Leica CL vs Q Popularity

[DirkS]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 21 Stunden schrieb Stevinci:

I have a more practical question.  Who has used the Leica 18-56mm TL lens?   

The most interesting Leica Zoom is the 11-23. It has excellent test results. I think, that every owner of an CL/T/TL/TL2 should try to get this lens!

If you agree I think, the Leica 18-56 is a nice, but not the best partner lens. I would try the (larger and more weightly) Panasonic 24-105 (for Leica L-Mont).

The advantages: Perfect zoom range (with the 11-23) of 24-105, inside O.I.S, nearly macro, f:4 constant, better qualitiy (in Germany the test Magazin called colorfoto gave 58,5 points to the Leica 11-23 and 91 points to the Panasonic, which is even made for the SL), and you can use it for the SL-Leica´, too.  The disadvantages: It is more weightly (220 Gramm more) and it is longer, so some peaople could say, it doesn`t fit optically to the very small CL.

I had both lenses and my experience: The Pana 24-105 is the better lense, even if the L 18-56 is a good lens.  

Sry for my english. I`m no native speaker and did my best....^^ 

Edited August 18, 2019 by DirkS

[Advertisement]

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

[Stevinci]

I searched another thread on this forum about the TL zooms and found this feedback from Nicci.   When the Digilux 2 was made, Leica figured out how to make a lens F2.0-F2.4.  Here it is in 2019 and we still have the choice of either a slow zoom lens or faster primes. 

I've reminded myself why I took a break from looking at cameras. I get caught up in this nonsense and forget that my interest in photography was rekindled about 8 years ago when I borrowed my father-in-law's simple Lumix camera and had a good day taking photos around the Acropolis (my wife's from Athens, Greece).   Since then, I've periodically gone on mad searches for equipment.   A few years ago, I thought the Leica T sounded great so I bought one with return privileges and took it to Greece.  I am not sure if I had a dud or it was me, but I couldn't get it to work.  Out of frustration, I borrowed the classic Leica Digilux 2 camera that I had sold my male buddy in Greece.  I took one of my favorite photo sessions ever with the Digilux 2, because I had let go and got into a nice focused, flow.  I put together a photo book with mostly the Digilux 2 output that now sits in the library of Lisle, IL national meditation center for Science of Spirituality(not to be confused with Scientology).  I had given a copy to my teacher and he bequeathed it to the library.  I'm unlikely to do anything with photography that I'm more proud of.  I am knocking myself in this sharing. I see my obsessive mind at work, and I am in danger of forgetting that photography is a means to slow down and see and follow the light -  These are excellent metaphors even on the spiritual development level.   Equipment and tricks and manipulation of images - What do these have to do with the core of what photography can offer?   I'm lucky I married a Greek woman.  The Greeks invented photography, ha ha (Didn't they invent everything?).  

Anyway, here's the feedback from Nicci:

11-23 is excellent. But TL zoom lenses with almost constant f/4 are still too slow for CL.

18-56mm is quite slow too. Especially at 56mm f/5.6 without IS and no pop-up flash. Make it almost unusable indoor. However it is a really nice lens, but not on par with 11-23 and 55-135 duet. 

APO 55-135mm is my most preferred zoom lens. Gorgeous images from it. But minimum focusing distance of 1 meter only is a deal breaker for me. 

Therefore I only shoot with prime lenses now either TL or M ones with f/2.8 minimum aperture  

 

Edited August 18, 2019 by Stevinci

[lct]

1 hour ago, DirkS said:

The advantages: Perfect zoom range (with the 11-23) of 24-105, inside O.I.S, nearly macro, f:4 constant, better qualitiy (in Germany the test Magazin called colorfoto gave 58,5 points to the Leica 11-23 and 91 points to the Panasonic, which is even made for the SL), and you can use it for the SL-Leica´, too.  The disadvantages: It is more weightly (220 Gramm more) and it is longer, so some peaople could say, it doesn`t fit optically to the very small CL.

Optically i don't know but pocketability is not its forte indeed.

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!

[LocalHero1953]

19 minutes ago, Stevinci said:

I searched another thread on this forum about the TL zooms and found this feedback from Nicci.   When the Digilux 2 was made, Leica figured out how to make a lens F2.0-F2.4.  Here it is in 2019 and we still have the choice of either a slow zoom lens or faster primes. 

