Leica CM / ML?/ New Leica Mirrorless Announcement

[LocalHero1953]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Do all SL lenses work on TLs, without problems, and vice versa?

Apart from the obvious cropping of TL lenses on the SL

[dkCambridgeshire]

Am I the only one who now finds Leica's various offerings very confusing? To be further complicated by yet another body.

 

Perhaps it's because I don't have the money to spend on a CL, CM, SL, S, T, TL2, Q or anything else, but if I did, I might worry that all these different cameras show a scatter-gun approach to camera development.

 

I know that some of them have the same lens mount, but for the life of me I couldn't tell you which ones and whether the lenses work properly on more than one body.

 

You know where you are with an M.

 

Leica Camera AG and Leica camera reviewers could not have documented the workings and compatibilities of the SL/TL/CL systems any better or plainer … it's all very well documented and hardly constitutes a 'scattergun' approach. And thankfully, Leica Camera AG is not relying solely on 'M' cameras and lenses to develop and maintain its sales in the digital age. 

 

dunk 

Edited May 29, 2018 by dkCambridgeshire

[Advertisement]

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

[toyfel]

But the SL/TL to M  adapter (i.e. the M adapter T) has the same size SL/TL rear mount … and the M lenses do not have any auto diaphragm or autofocus. Any new SL/TL lenses will have AF and auto diaphragm functions which need more than a little space within the lens mount. 

 

dunk 

 

If the camera has FF sensor and AF capability and L-mount there are already SL lenses for those users of this camera who need to have AF. But those who dislike large lenses and don't need AF will be happy to have access to smaller lenses (unless they already have M-lenses+adapter). A new L-mount lens of the size approximating M-lens + adapter is still smaller than current SL lenses. 

[andybarton]

Leica Camera AG and Leica camera reviewers could not have documented the workings and compatibilities of the SL/TL/CL systems any better or plainer … it's all very well documented and hardly constitutes a 'scatter gun' approach. 

 

dunk 

 

Dunk - I beg to differ. But, that must just be me.

[dkCambridgeshire]

If the camera has FF sensor and AF capability and L-mount there are already SL lenses for those users of this camera who need to have AF. But those who dislike large lenses and don't need AF will be happy to have access to smaller lenses (unless they already have M-lenses+adapter). A new L-mount lens of the size approximating M-lens + adapter is still smaller than current SL lenses. 

 

 

 

And would also be much less telecentric … necessary telecentricity being one reason why SL/TL lenses have larger diameters than M lenses … the whys and wherefores of TL/SL lens sizes have been discussed at length within the forum 

 

dunk 

Edited May 29, 2018 by dkCambridgeshire

[Jeff S]

Am I the only one who now finds Leica's various offerings very confusing? To be further complicated by yet another body.

 

Perhaps it's because I don't have the money to spend on a CL, CM, SL, S, T, TL2, Q or anything else, but if I did, I might worry that all these different cameras show a scatter-gun approach to camera development.

 

I know that some of them have the same lens mount, but for the life of me I couldn't tell you which ones and whether the lenses work properly on more than one body.

 

You know where you are with an M.

Well, there’s the M and the S, and everything else with interchangeable lenses (not Q) is L mount. The complexity comes from design elements, control interfaces, sensor sizes, etc. But the L mount is pervasive and seems the future.

 

Jeff

[jonatdonuts]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In that regard, 2x ILC APSC options and 2x ILC Full frame options using the same mount seem like a very sensible offering. But I really think it will come down to the quality of (hopefully) compact lenses to secure the future.  

Well, there’s the M and the S, and everything else with interchangeable lenses (not Q) is L mount. The complexity comes from design elements, control interfaces, sensor sizes, etc. But the L mount is pervasive and seems the future.

Jeff

Edited May 29, 2018 by jonatdonuts

[toyfel]

And would also be much less telecentric … necessary telecentricity being one reason why SL/TL lenses have larger diameters than M lenses … the whys and wherefores of TL/SL lens sizes have been discussed at length within the forum 

 

dunk 

 

Then how do you explain that a lot of people get good results with M-lenses on the SL? Sure, the results are perhaps not as good as with using SL lenses, but apparently good enough for quite a lot people. Even Leica endorsed the use of M-lenses on the SL when the SL was introduced. 

[LocalHero1953]

Am I the only one who now finds Leica's various offerings very confusing? To be further complicated by yet another body.

