Jump to content
justbananas

How many of you would skip the CL and go straight to the M

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If you are new to Leica M, this thread is mandatory reading:

 

No all posts are of interest, as it covers the M8 through M240 as well, but skim, pick, and choose.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Digital M vs CL .... I had the M9, Q, and now CL (plus film Ms)..... I miss having FF, easier when traveling (film camera for day, digital for night) so my lenses all match up, with a cropped sensor there is always at least an extra lens at the wide end. Second, I have gotten used to frame lines, deciding what goes in and what doesn’t, TTL focus loses that. So for me, the CL is great, I think its IQ is great especially with M and R lenses, and the size is wonderful ... and it worked great for me on safari (Jaap gave me some great pre-trip pointers) ....but there is always a but (see above) ... in the end, because I have the film Ms and for what I use the CL, I am keeping the CL 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Thanks for all of the replies.  As my week continues, I find myself bonding better with the M.

Once I return the M, I'll really have to give it some serious consideration.  I love the images from the CL.  I love the images from the M.  I took more photos with the CL, but that only amounted to more throw aways. I believe that autofocus subconsciously makes one take MORE photos, but that doesn't amount to more keeper photos, just more work culling through them. 

I feel more "connected" to the M, but slower and with more intent.  My focusing abilities quickly came to me.  Both are stellar cameras.  I have no idea how I could even entertain the idea of the Fuji XT-3 after this experience with both the CL and the M.  Although the Fuji autofocus is fabulously fast, and the flip out screen really does help in very low to the ground shooting.  I must remember that most of my photographs are of a toddler.  The rangefinder is far more difficult to use in the situation when I truly want knee level shooting, but I get a lot more exercise getting on the floor and up again 😂 (I'm an old dad haha)   I also keep in mind that children don't stay 3 feet tall forever.

I've also come the conclusion that with the M, photographs of running toddlers in a large open space is most likely not the best use of the M camera.  Not saying it can't be done, but possibly its purpose is better suited to more calm surroundings.  Upon reflection, even with my 80D, I don't take photos of my kid running in large open spaces that often, if ever.

The CL remains tempting with the announcement of the L-Mount Alliance.  I could see no issue with owning both in the long run.  Tough choices to narrow to just one for now.  Tomorrow I'll take the M through the same street walk I took the CL and attempt to capture the same or similar shots.    The M makes me excited every time I think about it, look at it or touch it.

A friend laughs at me, says Leica is all about the red dot for rich people.  He pulls out a (gigantic) DSLR and bursts off multiple continuous shot runs.  he culls a hundred? out of focus moving shots down to 20 decent photos, 1 of which has a lot of character (quality timing, framing, environment, subject), 2 or 3 others are "pretty good", the remaining mediocre.  And all of these photos are of child standing still.

I walked away with 15 photographs with great image character of my own from the M, out of 30-ish photos taken.  I can absolutely see the Leica look, it's just unique.  I guess not everyone cares?  Regardless, his comments hurt my feelings a little bit.  Anyway, If I bought a new M, it would be a -P anyway.. to me the red dot isn't the thing.  to me, image quality, ease of everyday use, artistry, longevity, and what makes me "excited" to explore the hobby deeper are what matter to me.  And I must keep in mind that my goal is to have a "I would like to take this to zoo on a hot day, all day, camera". Compact, light enough, not cumbersome.  All three, the CL, the M and the XT-3 fit that description pretty well. And I much much much appreciate the removal of all of the buttons, dials and gizmos on the M and the CL.  The CL was easy to accidentally move a dial without realizing it.  No such issue on the M.

Ok, well... there's my thoughts for today.

Edited by justbananas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Well said!

I guess if my eyes were young enough, I'd buy an M10 and a couple of lenses, and look for a used CL and one TL lens to compliment the M (the APO 55-135 is fantastic), but otherwise share the M lenses with both bodies. The extra cost would be far less than the satisfaction of having such flexibility.

Edited by bags27

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've followed this thread with interest. I still miss using film cameras, particularly my old OM1 and OM2: everything tactile, light and mechanical. You missed shots because you couldn't react fast enough, but you got other shots because you had to be more deliberate. You could take it everywhere as it was light and pocketable.

I wondered about an M, but in the end liked what the CL had to offer, and knowing I can add M lenses when I want to in the future. I gain convenience but lose that mechanical tactility. I regain some lightness but the TL lenses (excepting the 18mm which I do not own) are all bigger and heavier than the old Olympus 50mm f1.8. I guess the trick is to choose, stop making comparisons and simply focus on creating images that please you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PS justbabanas - you can lock the dials and D pad on the CL with a long press of the left top function button. I learned that the hard (inconvenient) way. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

13 hours ago, justbananas said:

I've also come the conclusion that with the M, photographs of running toddlers in a large open space is most likely not the best use of the M camera.  Not saying it can't be done, but possibly its purpose is better suited to more calm surroundings.  Upon reflection, even with my 80D, I don't take photos of my kid running in large open spaces that often, if ever.

