Arrival and Features of the CL2

[robgo2]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 5/16/2020 at 3:26 PM, nicci78 said:

I bought a Leica body to use Leica lenses.
If I have to use any other brand of lenses. I will just do it with another way cheaper body. 
When you start a new system, at least have the decency to release the bare minimum selection of lenses. Otherwise don’t even start it in the first place. 
Yes it absolutely have to be first party native lens = APS-C AF L-mount lens from Leica. 
 

In all fairness I never complained about the lack of TL lens before. I gave Leica the benefit of the doubt until now. They got 6 years to show us full support for APS-C. But let us down after the launch of the tiny but not mighty Elmarit-TL 18mm. Since then radio silence  🤫 

 

I sense that what you really want are autofocus lenses, as there are excellent MF lenses for the CL in the focal lengths that you desire, but they require adapters. In that case, you may have to find another camera maker, e.g. Sony, Panasonic, Fuji. 

On 75mm vs 90mm (equivalents) for portraits, the difference is not enough to worry about, as long as the lenses have fast max apertures. Much ado about nothing, IMO.

[Advertisement]

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

[jaapv]

13 hours ago, robgo2 said:

I sense that what you really want are autofocus lenses, as there are excellent MF lenses for the CL in the focal lengths that you desire, but they require adapters. In that case, you may have to find another camera maker, e.g. Sony, Panasonic, Fuji. 

On 75mm vs 90mm (equivalents) for portraits, the difference is not enough to worry about, as long as the lenses have fast max apertures. Much ado about nothing, IMO.

You are quite right.  This is Leica's official  opinion:

Quote

Keep in mind that we also have the M adapter. You can attach 48 M lenses. SL Summicrons. R lenses. There are more than 120 lenses to choose from for this system.

 

[bags27]

Probably for a new thread, but one factoid and one speculation.

1. over on a different thread, it's reported that Leica is committed to the APS-C format and that it's profitable for them.

 

2. the rather dramatic price reduction of the TL2 kit, at least in the US, might suggest they are clearing out stock. If it's between a TL3 and ending that camera to focus on the CL2, I'd bet the latter.

https://leicarumors.com/

 

[Peters]

24 minutes ago, bags27 said:

Probably for a new thread, but one factoid and one speculation.

1. over on a different thread, it's reported that Leica is committed to the APS-C format and that it's profitable for them.

 

2. the rather dramatic price reduction of the TL2 kit, at least in the US, might suggest they are clearing out stock. If it's between a TL3 and ending that camera to focus on the CL2, I'd bet the latter.

https://leicarumors.com/

 

Agree. TL2 is a very nice idea but I can see why it doesn't gel well for traditional shooters who prefer a viewfinder and more tactile controls. Having said that the CL2 has to be accompanied by a new line of lenses to really breath life into the new system. I have M lenses but I got the CL primarily for AF. There's another thread on the need for native lenses which contains interesting discussion. I did try to raise the topic myself back in late 2017 but it didn't generate much interest. Now it seems that the demand is growing. 

[bags27]

10 minutes ago, Peters said:

Agree. TL2 is a very nice idea but I can see why it doesn't gel well for traditional shooters who prefer a viewfinder and more tactile controls. Having said that the CL2 has to be accompanied by a new line of lenses to really breath life into the new system. I have M lenses but I got the CL primarily for AF. There's another thread on the need for native lenses which contains interesting discussion. I did try to raise the topic myself back in late 2017 but it didn't generate much interest. Now it seems that the demand is growing. 

I'm not convinced that there needs to be "a new line of lenses." If that zoom interview is accurate, Leica feels the format already is profitable for them. Personally, in a heartbeat I'd upgrade to the CL2 if its improvements mirror the degree of improvements in the M10, SL2, and Q2 over their predecessors, without a single new TL lens ever coming. There are plenty of other terrific lenses that Leica and others make that can be fitted to it. 

[ramarren]

If I needed a faster, autofocus prime lens for the CL, I'd buy an SL lens of the appropriate focal length and speed. There are 35, 50, 75, and 90mm Leica lenses with f/2 or faster in native mount, and there are offerings from Sigma as well and Panasonic as well. It's really that simple. 

Oh, you don't want to spend the money, or you want something smaller and lighter, or you want something ... different? To quote the old song, "You can't always get what you want."

