New CL -- Images look awful

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In that case you need an S

[jay968]

Here is another that I consider good IQ. This was shot with a Sony A7Rii

 

http://www.pbase.com/jayaltman/image/167518218

 

And bingo, I think you hit the nail on the head.

 

"In that case you meed an S"

 

I DO own a GFX and that camera has about the best image quality of anything I have ever owned. I suppose a lot of my reason for this post was to maybe hear what you said. Fuji XT-2 not whistanding as it may be the exception, I am not sure I have ever (other than that from the XT-2) been completely satisfied with an APS-C image technically. Since Fuji DOES do APS-C exceptionally well, maybe I was hoping that Leica did too.

 

I think that maybe my expectations were/are just too high for the CL.

Edited May 21, 2018 by jay968

[Advertisement]

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

[nlk10010]

The problem with the Q the way I see it is that it has a tendency to produce moire an awful lot. Otherwise, have always felt that its output is superb.

 

Yup, this goes to show that, as I said, quality of output is really a subjective matter.

[lct]

Jay, with respect, your image is misfocused. I would redo the same and use image magnification.

[jay968]

Jay, with respect, your image is misfocused. I would redo the same and use image magnification.

After reading reviews and comments about the CL for a couple of weeks, I was under the impression that for once I could rely on a camera which used focus peaking very well and could be relied on to do some very quick street type shooting. When I first tried the camera out, I was very pleased at just how quickly I could use the focus peaking to do what I wanted. However, what I was not prepared for was the reality that this method is just not very accurate and cannot be relied on at all. This camera was meant for me to be street a shooting camera, one that could be quick and accurate. If I have to rely on focus magnification, this defeats its purpose for me. On the other hand, using primarily or only TL auto focus lenses could be the answer but I am not about to spend upwards of $9000 or more on an APS-C system, especially when I've already got some of the best lenses made.

Besides the focus issues I had, please understand that I just do not like the rendition from this camera either. The focusing is only half the issue.

At any rate, I appreciate your comment but have decided that the CL is just not right for me. It has some fine pluses (size, build quality to name 2), but it's just not right for me.

Edited May 22, 2018 by jay968

[lct]

Slow focusing is indeed a problem for me as well but it is true for the CL as well as my Sony A7s mod or Fuji X-E2 with M lenses. Focus peaking may be appropriate for approximate focusing, although in your case it is way off, but it is not accurate enough for pixel peeping anyway. Bottom line, as long as Leica will use the L mount for its new cameras they will have the same focusing issue with M lenses although it finds a way to trigger auto zoom the same way as with M cameras.

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 People complain about slow rangefinder focusing, about slow image magnification, inaccuracy of focus peaking, etc. Well, focus peaking is inaccurate because it indicates a zone of maximum contrast and you need to find the middle of DOF. The slower you take it, the more accurate you will be. Auto focus magnification is a pain because it will come on in images where you don't want or need it. Manual magnification needs an extra thumb-flick, which does slow you down minimally. So it appears that manual focusing is too slow for some people, period.

 

As for focus accuracy. if one cannot get focus right without focus aid on a 35 mm lens @ f8 at 25 meters, it may be time to forget about manual focus altogether.

 

The way to go appears to be post-focus using an AF lens and 4K.

[lct]

[...] Bottom line, as long as Leica will use the L mount for its new cameras they will have the same focusing issue with M lenses although it finds a way to trigger auto zoom the same way as with M cameras.

 

I meant unless it finds a way sorry.

[danielfrimley]

I still struggle with AF on the CL from time to time, let alone manual!

 

Initially I went at it with a...

 

spot focus = precision = best-way-to-go-for-top-notch-photos, and

multi-field = generalised = happy-snapping-subpar-results

 

... and no-where in between attitude, so I used spot for everything. I've found that letting go and trusting the camera/ lens combo to do what it's designed to seems to be the path of least resistance to making my pictures better and my life a little easier!

