CL for trip to Morocco?

[eab]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi Everyone,

This is my first post to the forum after lurking since the purchase of my CL in April. I really love the size, handling and of course the beautiful pictures it captures.   When I get the courage up I will post some pictures but I am new to photography and not very confident. 

My wife and I are taking a trip to Morocco and will be traveling for about 3 weeks by truck camper. We will be in cities, the dessert and along the beaches. I was planning on bringing the trio of zooms and the 35 summilux ( which is sometimes a little bigger than I like as it is not very discreet).

I have a few concerns and would appreciate the collective wisdom of the group.

First, it is obviously a very sandy and dusty environment and the CL and lenses are not weather sealed.  Does anyone have any experience with the weather sealing of the camera and lenses in this kind of environment as I would hate to damage my gear. I am a very careful person but I have had issues in the past with fine dust getting in the focus and aperture rings on other brands.

Secondly, I do have some concerns regarding low light performance of the zooms in the tight quarters of markets and inside some of the dimly lit buildings.   I know the 35 will be great but there are times when I like to zoom into architectural details which makes the 35 less than perfect ( don’t get me wrong I really love this lens ).

Finally, when traveling I often enjoy taking pictures of wildlife and up until recently shot exclusively with a Sony a7riii for which I have a 100-400 and larger aperture zooms.   This setup comes at a cost of greater size and it is less enjoyable to use but has its place.  Having said that it seems there are not a lot of wildlife viewing opportunities so I think it is mute as far as the big zoom goes but the larger aperture zooms may be handy.

I really prefer the handling of the CL and the imagery it produces but don’t want to risk impacting how nicely the switches and focus rings feel in hand. This is my biggest concern but the others factors are part of my decision.

I would appreciate any comments and it is not my intent too start a fuss. If this were a walk around cities trip it would be the CL hands down. 

If I end up bringing the CL any comments regarding lens selection would be appreciated. 

Sorry for the long post.

Kind Regards,

Eric

[Advertisement]

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

[MDCT]

I have just faced the same issue. I am in Greece on the island of Samos. I have the Sony A7rIi with 70-300 for wildlife. For the same reasons I brought my CL with the 11-23 and 3 primes. I have had no prob with dust. Just keep the camera clean and don’t change lenses in a dusty environment and you should be good to go. The Leica zooms are fine for most things. I have a manual vivitar 70-150 for wildlife. It’s good enough for casual birding if you are used to manual glass. While the Sony can technically do more I love the haptics of the Leica and love the size, IQ and colors. Have a great trip!!!

Edited August 24, 2019 by MDCT

[wda]

Eric, welcome to the forum. 

If you plan prolonged exposure to sand, I would buy the best waterproof compact camera for those situations.

I would also travel light, possibly sacrificing one or even two zooms. In my case, I would consider taking an original Q for low light and market subjects. Indeed I would welcome the low weight /low bulk of just CL+ 18-56 zoom lens and an original Q.

[henry lesesne]

Good Morning EAB !

Last November ( 2018) I wrestled with the same concerns. I was in a group trip to Israel without any prior experience traveling there. I ended up taking a Leica CL with  a 18mm lens and a Leica Q. Months before I had actually fleshed out a Fujifilm XT1 system with two weatherproof bodies and zoom lenses ( optical stabilized)  with the intention of using them for the trip to Israel. After reading several accounts of other photographers using Leica successfully there, I decided to take the Leica CL and the Leica Q instead of the Fuji system. 

I was in Israel for 10 days and traveled all over the country. 

My experience was that the Leica Q was the camera I used most. In dark settings the internal image stabilization was a life saver and I had NO problems with dust getting into the equipment. I used the Leica CL with the  Leica TL 18mm  ONLY ONCE . The TL 18mm yielded images that were just too soft for my taste. I only took the CL and TL 18mm  to Masada ( dust ). Again, the Leica Q turned out to be my most used camera because of the better image quality ( TL 18mm vs. the Q's better lens)  and image stabilization .  By the way, I have since acquired the TL 11-23mm lens for my CL and am very happy.

If I were to repeat the trip I would take the CL with the CL 11-23mm and a Leica Q. Both cameras are  superb. My choice of taking the TL 18mm lens to Israel was unfortunate. I accept the blame for having not researched the 18mm lens. It's lower resolution is documented.

The Q was a joy to use.

I have since used the CL on other  trips and have found it with the CL 18-56mm to be an outstanding performer.

You can see some of my CL and Q images at the site below. There are a few non Israel photos mixed in. 

