Leica CL New Leica CL or Used Leica M?

[mph]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi all, 

 

I have recently sold my Leica Q in order to buy something with interchangeable lenses.

 

I am really struggling to chose between buying a new Leica CL, Summicron 23mm (and I will probably down the road buy the adapter and some M-lenses), or a used Leica M 240 along with a used Leica M lens (probably 50 mm Summicron). In the end both options will do the same damage to my wallet   For info, I do currently not own any Leica lenses.

 

I am not a professional, merely a happy amateur. My photography is concentrated around portraits (bokeh!!), family, travel, social activities, landscape, architecture.

 

My heart is leaning towards the M, while my brain (and wife, even though she is not negative for the M) towards the CL. I am a bit afraid of the rangefinder, and if I will be able to focus as quick as I want to. The CL have AF on TL-lenses and focus-peaking on M-glass through the EVF (I know the M240 have focus-peaking on the screen and the optional viewfinder, but then the point of the RF is kinda gone?). After all the CL might just be a pit-stop to the M(?). I am not interested in sports- or action photography (even though we do have a eager and young dog), but it would be awful to miss a moment due to lacking focus.

 

My question is; which option would you buy, and why?

 

PS: I have in the process already passed on Sony and Fujifilm due to their overly-complex nature...

[earleygallery]

Welcome to the forum.

 

The two options are chalk and cheese really. Only you can decide which is best for you. I'd suggest visiting a dealer so that you can handle the cameras and try them out a bit.

[Advertisement]

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

[mph]

I already have tried them on several occasions, but for me a visit to the dealer is unfortunately not enough to make up my mind. And the more I read, the more confused I get 

[jaapv]

I sold my M240 after  I got the CL and used it for a while.  I had to dust it off before sending it to the next owner...

[microview]

In my experience focusing is faster with the M rangefinder than using EVF on either TL2 or CL with an M lens. If 50mm is your preferred focal length that points to the 35 Summilux TL: a heavy lens at 427g, and physically large. Optically it is said to be way ahead of the 23mm Summicron which wins on size/weight of course.

[scott kirkpatrick]

Down either path, the costs will pile up in the lenses that you can now use, and so will the enjoyment.  If you can still get your hands on a CL with the 18mm kit lens plus the free M-lens adapter available in some areas, you will be off to a great start.  That will probably leave money available for an M medium lens, or the CL 23 or 35, but there are many to choose from, and you don't need to rush.  The other path is an M240 or M262 (240 sensor, no video but I believe they do have live view), purchased used from someone who has moved up to the M10 or SL world.  Lens availability is excellent, but you need to determine if you are comfortable using the rangefinder -- accurate, reliable, but slower than AF and it takes concentration.

[Le Chef]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm in a not dissimilar position in that the logical and easier step up for me would be to go from my DL109 to CL.

 

But...I can remember using my father's old Paxette camera from the early 60's so I'm intrigued by the idea of using a rangefinder again. On top of which a former colleague's grandfather used a Leica to capture the first pictures of Edward and Mrs. Simpson together in public. (There's magic and romance in that red dot!)

 

I'm very fortunate to have a terrific local dealer from whom I can loan both cameras to help me figure out which direction i want to go in.

 

It's a shame you do not know other Leica owners in Oslo, as I'm sure they would be more than willing to help you try an M at least. The alternative would be to take a weekend break with your other half to a city where they have a Leica Boutique and pre-arrange to loan both cameras for a day. If you both like photography this might be an interesting exercise in getting to an equitable agreement on the next camera!

[leonasj]

no need old m240, buy new CL, im keep m9 only for ccd sensor,but now my main camera is CL, sold my m240,SL after bought CL

[ramarren]

If I had nothing and were picking a camera for the first time, but knowing what I know how from having owned and used both M and CL cameras, I'd go with the CL first. The CL gives you more options and more automatic convenience options if you choose to buy it along with its dedicated lenses. 

 

There's no question in my mind that the photographs made with the CL are every bit as good as those that come from an M, it's just a matter of  the workflow/operational options that the two cameras differ by. 

 

I have the M-D typ 262 and the CL. They're utterly different in feel and workflow. I love 'em both.

[earleygallery]

OK, as you're used to the Q I would suggest that the CL would be the easier transition as it's very similar to the CL in many respects (EVF, AF) the main difference is FF v APSC but with the appropriate lens/es you have the same field of view.

 

The main issue with moving to an M is having manual focus all the time, and a less sophisticated built in meter, so you would need to learn the focussing techniques and how best to use the meter. Not a major task by any means but it really depends what you want to do.

 

As you sold your Q because you wanted something with interchangeable lenses I wonder why you'd choose the 23mm first and then M lenses? What was it about the Q that you felt you were missing? Presumably telephoto capability?

 

I'd consider the standard and tele zoom kit for the CL if I were going that route, but as I said above, only you can decide!