[jaapv]

I meant unless it finds a way sorry.

And especially an option to make it on-demand, like with the thumbwheel

[thighslapper]

Jay ...... as a general rule of thumb if you find ANYTHING that really irritates you in a camera in the first 48hrs of use you are never going to be satisfied with it and should really move on to something else as quickly as possible.

 

Despite the image quality from the A7 I found using the damn thing a complete pain and should have returned it for a refund after a few days. Instead I foolishly bought some new lenses hoping they would 'help'. It eventually sat in a drawer for 6 months and was sold on eBay at a significant loss. 

Edited May 22, 2018 by thighslapper

[jay968]

Jay ...... as a general rule of thumb if you find ANYTHING that really irritates you in a camera in the first 48hrs of use you are never going to be satisfied with it and should really move on to something else as quickly as possible.

 

Despite the image quality from the A7 I found using the damn thing a complete pain and should have returned it for a refund after a few days. Instead I foolishly bought some new lenses hoping they would 'help'. If eventually sat in a drawer for 6 months and was sold on eBay at a significant Yes

Yes, I owned some Sony gear for about a year before I finally realized that I was never going to be real satisfied with it for various reasons. Battery life, and very poor flash implementation were my 2 biggest complaints about it. Not to mention that more than once when purchasing lenses, I had to go through 3 or more copies before finding one that was not decentered.

Jaap, you are absolutely right about the focusing. It's obvious to me now that the only way the CL is going to be a quick street shooting camera is by using native AF lenses with it, and as I said earlier, the cost of doing so is just too prohibitive for me as I would probably want the 23, 11-23 and 55-150. Those 3 plus the body would come to over 8000 US dollars. Frankly, if I had $8000 to spend on camera equipment these days, I would probably put it towards a 50 APO instead.

Lct, as far as what you are saying about the problem being there with both Sony and Fuji as well...thing is, I already have 7 Fuji AF lenses that do the job so I am not concerned with using any MF lenses with that system.

 

Again, as I mentioned at one point, the whole idea of the CL for me was to simplify my equipment. Right now, I have M10 gear, Fuji XT-2 gear, and GFX gear. I thought of selling off the XT-2 stuff and replacing it with the CL and just using my M lenses with it. Now that I see that the MF experience with the CL is similar to the XT-2, I see no reason to dump the Fuji AF and go with the CL and MF lenses. The one advantage that I see in using a CL with M lenses is that it's at least not that god awful focus by wire crap. However, if I want slow, deliberate manual focusing I would just as soon use my M10. Plus, I still think after now having tried the CL, that the XT-2 files look better. Fuji actually makes some pretty decent stuff. No, the build quality is not Leica, not even close, but the performance is top rate.

[Louis]

In that case you need an S

 

I think he would be much happier with Japanese camera.... 

[Don Morley]

Here is another that I consider good IQ. This was shot with a Sony A7Rii

 

http://www.pbase.com/jayaltman/image/167518218

 

And bingo, I think you hit the nail on the head.

 

"In that case you meed an S"

 

I DO own a GFX and that camera has about the best image quality of anything I have ever owned. I suppose a lot of my reason for this post was to maybe hear what you said. Fuji XT-2 not whistanding as it may be the exception, I am not sure I have ever (other than that from the XT-2) been completely satisfied with an APS-C image technically. Since Fuji DOES do APS-C exceptionally well, maybe I was hoping that Leica did too.

 

I think that maybe my expectations were/are just too high for the CL.

Sorry but I think you are deluding yourself so maybe best if you just move on to something you do like. Don

[jaapv]

I still am not happy with the negatives on the image quality aspect. What do people think of this torture test? I was checking out my Vario-Elmar R 105-280 @ 280 handheld at ISO 3200, basically, for me, a real-life scenario. I cannot say that I was unhappy. Even the noise was pretty grain-like, and quite subdued.

 

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!