I've reminded myself why I took a break from looking at cameras. I get caught up in this nonsense and forget that my interest in photography was rekindled about 8 years ago when I borrowed my father-in-law's simple Lumix camera and had a good day taking photos around the Acropolis (my wife's from Athens, Greece).   Since then, I've periodically gone on mad searches for equipment.   A few years ago, I thought the Leica T sounded great so I bought one with return privileges and took it to Greece.  I am not sure if I had a dud or it was me, but I couldn't get it to work.  Out of frustration, I borrowed the classic Leica Digilux 2 camera that I had sold my male buddy in Greece.  I took one of my favorite photo sessions ever with the Digilux 2, because I had let go and got into a nice focused, flow.  I put together a photo book with mostly the Digilux 2 output that now sits in the library of Lisle, IL national meditation center for Science of Spirituality(not to be confused with Scientology).  I had given a copy to my teacher and he bequeathed it to the library.  I'm unlikely to do anything with photography that I'm more proud of.  I am knocking myself in this sharing. I see my obsessive mind at work, and I am in danger of forgetting that photography is a means to slow down and see and follow the light -  These are excellent metaphors even on the spiritual development level.   Equipment and tricks and manipulation of images - What do these have to do with the core of what photography can offer?   I'm lucky I married a Greek woman.  The Greeks invented photography, ha ha (Didn't they invent everything?).  

Anyway, here's the feedback from Nicci:

11-23 is excellent. But TL zoom lenses with almost constant f/4 are still too slow for CL.

18-56mm is quite slow too. Especially at 56mm f/5.6 without IS and no pop-up flash. Make it almost unusable indoor. However it is a really nice lens, but not on par with 11-23 and 55-135 duet. 

APO 55-135mm is my most preferred zoom lens. Gorgeous images from it. But minimum focusing distance of 1 meter only is a deal breaker for me. 

Therefore I only shoot with prime lenses now either TL or M ones with f/2.8 minimum aperture  

 

Recognising that good photography is about the photographer and not the equipment is the first step to becoming a good photographer!

Ref the comment on the 18-56: read more widely in this forum (including the posts after the one you quote) and you'll see that not everyone agrees with Nicci's assessment (certainly not me, but I'm not alone). Of course the facts (largest aperture, no IS) are a given - but 'usability' comes down to how the photographer uses it.

[ruskkyle]

1 hour ago, Stevinci said:

... and I am in danger of forgetting that photography is a means to slow down and see and follow the light

I love this!

[DirkS]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb lct:

Optically i don't know but pocketability is not its forte indeed.

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!

That`s the dilemma…...it seems like a good lens needs some size. So what`s the priority? Weight or pic quality? I think it depends on the situation, that`s why I have both lenses.

[kentishrev]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, DirkS said:

That`s the dilemma…...it seems like a good lens needs some size. So what`s the priority? Weight or pic quality? I think it depends on the situation, that`s why I have both lenses.

Sorry, tangential question.  Does the 24-105 extend? Or is it an internal zoom?

[DirkS]

It does extend.

[Stevinci]

Well,  what would you think if I told you that I got the black CL that ICT told me about for 1,250 euros?   I have to verify whether this happened or not, because the online ordering system went wonky when I tried to buy the camera directly from the seller's website rather than Ebay.  This explains the lower cost.  If the sale went through, I'm leaning towards the 18-56 mm lens.  I saw the example below on Flickr taken with the CL and the 18-56mm lens.  I'd be quite happy with output like this, and I'd love to have more flexibility.  The past couple of years, I've stuck to the Leica X2, because I couldn't seem to handle any other camera I had. I bought a Leica M8.2 and my mind froze when I tried to figure out a lens to get for it.  Paralysis by analysis is a real phenomenon.  I gave the M8.2 to my male buddy in Greece a few months ago, and he found a lens (Elmar 24mm) within a couple of weeks and has enjoyed the camera since.  I may give up for now if this CL purchase did not go through.  I'll post a follow up email tomorrow. 

 

 

 

Edited August 19, 2019 by jaapv
copyrighted material removed

[lct]

7 hours ago, Stevinci said:

Well,  what would you think if I told you that I got the black CL that ICT told me about for 1,250 euros?

€1,500 less 20% VAT i guess. 

[Stevinci]

Yes, the price online would have been 1,500 euros if I was in the European Union, 20% for the VAT.  Thanks for sending me the link.  I hesitated to buy the camera even at 1,500 euros but for 1,250 and return privileges, I did not have anything to lose.  I called the Leica Shop this morning and they received my order.  Now I need to get a lens.  

