Two CL bodies... too luxury?

[yst]

Wondering how many of you have two current CL bodies?  Is it overly too luxurious to have more than one CL body? 

When using the R & M systems before, it was a norm to bring along two R bodies, or two M bodies for different lenses, and for surety of in case one body had problem.  But nowadays with the digital bodies, not only way too expensive to purchase at new, it is also worthless in few year... 

However when thinking of two bodies' convenient shooting without changing lenses, a surety of won't be out of camera body if one fails.   e.g. one CL with a 23mm TL lens, another one with a 50/f1.4 M lens... 

However, considering the points above mentioned, is it too much to have two CL, how many of you have two CL?  Would you rather to put the cost of "second" CL body on another TL lens, or go for the double CL bodies, which would increase the usages of the already own lenses?   

 

 

 

[FrozenInTime]

Two bodies still makes sense to me if you are swapping lenses on the run and as a backup.

I got a TL2 then the CL 

The EVF built into the CL normally makes it the first choice, but sometimes the TL2, with a small lens by LCD or 11-23 and tiltable Visoflex , wins.

 

[yst]

1 hour ago, FrozenInTime said:

Two bodies still makes sense to me if you are swapping lenses on the run and as a backup.

I got a TL2 then the CL 

The EVF built into the CL normally makes it the first choice, but sometimes the TL2, with a small lens by LCD or 11-23 and tiltable Visoflex , wins.

 

Your two bodies use difference battery?   That could be another drag by bring different chargers... ?

[M.piras]

Yep yst , also to me 2 bodies make sense, but in my case i bought the CL specifically for M lenses compatibility. I can in this way have a backup body with a regular lens always with me , and is lighter.

M.

[nicci78]

I kinda got two bodies : Q  + CL 

a couple that makes total sense : fast wide angle for the Q (28+35mm) + everything else (especially normal and long focal length) with the CL 

even better  Q and CL share the same batteries ! 

Edited January 6 by nicci78

[Mute-on]

I travel with two Ms solely for the convenience of different focal lengths ready to go at any moment. Having a backup has also proven worthwhile on occasion. 

Two CLs, or Q and CL, makes perfect sense to me. 

[wda]

It all depends on your needs and photographic tasks. For professional photography two or more bodies are essential. For less pressured or amateur photography there is a weaker case. For example, the CL plus standard zoom lens effectively replaced my X-Vario.  To augment its capabilities I travelled with an additional D-Lux compact camera which made for a versatile and economical travel kit. The CL is the heart of another system and I can see a case for a second body with adapter for M-lenses. So much depends on personal choice in non-professional photography. 

[FrozenInTime]

6 hours ago, yst said:

Your two bodies use difference battery?   That could be another drag by bring different chargers... ?

I have a spare battery for each.

The TL2 does not need  a charger - just a USB-C cable., so it’s the carrying of the charger for the CL that’s the pain.

[nicci78]

Two bodies are always nice. 

Leica makes it quite easy to mix and match its different bodies with each other. 

CL + Q =  same batteries and menu. Similar bodies and handling. Complementary focal length. Same IQ 

CL + TL2 = share same TL lenses. But different user interface and batteries. The TL2 are more vidéo competent though (faster frame rate and bigger 16:9 screen real estate)  Same IQ

M10 + CL = share same menu and user interface. CL act as a 1.5x teleconverter for M lenses, and brings zooms and AF to the couple. Same IQ  

M10 + TL2 = same as with the CL except user interface and menu. But it adds the ability to share the same Visoflex. 

Etc... for other Leica couples.You get the idea. 

[Stealth3kpl]

I go 2xMP (28mm and 50mm) for film, or M240+50mm and Q for digital.

Pete

[nicci78]

Did you get a 0.58x MP for 28mm and a 0.85x MP for 50mm ? 

[Louis]

During my film period, I always had two bodies. One for B/W and one for color. It was not practical but useful.

Now, I have a T and a CL. When I take a lens with me, there is always a situation when I need another lens. Changing lens on street is not always wise if you wish to keep your sensor clean. So, I think it does perfectly make sens to take my both cameras in serious situations. One with 18-56 and the other with 55-135. But doing that every time I go out shooting is a pain. As for batteries; there is no problem; I have several for each.