I strongly beg to differ here. It will be difficult with a 75/1.4, but with a 24mm or the 15mm CV you can get great results, especially if you play with local movement blur 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jaapv: the colors of the CL are not 'oversaturated'. I believe you are not setting it correctly....The bottom line is that the CL and my M8.2 have a similar WB and I have been able to 'sync' my preferred color palette even prior to post-processing....the camera itself allows these advanced features.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Update:

i took the M to our small downtown, the images are mind numbing good. 

I got home and missed a bunch of shots in low light that would have been amazing. Oh well. 

I found an open box CL with 18, 23 and 35! Hand grip, extra battery, strap.. unused, for a price I could not pass up. 

So I purchased the CL tonight. 

I’ll consider adding some m glass, and then eventually an m body .. possibly even an m9 or me one day in the future.  Or when the m11 comes... we’ll see. 

At the end of the day, I truly feel the CL is a quality family camera with great IQ and an ease of use that fits me passing the camera to my wife “here honey, get a snapshot of us “ without much fuss 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Merv-O said:

Jaapv: the colors of the CL are not 'oversaturated'. I believe you are not setting it correctly....The bottom line is that the CL and my M8.2 have a similar WB and I have been able to 'sync' my preferred color palette even prior to post-processing....the camera itself allows these advanced features.

I never said they were over saturated. I don’t set cameras for colour rendering; I don’t use JPG. WB has nothing to do with saturation. In fact I was talking about the differences in post processing. 

Any  colour differences between cameras are caused by the choices made in sensor filtering (Bayer filter and to a certain extent IR filter) They can be evened out by post processing, if not completely, to the point that they don’t matter. 

 

I would strongly recommend “ Real world color management “ by Fraser er al. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, justbananas said:

I found an open box CL with 18, 23 and 35! Hand grip, extra battery, strap.. unused, for a price I could not pass up. 

That's a great lens combo.  Congratulations!  I'm sure you will love the CL.  From the way you wrote about using the M, I'm sure you will love the M as well.  Some people just 'get' the M and completely understand how and why it is used.  Sounds like you are in that club.  Happy shooting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/12/2019 at 11:20 AM, jaapv said:

I'm a bit surprised at your experience, as the CL produces quite saturated colours -sometimes too much so for my taste- (compare the M10 and CL image threads) I think that you are trying to postprocess your files with identical settings. If you use different cameras, you should figure out the optimal workflow (including profiling, capture sharpening and colour management) for each camera separately. Lightroom and ACR give you the option of assigning your basic setttings to  each individual camera.

If anything, I would call the M10 colours more subdued and "Sharpness" , whatever that is, about equal.

By the way, I also found that the CL saturated once I pulled the raw's into Lightroom than the M10.  I remember thinking to myself, "look at all that rich rich color"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great combo. Congrats!  Looking forward to seeing your pics. Enjoy!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Nobody makes cameras like M. Many makes AF and EVF cameras, lenses for less money and more selection of lenses.

Personally, I'm finding Pen F images more intresting than CL and it also has Leica lenses. It also has image stabilization and dust clean. These days all of mirrorless AF cameras have at least one of the two. CL has none. 

For home pictures of kinds AF system wipes the floor with M. But for taking not like anyone else pictures M seems to be better, for me.

Edited by Ko.Fe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/10/2019 at 3:16 AM, LocalHero1953 said:

after owning the CL since launch, the M just wasn't getting used.

Ditto! Since I bought the CL, my Q hasn’t been used. I was shocked by this. Never imagined an APS camera could render images as beautifully as my full frame Q. But it does and it’s smaller! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, globalwander said:

Ditto! Since I bought the CL, my Q hasn’t been used. I was shocked by this. Never imagined an APS camera could render images as beautifully as my full frame Q. But it does and it’s smaller! 

Something I appreciate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, globalwander said:

Ditto! Since I bought the CL, my Q hasn’t been used. I was shocked by this. Never imagined an APS camera could render images as beautifully as my full frame Q. But it does and it’s smaller! 

I am afraid I do not agree 100% with your opinion. In my experience (M10, Q, MM1 and more recently the CL) there is still a quite relevant difference between the rendering of a full frame camera and the one from an APSC sensor.

Aside from the M's range finder experience (that I have found out to prefer better than the manual focusing one on the CL), the raw pics from the M/Q do give me much more flexibility in PP (mainly Lightroom, sometimes Photoshop) and the final results are IMHO superior.

The CL portability and versatility (i.e. possibility to use either M or TL lenses) makes it a great APSC body and one terrific travel camera don't get me wrong, but I still like more the final results I can obtain from the FF bodies. Just my 2 cents...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I moved from an M10 to the Cl and have never regretted it. I found the M excessively heavy and printing to A3 with a 50mm Summicron no better quality than my Vario-Elmar. AND i have the advantage of a small zoom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree CL files print excellently up to A3+ at least. (The max my printer allows. )

Share this post


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.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...