Switching from M10 to CL. What would I be giving up?

[eosphoros]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've recently come to accept that, as a hobbyist, it is economically unsensible for me to keep the M10. Most of my photography consists of candid portraits of friends, street, and travel, as well as some boudoir. The Ms have all been an absolute pleasure to shoot with in almost all those respects save for: (1) the low-light performance of my previous M240; and (2) asking others to take photos of me and my friends when travelling -- almost always the person I hand the camera to will reposition after I have already set the focus and exposure.

 

I had previously owned the Q and had hoped that it would replace my M (then an M240). Alas, I found it to be just a tad too wide and so I ended up packing both the Q and M (with 50mm lux) on trips. I also had a brief stint with the Sony a7R II, which, although brilliant on paper, was incredibly boring to shoot and produced quite boring, dull images.

 

Enter the CL. Admittedly, I hadn't paid much attention to this product because at the time it was released, I was considering picking up an old film CL (in the end I got a Minolta TC-1) and so I found all the new CL information to be a nuisance in my research. I've spent the last few days catching up and it seems to me to be what I'm looking for. Yes, I'm giving up rangefinder mechanics and FF; but, I have made my peace with the former and everything I have read attests to the quality of the APS-C sensor here.

 

Unfortunately, unlike my previous experiment with the Q, I don't currently have the capital funds to comfortably purchase the CL whilst still holding onto the M10; hence this post. For those who either have both the M10 and the CL or swapped from the M10 to the CL, what has your experience been? For those in the former group, how often do you use the CL over the M10? For those in the latter group, what (if any) regrets do you have about having switched to the CL and, notwithstanding any regrets, would you nonetheless make the same decision now?

[Advertisement]

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

[jaapv]

No the M10,, but the M240. I sold it  after a few weeks. I never looked back. 

[Tobers]

I sold my M10 after getting a CL as well. Some things you’ll miss:

• Fast wide angle lenses. No 24lux unfortunately, and if you put a 24lux on you get a 35mm. You could look at Voigtlander I guess.
• Visible shutter speed, aperture and ISO on dedicated dials. I get that “what does this dial do again” thing as the dials change functionality depending on which mode you are in (eg is it shutter speed or exposure compensation today?)
• A more “engaging” photographic experience. The CL isn’t as involving as the M10.

Some things you wont’ miss:

• Removing the bottom plate to get the battery and card out.
• Rangefinder alignment fiascos.
• Having to chimp to check exposure and exact composition.

Plus of course you can have zoom lenses which is jolly convenient. But bloody hell why doesn’t the shutter speed go longer than 30 seconds?

[jaapv]

Putting the 24 Summilux on it gives you a 35 Summilux - but better I love that lens, irrespective of the camera I use it on.

For wideangle I use the Super-Elmar 18 on the M9 and Monochrom1. Both never-sell cameras

[Alistairm]

I also sold my M10 after getting used to the CL. For me the CL does everything the M10 does but also has the fantastic range of zoom lenses available. 

I don't want to sound like I am bashing the M10 - it is a superb camera - but I find an EVF gets me the image I want more often than a rangefinder. My only remaining rangefinder is an MA... and that will be pried out of my cold, dead hands! 

[lct]

As an M lens user i miss fast compact wides on the CL and DoF is what it is on APS cameras so i keep my FF bodies including M240 for RF experience. Great little camera otherwise, a pleasure to use really. I just miss a faster EVF in low light with less shaky effects.

Edited January 31, 2019 by lct

[nicci78]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Come from Q+M10 to Q+CL  I sold the M10 for CL, and never looked back. Best decision.

Q will deal with wide angle. I do miss small wider lens, but TL 11-23mm is absolutely excellent. So not a problem. Still waiting for a fast wide 14 or 16mm TL lens.

CL is more fun to shoot (lighter and smaller) with same IQ than M10.

 

I do miss optical viewfinder in very bright sunny days. Just shade the OLED EVF, and you’re good to go. 

 

I was very happy to get a stash of money back after reselling the M10. Now I can buy a film M, when rangefinder itch came back. It will trust me.