Have Fun in Morocco !

Cheers !

Henry L

http://www.ipernity.com/home/298493

Edited August 24, 2019 by henry lesesne
spelling

[ropo54]

17 minutes ago, henry lesesne said:

Good Morning EAB !

Last November ( 2018) I wrestled with the same concerns. I was in a group trip to Israel without any prior experience traveling there. I ended up taking a Leica CL with  a 18mm lens and a Leica Q. Months before I had actually fleshed out a Fujifilm XT1 system with two weatherproof bodies and zoom lenses ( optical stabilized)  with the intention of using them for the trip to Israel. After reading several accounts of other photographers using Leica successfully there, I decided to take the Leica CL and the Leica Q instead of the Fuji system. 

I was in Israel for 10 days and traveled all over the country. 

My experience was that the Leica Q was the camera I used most. In dark settings the internal image stabilization was a life saver and I had NO problems with dust getting into the equipment. I used the Leica CL with the  Leica TL 18mm  ONLY ONCE . The TL 18mm yielded images that were just too soft for my taste. I only took the CL and TL 18mm  to Masada ( dust ). Again, the Leica Q turned out to be my most used camera because of the better image quality ( TL 18mm vs. the Q's better lens)  and image stabilization .  By the way, I have since acquired the TL 11-23mm lens for my CL and am very happy.

If I were to repeat the trip I would take the CL with the CL 11-23mm and a Leica Q. Both cameras are  superb. My choice of taking the TL 18mm lens to Israel was unfortunate. I accept the blame for having not researched the 18mm lens. It's lower resolution is documented.

The Q was a joy to use.

I have since used the CL on other  trips and have found it with the CL 18-56mm to be an outstanding performer.

You can see some of my CL and Q images at the site below. There are a few non Israel photos mixed in. 

Have Fun in Morocco !

Cheers !

Henry L

http://www.ipernity.com/home/298493

Some nice photos from your trip to Israel!  Thanks for sharing.

(I was there in 1999 with an early digital Olympus 1or 2 mb camera!)

Rob

Edited August 24, 2019 by ropo54

[Jonathan Hanson]

Hi Eric,

While one of my few wishes for the CL would be better weather sealing, I just took ours across Africa in a Land Cruiser (South Africa-Botswana-Namibia), including a  lot of off-tarmac travel, with no issues. I took a filtered bulb blower and a brush, and gave the camera and lens a once-over every few days. I wouldn't worry about it. Do make sure you have a good sensor- cleaning kit (one of my other wishes is for auto-sensor cleaning).

 

[bags27]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I don't own the TL 18, but I've heard it's the weakest of the TL lenses. Also, I guess I wouldn't depend on that lens if I were also taking the Q since it's pretty much a redundant focal length.

Recently I traveled with the Q and the CL + 3 lenses. By far, the best experience and results were with carrying both the Q and the CL + 55-135 at the same time. The latter is a terrific lens and I pretty much had everything covered. And, as you say, the Q is incredible in lowlight.

So, if I had what the OP had, I'd take the 11-23 and the 55-135. The problem would be dust if I were swapping out a lot, so I'd save room for sensor cleaners. As for low light, I don't have an easy solution, but there are now terrific small and light tripods.

Edited August 24, 2019 by bags27

[eab]

3 hours ago, MDCT said:

I have just faced the same issue. I am in Greece on the island of Samos. I have the Sony A7rIi with 70-300 for wildlife. For the same reasons I brought my CL with the 11-23 and 3 primes. I have had no prob with dust. Just keep the camera clean and don’t change lenses in a dusty environment and you should be good to go. The Leica zooms are fine for most things. I have a manual vivitar 70-150 for wildlife. It’s good enough for casual birding if you are used to manual glass. While the Sony can technically do more I love the haptics of the Leica and love the size, IQ and colors. Have a great trip!!!

MDCT,

Yes I agree the Sony can do more but I really don't enjoy using it as much.  When you were in Morocco did you see much wildlife and regret not having a long lens or were the few opportunities for wildlife photos?

[eab]

1 hour ago, henry lesesne said:

Good Morning EAB !

Last November ( 2018) I wrestled with the same concerns. I was in a group trip to Israel without any prior experience traveling there. I ended up taking a Leica CL with  a 18mm lens and a Leica Q. Months before I had actually fleshed out a Fujifilm XT1 system with two weatherproof bodies and zoom lenses ( optical stabilized)  with the intention of using them for the trip to Israel. After reading several accounts of other photographers using Leica successfully there, I decided to take the Leica CL and the Leica Q instead of the Fuji system. 