 

 

100% crop

 

 

[burkey]

"What do people think of this test."?

Jaapv - I think the image is extremely sharp and the IQ exceptional.  Nice solar array, by the way.

Manual focus is a challenge and I'm fine with that.  As a matter of fact I sorta' enjoy the challenge.  Do I occasionally miss it?  Yup, I do with my CL and m-mount lenses as I do with my R-D1s.  (A big thanks to Stephen Gandy for getting the rangefinder so perfectly aligned.)  It's what it is.

I currently have four Fuji X bodies and an assortment of Fuji lenses.  They are all very good image making tools for me as is the CL with my m-mount or my TL lenses.

If I was unhappy with any of my gear now, as I have occasionally in the past, I'd put it up on eBay and move on.  However, from my vantage point right now my CL body isn't going anywhere soon.

'Just my candid thoughts, nothing more.

. . . David    

[DS1969]

Sorry for wanting to appear controversial, digital rev tv once did a review with Kai about auto focus and manual focus speeds, oddly manual on a Leica won. 

 

I have the CL on my short list for my next camera, but will try to test before I jump in and buy.

[bags27]

The question of (obsession with?) "sharpness" in this age of computerized refinement is really an interesting one to me. I don't know anything about the formal philosophy of photography, from Walter Benjamin to Susan Sontag and well beyond. But the "representation of reality" (mimesis) has been part of the largely photographically-induced phenomenological crisis since the late 19th C.

 

Well, that's a pile of crap :-) . Really, que sais-je? But seriously, today's photographic technology is Mephistophelean. A huge number of contributors to this site still shoot film (me included) and "sharpness" is of a very different level of aesthetic concern. Doesn't make file photography less wonderful or satisfying.

 

"measuring" became important in Italian city-states (banking, actuary), enhanced with the Black Death (insurance), and then especially with civil society in 19th C (Alphone Quetelet) that developed the social sciences based on the assumption that if we can measure enough people in enough ways we can predict what's best for them.

 

We measure everything today and that's a terrible curse:

https://press.princeton.edu/titles/11218.html

 

Leicas are beautiful instruments. They take beautiful pictures. 

[david strachan]

Sorry for wanting to appear controversial, digital rev tv once did a review with Kai about auto focus and manual focus speeds, oddly manual on a Leica won. 

 

 

Really have to watch Kai for amusement only.

It wasn't a rigorous or fair test, at all...perhaps he'd prefocused, for example. I did see that clip.

 

Some are very fast with Leica focusing rangefinders. But i don't mind being a bit slow. I use a different camera for party photography, for example. It all just depends...as always.

 

...

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[LocalHero1953]

One just can't say that AF is faster than MF or vice versa - there are too many factors. All you can say is that the speed of movement of the AF mechanism is faster than the hand. Add to that subject selection, subject movement (laterally and to/from the camera), and speed of selecting the appropriate AF set up, or (with EVF-based cameras) speed of use of MF focusing aids, then either AF or MF may be quicker at getting you from seeing the image to capturing it.

 

I think I might go so far as to say that, in the middle of a shooting sequence for one type of subject, AF is probably quicker once you have the camera AF set up. But the moment you have to change from Face Recognition to Tracking to Static, or moving the focus point around, or change from 1-point to zone, MF has an immediate advantage: with a rangefinder, your only delaying option is to focus and reframe, and with the CL/SL it is to engage focus magnification*. For simple subjects and scenes you might find one AF setup OK, but for dynamic situations with multiple moving people, or subjects behind other objects, you might need to switch between different options.

 

It's not speed of the focusing mechanism that counts, but speed of getting the shot. 

 

 

* I don't use focus peaking, and certainly not with wide lenses - as the OP has found, it is too coarse a tool. Unless you are able to adjust its sensitivity on the fly for different focal lengths and scene brightness/contrast, it is more of a distraction IMO.

Edited May 23, 2018 by LocalHero1953