[Boojay]

I have M10 and CL, if I could only have one it would be the CL, it is much more versatile than the M, for travel and just everyday photography.  

[mph]

In my experience focusing is faster with the M rangefinder than using EVF on either TL2 or CL with an M lens. If 50mm is your preferred focal length that points to the 35 Summilux TL: a heavy lens at 427g, and physically large. Optically it is said to be way ahead of the 23mm Summicron which wins on size/weight of course.

I am a bit torn between 35mm or 50mm, but IMHO the 35mm Summilux-T is too big, and heavy compared to the 23mm Summicron-T. I need to be able to go around comfortable with my camera. That's one of many reason I want a Leica - a compact size. CL + Summicron-T is compact, the M with almost any lens is compact. The CL + Summilux-T - kinda removes that aspect.

 

 

Down either path, the costs will pile up in the lenses that you can now use, and so will the enjoyment.  If you can still get your hands on a CL with the 18mm kit lens plus the free M-lens adapter available in some areas, you will be off to a great start.  That will probably leave money available for an M medium lens, or the CL 23 or 35, but there are many to choose from, and you don't need to rush.  The other path is an M240 or M262 (240 sensor, no video but I believe they do have live view), purchased used from someone who has moved up to the M10 or SL world.  Lens availability is excellent, but you need to determine if you are comfortable using the rangefinder -- accurate, reliable, but slower than AF and it takes concentration.

Would love for that offer to be available in Norway, and since the VAT is 25% is importing not really an option. So for now its used M + used M-lens, or new CL + Summicron-T. Same price.

 

If I had nothing and were picking a camera for the first time, but knowing what I know how from having owned and used both M and CL cameras, I'd go with the CL first. The CL gives you more options and more automatic convenience options if you choose to buy it along with its dedicated lenses. 

 

There's no question in my mind that the photographs made with the CL are every bit as good as those that come from an M, it's just a matter of  the workflow/operational options that the two cameras differ by. 

 

I have the M-D typ 262 and the CL. They're utterly different in feel and workflow. I love 'em both.

What do you value most over the CL compared to the M?

 

OK, as you're used to the Q I would suggest that the CL would be the easier transition as it's very similar to the CL in many respects (EVF, AF) the main difference is FF v APSC but with the appropriate lens/es you have the same field of view.

 

The main issue with moving to an M is having manual focus all the time, and a less sophisticated built in meter, so you would need to learn the focussing techniques and how best to use the meter. Not a major task by any means but it really depends what you want to do.

 

As you sold your Q because you wanted something with interchangeable lenses I wonder why you'd choose the 23mm first and then M lenses? What was it about the Q that you felt you were missing? Presumably telephoto capability?

 

I'd consider the standard and tele zoom kit for the CL if I were going that route, but as I said above, only you can decide!

I prefer 35mm or 50mm (FF), and the equivalent lenses is the 23mm Summicron-T and the 35mm Summilux-T (which is to large IMO). So then, in my mind, I will buy the 23mm Summicron-T and a 35mm M-lens (50mm equivalent on APS-C).

 

One of the aspects which attracts me to the M - is this challenge. You work more for your pictures and prints, they feel more real, you maybe feel more satisfaction looking at the result afterwards?

 

Please correct me if I am mistanken, but the 23mm Summicron-T is 35mm equivalent on FF? As my prefer 35mm and 50mm, does it seem like a good option. I sold the Q because I didn't get quite comfortable with the 28mm lens, the camera is great! I, however, like to change lenses from time to time.

[mph]

I have M10 and CL, if I could only have one it would be the CL, it is much more versatile than the M, for travel and just everyday photography.  

May I ask which TL-lenses you own? And which lenses (M or T) you use the most on the CL?

[ropo54]

Hi all, 

 

I have recently sold my Leica Q in order to buy something with interchangeable lenses.

 

I am really struggling to chose between buying a new Leica CL, Summicron 23mm (and I will probably down the road buy the adapter and some M-lenses), or a used Leica M 240 along with a used Leica M lens (probably 50 mm Summicron). In the end both options will do the same damage to my wallet   For info, I do currently not own any Leica lenses.

 

I am not a professional, merely a happy amateur. My photography is concentrated around portraits (bokeh!!), family, travel, social activities, landscape, architecture.

 

My heart is leaning towards the M, while my brain (and wife, even though she is not negative for the M) towards the CL. I am a bit afraid of the rangefinder, and if I will be able to focus as quick as I want to. The CL have AF on TL-lenses and focus-peaking on M-glass through the EVF (I know the M240 have focus-peaking on the screen and the optional viewfinder, but then the point of the RF is kinda gone?). After all the CL might just be a pit-stop to the M(?). I am not interested in sports- or action photography (even though we do have a eager and young dog), but it would be awful to miss a moment due to lacking focus.

 

My question is; which option would you buy, and why?

 

PS: I have in the process already passed on Sony and Fujifilm due to their overly-complex nature...

