Jump to content

Leica Q EVF versus CL


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 2/7/2019 at 2:15 PM, dkmoore said:

I’d imagine the Q2 will recycle the SL evf but that is my guess. 

 My position;

* manual focusing on “mirrorless” cameras is very important to me

* two technical factors that impact the experience of an EVF in manual focusing are number of pixels in the EVF and magnification of the evf at the eyepiece 

* different display tech could also be a factor as was raised here by some ( who have not actually seen both cameras in their hands), but I’m not sure you can beat a big difference in pixel count and optical magnification with that change in sensor tech   

* I was very interested in the CL for my application, but one hour hands on with it caused me to decide to skip the CL because of the EVF. I think it is a fun little camera, I boils manually focus it, but the experience was below my expectations.  While I use my Q in AF 85% of the time I love using it in MF, especially in macro  

* among production cameras that I have experienced with manual focusing (with non native lenses), the Leica SL is the top ranking IMHO.  There are many others that back this up, but I’ve tested the SL head to head with SonyA7Riii, Canon R and Nikon Z6 and M10 with external evf.  Of those 3, the Nikon is my pick as closest to the SL .  Notably the tech specs of evf resolution and magnification correlate very well to my experience.  Also, many bloggers are now weighing in with similar comments. 

Most important:  dkmoore have you tried them both yet?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel fairly sure that this is a personal preference type of issue, depending on the particularities of individual eye strength and the irrational aspect of psychology. There are plenty of terrific photographers on the CL thread who use manual focus, just as there are here on the Q thread. I just bought a CL to go with my Q, and, while I am awaiting my adapter to use it (sigh!), I've used a CL in the Leica store and thought the EVF resolution fine. 

Yes, the SL resolution is amazing, but so is the weight of the camera. BTW, the new Panasonic EVF tops it, and Sony has announced an EVF that will top the Panasonic. Okay.... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, pixelman said:

 My position;

* manual focusing on “mirrorless” cameras is very important to me

* two technical factors that impact the experience of an EVF in manual focusing are number of pixels in the EVF and magnification of the evf at the eyepiece 

* different display tech could also be a factor as was raised here by some ( who have not actually seen both cameras in their hands), but I’m not sure you can beat a big difference in pixel count and optical magnification with that change in sensor tech   

* I was very interested in the CL for my application, but one hour hands on with it caused me to decide to skip the CL because of the EVF. I think it is a fun little camera, I boils manually focus it, but the experience was below my expectations.  While I use my Q in AF 85% of the time I love using it in MF, especially in macro  

* among production cameras that I have experienced with manual focusing (with non native lenses), the Leica SL is the top ranking IMHO.  There are many others that back this up, but I’ve tested the SL head to head with SonyA7Riii, Canon R and Nikon Z6 and M10 with external evf.  Of those 3, the Nikon is my pick as closest to the SL .  Notably the tech specs of evf resolution and magnification correlate very well to my experience.  Also, many bloggers are now weighing in with similar comments. 

Most important:  dkmoore have you tried them both yet?

I've owned the Q and have used the SL. I am actually heading to my local Leica store this weekend to try the CL out. I was hoping the Q2 would be released this week. Regardless, case of the GAS in full affect.

Thanks for the info and thoughts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, bags27 said:

I feel fairly sure that this is a personal preference type of issue, depending on the particularities of individual eye strength and the irrational aspect of psychology. There are plenty of terrific photographers on the CL thread who use manual focus, just as there are here on the Q thread. I just bought a CL to go with my Q, and, while I am awaiting my adapter to use it (sigh!), I've used a CL in the Leica store and thought the EVF resolution fine. 

Yes, the SL resolution is amazing, but so is the weight of the camera. BTW, the new Panasonic EVF tops it, and Sony has announced an EVF that will top the Panasonic. Okay.... 

I don't really have an issue with eyesight. I use the M10 and other M variations without difficulties. I'm in my 30s so eyesight is still relatively ok.

Are you talking about the Panasonic S1 cameras? Have you had a chance to use the camera? 

I ask because I haven't read any articles digging into the new EVFs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, dkmoore said:

Are you talking about the Panasonic S1 cameras? Have you had a chance to use the camera? 

I ask because I haven't read any articles digging into the new EVFs.

It's been announced broadly. here's the first article that came up on google

https://www.digitaltrends.com/photography/panasonic-lumix-s1r-official-announcement/

not calling into doubt your eye sight: I was responding to pixelman. And the new Q2 EVF has been rumored just now.

Edited by bags27
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, bags27 said:

It's been announced broadly. here's the first article that came up on google

https://www.digitaltrends.com/photography/panasonic-lumix-s1r-official-announcement/

not calling into doubt your eye sight: I was responding to pixelman. And the new Q2 EVF has been rumored just now.

Just read, interesting. Will look forward to trying it. The SL EVF is very good.

What is the rumor about the Q2 EVF? I haven't seen that yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Beyond a certain level, the number of pixels in an EVF becomes less important than other factors (IMO), just as with sensors. There are also downsides to having more pixels - mainly greater processing needs in- and (for the sensor) out-of-camera; in-camera processing also demands more battery. The SL EVF is superb, but I am not convinced I need the S1 increased pixel count; the CL EVF, although not as high res as the SL, is still good enough for me most of the time. I suspect a higher res EVF would demand a bigger housing as well.

The other factors I refer to above are speed of response (no jagged movement as you move the camera or as the subject moves), no blackout or freezing at the time of shot, colour fidelity, dynamic range, low light performance, visibility in bright/low light, no lag wrt shutter/sensor.

Edited by LocalHero1953
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I tried out the CL camera today and although I thought the EVF was fine, maybe slightly better than the Qs, to me, I have decided to wait for the Q2.

I did end up buying a 90 APO and the 50 Lux UNLIMITED edition (such a great looking lens). Never been into 90s but had a few instances this past summer during trips that I thought I need significantly more reach in the mountains, etc. Hopefully I will like it.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...