I was in Israel for 10 days and traveled all over the country. 

My experience was that the Leica Q was the camera I used most. In dark settings the internal image stabilization was a life saver and I had NO problems with dust getting into the equipment. I used the Leica CL with the  Leica TL 18mm  ONLY ONCE . The TL 18mm yielded images that were just too soft for my taste. I only took the CL and TL 18mm  to Masada ( dust ). Again, the Leica Q turned out to be my most used camera because of the better image quality ( TL 18mm vs. the Q's better lens)  and image stabilization .  By the way, I have since acquired the TL 11-23mm lens for my CL and am very happy.

If I were to repeat the trip I would take the CL with the CL 11-23mm and a Leica Q. Both cameras are  superb. My choice of taking the TL 18mm lens to Israel was unfortunate. I accept the blame for having not researched the 18mm lens. It's lower resolution is documented.

The Q was a joy to use.

I have since used the CL on other  trips and have found it with the CL 18-56mm to be an outstanding performer.

You can see some of my CL and Q images at the site below. There are a few non Israel photos mixed in. 

Have Fun in Morocco !

Cheers !

Henry L

http://www.ipernity.com/home/298493

Henry,

Some very nice pictures, thank you for sharing.  I have the 18 and don't care for it either, it came with my CL.  I just received the 11-23 so I have no experience with it yet.  I have used the 18-56 and the 35 the most.  I end up putting the 35 on at the end of the day as the light begins to fade. It would be great if the CL was stabilized but like most things there are compromises.  I have not been to Israel yet but it is on the list. 

 

[eab]

56 minutes ago, Jonathan Hanson said:

Hi Eric,

While one of my few wishes for the CL would be better weather sealing, I just took ours across Africa in a Land Cruiser (South Africa-Botswana-Namibia), including a  lot of off-tarmac travel, with no issues. I took a filtered bulb blower and a brush, and gave the camera and lens a once-over every few days. I wouldn't worry about it. Do make sure you have a good sensor- cleaning kit (one of my other wishes is for auto-sensor cleaning).

 

Hi Johnathan,

Now that is my kind of trip.  I had the opurtunity to go to Botswana, Zimbabwe and Namibia last year but I was unable to secure passage on a transport for our truck.  We hope to go sometime soon.  I think I would have a harder decision to make in terms of what kit to bring along as from what I understand the Wildlife is off the scale there.  Did you end up bringing any other gear?  

I had never heard of a filtered bulb to now but I understand why that would be advantageous, thanks for the tip.

[eab]

All,

I have a more generic question based on the responses thus far.  There are a number of responses to bring the CL and a Q.  I have the TL Summilux 35,  would it be a reasonable replacement for the Q in terms of low light performance ?  Or since the CL is APSC is the resultant 52.5 focal length to tight for the kind of pictures one would expect to take?  As I mentioned I am relatively new to photography and don't have enough experience to rely on.  

[ropo54]

I would prefer to have the Q, particularly for city shots and interiors, as 50mm (35 1.4TL on the CL) might be too limiting.

Rob

[Jake]

I've been to Marrakesh, although it was 1995. The CL will do just fine in the Medina (markets). There is plenty of light for the CL sensor. I don't own nor have I used a Q, but I just wanted to let you know that from what I remember (and the photos I took with film), I don't believe light will be a problem unless you want to shoot at night. I've also been astounded how well the CL performs inside dimly lit buildings. But ultimately, you have to decide how much gear you are willing to lug around. After hauling more than one camera body to satisfy ISO requirements with film, I'm all for a small package. 

And by the way, learn the words "Emshee!! Sebnee!!" It means "Go Away!!. Leave me alone!!" You'll need it in any populated areas because you will be accosted quite often and aggressively. On the outskirts of the market, you'll have kids, teenagers, etc wanting to be your guide through the medina. If you have good sense of direction, you might not need a guide, but most are there as a scam and will take you to stalls that will pay them a commission if you buy something. But the medina can be intimidating as it appears at first to be a maze. And it is. And also watch your wallet and zippers of a backpack. Pick pockets are everywhere. 

Have a great trip. 

[geoffreyg]

Or the 23, which gives the classic, invaluable 35mm Leica view of the  world. One camera, one lens. 

[eab]

Rob confirmed my thoughts on the 35 being to tight for what I was looking for which led me to think about the 23.   I know it is F2 which is certainly better than the zooms but having never used it, how would it compare to the Q in low light?  

