New product launch, UK. 6th Nov.

[nicci78]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4 hours ago, SlowDriver said:

As the Leica CL was only released in November 2017 I would realistically not expect a CL2 before early 2021 though...  

I would not expect any new lenses before that either.  IBIS/OIS very unlikely I feel.  Might be a case of too little too late for quite a few people...

Not sure that future CL2 follow the full frame 4 years cycle. It may stay at 3 years. An entry level camera as to be updated more frequently. So November 2020 is still a possible refresh date. 
 

SL2 will lift the IBIS barrier. No reason not to give IBIS to CL2 also. I think that Leica acknowledges that without any kind of stabilisation its cameras will be harder to sell in the future. 
 

However not sure if CL2 will get 36MP. Sony has one in its catalog. But did not use it itself yet. It also depends of Leica number of sensor commitment. That’s why Leica was stuck so many years with same 16MP APS-C used over X2, T, TL, X, X Vario and X-U.

So worst case scenario : CL2 in April 2021 (replacing both TL2 and CL) launch 4 years after TL2. Still 24MP and no IBIS, no weather sealing = Instant failure 

Best case scenario : CL2 In November 2020 with 36MP, IBIS & weather sealing. Full magnesium body, such as Q2 and SL2. But heavier than CL due to IBIS. = instant success ? 

Of course everything is possible between these two. 

[Advertisement]

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

[LocalHero1953]

6 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

The passion for the CL on the forum is fascinating.  It isn’t as featured as the TL2, and is retrograde in many respect (M-like, I guess, which is no bad thing).  The TL2 has the same sensor and takes the same lenses as the CL, yet it is declare dead and buried many times here - having said that, so has just about every Leica camera at some point.

Perhaps it’s a reflection of the market desire for a built in EVF ...

Curious about this. I have both, and while the TL2 has in-camera charging and better video functions, the built-in EVF of the CL is a big difference, and my feeling is that the CL has more menu-adjustable items (though I haven't been through to count them). The CL's AF is faster as well.

[IkarusJohn]

Each to their own, I guess.

The faux M look of the CL does nothing for me.  I have three M cameras, and if I want the M look, I use one of them.  I prefer cameras to be honest expressions of what they do.  I like the TL2 interface.  I ditched the original TL largely due to the black out.  That was fixed.  In camera charging is important to me - I loathe the fact that this has not been implemented in the SL or the M cameras - this is just laziness in Leica.  I also like the menu in the TL2, and its flat menu architecture.

As for AF speed, this was the comment prior to the TL2 firmware upgrade.  Not sure that the difference is such that I would consider it a problem in the TL2.  I suspect that the 1DX is faster than the CL - does that matter?  I don’t look at the features of other cameras and then wish my cameras were better.  It’s only an issue for me if it interferes with my enjoyment of what the camera has to offer.

Would then X1D II be better if its lenses where smaller and lighter?  Yes, but they aren’t.  Would the SL be better if it felt as good as the X1D in the hand? Sure, but it does other things better ... I think you get the picture.  Then endless image comparisons on this forum just reinforce to my mind that we’re dancing on the head of a pin.  Usually, I can’t tell the difference between one image and another - and that’s with a side by side comparison.

I like the TL2 for its size, its user interface and ... it’s cool.  The CL has no better image quality, and there’s the proof of the eating of that pudding.  I have nothing against the CL.  I just think that the cameras I have are light years ahead of life with film, and the only constraint is my skill.

[helged]

45 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

Curious about this. I have both, and while the TL2 has in-camera charging and better video functions, the built-in EVF of the CL is a big difference, and my feeling is that the CL has more menu-adjustable items (though I haven't been through to count them). The CL's AF is faster as well.

What the CL lacks - and the reason that I sold my CL-gear - was no option to back-focus. So my hope for CL2 is IBIS + possibility to back-focus...

Edited October 30, 2019 by helged

[LocalHero1953]

1 hour ago, helged said:

What the CL lacks - and the reason that I sold my CL-gear - was no option to back-focus. So my hope for CL2 is IBIS + possibility to back-focus...

Yes, I agree - though I was I was looking at the comparison with the TL2, which doesn't have it either.

[LocalHero1953]

1 hour ago, IkarusJohn said:

Each to their own, I guess.

The faux M look of the CL does nothing for me.  I have three M cameras, and if I want the M look, I use one of them.  I prefer cameras to be honest expressions of what they do.  I like the TL2 interface.  I ditched the original TL largely due to the black out.  That was fixed.  In camera charging is important to me - I loathe the fact that this has not been implemented in the SL or the M cameras - this is just laziness in Leica.  I also like the menu in the TL2, and its flat menu architecture.

As for AF speed, this was the comment prior to the TL2 firmware upgrade.  Not sure that the difference is such that I would consider it a problem in the TL2.  I suspect that the 1DX is faster than the CL - does that matter?  I don’t look at the features of other cameras and then wish my cameras were better.  It’s only an issue for me if it interferes with my enjoyment of what the camera has to offer.

