympus om lens can be adapted but not m43 lens.

Thank you.  

[miro]

 In some ways I found it to be preferable to the TL2.

 

How so ?

[tritentrue]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The most obvious difference is the T's built-in flash.

 

The T retained the film style I selected when I imported .dng files into Lightroom using Leica's embedded profile.  The TL2 did not retain the film style on import.

 

The T had an unmistakable shimmer on contrasting edges that made manual focusing easy.  I did not observe this shimmer on the TL2.

 

The T's autofocus never missed with the 18-56, whereas my TL2 slightly missed critical  focus with this lens sometimes.  Same with the 55-135, except that the TL2 never autofocused correctly with the 55-135 wide open, and often missed at infinity distances when stopped down.

 

Perhaps worst for me about the TL2 was that I had 2 copies that didn't work out.  #1 was recalled by Leica after one week due to the Visoflex issue with the firmware.  The hot shoe on #2 became buggy in the middle of a long holiday, making the Visoflex not dependable.

 

[tom0511]

I have the feeling that while improving AF speed with firmware and versions Leica maybe gave up a little on AF accurancy?

[IkarusJohn]

Sounds like a great idea to me. Manual focusing without the evf is a struggle, but doable. I guess your choice is whether to buy a TL AF lens. I would (I did), and having the SL, the TL2 with a couple of AF lenses is very useful - small camera to take when the SL is just the wrong thing to take.

 

I loved my T, but found the TL2 better - not in a fatal way. I just hated the blackout on the T. Perhaps I was too critical.

[dritz]

I shoot an SL and M246 and would like a portable kit.  I'm thinking of a T with the 18-56.  I can't justify the 4x cost of a new T2 over a mint T.

 

First question, for those familiar with both cameras (or M10 which is the same as the SL) when does the T ISO noise strongly depart from the SL/M10? Can I get to ISO1600 with quality that exceeds, say, the M9?

 

Second, my lens adapters for the SL should work on the T, right? Then I can (if I get the Visoflex) use M and R lenses on the little beast?

 

Thanks.

Dean

[ropo54]

Hi  Dean,

 

I would think up to 1600 your T's ISO will be pretty good and comparable to the SL's. And, yes, your M adapter L will work on the T/TL.

 

I have an original T and a TL2.  The TL2 will give you a bit better iso, but I'd think image quality is comparable for the most part. I think you can find a used T for $500 range and a TL2 for $1300-1400.

 

I've used M lenses on the T/TL with very good success. The visoflex is pretty good, but does not compare with the SL's. Nonetheless I think you should be able to make due.  The below photos were shot using the Noctilux 0.95, the top one with the TL2 and the bottom with the T.

 

Build quality is identical. Menu system on the TL2 is a bit better organized, but one can easily live with the T's once one acclimates to the on-screen menu system.

 

I don't think the jpegs from either are very good, which is not the case with the CL.  If you are shooting DNG, the files of the T, TL2, and CL will all shine. 

 

I just got back from Europe and took my TL2 and my Q.  For the first time I shot the TL2 without the visoflex and  it worked out just fine as a great point and shoot. (However, comparatively, the Q will outshine the T/TL2)

 

Rob

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited July 29, 2018 by ropo54

[miro]

The Leica CL has the same processor and sensor as the Leica TL2 , No ?

[Petercoll]

Visoflex, visoflex visoflex... etcetera ! Im not at all a camera pro, but I leave mine attached always, and leave it to the spare of the moment where my eye ends up when I click the button, head right over the camera, pressed up behind, or rearwards, arms stretched a little . This capability is strictly part of the DNA of the Camera, in my personal view .

[Frans Kemper]

Hi  Dean,

 

I would think up to 1600 your T's ISO will be pretty good and comparable to the SL's. And, yes, your M adapter L will work on the T/TL.

 

I have an original T and a TL2.  The TL2 will give you a bit better iso, but I'd think image quality is comparable for the most part. I think you can find a used T for $500 range and a TL2 for $1300-1400.

 

I've used M lenses on the T/TL with very good success. The visoflex is pretty good, but does not compare with the SL's. Nonetheless I think you should be able to make due.  The below photos were shot using the Noctilux 0.95, the top one with the TL2 and the bottom with the T.

 

Build quality is identical. Menu system on the TL2 is a bit better organized, but one can easily live with the T's once one acclimates to the on-screen menu system.

 

I don't think the jpegs from either are very good, which is not the case with the CL.  If you are shooting DNG, the files of the T, TL2, and CL will all shine. 

 

I just got back from Europe and took my TL2 and my Q.  For the first time I shot the TL2 without the visoflex and  it worked out just fine as a great point and shoot. (However, comparatively, the Q will outshine the T/TL2)

 

Rob

 

Hello Rob,

 

I am in between acquiring either a Q or a CL/TL2. In what area(s) will the Q outshine the TL2 in your opinion?

 

Thanks!

[ropo54]

Hello Rob,

 

I am in between acquiring either a Q or a CL/TL2. In what area(s) will the Q outshine the TL2 in your opinion?

 

Thanks!

 

Hi Frans Kemper,

 

The Q has very fast autofocus, is full frame, has a built-in viewfinder, and has a wonderfully mated 28mm 1.7 lens. In low light conditions the full frame and 1.7 lens makes the Q exceptional.  The colors and IQ are as just superb.

 

The CL/T lines have the flexibility of different lenses. And, yes, you can add a fast lens to get a measure of equivalence, but still it is not full frame. You can get superb results (see my photos above taken with the noctilux) , but it is still tough to beat the Q. 

 

If you are comfortable with a single focal length of 28mm, I would choose the Q.

 

Good luck . . . No bad choices.

 

Rob

Edited August 2, 2018 by ropo54

[microview]

+1

[Volbeat]

The Leica CL has the same processor and sensor as the Leica TL2 , No ?

 

As far as I know yes.

It seems incomprehensible to me that there is (or can be) any difference in output but the CL enthusiasts/ reviewers are vocal in their praise for the CL and quick to criticise the TL2. Same goes for autofocus.

From all the empirical evidence I can find the 'active ingredients' are the same. Obviously they live in different housings but otherwise they are the same camera.