 

Perhaps it's because I don't have the money to spend on a CL, CM, SL, S, T, TL2, Q or anything else, but if I did, I might worry that all these different cameras show a scatter-gun approach to camera development.

 

I know that some of them have the same lens mount, but for the life of me I couldn't tell you which ones and whether the lenses work properly on more than one body.

 

You know where you are with an M.

Any more confusing than all the different M iterations that have had a simultaneous existence? Until recently we had: M7, MA, M240, MD, M Monochrome, MP (and M240-P), M10, M a la carte.

Edited May 29, 2018 by LocalHero1953

[earleygallery]

Am I the only one who now finds Leica's various offerings very confusing? To be further complicated by yet another body.

 

Perhaps it's because I don't have the money to spend on a CL, CM, SL, S, T, TL2, Q or anything else, but if I did, I might worry that all these different cameras show a scatter-gun approach to camera development.

 

I know that some of them have the same lens mount, but for the life of me I couldn't tell you which ones and whether the lenses work properly on more than one body.

 

You know where you are with an M.

 

I agree Andy. I was going to post a similar comment (or thread on the subject) but thought I'd wait to see what this new camera actually turns out to be.

 

Rather than an integrated range of options they seem to design each new release in silo. A lot of individual little design exercises, each with their own little idiosyncrasies, and an apparent reluctance to make anything too good that it might take away sales from another product.

[onasj]

Like many camera manufacturers, Leica offers different trunks (mounts), branches (M9, M10, etc), subbranches (M262, etc), and leaves (special edition variants). Other than the special editions, other manufacturers do the same. Sony a7II/a7sII/a7rII/a7rIII/a7III/a9, for example. I don’t see it as disorganization, since for virtually all their offerings I can discern a clear rationale.

[dkCambridgeshire]

Then how do you explain that a lot of people get good results with M-lenses on the SL? Sure, the results are perhaps not as good as with using SL lenses, but apparently good enough for quite a lot people. Even Leica endorsed the use of M-lenses on the SL when the SL was introduced. 

 

 

Because the SL provides 'in camera correction' via its 'M lens profiles' facility.  Whatever new SL/TL/CL/CM lenses (all with the same size rear mount) are announced in June, they will likely have been in development for at least two years and will almost certainly (a 99.99% certainty) be AF … and efficient AF adds to the weight and size … so M size SL/CL/CM lenses are a fantasy. Furthermore we are discussing Leica lenses … not plastic Sony FE lenses with dubious build quality.  And yes, I have some 'small' FF Sony FE lenses in addition to SL/TL lenses. 

 

dunk 

Edited May 29, 2018 by dkCambridgeshire

[toyfel]

Because the SL provides 'in camera correction' via its 'M lens profiles' facility.  Whatever new SL/TL lenses are announced in June, they will likely have been in development for at least two years and will almost certainly (a 99.99% certainty) be AF … and efficient AF adds to the weight and size … so M size SL/CL/CM lenses are a fantasy. Furthermore we are discussing Leica lenses … not plastic Sony FE lenses with dubious build quality.  And yes, I have some 'small' FF Sony FE lenses in addition to SL/TL lenses. 

 

dunk 

 

As I wrote before, we assume the new camera has an L-mount. So if your claim were true that any new lens for that camera has to have the same size as the existing SL lenses, then why should Leica develop such lenses anew when there are already top-notch SL lenses with L-mount? That would be an embarrassingly dumb move in my opinion. In fact, that's the beauty of having the same mount on different cameras. Then you can use lenses from one system on other cameras as well. So again, the idea is to use SL lenses on the new cam when you want AF and stellar IQ or use new manual focus L-mount lenses on the new cam when you don't need AF and are willing to have just slightly lesser IQ as a trade off for smaller size and lower weight.

 

I do not know were you get your "99.9% certainty" claims from. Reminds me of the abundant claims on this forum that an FF digital M camera is "totally impossible". Luckily, Leica didn't care and promptly released the M9.     

 

By the way, I didn't mention Sony lenses. If somebody else did that, you should talk to them.

Edited May 29, 2018 by toyfel

[tgdinamo]

I would love to see a new Leica camera (whatever the name) with the size of Q (or up to size of M10), with native M mount and SL quality EVF. Willing to give up AF to get the native M mount finetuned for those sweet super high quality M lenses. Of course, that's probably the least likely announcement Leica will ever make, after all the talk about the L mount being the future.

[timde]

It would not surprise me if this new L-mount camera was having a medium format sensor of some nature, to compete against Hasselblad X1d ... and a collection of lenses to match.

