Jump to content

Arrival and Features of the CL2


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, robgo2 said:

So, you can back that assertion with data showing that I am wrong about some of IBIS-meh folks having never experienced the benefits? I would imagine that lots of died-in-the-wool Leica users have never used image stabilization.

I've had at least nine different cameras that had image stabilization, either optical or in-body. I know exactly what it's good for and when it is useless, that is, degrades image quality. 

Image stabilization is wonderful for what it's designed to do, which is NOT eliminating the need for a tripod or other camera fixture. Image stabilization is designed to allow more flexible hand-holding of portrait to medium-long telephoto lenses. It's mostly useless with wide-angle lenses and it's use in extremely low light with fast lenses is only occasionally of use, since the exposure times grow and subject motion becomes the limiting factor. It's not designed with macro in mind, and you have to turn it off when you use a tripod in most cases (because the resonant frequency of the camera mounted on a tripod is AGAIN not what it's designed to correct for. 

If you are often hand-holding an 80 to 300mm eqFOV lens, and particularly in marginal light, it's a nice thing. It's of no particular value to me since I don't do that very often at all, nor have any particular desire to. Of the nine cameras I've owned with IBIS, it died and cost me two of them as they weren't sensibly repairable (replacement was cheaper). And none of those cameras were particularly old.

I don't know (or care) about the rest of the world: IBIS hasn't made me a huge fan. I'll use it if I have it; I'd not buy a camera because it was included.

G

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, robgo2 said:

So, you can back that assertion with data showing that I am wrong about some of IBIS-meh folks having never experienced the benefits? I would imagine that lots of died-in-the-wool Leica users have never used image stabilization.

Yes - just look at my wildlife shots. A large percentage has been taken with an 800 mm lens and 5-stop stabilisation, handheld and as slow as 1/125th. However, for shorter focal lengths, I think the benefits are marginal and can easily be compensated by proper camera-handling techniques. At shorter focal lengths, a large proportion of motion blur will be by subject movement, not camera movement. IBIS won't help. There are, however, postprocessing tools that are quite effective, like Focus Magic. Many died-in-the wool Leica users here are multi-brand photographers and well aware of developments in photography.

IBIS-meh folks, as you put it so pejoratively, are in general photographers who are familiar with the system and are aware of the real, but limited, benefit and limitations, often decade-long  M users, well used to shooting down to 1/8th second with very fast glass.

Personally I would not mind an IBIS - CL, it could simplify life in some situations, but it is certainly not an essential. On long lenses - OIS is far more important.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Almost every Leica lenses do not have OIS except 2 SL zooms.
So CL2 has to provide IBIS to stay relevant. At least on marketing terms. You know how it works. If the tech specs do not appeal to most of us, the camera will not sell. 
And we all know that Leica does not bother to support new firmware for commercial failure : X typ 113, X Vario, TL2. 
 

Edited by nicci78
Link to post
Share on other sites

Another issue of future CL2. The lack of extensive TL lenses lineup. 6 years later after T launch, only 7 lenses were produced. Zero were launched since the announcement of CL with its 18mm pancake. 

Using SL lenses is OK, but kinda silly because of size. 

I am thinking that it may not worth to upgrade to CL2 if it still be stuck with only native seven lenses. Even Sigma is late to release the promise L-mount version of its DC DN Art f/1.4 line up : 16mm, 30mm and 56mm

After 2.5 years with CL. I owned every TL lenses. And sold 6 of them and I am now on the verge to sell the very last one : Summilux-TL 35mm. Why ?

  • The 3 Vario-Elmar-TL do not have OIS and are too slow for APS-C sensor for my liking.
  • Elmarit-TL 18 and Summicron-TL 23mm are meh lenses in Leica world. And not relevant at all against Q & Q2
  • APO-Macro-Elmarit-TL 60 was replaced by APO-Macro-Elmarit-R 100
  • Then Lux-TL 35 is in competition with Q2 at 50mm crop

So what's the point to own CL2 in the future ? If I did not own any TL lenses anymore ? I am even thinking to buy an SL instead, just to get access to wider range of ultra wide lenses. 

What a shame, I really like APS-C, but the lack of lenses (especially wide lenses) kill it in Leica world. 

 

Leica tried to be the master of 3:2 aspect ratio. With every size possible with this ratio :

  • 2.7x crop 1 inch sensor 3:2 with C-Lux and V-Lux
  • 2.2x crop : D-Lux typ 109 and D-Lux 7 with cut down version of m4/3 sensor, available natively into 3:2 aspect
  • 1.5x crop : APS-C 3:2 TL and CL line up
  • no crop : 24x36 3:2 is actually the real Leica format, the one that they invented for the whole world to use. 
  • 0.8x crop : 30x45 3:2 small medium format sensor for S lineup. This choice is quite stupid, forcing Leica to produce its own sensor, instead of using widely available 33x44 Sony medium format sensor

May be Leica, should just tried to be the master to 24x36 only, with a version of Q with interchangeable lenses or a smaller SL and a line up of tiny full frame SL lenses. 