Last summer I bought a brand new M 262 kit (with 2,4/50mm) at steep discount. But after 2 months I did not see the point to keep a M camera. Alas CL IQ is much better than M 240/262, and my wife didn’t like the M photos. So I sold it, but keep the excellent Summarit 50mm f/2,4  

For now no more M. But still love the CL. And I even found him a little buddy : the T as a backup camera 

Edited January 31, 2019 by nicci78

[Photon42]

I have the M10 and bought the CL shortly after it came out. It is a superb little camera and image quality is on par with the M in almost all cases. The CL generally is easier to operate, once you figured it out and adjusted the camera to your needs. The native lenses are as good as it gets in this sensor format. I did buy the CL in addition to the M with an adapter and the 11-23, using M lenses to fill the gaps. I would never have swapped out my M10 for it, however. Why? Shooting experience of the M, and similar operation to film rangefinders, so I can use them easily together.

The CL system presently does not offer any fast lenses other than the 35/1.4. In case you like the look of fast wide angle lenses, you are out of luck. On the tele side, M lenses are easy to use, but not auto focus. I am selling mine now because I want to concentrate on the M. I am feeling I have one system too much. Will miss the CL, though.

[LucisPictor]

It all depends on how you prefer to shoot and what you want to do.

It might be that you won't miss anything, but will be happy about additional features (e.g. AF).
But it might also be that you miss a lot (such as the classic "feel" of shooting a rangefinder cam).

 

[M11 for me]

Allow me to say something too, even though I have no CL but only an M10. 

Above in this thread the shallow DoF was mentioned with the larger sensor. But note what I experienced yesterday as Idecided to take the M10 with manual focus and 75mm Summicron to shoot some inside portraits in an office (all at f/2 and a distance of approx 1.5m). And I was upset when I came home and in lightroom I saw that the majority of my shots were blured. I missed the right focus on the eyes. And tomorrow I am going to repeat that shooting with an Autofocus camera this time.

Reading above what you shoot you might appreciate an autofocus camera even though it seems that for portraits you did well with manual focus. 

 

[nicci78]

What we have to know : M (with 0.68x or 0,72x viewfinder) are only really suitable for 35 and 50mm. Yes that's it. With these two lenses, no problem. Clear, bright optical viewfinder with rangefinder is the best for 35 & 50mm.

 

28mm is already a challenge for composition, especially if you are wearing glasses. Q is way better and cheaper.

Longer lenses wide open goes from quite challenging (75mm) to almost impossible (135mm) even with 1,25x or 1,4x magnifier. Visoflex is really necessary.

Wider lenses requires Visoflex or external optical viewfinder (without any shooting information) or the huge Frankenfinder 16-18-21-24-28

 

So if you plan to use M10 + Visoflex, you will be better served with a CL or a SL. 

 

Maybe the best setup is to have M10 (35&50mm) + CL (everything else). Or the CL alone (from 16-200mm equivalent). Or even better Q (wide angle 28mm) + CL (ultra wide, normal and longer lenses)

 

Edited January 31, 2019 by nicci78

[Photon42]

15 hours ago, eosphoros said:

I've recently come to accept that, as a hobbyist, it is economically unsensible for me to keep the M10. Most of my photography consists of candid portraits of friends, street, and travel, as well as some boudoir. The Ms have all been an absolute pleasure to shoot with in almost all those respects save for: (1) the low-light performance of my previous M240; and (2) asking others to take photos of me and my friends when travelling -- almost always the person I hand the camera to will reposition after I have already set the focus and exposure.

Forgot to ask: What made you come to the M to begin with? 

[Bill W]

I have two M10 bodies and am selling one. I got the CL back in 2018 after a lot of research. After using it for a few months, I was rarely even looking at my M10's. I now have two CL bodies all three zooms and the 23. What can I say, it is such a great little system for being APS. 

[nicci78]

You should add tiny TL 18mm. Very nice, love it. Since I got it, most used lens, even if I still got the Q. 

So small, it makes CL or T compact enough to fit in jacket pocket. 

[ramarren]

I have the M-D and the CL. While I've loved Leica M rangefinder cameras for fifty years, if I could only have one it would be the CL. It's simply a much more versatile camera ... I only really like working with 35, 50, 75, and 90 mm lenses on the M, I can use both a larger range of lenses, both short and long, and zooms, and lenses from both my M and R lens lines. The CL also works brilliantly with my macro and table top setups, provides more precise focusing in nearly all situations, and allows me to see DoF while making exposure decisions. The image quality I obtain from the CL is as good as it was from my M9, SL, M-P240, and M-D.