 

Another thought . . . think about a pre-owned T along with your lens options.  Much less costly and you could purchase an extra lens, as well, with the same budget. You will not likely see a difference in image quality from the cameras and should you wish to upgrade you will not likely lose anything when re-selling the T based on the current pre-owned prices. 

[IkarusJohn]

Not sure I agree that the 35 Summilux-TL is heavy; it's among the lightest lenses I have (if you're considering an M(240), then weight sure isn't the issue?), but it is large.

 

I have the TL2, and the 11-23 zoom and 35 Summilux-TL.  I also have 2 M cameras (Monochrom and M-A) and 8 or so M mount lenses, ranging from large (Noct) to tiny (28 Summaron-M).  While I don't have a colour digital M, the point for me is that they are less choices as different, complementary systems.  I like the optical viewfinder (despite its unhelpful limitations) and being restricted to 28-75mm in focal lengths (I also have a 21mm and a 135mm M lens, but tend not to use them with my M cameras).  It is the clarity of use of the M cameras which appeal to me - they make me think, and I think I take better pictures for it.

 

There is no reason at all, however, why the CL should not take just as excellent pictures; but the whole approach is different.  First, the small matter of it being APS-C.  This allows for smaller lenses (yet, paradoxically, the M lenses tend to be smaller - AF?), but for me I prefer to think in terms of full frame focal lengths.  I know it's silly, but 35mm is not 50mm in terms of field of view.  Maybe I'm getting old.

 

Like others here, if I want a compact camera, or I'm rushing out the door, I grab the TL2 with the 11-23 zoom on it.  Not small, but light and small enough.  If I want compact I'll put one of the smaller M lenses on with an adapter (the 28 Summaron-M gives 42mm field of view, which I quite like - it will also slide into my cycling jersey quite comfortably).

 

Long term, I suspect the M camera is an itch you will want to scratch!

 

Cheers

John

[Boojay]

May I ask which TL-lenses you own? And which lenses (M or T) you use the most on the CL?

 

Yes of course.  I have the 18-56 as that's the kit I bought, then I added the 35TL and the 55-135.  I find both zooms really good, the image quality from the 35mm excellent, most used out of the three would probably be the 18-56, but really it's all down to what you like shoot.  I did try the 23mm TL, good but really didn't do too much for me.  I am almost too ashamed to say how many M (and indeed R) lenses I have, but I use them all.  My most used M lens on CL is 50mm Summilux.

 

The only thought I have for you is that having sold your Q for ILC, and given your list of photographic aims, portrait, travel, architecture etc, I would really think again about restricting yourself to the 23 to start with and give more thought to maybe going with the zoom.  Check out the image thread here and look at results (especially from Louis), I think you will see just how good the zoom can be.  

 

I think many people are put off by just the tag 18-56 and automatically think "cheap zoom".  After seven months of using the CL with the 18-56, and being able to use my M lenses with the adaptor, I finally parted with my Canon 5DIV and 24-70 2.8, along with the rest of my Canon kit.  I don't miss it at all, certainly not my heavy old bags.

 

Good luck with your choice, think you will be happy whichever way you go.

Edited August 14, 2018 by Boojay

[Jeff S]

If you can afford it, you could get the CL and a nice used M8, or preferably an M8.2. A 35mm lens would have an equivalent field of view of roughly 52mm on the CL, and about 47mm on the M8. You could try both and if you don’t bond with the RF experience, sell it without much loss.

 

Or get the M8.2, first, and if the RF works for you, consider moving up to an M240-based M for a more robust platform. Again, not much loss if you decide to sell.

 

In the US, there are also good sources to rent most all Leica gear.

https://www.lensrentals.com/rent/brands/leica

 

Since you liked the Q (except for the fixed 28), the CL is a much safer bet. I’d be surprised if you didn’t like it. The M is a different cup of tea.

 

Jeff

Edited August 14, 2018 by Jeff S

[Ko.Fe.]

Super easy to choose from.

Want to have all kind of lenses on normal sized sensor and only Leica made camera? But MF.

Or want camera with Leica label which has nothing and does nothing than many others do for less with AF, EVF and crop.

 

Personally, I choose M, it is the only canera Leica is good at. Just because nobody else makes then .

[ramarren]

...

What do you value most [about] the CL compared to the M?

....

 

 

Not one thing but two or three:

• TTL viewing for close focusing work and telephoto lenses. 
• Its versatile ability to be used with any of my M or R lenses.
• Its slightly smaller size and lighter weight allows it to fit more easily into my bicycle pack.

Since I use the CL mostly with R system lenses, it focuses more closely than the M does. (Typically, I use the 28 and 50 mm R lenses as my walking kit, and both focus to about half the distance that the M 35 and M 75 lenses do.) The TL lenses also focus more closely than M lenses, as a rule. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Mr.Q]

I'd get the M first. The M is the　quintessential Leica camera. If you get the CL you will always wonder what it's like to shoot with a M.　If you don't like it, you could sell it at a minimal loss.