Edited by nicci78
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm another Leica enthusiast who is not over-enthusiastic about IBIS. I've used it and I don't object to it, but the whole point of it is to mitigate camera movement at slow shutter speeds. If your aim is to mitigate subject movement it is irrelevant, and you would rather have faster shutter speeds anyway. If you take shots of static subjects in low light, then IS is useful.

I have OIS with my SL and its midrange and long zooms, and find it useful. I don't miss it on the wide angle zoom, but I would like it for the Summicron 90SL.

I generally shoot midrange to wide with the CL (no long lenses) so don't feel a great need for IBIS. It might be useful with the 60TL.

So, yes, I think I understand where IS is useful and where it isn't.

And given a choice between IBIS, body size and battery life, IBIS would have the lowest priority for me.

Edited by LocalHero1953
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, nicci78 said:

Another issue of future CL2. The lack of extensive TL lenses lineup. 6 years later after T launch, only 7 lenses were produced. Zero were launched since the announcement of CL with its 18mm pancake. 

Using SL lenses is OK, but kinda silly because of size. 

I am thinking that it may not worth to upgrade to CL2 if it still be stuck with only native seven lenses. Even Sigma is late to release the promise L-mount version of its DC DN Art f/1.4 line up : 16mm, 30mm and 56mm

After 2.5 years with CL. I owned every TL lenses. And sold 6 of them and I am now on the verge to sell the very last one : Summilux-TL 35mm. Why ?

  • The 3 Vario-Elmar-TL do not have OIS and are too slow for APS-C sensor for my liking.
  • Elmarit-TL 18 and Summicron-TL 23mm are meh lenses in Leica world. And not relevant at all against Q & Q2. 
  • APO-Macro-Elmarit-TL 60 was replaced by APO-Macro-Elmarit-R 100
  • Then Lux-TL 35 is in competition with Q2 at 50mm crop

So what's the point to own CL2 in the future ? If I did not own any TL lenses anymore ? I am even thinking to buy an SL instead, just to get access to wider range of ultra wide lenses. 

What a shame, I really like APS-C, but the lack of lenses (especially wide lenses) kill it in Leica world. 

 

Leica tried to be the master of 3:2 aspect ratio. With every size possible with this ratio :

  • 2.7x crop 1 inch sensor 3:2 with C-Lux and V-Lux
  • 2.2x crop : D-Lux typ 109 and D-Lux 7 with cut down version of m4/3 sensor, available natively into 3:2 aspect
  • 1.5x crop : APS-C 3:2 TL and CL line up
  • no crop : 24x36 3:2 is actually the real Leica format, the one that they invented for the whole world to use. 
  • 0.8x crop : 30x45 3:2 small medium format sensor for S lineup. This choice is quite stupid, forcing Leica to produce its own sensor, instead of using widely available 33x44 Sony medium format sensor

May be Leica, should just tried to be the master to 24x36 only, with a version of Q with interchangeable lenses or a smaller SL and a line up of tiny full frame SL lenses. 

If they didn't have the CL, they would have lost me as a customer a couple of years ago...
I have migrated to APS-C, as it has come to provide excellent quality in a small and light package (didn't somebody with the initials O.B. have a similar idea a while ago?) . And I don't want to carry big and heavy camera systems any more.  The CL-TL system is a brilliant one for my use (and quite a few others).
Don't assume that if a product doesn't fit your customer group, it is stupid.

Lenses? A good coverage of zooms and a few specials - and a galaxy of M and R lenses etc. No shortage at all. (except a compact long telezoom)

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, jaapv said:

Yes - just look at my wildlife shots. A large percentage has been taken with an 800 mm lens and 5-stop stabilisation, handheld and as slow as 1/125th. However, for shorter focal lengths, I think the benefits are marginal and can easily be compensated by proper camera-handling techniques. At shorter focal lengths, a large proportion of motion blur will be by subject movement, not camera movement. IBIS won't help. There are, however, postprocessing tools that are quite effective, like Focus Magic. Many died-in-the wool Leica users here are multi-brand photographers and well aware of developments in photography.

IBIS-meh folks, as you put it so pejoratively, are in general photographers who are familiar with the system and are aware of the real, but limited, benefit and limitations, often decade-long  M users, well used to shooting down to 1/8th second with very fast glass.

Personally I would not mind an IBIS - CL, it could simplify life in some situations, but it is certainly not an essential. On long lenses - OIS is far more important.