[scott kirkpatrick]

I used two CLs for a few days at a state fair last summer.  Mine with the 23 and a borrowed one with the 18. It worked great in a fairly high density situation.  I also had a 60 as a spare for longer shots, but only used it once for an hour.  I had two spare batteries, and tended to need one of them each day.

Edited January 6 by scott kirkpatrick

[jaapv]

I would use a second CL as a backup/second camera for lens changes - IF Leica made the lens I need. Now I use a Panasonic GX8 instead.

[LocalHero1953]

I bought a TL2 to backup my CL for a recent trip to India. I admit the main risk I considered was theft rather than breakdown. But I also recognised the benefit of having two cameras with different modi operandi: I tended to use the CL in daytime with the 18-56 zoom, and the TL2 at night with the 18mm - more compact and unobtrusive in use with the rear screen.

As an amateur, I've never seen the benefit of two identical bodies in case of a breakdown (how often does that actually happen???), but the light TL2 is a great alternative for different scenarios, taking the same lenses as the CL. Yes, it takes different batteries, but those are small, and I'm not carrying the chargers around with me - they stay at the hotel.

 

[ramarren]

At present, I complement the M-D typ 262 with the CL. Or vice versa, depending upon your perspective.  I use a much wider range of lenses on the CL, and do a more diverse set of things with it too. 

I never got into the 'use multiple bodies with different lenses' shooting workflow. Always found it too confusing. I don't change lenses often, and have to think with much deliberation when I do, so almost never switched back and forth between lenses very often or very quickly. However, if I were depending on the CL for assignments or paid projects, I'd want a second identical body in the bag, ready to use in the case it was convenient or necessary. Same for the M (although, if the M, I'd likely want an M-P 240 (same battery), M10-P or M10-D (different battery) in the bag now as the backup). That's how I always worked when I was doing photography for pay. I only rarely ever used the second body, but it's a necessary security if someone is paying me to do a job: I must deliver the goods. 

[scott kirkpatrick]

I think either two CLs or two M10s would both be excellent general purpose, mostly on the street kits.  I put one on a short strap around my neck and keep the other in hand.  It's not hard to switch.  The one in hand is determined by the working distance and density, mostly.  21/24/28 on one camera and 35 or 50 on the other are all good combinations.  And if I just have an hour to go out and shoot, I grab a camera put on a lens that I haven't used recently and see what happens.

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, ramarren said:

At present, I complement the M-D typ 262 with the CL. Or vice versa, depending upon your perspective.  I use a much wider range of lenses on the CL, and do a more diverse set of things with it too. 

I never got into the 'use multiple bodies with different lenses' shooting workflow. Always found it too confusing. I don't change lenses often, and have to think with much deliberation when I do, so almost never switched back and forth between lenses very often or very quickly. However, if I were depending on the CL for assignments or paid projects, I'd want a second identical body in the bag, ready to use in the case it was convenient or necessary. Same for the M (although, if the M, I'd likely want an M-P 240 (same battery), M10-P or M10-D (different battery) in the bag now as the backup). That's how I always worked when I was doing photography for pay. I only rarely ever used the second body, but it's a necessary security if someone is paying me to do a job: I must deliver the goods. 

Well, if one lens is 400 mm+ and the other a 35, it is hard to confuse them

[nicci78]

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

I would use a second CL as a backup/second camera for lens changes - IF Leica made the lens I need. Now I use a Panasonic GX8 instead.

I thought once about the GX8 as a third camera for Q and CL. Because they can all three share same batteries. 

But finally voted against it because of the too complicated Panasonic user interface. 

[Tobers]

I have been pondering getting a T to compliment my CL, for fun and as a backup body, and as a lazy-man’s 2-lens setup. Seems you can get a T quite cheaply these days, and I could put the 18-56 on one and the 55-135 on the other.

Back in the day when I was shooting sport I would have 3 Canon 1Dnnn bodies and I got used to the ease of not having to change lenses. Changing lenses sucks.

I think 2x CL bodies is an excellent suggestion.