ropo54 Posted July 18, 2019 Share #61 Posted July 18, 2019 Advertisement (gone after registration) 1 hour ago, Jake said: Yikes. Interesting convo. But I'll throw my two cents from the peanut gallery. You know what I want? Standardisation. Great point! I'd like Leica to start it with an identical user interface for all of its cameras! Why not? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 18, 2019 Posted July 18, 2019 Hi ropo54, Take a look here TL CL future. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
hoppyman Posted July 18, 2019 Share #62 Posted July 18, 2019 The SL menu and controls seem to follow that of the S. If anything , I think the menu system is their best ever. Different families within their range of cameras, I think. There are consistencies from M to others as well for example too. i think that the CL is better than the very different T’s in regard to interface but actually too clever to be completely intuitive. At least it requires setup and learning, then it’s set and forget for me. The same controls won’t necessarily work/ fit in different bodies I think Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldwino Posted July 19, 2019 Share #63 Posted July 19, 2019 I’m very happy with my M-D’s menu interface. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 20, 2019 Share #64 Posted July 20, 2019 On 7/18/2019 at 10:30 PM, Vip said: Yes we are living an age where everything becomes obsolete very fast. But the point is not whether the CL should last ten years or not , but if the CL system is continuously feed. Lens, and all accessories can be still used in future versions or finishing as the 4/3 that Leica produced years ago? The R system where the M solution is simply a makeshift solution as focusing on R camera is not the same in the visoflex for M. When a customer choose a Leica doesn’t choose a cheap one. Long lasting value is a paradigm in this kind of market as the M was and is. I think that the difference is that the Digilux3 was not a Leica-developed camera, but a co-production from Olympus-Panasonic rebodied by Leica. It was not well received by the public nor by the press. Furthermore its introduction at Photokina was totally eclipsed by the M8. I remember feeling sorry for the bloke on the Digilux3 stand. The M8 counter was jam-packed three rows thick with about ten Leica reps being overworked, I was his sole visitor. What is more, I was carrying a Digilux2 at the time and was horrified at the huge lump. And the reflex viewfinder was worse than the Digilux2 EVF. Which is saying quite something. That was not a good entry into the system. Another difference: the image quality was OK, but couldn't hold a candle to the DMR and M8. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Hanson Posted July 21, 2019 Share #65 Posted July 21, 2019 I always shake my head at this persistent assumption that the "full frame" sensor represents some actual paradigm, when in fact it is a completely archaic reference. The fact that a sensor is the same size as a 35mm film frame means exactly nothing. For decades film technology advanced to the point at which 35mm images became suitable for reproduction in publications that had previously only accepted 4x5 images. The same thing is now transpiring with digital sensors. A micro 4/3 camera is fully capable of producing a 300 dpi double-page spread in a standard magazine or a fine image on a 23" computer screen—I do so all the time with the Lumix GX8 that was my standard photojournalist tool until I bought a CL. The CL's APS-C sensor gives me a significant margin of excess for those applications. Larger file sizes from a "full-frame" sensor would only create storage issues for me. I'm over the moon with the instinctive controls and handling of the CL, the exact opposite of the button festival that is the GX8. Yes, the lenses are insanely overpriced. Yes, I wish the CL had IS, weatherproofing, and automatic sensor cleaning (pleeease Leica?). But every time I pick it up it inspires me to do my best work, and you can't ask more of a camera than that. 6 1 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 21, 2019 Share #66 Posted July 21, 2019 I agree. I have no problem making A3+ prints from my GX8, even with moderate cropping. However, the CL makes things easier and gives more leeway in postprocessing. Anything more is overkill for my use. 1 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicci78 Posted July 21, 2019 Share #67 Posted July 21, 2019 Advertisement (gone after registration) We will get soon in the same period as film days : you choose your film/sensor format according to the output you are looking for. Printing large = more MP = bigger sensor = bigger film. m4/3 seems stuck at 20MP. APS-C will reach 36MP 24x36 will reach 80MP 33*44 will reach 137MP Need more MP ? get a bigger sensor with bigger lens. Just as film days Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted July 21, 2019 Share #68 Posted July 21, 2019 6 minutes ago, nicci78 said: [...] Need more MP ? get a bigger sensor with bigger lens. Just as film days Which is why I suggest some to look at medium format or larger film cameras. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted July 21, 2019 Share #69 Posted July 21, 2019 3 hours ago, Jonathan Hanson said: I always shake my head at this persistent assumption that the "full frame" sensor represents some actual paradigm, when in fact it is a completely archaic reference. The fact that a sensor is the same size as a 35mm film frame means exactly nothing. For decades film technology advanced to the point at which 35mm images became suitable for reproduction in publications that had previously only accepted 4x5 images. The same thing is now transpiring with digital sensors. A micro 4/3 camera is fully capable of producing a 300 dpi double-page spread in a standard magazine or a fine image on a 23" computer screen—I do so all the time with the Lumix GX8 that was my standard photojournalist tool until I bought a CL. The CL's APS-C sensor gives me a significant margin of excess for those applications. Larger file sizes from a "full-frame" sensor would only create storage issues for me. I'm over the moon with the instinctive controls and handling of the CL, the exact opposite of the button festival that is the GX8. Yes, the lenses are insanely overpriced. Yes, I wish the CL had IS, weatherproofing, and automatic sensor cleaning (pleeease Leica?). But every time I pick it up it inspires me to do my best work, and you can't ask more of a camera than that. I’ve said before that Leica could make a killer APSC system to appeal to professionals doing photojournalism, weddings, editorial etc. Latest sensors plus Leica lenses, no need for anything more. Also it’s a segment that Nikon and Canon dominated but have failed to develop, concentrating on FF mainly due to their legacy users and lenses. Imagine a Leica APSC system that could take all lenses, like a mini S or SL. Rugged weather sealed body, full range of lenses including fast primes and zooms. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted July 21, 2019 Share #70 Posted July 21, 2019 (edited) Want less DoF? Forget APS or smaller sensors unless you don't mind to carry big fast wides if any. Edited July 21, 2019 by lct 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted July 21, 2019 Share #71 Posted July 21, 2019 (edited) 7 minutes ago, lct said: Want less DoF? Forget APS or smaller sensors unless you don't need to carry big fast wides if any. Noctilux effects are available on the latest iPhones For many applications it’s not desired. Edited July 21, 2019 by earleygallery Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted July 21, 2019 Share #72 Posted July 21, 2019 Matter of tastes... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vip Posted July 22, 2019 Author Share #73 Posted July 22, 2019 Most of the potential Cl users are younger nd not that demanding for dof selective effects. While very poorly tolerant on weight and size... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vip Posted July 22, 2019 Author Share #74 Posted July 22, 2019 What still CL/TL sistem lacks are long telephoto lens 1 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted July 22, 2019 Share #75 Posted July 22, 2019 1 hour ago, Vip said: Most of the potential Cl users are younger nd not that demanding for dof selective effects. Dunno how many young people can afford a Leica but the ones around me are either interested in photography and know well how DoF works or they have other hobbies and they prefer a smartphone or a small sensor camera. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Hanson Posted July 22, 2019 Share #76 Posted July 22, 2019 1 hour ago, Vip said: What still CL/TL sistem lacks are long telephoto lens Quite true. And for me it would miss the whole point of the APS-C format's advantages to simply shoehorn on a full-frame-sized lens. The Leica/Lumix 100-400mm zoom I have for my GX8 is a stunning accomplishment; what I would give to have it scaled up to APS-C. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Le Chef Posted July 22, 2019 Share #77 Posted July 22, 2019 1 hour ago, Vip said: Most of the potential Cl users are younger nd not that demanding for dof selective effects. While very poorly tolerant on weight and size... I would love to see the data that supports this argument! If you have it please share here and educate us. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 22, 2019 Share #78 Posted July 22, 2019 Well, there is a point there, DOF on APS-C will not be as narrow as on 135 influencing the choice of camera, and the younger generation is more used to smartphones with DOF from toenails to horizon., however, the same argument goes for 135 vs medium format, etc. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vip Posted July 22, 2019 Author Share #79 Posted July 22, 2019 I am so lucky to travel frequently around the word. I visit when I can officials Leica shops. Asking to the manager tl/Cl attracts more younger people ( relatively young around 40) while M attract more people that already has other photographic experience. That what I was told. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted July 22, 2019 Share #80 Posted July 22, 2019 23 hours ago, Jonathan Hanson said: I always shake my head at this persistent assumption that the "full frame" sensor represents some actual paradigm, when in fact it is a completely archaic reference. The fact that a sensor is the same size as a 35mm film frame means exactly nothing. It doesn’t matter what the size is referenced to, the fact is that’s its 4x the size of APS-C. There is inescapable physics that, given similar technology, a FF sensor will have better light sensitivity and DR. There is also much more DOF play, although some argue that have more in sharp on smaller sensors is a benefit. There are far more advantages to FF sensors, such as less stress on the lens for sharper images, but I won’t list them all here. That doesn’t mean that APS-C cameras are bad. Quite the contrary. The current Fuji-x line, Sony 6xxx and CL/TL2 are all exceptional cameras which professionals could use at a pinch. Any doubt can be quickly dispelled by looking at what Jason Lanier is able to achieve using Sony 6xxx series in professional shoots. However there is a difference. If you want to eek out the best in IQ you need to go FF, or even MF. The big disadvantage is the size of the lenses, which again has a limit due to physics. For me the CL system is an idea low weight high quality system. It can be used for all types of shooting with confidence, and, unusually for Leica, it’s sensor was state of the art when released and is still not bettered. I know that there are new generations of this Sony sensor with back lighting, etc. but nothing that alters the fundamental IQ obtainable from it. My 2 cents is for y’all to enjoy your lightweight high quality system and don’t waste bandwidth on comparing it to FF or other sensor sized systems 2 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.