TL CL future

[Jonathan Hanson]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

30 minutes ago, colonel said:

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

I agree with you; my point is that by referring to a sensor as "full-frame" it infers that it is somehow more correct than other sizes, when it's not. As you mentioned, we should be choosing sensor (and camera) size by the results (and the lenses and accessories) we need.

[Advertisement]

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

[Jonathan Hanson]

I sometimes wonder if Leica pursues the same strategy as Porsche, which has to be very careful not to let the performance of its mid-engined Cayman overtake that of its flagship Carrera. Imagine if Leica produced a CL2 with full weathersealing, in-body IS, and automatic sensor cleaning, along with a full line of lenses up to super-telephoto, with a few wide-aperture primes, all in the compact APS-C format. Would that cut into M sales, which I'm sure are more profitable on a camera to camera basis?

[jankap]

51 minutes ago, colonel said:

It doesn’t matter what the size is referenced to, the fact is that’s its 4x the size of APS-C.

FF has 2 times the surface of APS-C.

[scroy]

Horses for courses.  

I like the CL as a nice backup for my SL and with the crop-sensor its pretty reasonable for me to put my reasonably (or unreasonably) large 90-280mm and go out for some shots at a baseball or football game.  I'd love for some more CL friendly telephoto lenses (or a 200mm macro) and enhanced dynamic range, but its a very nice performer. Making  the CL a full-frame camera wouldn't be one of the top-10 reasons I would buy a CL, if I had to do it again or for that matter a CL2 if Leica makes one.

[Jonathan Hanson]

22 minutes ago, jankap said:

FF has 2 times the surface of APS-C.

2.3 to be precise, but clearly not four!

[colonel]

1 hour ago, Jonathan Hanson said:

2.3 to be precise, but clearly not four!

Correct

 

[geoffreyg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Biggest worry I have about the CL is the lens lineup - these type TL lenses (crop) are limited in number, and we could use a few more. of course, the ability to use M or R lenses is great, but gee, one gets sucked into the benefits of AF. I did some comparisons of the CL vs M240 and MM, and found the focus accuracy of the CL was a key factor. 

Would like more lens variants. It seems Sigma is aiming at full frame L, a different animal. 

[Jonathan Hanson]

8 minutes ago, geoffreyg said:

Biggest worry I have about the CL is the lens lineup - these type TL lenses (crop) are limited in number, and we could use a few more. of course, the ability to use M or R lenses is great, but gee, one gets sucked into the benefits of AF. I did some comparisons of the CL vs M240 and MM, and found the focus accuracy of the CL was a key factor. 

Would like more lens variants. It seems Sigma is aiming at full frame L, a different animal. 

I agree. Hanging a full-frame lens on an APS-C body destroys the entire reason to shoot APS-C. The entire reason I ditched my full-frame Canon equipment was to save weight due to increasingly strict airline carry-on rules. The lenses were significantly the heaviest component of that system.

[jaapv]

M lenses are as small or smaller than many APS lenses. 

[lct]

27 minutes ago, Jonathan Hanson said:

Hanging a full-frame lens on an APS-C body destroys the entire reason to shoot APS-C

You mean AF lenses i guess. M and LTM ones are not too big or heavy for the CL, at least most of them.

[Jonathan Hanson]

17 minutes ago, lct said:

You mean AF lenses i guess. M and LTM ones are not too big or heavy for the CL, at least most of them.

Yes, I did mean AF lenses.

[colonel]

1 hour ago, geoffreyg said:

Biggest worry I have about the CL is the lens lineup - these type TL lenses (crop) are limited in number, and we could use a few more. of course, the ability to use M or R lenses is great, but gee, one gets sucked into the benefits of AF. I did some comparisons of the CL vs M240 and MM, and found the focus accuracy of the CL was a key factor. 

Would like more lens variants. It seems Sigma is aiming at full frame L, a different animal. 

Sigma is apparently going to launch some L mount APS lenses in 2019. I am not sure if this is because they are launching a APS-C camera or Panasonic is.

I really really really want a 1.4, 1.8 or 2.0 28mm and then 24mm. 