[ramarren]

On 8/15/2019 at 3:35 PM, Stevinci said:

I've read several threads about the Leica CL vs the Q, yet I've yet to see anyone highlight what happens on the used market with these cameras.  The Q is an older camera yet blows the CL out  of the water in terms of appeal.  You don't believe me?   Scan Ebay auctions over the next few weeks and see how many Leica Qs sell vs the Leica CL.   I nearly bought a CL with the 18-56mm kit lens. I'm glad I didn't.  This is clear that I'd take a beating on resale in case I didn't like it.    I know some users love the CL and I respect this, but I wouldn't believe anyone who claimed that the CL has anywhere close to the level of respect and appeal as the Q in the resale market.  Am I missing something?  Maybe Q owners are simply more realistic.  This is common  to find a Leica Q listed in an auction format with a low opening price.  This is rare to see the CL listed at a low starting price in auction format.  

Why one might feel the need, having purchased the camera that appeals to you, to go onto the forum for the other camera to say, "The one I bought must be more popular because it is special and better!" is beyond me. It speaks to me of a certain insecurity and ambivalence, of looking for rationalization for having spent so much money, and maybe some encouragement from others that you have made the right choice. 

I don't really understand this thread. Both CL and Q are excellent cameras. Whichever one you have, go use it and enjoy it. What the market sales of one vs the other has to do with using the cameras to make the superb photographs they are capable of is completely irrelevant. 

[lct]

Did the OP purchase a Q or Q2 actually?

[Stevinci]

In response to ramarren, I realize now that I was fishing for help how to find a Leica CL for sale. Ict read my thoughts and helped me out and forwarded me a link to a CL on sale at a good price.  I appreciate this!   I knew I still had a chance to return the Leica Q I purchased.   I have run into a snag with the shop that I thought I bought the CL from, so this isn't over yet.  In the past couple of years, I've relied upon the Leica X2 and I've, been more or less content.  Then I heard about the CL and the zoom kit lens (18-56mm), and this stoked the desire to have more flexibility again.   A fixed lens camera works in most places I go.   I mentioned in an earlier response that my wife is from Athens, Greece.  The Acropolis is a classic example of why a zoom lens is helpful.  You can't zoom with your feet around roped off monuments or catch details on the top of columns with a 28mm or 35mm or even a 50mm lens.  

[ramarren]

LOL! That was sure a circuitous way of "fishing for help to find a camera for sale"! Why not just say, "Hey, I'm looking for a clean CL with the zoom lens. Anyone have one for sale?"  But such it is. 

I like the Q2 a lot, but the CL is the camera that does what I need even if I do use one prime lens the majority of the time. For a 50 Mpixel camera, I want a larger format than FF to achieve the look I'm trying to get. But they're all good, and serve their purpose well. 

[Charadis]

7 hours ago, Stevinci said:

In response to ramarren, I realize now that I was fishing for help how to find a Leica CL for sale. Ict read my thoughts and helped me out and forwarded me a link to a CL on sale at a good price.  I appreciate this!   I knew I still had a chance to return the Leica Q I purchased.   I have run into a snag with the shop that I thought I bought the CL from, so this isn't over yet.  In the past couple of years, I've relied upon the Leica X2 and I've, been more or less content.  Then I heard about the CL and the zoom kit lens (18-56mm), and this stoked the desire to have more flexibility again.   A fixed lens camera works in most places I go.   I mentioned in an earlier response that my wife is from Athens, Greece.  The Acropolis is a classic example of why a zoom lens is helpful.  You can't zoom with your feet around roped off monuments or catch details on the top of columns with a 28mm or 35mm or even a 50mm lens.  

Sorry to hear about the snag, hope it all pans out. That looked like a great deal on a unit straight through a dealer, and I'm sure deals will be popping up here and there if it doesn't work out. I've only ever had the 18-56mm that I've now borrowed from the TL and affixed to my CL. Good lens, but can be dark when indoors especially at higher zooms. I haven't had the opportunity to try out other lenses, yet. 

[Stevinci]

In a plan that every Leica camera lover can relate with, I'm on the verge to try out both the Q and the CL with the 18-56 mm lens. I already have receipt of the Q.   I still need to get this straight with the dealer to pay them for the CL.  I never thought I'd do something like this, but what the hey.  I haven't used a camera with a zoom lens for years.  I imagine what will influence my decision the most is how the cameras feel in my hands.  What makes me want to grab it more and take photos?  I know both are capable of wonderful image quality.  I've read threads and I respect the varying opinions about the strengths and weaknesses of each camera and why a person prefers one over the other.  The personal aspect of photography is part of its appeal.  What works for you may not work for me or vice versa.  I enjoy this forum.   This is both fun and helpful to hear from other people who believe that Leica cameras and the Leica look is special.   In a generation raised on smart phones capable of taking decent photos, this is easy to feel like a nut for preferring good equipment and caring about the quality of your lenses.  

