Favorite lens with your CL?

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

52 minutes ago, kengai said:

I am interested in the 11-23 mm zoom as focal lengths, but its size is holding me back. Which M lens could be suitable as a replacement?

M lenses used to stop at 15mm (Hologon 15/8), now at 16mm (Tri-Elmar 16-18-21/4). I have no experience with them but besides lenses listed by Jaap above, the digital CL works fine with the CV 15/4.5 v2 (no experience with v3).

[Advertisement]

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

[ramarren]

The Voigtländer HyperWide 10mm f/5.6 works beautifully on the CL, netting an extremely wide and very high resolution FoV: 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Leica CL + Voigtländer 10mm f/5.6
ISO 100 @ f/8 @ 1/80

It's significantly less expensive and much smaller than than the TL11-23, works beautifully on the M as well. 

 

 

Edited December 5, 2020 by ramarren

[kengai]

2 hours ago, lct said:

M lenses used to stop at 15mm (Hologon 15/8), now at 16mm (Tri-Elmar 16-18-21/4). I have no experience with them but besides lenses listed by Jaap above, the digital CL works fine with the CV 15/4.5 v2 (no experience with v3).

do you think this 15mm CV can be used with satisfactory results on the Leica CL as well as the M10?

[jaapv]

Yes, I have it and like it, but it is not very wide, 23 mm equivalent. I just found a mint used 12 mm for 500 Euro.

[lct]

2 hours ago, kengai said:

do you think this 15mm CV can be used with satisfactory results on the Leica CL as well as the M10?

On the CL yes, on the M240 no (red edges), on the M10 i don't know. I've read that the M10 performs better than the M240 with this lens but i don't remember where sorry.

[nicci78]

VL 15mm III on CL is nowhere near the IQ of TL 11-23. 
It is sharp, but never razor sharp like the Leica zoom. 
Rendering is nice.  
It is easy to use, thanks to its small size.   
Nicely build.    
At 22.5mm equivalent, forget about zone focusing. Otherwise it will never be sharp enough for my taste. 
It produced beautiful stars. 
Lightroom specific lens profile works well. 
 

So it is a mixed bag. It is a joy to use. But il makes my CL looks like 12MP camera. T + TL 11-23mm with 16MP only is way sharper. It is no match against CL + 11-23mm. 
 

In the future I will stick to Leica’s and Sigma’s lenses. Voigtländer is not good enough. 

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

MPs don't make sharpness...🙄

[nicci78]

12 minutes ago, jaapv said:

MPs don't make sharpness...🙄

Obviously I am talking about perceived sharpness. The more MP, the more sharp it will be. 
Even in focus VM 15mm III lacks crispness. At first I thought that I missed focused. But that was not the case.  
Sadly zone focusing will be enven worst. It should be the perfect lens for hyperfocal. But the results will be subpar.  

 

If you are looking for an excellent ultra wide angle. Look no further than TL 11-23. It is also better than WATE 16-18-21mm 

Or choose Sigma 16mm DC DN. it is sharper at f/1.4 than VM 15mm III at f/8. 

Edited December 7, 2020 by nicci78

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, nicci78 said:

Obviously I am talking about perceived sharpness. The more MP, the more sharp it will be

No. Less MP will only result in loss of detail. Sharpness is a favourite Internet word without any quantifiable meaning in optics anyway. Take an image that is seen as "soft" and kick up the contrast. It will be perceived as "more sharp".

Now you are talking about crispness. That is something else again. I suspect that  you are seeing a difference in contrast.

[nicci78]

I should say acuity. 
VM 15mm III has poorer acuity compare to TL 11-23. There is no contest. 
Such lens makes much more sense with M cameras or SL ones. 
15mm field of view is more extraordinaire than 22.5mm. 
 