I take many pics with a 50mm lens in dim light, and I am quite certain that I can use two stops slower shutter speeds and lower ISOs with IS than without it. Many of these pics do not have moving subjects (and I am including portraits), so motion blur is not an issue. The end result is better IQ. The point is that IS can be very useful in common photography situations, not just with long telephoto lenses. With wide angle lenses, it is less useful. No argument there. 

Edited by robgo2
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, robgo2 said:

I take many pics with a 50mm lens in dim light, and I am quite certain that I can use two stops lower ISO with IS than without it. Many of these pics do not have moving subjects (and I am including portraits), so motion blur is not an issue. The end result is better IQ. The point is that IS can be very useful in common photography situations, not just with long telephoto lenses. With wide angle lenses, it is less useful. No argument there. 

I wouldn't argue with your wish to have IBIS. But it's safer not to make assumptions about the experience of people who don't shoot the same way you do 🙂!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

I wouldn't argue with your wish to have IBIS. But it's safer not to make assumptions about the experience of people who don't shoot the same way you do 🙂!

Point taken, but neither should they make assumptions about other people’s needs. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, nicci78 said:

... So what's the point to own CL2 in the future ? If I did not own any TL lenses anymore ? ...

I've never owned any TL lenses. They're not relevant to what I bought the CL body for. The CL body is simply a better body for what I want to do photographically than either the M or the SL. It works beautifully with the profusion of M and R lenses I have in my gear cabinet. 

G

Edited by ramarren
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, robgo2 said:

Point taken, but neither should they make assumptions about other people’s needs. 

I make no assumptions about anyone else's needs. I speak only in the context of my needs and what I want in a camera. :D

G

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is why product development people have to learn how to shave their heads to avoid tearing their hair out. What we need is a CL "Push-me-pull-you". No one is ever going to be 100% happy with any new product, not even the product development team: compromise is the name of the game based on your goals.

I'm happy to wait for Leica to tell me what they have launched, but in the meantime FIX THE DAMNED WANDERING FOCAL POINT!

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

My new Hasselblad 907x SE has 'the damned wandering focal point' when I use it with its native XCD lenses—the slightest touch of the screen moves where the focus will be sampled from. When the focus point wanders somewhere I can't find, I double tap the LCD and it's back in the middle. Or I press the X button and it's back in the middle. Same thing with my Light L16. I dunno ... that seems sufficient to me. 

Of course, this is said from the perspective of someone who really doesn't care much about autofocus. I don't have this problem with the CL at all because I don't use any autofocus lenses with that camera. :) 

G

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Leica is going to collapse the CL and TL lines into one effort, after resolving the same question we ask (do we even need a $3000 APS-C camera?), then I believe they will throw everything at it, including IBIS, that can reasonably fit. For this line to continue to serve both the TL lens market and offer a much lighter alternative to the SL2 and even an EVF alternative to the M, it will need to demonstrate competitive value. A minor upgrade is going to underwhelm most buyers. Leica hit it out of the park with the M10, M10M, SL2 and Q2. It will do so again with the CL2.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ramarren said:

I make no assumptions about anyone else's needs. I speak only in the context of my needs and what I want in a camera. :D

G

So, is it OK with you for the CL2 to have IBIS, as long as you can disable it? 🙃

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, robgo2 said:

So, is it OK with you for the CL2 to have IBIS, as long as you can disable it? 🙃

It's fine with me whatever they do, I'm not in charge of what Leica decides to build into its cameras. I don't have to buy it, and likely wouldn't if they don't put a port into it for a wired release. That's the only thing I find I need and want that isn't in the current CL. If they did put IBIS into it, AND it remained the same size and weight, AND the performance of the sensor wasn't degraded from what I already have, AND they put the wired port I want into it, AND they didn't muck up the user interface with a bunch of (to me) unnecessary buttons and commands, I'd buy one. 

As you can tell, I'm pretty happy with the camera exactly as it is and see very little need to "upgrade" it. I get so tired of people telling me "well, to be competitive with other cameras, they HAVE TO add this and that and this and that and this and ... " ad nauseam. What the heck is wrong with building a good, solid, simple product that works perfectly and leaving it alone, selling as many of them as there are people who appreciate good quality cameras? I simply don't understand the absurd need for a half a dozen new features every other year. I buy a camera to make photographs, not to play with new camera features and keep up with all the other cameras. Once a camera does that, I stop being interested in buying another. 

Are all those pictures of cats really in need of IBIS and a 48Mpixel sensor? Sheesh. If Leica chose to make the CL2 into a magic wurlitzer of goofy new features, I'd laugh, keep my CL, and just keep using it until it stopped working and could no longer be repaired. Then I'd buy the next camera that does what I want. 

G

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...