[ruskkyle]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, ramarren said:

If I needed a faster, autofocus prime lens for the CL, I'd buy an SL lens of the appropriate focal length and speed. There are 35, 50, 75, and 90mm Leica lenses with f/2 or faster in native mount, and there are offerings from Sigma as well and Panasonic as well. It's really that simple. 

Oh, you don't want to spend the money, or you want something smaller and lighter, or you want something ... different? To quote the old song, "You can't always get what you want."

I’m sorry but this rather misses the point of an entry-level priced system. You’re right in that I don’t want to spend the money for an SL prime... more accurately I nor I imagine some others who have got into this system have £4K for one lens either.

Not to rehash the content of the other thread.

[ramarren]

1 hour ago, ruskkyle said:

I’m sorry but this rather misses the point of an entry-level priced system. You’re right in that I don’t want to spend the money for an SL prime... more accurately I nor I imagine some others who have got into this system have £4K for one lens either.

Not to rehash the content of the other thread.

A $3000 body and $1000-$4000 native lenses is not by any definition I can apply to any photographic equipment in my lifetime an "entry-level priced system." If it is to you, good on that, but that's a very expensive system in absolute terms for most persons seeking "entry level" equipment. 

Regardless: The CL is certainly not an entry-level quality body, and the TL lenses are certainly not entry-level quality lenses, even if you happen to consider their price entry-level. Their performance is right up there with the more expensive Leica products, even if the materials quality on these lenses is not quite to that level. 

An "entry-level priced system" in my book is a kit that includes body and one to three good lenses for $1000-$1200. That system is easily purchasable from several manufacturers, not from Leica.

G

[ruskkyle]

24 minutes ago, ramarren said:

A $3000 body and $1000-$4000 native lenses is not by any definition I can apply to any photographic equipment in my lifetime an "entry-level priced system." If it is to you, good on that, but that's a very expensive system in absolute terms for most persons seeking "entry level" equipment. 

Regardless: The CL is certainly not an entry-level quality body, and the TL lenses are certainly not entry-level quality lenses, even if you happen to consider their price entry-level. Their performance is right up there with the more expensive Leica products, even if the materials quality on these lenses is not quite to that level. 

An "entry-level priced system" in my book is a kit that includes body and one to three good lenses for $1000-$1200. That system is easily purchasable from several manufacturers, not from Leica.

G

Are you deliberately misunderstanding my point? I did not say that the TL/CL system is cheap or low in quality. I am saying it is Leica’s entry level system in that it is their most affordable to enter into.

And to imply I am somehow spoilt is beyond absurd as my argument is precisely the opposite: the TL lenses are quite expensive enough so suggesting people just buy the SL lenses instead - at double the cost - if they dare wish for other focal lengths is not great logic.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

If there's a CL2 coming then I guess it's already done and we're just having fun because we can't change any minds now.

Leica don't make entry level cameras. Not on price anyway. If spending less money is the objective you have chosen the wrong brand. Sure there are adapted options and potentially Sigma lenses in the future. But budget Leica lenses. Not really. So no point asking.

For the lenses Leica face an interesting conundrum that no other manufacturer does. They have too many systems and are now in a position where it's difficult to separate some of them. Fuji went with APSC and miniMF. Sony with APSC and 135 format. Including shared cameras Leica have everything from 1" to miniMF including m43, APSC and 135 format. And they don't really have a second tier of lens products except for lens speed. That's an issue.

The SL2 and larger L mount is really Leicas current flagship. The S user base is small and shrinking. For the SL2, apart from really long and macro, most of the bases are covered. Many exotic options like TS lenses are easily covered by adaptors, for now. In some areas the SL2 is class leading (IBIS, EVF, build, menus, hybrid balance) rather than just being a pretty toy. You can argue all day if a better menu is worth 2x the S1R. But the SL2 does better video as well.

That leaves the CL in an interesting spot. It can't be cheap or seen to be cheap. It can't compete with the SL and adding a 60mm 1.4 competes directly against the SL2 and 90mm summicron. The fashion camera experiment that was the TL doesn't look like it worked, although the TL with a built in EVF should have been what they made. So what to do with the CL? I'm glad I'm not the one making that decision.