[lct]

Not sure if acutance and crispness are different things but my sharper cameras are low resolution ones namely M8.2 and Kolari mod Sony A7s due to their thin sensor stack. As for CV lenses, the 15/4.5 i referred to above is the v2 of this lens. It is a bit soft at f/4.5 and plenty sharp at f/5.6 and on. I mean on the digital CL. No red edge on this body, little flare, CA and distortion otherwise. Only con is its slow aperture but it is very compact. Here on the CL at f/8.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[jaapv]

But Voigtlander lenses are known to have some sample variation. Maybe Niccy has an outlier.

[jaapv]

16 hours ago, lct said:

Not sure if acutance and crispness are different things but my sharper cameras are low resolution ones namely M8.2 and Kolari mod Sony A7s due to their thin sensor stack

That is quite correct. As to the lens choice: On an APS-C system lens size matters, and the Voigtländers score well in that respect; the 11-23 is indeed the better lens, but not by  the margin suggested. The image quality on the CL can still be described as "highly satisfactory".
Still the focal ranges puzzle me. If the CL is meant to be a three-zoom system, the huge overlap between 18-56 and 11-23 is a puzzling design choice. The long end is much more harmonious, with 18-56 and 55-135 matching perfectly.

I just got the Voigtländer 12 mm in - although the weather was too miserable to get some decent shooting in, the initial results do not disappoint on the CL. The lens resolves well, including the corners, does not appear to distort significantly and renders well albeit somewhat flat in contrast and saturation, but that may have been due to the adverse conditions and is easily seasoned by Photoshop. There was some lateral chromatic aberration towards the corners but one click in ACR resolved it 100%. I bought a mint in box one for 599 Euro, it punches far above its class.

[jaapv]

The weather cleared slightly today, so I could do some shots without artistic merit using the Ultra-Wide Heliar 12/5.6. Plenty of detail, acuity fine, so most likely more than enough resolution. And, importantly, on the CL the quality holds into the corners -see the crop- Compact, light  and balances well. Certainly a keeper.

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[jaapv]

.

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[nicci78]

Let’s say that VM 15mm III photos do not fit well among my other photos taken with Leica lenses. There is an obvious difference in colour and in acuity. Looks like another camera. 
 

If that’s ok with you. Fine. For me it’s weird. I prefer a consistent look.   
But right now I have to deal with 3 kind of looks : Voigtländer VM, Leica Q2 and Sigma DC DN. 

All three are different. You can tell which one is which. Beyond their respective focal length difference of course. 
 

So it is a bad thing ? Time will tell. 

[jaapv]

I never had much problems equalizing images between cameras or brands. I'll generate a specific profile to match my other lenses for colour. Acuity? = contrast management in post to get the same look.

[Gregm61]

On 12/7/2020 at 8:00 PM, jaapv said:

Still the focal ranges puzzle me. If the CL is meant to be a three-zoom system, the huge overlap between 18-56 and 11-23 is a puzzling design choice. The long end is much more harmonious, with 18-56 and 55-135 matching perfectly.

 

Maybe curious but very much traditional. Most brands have had these three ranges in their primary lens lineups but most have gone even wider with the standard zoom, choosing to start at a 24mm equivalent field of view.

My two most used M prime lenses on an M body are the 35 and 21mm focal lengths, so I could easily go out/travel with the 11-23, 35 and 55-135 three lens setup.

I've also travelled with my M camera and just the 28 and 50mm lenses so, enter the 18-56....

When I choose to add the 18-56, and when I do it's the primary used lens, I consider the 11-23 as an 11mm superwide with the ability to zoom in a little as needed

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[edstock]

Given I only bought one lens with my CL, the 18 f2.8 I must say it’s my favorite CL lens. I have the adapter to use with my M lenses.

[Michael Markey]

Having posted earlier in this thread when I only had one lens for my CL I now find I have a few more plus my existing M lenses.

So which is my favorite lens now ?

It has to be which ever one enables me to get the shot which I`m after .

That tends to favour the most versatile lens which is the 55 -135.

This despite the fact that I don`t like zooms especially not extendable zooms and even more so variable aperture zooms.

So my favourite lens turns out to be the most useful given the circumstances which I find myself in at the time.