 

However, much depends on wether Leica want to satisfy their existing user base, or expand it ... so its probably more likely to see another variation of the L-mount with a FF sensor, and perhaps a few compact lenses to go with it -  perhaps with a classical look similar to the Q lens.

 

My feeling is that both Sony and Hasselblad have created problems ... and opportunities for Leica ... to introduce a _more_ expensive system camera, at a similar price point as the X1d, perhaps with _even_ more expensive (and compact) classic styled AF lenses.

[SiggiGun]

I think it is (technical) time now for a ML. Means M10 is so most advanced M = Mechanical Messbecher (Rangefinder) with M Mount. Time now for L based Ragender with SL style  EVF, L-Bajonet but M-(classic) style fonctions, except zoom lenses and autofocus support.

TL for Young urban user

CL for Nostalic user

ML for modern M user

SL for professional user

 

L-Bajonet will replace M iin a mid term vision

[scott kirkpatrick]

Do all SL lenses work on TLs, without problems, and vice versa?

TL lenses work on SLs but produce APS-C size images, roughly 10 MPx in content.  That's just fine for 4K video, which uses only this area, but that may not be your thing.  Everything is recognized and there are profiles provided for each lens.  If there is a lens firmware upgrade, however, you have to go find a T, TL or TL2 to do it.  This happens if you found a new-in-the-box bargain copy of a TL lens and try to use it on your current SL (maybe on a CL, too, but I solved this problem before I had a CL.)

 

SL lenses work just fine on TL and CL bodies, with the cropped field of view. An obvious example is the 90-280 zoom, for which the CL is effectively an 1.5X extender.  Again, when a lens firmware upgrade comes along, you have to find an SL to install it.  This has been fairly rare.    And of course M lenses with their adapter work just fine on both SL and TL/CL bodies.  They are recognized and have profiles supplied.  S lenses, however, are not recognized (with their adapter) on a CL but do work just fine on an SL.  The S 120 macro is an example where this provides value that the SL's lenses don't yet supply.

 

I think there may be an advantage in getting one of the coming 35 or 50 Summicron SL's on a CL.  If the upcoming June announcement includes additional wider angles in SL mounts, these would also help (but not this year...).  I've tried M 24 Elmarit and  50 Summilux lenses on my CL and they are very useful. 

Edited May 29, 2018 by scott kirkpatrick

[dkCambridgeshire]

Whatever is announced in June, the only certainty is that there will be a load of comments from armchair Leica camera and lens designers stating their usual inevitable objections and suggestions … most of which fail to acknowledge that anything new announced would have taken at least two years to design and develop and with as much thought and future-proofing by Leica Camera AG as they were able to input to the projects at inception. 

 

dunk  

[IkarusJohn]

Yes, of course, but was speculating on the development of a range of compact full frame lenses similar to the size of the Q in the future. Though that would seem counterintuitive given the imminent release of the Q2 and the current SL range being huuuge.

 

If you look at the lens line up offered by Leica, we have the S, SL, TL and M primes (putting aside the cine lenses). I don’t see Leica defying the laws of physics, space and time and producing a new line of small L mount lenses for this new camera. If you want small, the M system is for you. Or the new ML or whatever it’s called, and have an L mount camera (giving accessibility to SL & TL lenses) and M mount lenses with an adapter.

 

Smaller AF, L mount lenses? Unlikely, I’d have though. Leica concetrates on the quality of their lenses - that’s their core business, so I expect more L mount lenses, and a lot of them will be smaller, slower primes. But they will need to produce flagship fast lenses to keep buyers happy.

 

Edit - Not wanting to drag up old issues, but I’d be interested if this new camera was an ML - M size and form factor (no baseplate, please), L mount and SL EVF. I certainly don’t see this camera (or any other Leica camera) offering a new medium format sensor - that would require intense CPR to the S lense line up.

 

Rather begs the question what the new sensor in the ML will be. More pickles for the croppers?

Edited May 29, 2018 by IkarusJohn

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Wojtek]

What features do you think they will drop to account for the lower price, if this is correct?

 

 

Surely the "cheaper one" could be without weather resistance, with worseEVF and worse body quality (built like CL, not like SL). But I really hope they wouldn't because those are SLs (almost only) advantages over competition (let's say A7 III).

But stuff like LocalHero suggested, "one card only, smaller battery, smaller rear screen, no cable connectors" - IMO please go for it to lower the price