Is a Leica CL for me?

[RomeoBravo]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello All!

I've been updating my website recently, and that means going through folders of new and old pictures.  While doing this, I realized how much I miss the micro-contrast I got with Leica (lenses and cameras).

 

I have owned:

Leica M240 (but my failing eyes robbed me of a joyful Rangefinder experience)

 

Leica T - Hated the lack of EVF.  I bought the Visoflex EVF, but it lagged so much on the original T, that I soon gave up on it and sent it back.  Oddly - a picture I took with the T and an adapted Summicron DR is one of the sharpest (with a lot of 3D Depth and microcontrast) that have ever taken of this light fixture - even compared to the Fuji GFX, and Hasselblad X1D (I always take pictures of the same light when testing cameras/lenses)

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!

 

Leica Q - Loved the images I got out of it.  I would use it as a complement to my Sony a7R II, or Hasselblad X1D during fashion shoots.  I would often take my favorite shot of the editorial with the Q. 

 

However a few things really bothered me about the Q:

• The shutter was so silent that models would stand still until I told them I was shooting
• I could not get used to half pressing the shutter in order to see the WYSIWYG image I was used to seeing by default on my other cameras, and this caused me to miss quite a few opportunities (due to improperly exposed shots)
• The buffer was terrible.  When used with my X1D, the Q acted as my Quick AF camera for action shots - but I could only get about 2-3s of action before hitting the buffer

I've contemplated the Leica SL, and actually ordered one after reading the 90+ page SL vs X1D thread, but after taking to two photographers that owned both, I went with the X1D.

 

So, I know from reading the forum that the CL has a louder shutter than the Q, so that eliminates one con...

1. Does the CL automatically display WYSIWYG as you change settings, or do you have to half-press the shutter first?
2. Can anyone comment on the buffer of the CL vs the Q?  I'm talking DNG only.

 

 

I have a Leica portfolio on my website if interested:

http://www.romeobravophoto.com/leica-love/

 

 

 

Thank you very much for your input.

 

 

 

 

[Jacek.PL]

RomeoBravo

 *  the CL automatically display WYSIWYG as you change settings.

[Advertisement]

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

[Guest VVJ]

With regards to the buffer I believe the Leica CL officially does 33 frames, and the CL does offer you the option of DNG only which the Leica Q didn't do (if I recall correctly, I sold mine).  

[Guest VVJ]

I've contemplated the Leica SL, and actually ordered one after reading the 90+ page SL vs X1D thread, but after taking to two photographers that owned both, I went with the X1D.

 

Slightly off topic probably but I would be interested to know what the feedback of those two photographers was.  

[RomeoBravo]

Slightly off topic probably but I would be interested to know what the feedback of those two photographers was.

 

Quite simply they said the SL was great, but considering the size & cost, they recommended the X1D over it.

[bags27]

With regards to the buffer I believe the Leica CL officially does 33 frames, and the CL does offer you the option of DNG only which the Leica Q didn't do (if I recall correctly, I sold mine).

 

Firmware update on Q fixed that.

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I haven’t bought the SL in large part because of the size and weight of the native zooms. And for me, the X1D isn’t fully flushed out, even with FW updates, and there is still no zoom. The CL falls short of a mini SL for me because it lacks weather sealing, lacks any stabilization (body or native lenses), and the lens line is still young (true for all of these options).

 

Choices, and compromises, as usual. The good news is that IQ is hardly an issue anymore across brands and models, apart from specialized needs.

 

Jeff

[rbaron]

Long time (actually, very long time) Leica rangefinder shooter here.  Over the years I have tried various autofocus cameras (Nikon, Canon, et al) but I've always had difficulty getting the camera to focus on what I want it to focus on, and not only when subjects are moving.  This is particularly important for me because I often prefer to shoot at or near full aperture. How does the CL address this issue?

 

--Bob

[Ari Kfir]

Hello All!

I've been updating my website recently, and that means going through folders of new and old pictures.  While doing this, I realized how much I miss the micro-contrast I got with Leica (lenses and cameras).

 

I have owned:

Leica M240 (but my failing eyes robbed me of a joyful Rangefinder experience)

 

Leica T - Hated the lack of EVF.  I bought the Visoflex EVF, but it lagged so much on the original T, that I soon gave up on it and sent it back.  Oddly - a picture I took with the T and an adapted Summicron DR is one of the sharpest (with a lot of 3D Depth and microcontrast) that have ever taken of this light fixture - even compared to the Fuji GFX, and Hasselblad X1D (I always take pictures of the same light when testing cameras/lenses)

Leica T Summicron DR (2).JPG

 

Leica Q - Loved the images I got out of it.  I would use it as a complement to my Sony a7R II, or Hasselblad X1D during fashion shoots.  I would often take my favorite shot of the editorial with the Q. 