The theme on this thread is for the CL2 to be a mini SL2. IBIS, faster and longer lenses and better video. I'd like this too. Very much. And I'd keep using my SL2 as well. But Leica know many wouldn't and they need to work out how many people would abandon the SL2 *if* they make the CL a lot of people are asking for. It seems people want to see a CL system like what Fuji does. But Fuji doesn't have a 135 format system to worry about. 

But if they don't the CL line might be doomed anyway. Fuji makes a great system with better controls. Nothing will convince me that lenses aren't better with aperture rings on them. There's a rumor of a high resolution m43 sensor and potentially a new Olympus PenF. Apart from the horrid menus it's the camera I generally take instead of the CL because it has exactly all the stuff we're asking for here. It even has a grip with cutout and tripod socket. And it's pretty. Very pretty.

If it were me making a decision for Leica, it would be a set of small Summicron primes and some high quality f4 zooms, including a really long option. Sure many would scream for faster primes and 2.8 zooms but I think you need to differentiate if you're not making the lenses any less good than the SL ones. The only 1.4 would be the 35. IBIS sells cameras so that's in. Resolution? Probably keep the 24MP as a differentiator as there's no low resolution SL2. If I were Leica........

What I want, is a different matter. I'd like to see the buttons move to the right. That's where they should be on a mirrorless camera, especially the play button. I sound like a broken record but adopting the M10 button layout was a mistake and they should have gone with the SL layout on all the systems. The camera is more difficult to use with the buttons on the left but easier to accidentally move the focus point to the lower right corner every thirty seconds. Putting them on the right also makes it easy to add a joystick on a small camera. Same as the SL2. It can be used as BBF or to re-centre the focus point. IBIS, 36MP, two buttons on the front ala SL2. The EVF is fine for such a small battery. SL2 menus. Somewhere to put my thumb. And if it's a bit bigger then a bigger battery. I don't need tiny. So a Q2 size with SL battery would suit me perfectly. I get that others want small though.

I want a long option. I love the idea of adapting the Panna Leica 100-400. I want three or four 1.4 primes plus a full set of tiny sharp Summicrons. A pair of f4 zooms. Keep the wide zoom. It's spectacular.

I do wonder, in hindsight, if Leica might have been better off going m43 instead of the TL. Then the differentiation with the SL2 would be clear. Mind you we might not have gotten an SL2 at all.

Gordon

[ramarren]

2 hours ago, ruskkyle said:

Are you deliberately misunderstanding my point? I did not say that the TL/CL system is cheap or low in quality. I am saying it is Leica’s entry level system in that it is their most affordable to enter into.

And to imply I am somehow spoilt is beyond absurd as my argument is precisely the opposite: the TL lenses are quite expensive enough so suggesting people just buy the SL lenses instead - at double the cost - if they dare wish for other focal lengths is not great logic.

Honestly, I didn't see that you had much point. Considering a $4000 camera and lens as any kind of entry level purchase makes no sense at all. People considering a CL because they "can't afford" an M10 or an SL2 is ridiculous. Those people should get their heads put back on straight and realize that if they're buying a Leica, they're NOT buying entry level anything, they're buying premium class gear. All of it. Save up your money and buy the thing you want, not something with the name so you can say you own something like what you want...

Just how much less do you think a fast Leica 60mm lens that covers APS-C only might cost than the SL50/2 or SL75/2? How much smaller and lighter do you imagine it might be? And what about when your entry person wants to upgrade to the SL from the CL ...  There's no upgrade path from an APS-C only lens onto a FF camera, you cripple the FF camera with a small format capture. So the very concept of 'entry level' with respect to buying the CL and invest in a whole big bunch of TL lenses isn't treating it as an entry level anything. Entry level implies an expectation that the buyer will upgrade to the higher end gear from it, and will make limited purchases in this level as they ready themselves to buy the next level.

People should buy the CL on its own merits as a camera and consider the whole ecosystem of bodies and lenses that it is a part of in the process, which includes all the SL lens, all the M lenses, and all the R lenses in addition to the TL lenses. The TL lens line as it stands today is fine for that 95% who have no need or desire for anything else. The others should do their research and buy based upon the existing options, which are plentiful. And all of them should realize that they are buying premium class camera equipment, in part because they're paying premium class prices for it.

G

 

[Le Chef]

“Entry point” is a useless phrase without context. A Bentley Continental GT is “entry point” for Bentley, but obviously not cheap.