 

[ramarren]

1 hour ago, geoffreyg said:

Biggest worry I have about the CL is the lens lineup - these type TL lenses (crop) are limited in number, and we could use a few more. of course, the ability to use M or R lenses is great, but gee, one gets sucked into the benefits of AF. I did some comparisons of the CL vs M240 and MM, and found the focus accuracy of the CL was a key factor. 

Would like more lens variants. It seems Sigma is aiming at full frame L, a different animal. 

I've owned plenty of cameras and lenses with AF. Seriously, I find it an annoyance nearly as much of the time as a convenience.

I don't own any AF lenses for my CL ... I use Leica R and M mount lenses all the time. I don't find them either too big or too heavy, and focusing is so easy with the CL's excellent EVF... No wandering AF point issues, no picking AF-Lock or AF modes. Works really well for me.

[rob_w]

38 minutes ago, ramarren said:

Seriously, I find it an annoyance nearly as much of the time as a convenience.

Amen.  But when your eyesight is deteriorating, AF is a godsend.

[ramarren]

1 hour ago, rob_w said:

Amen.  But when your eyesight is deteriorating, AF is a godsend.

My eyesight has never been all that great. When I can't see well enough to focus, I set focus distance by scale; it's one of the reasons why I like manual focus lenses. If I can't see well enough to see photographs, well, then I don't make photographs.

But I do understand what you mean.

[colonel]

2 hours ago, ramarren said:

I've owned plenty of cameras and lenses with AF. Seriously, I find it an annoyance nearly as much of the time as a convenience.

I don't own any AF lenses for my CL ... I use Leica R and M mount lenses all the time. I don't find them either too big or too heavy, and focusing is so easy with the CL's excellent EVF... No wandering AF point issues, no picking AF-Lock or AF modes. Works really well for me.

I really like the new high sensitivity focus peaking in firmware 3.1

I can recommend trying out an AF TL lens, they are very good

[ramarren]

19 minutes ago, colonel said:

I really like the new high sensitivity focus peaking in firmware 3.1

I can recommend trying out an AF TL lens, they are very good

The ability to adjust the level of sensitivity for the peaking is very useful in different circumstances and with different lenses. That said, I often turn it off because it gets in the way... particularly when I'm doing critical focus for copy work. My user profile specific to that endeavor disables peaking as a default. 

I tested the APO Macro-Elmarit-TL 60mm against my Macro-Elmarit-R 60mm with a CL body at the Leica Store before I bought the CL. What was stunning to me was that the two very different lens designs could produce such amazingly similar results...! I thought the TL series lens was excellent ... but since I already owned the R lens (and already owned all my other R lenses) and generally prefer manual focus, there's really no point to buying a TL lens just because it is AF. I don't see that I'm giving anything up in lens performance that's important to me and the AF is purely an occasional convenience. More importantly, the modern lenses don't have focusing scales and DOF markings so they're not as useful as my R and M lenses in that regard. 

Whatever makes the photographs you want, the way you want to make them, is all that matters.

[Jake]

On 7/22/2019 at 9:53 AM, Vip said:

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. 

For fear of sounding like a broken record, the CL isn't in the same price range as the M series. I would venture a guess and say the TL/ CL attracts more younger people because it's a quality name brand at an accessible price. Sure, you could get a sony full frame mirrorless, but it's not Leica. And with today's "influencers (whatever the hell that means)" name recognition is everything.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[colonel]

On 7/23/2019 at 10:59 PM, Jake said:

For fear of sounding like a broken record, the CL isn't in the same price range as the M series. I would venture a guess and say the TL/ CL attracts more younger people because it's a quality name brand at an accessible price. Sure, you could get a sony full frame mirrorless, but it's not Leica. And with today's "influencers (whatever the hell that means)" name recognition is everything.

The CL plus lens is also nice and light. I have a Z6 and A7Rii, and once a lens is on its quite heavy to carry around. At some point you just want something lighter. I did try a D-Lux 7 but I can’t deal with motorised zoom and its automatic extension when switched on. The build and picture quality of the CL is noticeably different, but initially the 7 did appeal because of size

Edited July 25, 2019 by colonel

[Vip]

What I read on this tread that CL is a loved camera, more than expected. It only miss more lens and more dedication to firmware updates based on User’s needing. 

What I read that almost every one loves compact size more than FF camera size ( except M)