Leica Fashion Photograph.jpg

 

However a few things really bothered me about the Q:

• The shutter was so silent that models would stand still until I told them I was shooting
• I could not get used to half pressing the shutter in order to see the WYSIWYG image I was used to seeing by default on my other cameras, and this caused me to miss quite a few opportunities (due to improperly exposed shots)
• The buffer was terrible.  When used with my X1D, the Q acted as my Quick AF camera for action shots - but I could only get about 2-3s of action before hitting the buffer

I've contemplated the Leica SL, and actually ordered one after reading the 90+ page SL vs X1D thread, but after taking to two photographers that owned both, I went with the X1D.

 

So, I know from reading the forum that the CL has a louder shutter than the Q, so that eliminates one con...

1. Does the CL automatically display WYSIWYG as you change settings, or do you have to half-press the shutter first?
2. Can anyone comment on the buffer of the CL vs the Q?  I'm talking DNG only.

 

 

I have a Leica portfolio on my website if interested:

http://www.romeobravophoto.com/leica-love/

 

 

 

Thank you very much for your input.

 

 

Romeo, this is a very short note from a very happy Q owner who, while not being a portrait photographer (I am mostly a vagabonding street shooter, think about low quality Cartier-Bresson type) loves the Q as an action camera so much, that after losing his first one in an accident (and not reimbursed by the insurance company) paid full price for another one.

 

BTW, I looked at your work and want to say, – Bravissimo, Signore Bravo!

[jaapv]

Long time (actually, very long time) Leica rangefinder shooter here.  Over the years I have tried various autofocus cameras (Nikon, Canon, et al) but I've always had difficulty getting the camera to focus on what I want it to focus on, and not only when subjects are moving.  This is particularly important for me because I often prefer to shoot at or near full aperture. How does the CL address this issue?

 

--Bob

Use the CL with M lenses or use manual focus. But the AF is really rather simple to use. Spot AF, focus-half-press and recompose. The only fly in the ointment is a focus point that won't stay centered all the time.

[rbaron]

Use the CL with M lenses or use manual focus.  

 

 

But the AF is really rather simple to use. Spot AF, focus-half-press and recompose. The only fly in the ointment is a focus point that won't stay centered all the time.

 

Yes, manual focus is always an option!  ;-)

 

What do you mean about the focus point not staying centered: does it move around on its own?  Can you specify where you want it to be?

[Guest VVJ]

But the AF is really rather simple to use. Spot AF, focus-half-press and recompose. The only fly in the ointment is a focus point that won't stay centered all the time.

 

Why recompose when you can move the focus point with the 4-way D-buttons?  And the focus point stays where you leave it...  Not sure what you mean with that last phrase.  

[jaapv]

Slooowww... and fiddly. Focus-recompose is far quicker and practical.

The focus point gets moved around when accidentally touching the arrow buttons, which happens when one handles the camera, or even if one carries it against on the strap, as it bumps against your body..

[jaapv]

Yes, manual focus is always an option!  ;-)

 

What do you mean about the focus point not staying centered: does it move around on its own?  Can you specify where you want it to be?

As said above, it moves about when the arrow buttons are touched, which happens all the time; I dislike switching off the camera when carrying it.

[Guest VVJ]

Slooowww... and fiddly. Focus-recompose is far quicker and practical.

The focus point gets moved around when accidentally touching the arrow buttons, which happens when one handles the camera, or even if one carries it against on the strap, as it bumps against your body..

 

But far more accurate... I personally only use focus and recompose anymore in case speed is required to get the image. 

 

Besides that I never accidentally seem to touch the 4-way buttons and I don't use a strap.  As far as the buttons goes I very much prefer the joystick of the SL to the buttons.  

[jaapv]

Accurate focus is manual focus.

[lct]

Focus-recompose may be inaccurate in case of field curvature. Better use a movable focus patch then. Slow but unbeatable as far a focus accuracy. Pity it doesn't work with M lenses though, i wonder why. 

[jaapv]

Maybe because M lenses don't do autofocus? 

 

Anyway, I have been able to get quite accurate focus with focus-recompose, whether it was by M cameras, SLRs with split image or now, EVF, so I don't see why I should discontinue the practice and start missing moments.

[lct]

Maybe because M lenses don't do autofocus? [...]

 

M lenses can do autofocus on some non Leica bodies with an adapter but the movable focus patch of my Sony and Fuji bodies work perfectly with M lenses. How is it that this (indispensable to me) feature cannot work on the CL? Really curious.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[jaapv]

Maybe but what sense? If it is linked that adapter, OK, I can see that it would work, but normally there is no way a focus patch is going control your left hand digitally. So how does it work in your perception? The only thing such a patch does is indicate in the viewfinder which section of the sensor is controlling the AF of the lens.