If you want to use “entry point” then reference what lies above and how far up the category or brand goes otherwise you fall into the contextual trap built upon personal bias.

[Peters]

2 hours ago, ramarren said:

Honestly, I didn't see that you had much point. Considering a $4000 camera and lens as any kind of entry level purchase makes no sense at all. People considering a CL because they "can't afford" an M10 or an SL2 is ridiculous. Those people should get their heads put back on straight and realize that if they're buying a Leica, they're NOT buying entry level anything, they're buying premium class gear. All of it. Save up your money and buy the thing you want, not something with the name so you can say you own something like what you want...

Just how much less do you think a fast Leica 60mm lens that covers APS-C only might cost than the SL50/2 or SL75/2? How much smaller and lighter do you imagine it might be? And what about when your entry person wants to upgrade to the SL from the CL ...  There's no upgrade path from an APS-C only lens onto a FF camera, you cripple the FF camera with a small format capture. So the very concept of 'entry level' with respect to buying the CL and invest in a whole big bunch of TL lenses isn't treating it as an entry level anything. Entry level implies an expectation that the buyer will upgrade to the higher end gear from it, and will make limited purchases in this level as they ready themselves to buy the next level.

People should buy the CL on its own merits as a camera and consider the whole ecosystem of bodies and lenses that it is a part of in the process, which includes all the SL lens, all the M lenses, and all the R lenses in addition to the TL lenses. The TL lens line as it stands today is fine for that 95% who have no need or desire for anything else. The others should do their research and buy based upon the existing options, which are plentiful. And all of them should realize that they are buying premium class camera equipment, in part because they're paying premium class prices for it.

G

 

Now, now,. Let's be a bit more cordial to one another. 

And I don't see what's wrong with wanting fast portrait primes or, for that matter, any other lens for the TL system, even if it overlaps with other SL or M lenses. Benefits: 

1. In comparison to the beautiful M lenses, it would have AF, which is very beneficial at the longer, faster end, and take advantage of the CL's good autofocus. 
2. It would be smaller and lighter than its full framed SL equivalent.
3. It would be theoretically cheaper. 
4. It therefore makes sense from the view of efficiency. It's the same reason why I don't think many street photographers (including myself) who shoot at F2 at the widest end would be happy if the Noctilux was the only available 50mm for the Leica M system. Sure, it's beautiful, but it's big, heavy, and you're spending triple the money to use just 50% of the lens. Even if you were a millionaire street photographer it still doesn't make sense. 

I appreciate that you may be happy with what you have, which is great. You have no more interest in Leica developing this system further. But this thread is about those who still want more, and that group is far beyond the 5% of CL/TL users quoted above. Maike, Leica's APSC product manager, conceded to this demand for more lenses herself back in 2018 - with a particular reference to more Summilux primes.

And surely the demand for more is a good thing. It shows that there's an interest in developing the TL system further, for different kinds of photographers who have different kinds of uses. And taking this step would be both beneficial to those photographers as well as to Leica as a business. 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 21, 2020 by Peters

[scott kirkpatrick]

This is becoming a fairly long, enthusiastic thread.  It is interesting to see that a significant part of the enthusiasm comes from people who say "I'm quite happy with my CL.  Don't change a thing, I don't need any more."  Trying to do Leica's business planning for them is a foolish endeavor, but I am sure that packing their bags and going home, now that the customers are satisfied is Not.Leica's.Plan.  So this thread is directed at the question -- they are certainly going to Do.Something; they can't make the CL forever, as components go out of stock and there is lots of new stuff to build with; what can keep the strengths of the existing CL adding only the best and most relevant new stuff?

Hence my suggestion that the SL2 showed that you can fit IBIS into a very slim body, and chips with more MPx are almost a given.  (There have to be planners' meetings in which the various future products are placed on a diagram with shipment year and MPx as axes.)  Maybe if they add Just One More Button in the right place so that back button focus will happen, the dyed-in-the-wool CL fanatics will in fact purchase the next one, and convince their friends to join them. I'd be enthusiastic about having a USB-C plug to charge with and BTLE on board if Leica could only learn how to do those better than the competition can.  Fotos still doesn't use those robustly yet in the Q2 or SL2, and the SL2 can't seem to use its USB-C connection as an AC power input or as a remote wired trigger.  But things can be learned.