All in all, the CL is a brilliant camera. 

(Note that, for me, ultrawides only rarely need to be faster than f/4. Both the Tri-Elmar-M 16-18-21mm f/4 and Super-Elmar-R 15mm f/3.5 are wide and fast enough for me. If I needed wider, I'd buy the TL 11-23mm zoom or Voigtländer 12mm.)

It will take a major change of heart to give up my M-D, however, but I never say never when it comes to equipment. Economics aside, interests and ideas change all the time, and for some changes of interest and ideas, different equipment is required. 🙃

 

"Equipment is transitory. Photographs endure.

Edited January 31, 2019 by ramarren

[eosphoros]

Wow thanks for all the helpful replies -- I really appreciate it. I was not expecting such a consensus on the CL. It seems that what I'll miss the most are the fast lenses. 

8 hours ago, Photon42 said:

Forgot to ask: What made you come to the M to begin with? 

Initially it was all about size: FF sensor and fast lenses in an amazingly small package. I was sick of lugging my bulky Nikon D[whatever] around and, at the time, the M240 just about to hit the shelves. I also loved the design and craftsmanship. Can't recall if there were any other considerations at the time but size and design were the two primary considerations that led me to acquiring the M. 

9 hours ago, nicci78 said:

Longer lenses wide open goes from quite challenging (75mm) to almost impossible (135mm) even with 1,25x or 1,4x magnifier. Visoflex is really necessary.

 

10 hours ago, Alex U. said:

Above in this thread the shallow DoF was mentioned with the larger sensor. But note what I experienced yesterday as Idecided to take the M10 with manual focus and 75mm Summicron to shoot some inside portraits in an office (all at f/2 and a distance of approx 1.5m). And I was upset when I came home and in lightroom I saw that the majority of my shots were blured. I missed the right focus on the eyes. And tomorrow I am going to repeat that shooting with an Autofocus camera this time.

Reading above what you shoot you might appreciate an autofocus camera even though it seems that for portraits you did well with manual focus. 

I have to agree with both these observations. The difficulty of shooting long certainly slipped my mind. Most of the portraits I've taken with the 90mm APO-cron wide open aren't focused correctly, which is always very upsetting because the thumbnails all look so gorgeous. I had a Visioflex for a while (lost it) but really didn't like it. It's way too chunky.

[jaapv]

I never had problems with 135 mm lenses on M cameras, but I accept some users do. IMO it is a matter of focusing technique and practice.

[M11 for me]

vor 54 Minuten schrieb jaapv:

I never had problems with 135 mm lenses on M cameras, but I accept some users do. IMO it is a matter of focusing technique and practice.

I must agree with that. For some reason I think that when people are posing in front of my lens it has to go quick. Even though people were standing fully quiet I still did not take enough time to focus properly. It is true that on the little monitor I would have seen that my pics were not sharp at the right place if only I had zoomed in. However, today I repeated my shot. I did not have to explain anything 😪. And today with AF everything is perfect. 

This story is maybe a bit OT. On the other hand when the question here is "what would I be giving up" then you would be giving up a manual focus system with all its difficulties. Note that 90% of my shots I make with my M10 after all. For nature, travelling and even portraits (when i can take my time) I bring home wonderful material.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[ramarren]

33 minutes ago, Alex U. said:

I must agree with that. For some reason I think that when people are posing in front of my lens it has to go quick. Even though people were standing fully quiet I still did not take enough time to focus properly. It is true that on the little monitor I would have seen that my pics were not sharp at the right place if only I had zoomed in. However, today I repeated my shot. I did not have to explain anything 😪. And today with AF everything is perfect. 

This story is maybe a bit OT. On the other hand when the question here is "what would I be giving up" then you would be giving up a manual focus system with all its difficulties. Note that 90% of my shots I make with my M10 after all. For nature, travelling and even portraits (when i can take my time) I bring home wonderful material.

I have to admit being slightly amused by this. I see more difficulties getting exactly what I want in focus when I use AF systems than I do when I focus manually, regardless whether I'm focusing with a TTL viewfinder or a rangefinder. I use my CL only with manual focus lenses...

[lct]

Little point to have AF w/o face recognition or eye tracking support when shooting moving subjects at fast apertures. Nor sure if the CL or any other Leica camera can do that.