[ramarren]

On 8/18/2019 at 5:38 AM, Stevinci said:

I searched another thread on this forum about the TL zooms and found this feedback from Nicci.   When the Digilux 2 was made, Leica figured out how to make a lens F2.0-F2.4.  Here it is in 2019 and we still have the choice of either a slow zoom lens or faster primes. 

I've reminded myself why I took a break from looking at cameras. I get caught up in this nonsense and forget that my interest in photography was rekindled about 8 years ago when I borrowed my father-in-law's simple Lumix camera and had a good day taking photos around the Acropolis (my wife's from Athens, Greece).   Since then, I've periodically gone on mad searches for equipment.   A few years ago, I thought the Leica T sounded great so I bought one with return privileges and took it to Greece.  I am not sure if I had a dud or it was me, but I couldn't get it to work.  Out of frustration, I borrowed the classic Leica Digilux 2 camera that I had sold my male buddy in Greece.  I took one of my favorite photo sessions ever with the Digilux 2, because I had let go and got into a nice focused, flow.  I put together a photo book with mostly the Digilux 2 output that now sits in the library of Lisle, IL national meditation center for Science of Spirituality(not to be confused with Scientology).  I had given a copy to my teacher and he bequeathed it to the library.  I'm unlikely to do anything with photography that I'm more proud of.  I am knocking myself in this sharing. I see my obsessive mind at work, and I am in danger of forgetting that photography is a means to slow down and see and follow the light -  These are excellent metaphors even on the spiritual development level.   Equipment and tricks and manipulation of images - What do these have to do with the core of what photography can offer?   I'm lucky I married a Greek woman.  The Greeks invented photography, ha ha (Didn't they invent everything?).  

Anyway, here's the feedback from Nicci:

11-23 is excellent. But TL zoom lenses with almost constant f/4 are still too slow for CL.

18-56mm is quite slow too. Especially at 56mm f/5.6 without IS and no pop-up flash. Make it almost unusable indoor. However it is a really nice lens, but not on par with 11-23 and 55-135 duet. 

APO 55-135mm is my most preferred zoom lens. Gorgeous images from it. But minimum focusing distance of 1 meter only is a deal breaker for me. 

Therefore I only shoot with prime lenses now either TL or M ones with f/2.8 minimum aperture  

 

It's much easier to make a compact, high quality f/2-2.4 zoom lens when the format coverage required is a 5/8" sensor rather than an APS-C sensor. 

I don't find f/4 to be "too slow on the CL" at all. I don't have the 18-56mm zoom (or the 11-23 zoom, for that matter) because I prefer working with fixed focal length lenses. One of my recent (and favorite) lens acquisitions is the superb Voigtländer HyperWide 10mm f/5.6 ... I use it at f/8 nearly all the time, and have no problem shooting with it in nearly any reasonable light. 

Opinions like this simply reflect personal preferences. They're not facts.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[geoffreyg]

Just to add a point to this rather comprehensive discussion - I've been largely a one lens shooter for many years, and only just now gotten into the CL and the zoom possibilities. I like it not so much for zooming, but rather for cropping in the camera - as with modest size sensor, and large prints (17 x 22) you need all the pixels you can get. Also there is flexibility with the CL - normally I would say the Q would cover all the needs. However, its fun having extra capabilities with the CL. I put some Rollei medium format glass on it (totally weird thing to do), but had a great time shooting handheld with a 250 Zeiss in daylight. Some shots are in the CL image thread (didn't want to repeat them here). Sure, could probably do this all with more conventional gear, but the CL rose to the task. Just an example of the headroom the CL provides. 

[nicci78]

I will say that the Q is way better than CL + 18-56mm 

Q is really awesome. And CL really shines with fast lenses. 

 

What I learned after 4 years with the Q and now using Q2. Is that nothing beats a fast lens. I cannot use any slow lens anymore. Fast aperture gives you more creative choices. You do not have to use it wide open every time of course 😉 

That’s why I think that fast primes are way better than slow zooms. 

 

Of course my point of view is corrupted by 8 years of photography without using any zoom. I gave up on them a long time ago. Tried them once again with TL zoom lenses. Even if 11-23 and 55-135 are awesome. I felt too limited with them and sold them without any regret. 

Summilux-TL 35 and APO-Macro-Elmarit-TL 60 are the two true gems of TL line up. 

Edited August 21, 2019 by nicci78