Edited May 21, 2020 by scott kirkpatrick

[ruskkyle]

3 hours ago, Peters said:

Maike, Leica's APSC product manager, conceded to this demand for more lenses herself back in 2018 - with a particular reference to more Summilux primes.

Precisely. They would clearly be very popular.

I’ve said my piece and will check out of this one now. Some users on here could quite frankly work on their manners.

[LocalHero1953]

I started this thread a couple of years ago:

If you've been on this forum long enough you know to treat the comments of those who make that claim with sympathy, understanding and total disbelief.

[nicci78]

On 5/19/2020 at 8:03 PM, robgo2 said:

On 75mm vs 90mm (equivalents) for portraits, the difference is not enough to worry about, as long as the lenses have fast max apertures. Much ado about nothing, IMO.

If someone knows how 75 differs from 90mm. It is Leica. They have released for every system (except TL/CL) a 75/80mm and a 90/96mm and a macro lens altogether.
M : Summarit-M 2.4/75 or 90 & Summilux-M 1.4/75 & APO-Summicron-M 2/75 or 2/90 & Noctilux-M 1.25/75 & Summilux-M 1.5/90 & Macro-Elmar-M 4/90

R : Summilux-R 1.4/80 & APO-Summicron-R 2/90 & APO-Macro-Elmarit-R 2.8/100

SL : APO-Summicron-SL 2/75 or 2/90

S : Summicron-S 2/100 (1.6/80) & APO-Macro-Summarit-S 2.5/120 (2/96)

TL : APO-Macro-Elmarit-TL 2.8/60 (4.2/90) only. It is a Macro lens. It is not fast and only 90mm equivalent. Still missing a fast 75 or 90mm equivalent. Fast 75mm can be adapted frime Summilux-M 50. Even faster with Noctilux-M 50. Summilux-SL 50 seems silly for CL. No fast 90mm equivalent can be adapted. 
 

I really tried to like 75mm equivalent. But   I can’t, sorry. For years I always prefer 90mm look. 

 

Edited May 21, 2020 by nicci78

[jaapv]

52 minutes ago, nicci78 said:

If someone knows how 75 differs from 90mm. It is Leica. They have released for every system (except TL/CL) a 75/80mm and a 90/96mm and a macro lens altogether.
M : Summarit-M 2.4/75 or 90 & Summilux-M 1.4/75 & APO-Summicron-M 2/75 or 2/90 & Noctilux-M 1.25/75 & Summilux-M 1.5/90 & Macro-Elmar-M 4/90

R : Summilux-R 1.4/80 & APO-Summicron-R 2/90 & APO-Macro-Elmarit-R 2.8/100

SL : APO-Summicron-SL 2/75 or 2/90

S : Summicron-S 2/100 (1.6/80) & APO-Macro-Summarit-S 2.5/120 (2/96)

TL : APO-Macro-Elmarit-TL 2.8/60 (4.2/90) only. It is a Macro lens. It is not fast and only 90mm equivalent. Still missing a fast 75 or 90mm equivalent. Fast 75mm can be adapted frime Summilux-M 50. Even faster with Noctilux-M 50. Summilux-SL 50 seems silly for CL. No fast 90mm equivalent can be adapted. 
 

I really tried to like 75mm equivalent. But   I can’t, sorry. For years I always prefer 90mm look. 

 

I've always found a 75 a bit close to a 50 mm lens - Leica introduced the focal length 75 long after the first 90-ies.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[robgo2]

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

I've always found a 75 a bit close to a 50 mm lens - Leica introduced the focal length 75 long after the first 90-ies.

I used to feel that way as well, but lately, I have been using a 50/f1.2 lens on my CL for portraits, and the results are excellent and different than with my 35mm lenses. Lest we forget, the Summilux-R 80/f1.4 and the Summilux-M 75/f1.4 are considered by some as the ne plus ultra of portrait lenses. My point is simply that both 75mm and 90mm are great for portraits

Leica CL + Voigtlander Nokton-M 50/f1.2 (cropped)

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 May 21, 2020 by robgo2

[cp995]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb jaapv:

I've always found a 75 a bit close to a 50 mm lens - Leica introduced the focal length 75 long after the first 90-ies.

That' korrekt!

My main setup on a FF Body is 35mm and 75mm.
28mm and 50mm might be another option.
So 23mm and 50mm is a good choice for APS-C!