In response to Jake, I really enjoy shooting as the sun goes down and early evening.   Normally my wife and I head out to dinner around 7, we walk around a bit and then find something to eat.  I have learned to always bring my camera as I find that time of day my favorite.  Sometimes after dinner, especially in less modern cities, I am drawn to certain scenes that I want to capture. I have gotten in the habit of using the 35 but would prefer something a little wider.  Truth be told I even tried a 24 Summilux with the L to M adapter but it was difficult for me to nail the focus.  I would get back to our hotel, download the images to my iPad and they just weren’t as sharp as the pictures I took with the 35, I eventually traded in the lens ( I kept the adapter, just in case).  Maybe I need to revisit that and just practice more.

 

 

[Jonathan Hanson]

3 hours ago, eab said:

Hi Johnathan,

Now that is my kind of trip.  I had the opurtunity to go to Botswana, Zimbabwe and Namibia last year but I was unable to secure passage on a transport for our truck.  We hope to go sometime soon.  I think I would have a harder decision to make in terms of what kit to bring along as from what I understand the Wildlife is off the scale there.  Did you end up bringing any other gear?  

I had never heard of a filtered bulb to now but I understand why that would be advantageous, thanks for the tip.

Eric,

We had our Land Cruiser shipped from Australia to Durban; it's now on its way to the U.S. in a container. 

I have to admit I'm a two-system photographer at the moment. I love the CL for street and camp photography, and I love its instinctive operation and fabulous images. But I also carry a Lumix GX8 with the superb Leica 100-400mm (i.e. 200-800mm) zoom. With dual image stabilization that combination is magic for wildlife photography. Since both cameras take the same battery it's not as inconvenient as one might think, and still weighs much less than my old full-frame Canon system. I'd love to see Leica make an equivalent (i.e. 150-550mm or so) lens for the CL, but I don't hold out much hope. 

And yes, wildlife is off the scale there, especially Botswana. Perhaps not the legendarily epic scale of Serengeti, but much more accessible and affordable.

 

 

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!

Edited August 24, 2019 by Jonathan Hanson

[ropo54]

2 hours ago, eab said:

Rob confirmed my thoughts on the 35 being to tight for what I was looking for which led me to think about the 23.   I know it is F2 which is certainly better than the zooms but having never used it, how would it compare to the Q in low light?  

 

 

The Q will be better in low light than the CL w 23mm, as it is a faster lens, with a larger sensor. 
Rob

[eab]

2 hours ago, Jonathan Hanson said:

Eric,

We had our Land Cruiser shipped from Australia to Durban; it's now on its way to the U.S. in a container. 

I have to admit I'm a two-system photographer at the moment. I love the CL for street and camp photography, and I love its instinctive operation and fabulous images. But I also carry a Lumix GX8 with the superb Leica 100-400mm (i.e. 200-800mm) zoom. With dual image stabilization that combination is magic for wildlife photography. Since both cameras take the same battery it's not as inconvenient as one might think, and still weighs much less than my old full-frame Canon system. I'd love to see Leica make an equivalent (i.e. 150-550mm or so) lens for the CL, but I don't hold out much hope. 

And yes, wildlife is off the scale there, especially Botswana. Perhaps not the legendarily epic scale of Serengeti, but much more accessible and affordable.

 

 

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!

Thats a beautiful shot.  My wife and I have traveled all over the US and Canada in our camper.  We are now working on Europe and the parts of Africa we feel safe in.  We went up to the Nord Kapp in Norway, it was great.  Not sure what we are going to do after Morroco.  If you have any questions regarding truck travel here let me know. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[eab]

1 hour ago, ropo54 said:

The Q will be better in low light than the CL w 23mm, as it is a faster lens, with a larger sensor. 
Rob

Hi Rob,

I kinda assumed that but wasn't sure if the 23 was good enough.  I forgot that the Q has OIS as well which doesn't hurt. 

[Jonathan Hanson]

1 hour ago, eab said:

Thats a beautiful shot.  My wife and I have traveled all over the US and Canada in our camper.  We are now working on Europe and the parts of Africa we feel safe in.  We went up to the Nord Kapp in Norway, it was great.  Not sure what we are going to do after Morroco.  If you have any questions regarding truck travel here let me know. 

Thank you! My wife and I actually live in Arizona. We started the Overland Expo here and ran it for ten years, so we are naturally big fans of vehicle-dependent travel.