Would then X1D II be better if its lenses where smaller and lighter?  Yes, but they aren’t.  Would the SL be better if it felt as good as the X1D in the hand? Sure, but it does other things better ... I think you get the picture.  Then endless image comparisons on this forum just reinforce to my mind that we’re dancing on the head of a pin.  Usually, I can’t tell the difference between one image and another - and that’s with a side by side comparison.

I like the TL2 for its size, its user interface and ... it’s cool.  The CL has no better image quality, and there’s the proof of the eating of that pudding.  I have nothing against the CL.  I just think that the cameras I have are light years ahead of life with film, and the only constraint is my skill.

I agree with much of what you say, and I also prefer the TL2 interface. But, owning the two, I am reminded each time I swap between them that the CL AF is quicker. No, it's not a big difference, but enough for me to have to reset my brain. But I'll be selling the TL2 when the Sigma fp arrives: as still cameras they should be much the same size and way of working in the hand, while the fp is full frame (though I'm getting it mainly for video).

Edited October 30, 2019 by LocalHero1953

[IkarusJohn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Running APS-C, full frame and MF has me thinking from time to time, but not as much as I thought it might.

[Guest]

16 hours ago, nicci78 said:

So worst case scenario : CL2 in April 2021 (replacing both TL2 and CL) launch 4 years after TL2. Still 24MP and no IBIS, no weather sealing = Instant failure 

Perhaps I am too pessimistic but that is precisely how I envision the CL2 will look like: almost identical to the CL, 24MP, no IBIS, 1 or 2 new Summilux lenses.

I really believe that for Leica APS-C is complete as most of its design goals have been met:

• preventing M-lens and R-lens owners from jumping ship and shooting them on Sony or Fuji bodies
• a travel camera complimentary to the Leica SL (size, weight)
• a more modern EVF-based AF camera complimentary to the Leica M
• a native lens line-up that is appealing enough to buy into the system but not complete enough as an only system

And on top of that, as long as the Leica Q sells in the quantities it currently does I personally expect little to no investment in APS-C, similar to what we have seen during recent years, 1 lens in 3 years, a 80g pancake one...   I do expect a TL3 as Maike Harberts confirmed last year that development was still ongoing.  

Edited October 31, 2019 by Guest

[frame-it]

14 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

But I'll be selling the TL2 when the Sigma fp arrives: as still cameras they should be much the same size and way of working in the hand, while the fp is full frame (though I'm getting it mainly for video).

i didn't realise the FP was released already..some nice pics online  https://www.instagram.com/explore/tags/sigmafp/

[bags27]

10 minutes ago, frame-it said:

i didn't realise the FP was released already..some nice pics online  https://www.instagram.com/explore/tags/sigmafp/

How, exactly, does one use this camera with Leica lenses? TL lenses will render at, what?, around 10 mps? L lenses will be huge and out of balance. M  & R lenses will be difficult to focus unless one adds the EVF, and that's expensive and clunky. Not to mention that the wider M & R lenses may see lots of border distortion. 

[frame-it]

7 minutes ago, bags27 said:

How, exactly, does one use this camera with Leica lenses? TL lenses will render at, what?, around 10 mps? L lenses will be huge and out of balance. M  & R lenses will be difficult to focus unless one adds the EVF, and that's expensive and clunky. Not to mention that the wider M & R lenses may see lots of border distortion. 

perhaps you should go try it at a shop ?

[LocalHero1953]

8 minutes ago, bags27 said:

How, exactly, does one use this camera with Leica lenses? TL lenses will render at, what?, around 10 mps? L lenses will be huge and out of balance. M  & R lenses will be difficult to focus unless one adds the EVF, and that's expensive and clunky. Not to mention that the wider M & R lenses may see lots of border distortion. 

I will initially be using the fp for static video (recording theatre and music productions) so will probably start with M lenses: ApoSummicron 50, Summilux 35 FLE - manual focus will be adequate. But I expect it will be fine hand held with the SL Summicrons (I've tried the 90 SL on my TL2). I shall keep the big SL zooms for the SL itself. The L-mount Sigma 45 is getting good reviews as a smallish AF lens. 

Edited October 31, 2019 by LocalHero1953

[ynp]

On 10/30/2019 at 12:39 AM, jaapv said:

Tropical rainstorms, 100% moisture @ 30º plus and salt air, spray from the ocean in small boats, mud splatters from bogged down 4WDs, my CL survived all of that the last few weeks. It may not have an IP rating, but it is one tough little camera.

My CL with the zooms survived two months of boating in an open 8,5 meter RHIB in Thailand and Sumatra this year. No problems with the camera yet. 

[Jeff S]

I could get over the weather sealing issue on the CL (more so with these good reports) if not for the lesser EVF and lack of IBIS or OIS (zooms) compared to the expected SL2.  If a CL2 addressed these issues, the system size and portability would sway me over the SL system, which gives pause mostly because of its bulk (with native lenses). But that’s a year or two away. Trade offs, as always...just as Leica intends.

Jeff