TL/CL system needs way more native lens

[cp995]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 3 Stunden schrieb nicci78:

APS-C & m4/3 are +85% of the market

No, MFT has a lot less than 10% market share and APS-C (DSLR) is the most shrinking market due to the SPs.
You have to look for the revenue numbers

The future ist SP and for system cameras it is FF,  there ist absolutely no doubt!
APS-C is a future niche, which is covered fully only by Fuji, as they don't have any FF body.

But where is the problem?
The CL is s very nice niche product and I'm thinking about buying it too, to use my M-Lenses and maybe a Summciron 23 for AF purposes.
I can also understand that Leica will not invest a lot of lenses in such a small niche (as Jaap still told).

There are still a lot lenses available for TL/CL bodies and for users with more needs, they can buy L-mount lenses from the Leica SL and the Sigma L-mount portfolio.
 

Edited May 19, 2020 by cp995

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, cp995 said:

There are still a lot lenses available for TL/CL bodies and for users with more needs, they can buy L-mount lenses from the Leica SL and the Sigma L-mount portfolio.
 

That is the brilliance of the concept - small and affordable enough to work as a casual camera, yet positioned in the centre of the SL and M mount systems with a quality to satisfy users of those two systems.

BTW - I am puzzled at the bashing of the 18-56. It is by far the best standard zoom for APS-C on the market. A bit of anti-standard zoom "kit lens" snobbery?

[Advertisement]

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

[Mr.Prime]

The 18-56 on paper would be ideal for me as a walk about. I just can't bring myself to use a lens that physically extends when I change focal length - it's a personal thing, just can't stand it and I stick with primes on my CL as a result. It's a compromise for sure, especially as they are all manual focus, manual aperture but there's no auto focus lens for the CL at a price that makes any sense to me because it would not work on my film bodies.

Edited May 19, 2020 by Mr.Prime

[jaapv]

I used to feel the same - until Peter Karbe explained the reason.

[Ko.Fe.]

2 hours ago, Peters said:

I don't see why the CL can't be a professional camera. Image quality is stellar and many photojournalists use APSC. Fuji has even captured quite a few Magnum photographers. But to attract  more people to it you do need to expand the lens selection. And Leica has always been about the lenses. 

 

Most professionals depends on professional service which includes availability and quality of service.     

[lct]

43 minutes ago, Mr.Prime said:

The 18-56 on paper would be ideal for me as a walk about. I just can't bring myself to use a lens that physically extends when I change focal length - it's a personal thing, just can't stand it and I stick with primes on my CL as a result. It's a compromise for sure, especially as they are all manual focus, manual aperture but there's no auto focus lens for the CL at a price that makes any sense to me because it would not work on my film bodies.

Same here and i find f/5.6 definitely too slow. My MATE is a constant f/4 and is not erectile fortunately but i may change my mind when i become too old to err... focus manually .

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Are you. REALLY going to see the difference between  4.0 and 3.5-5.6?

[ramarren]

6 hours ago, jaapv said:

@Ramarran:
Yes - of course, and that is mainly the point I wanted to make, but in general, fast lenses help to keep ISO down, which is highly desirable on sensors with a limited ISO capability.
I would submit from experience that focus zone control will always be a weak point of the MFT system. Personally I found it more effective to either use a longer lens or move in closer. BTW, the Summilux 25 is  quite an impressive lens on MFT, not to mention the Nocticron.

Focus zone control is not a problem at all, presuming you have fast enough lenses. This is why Olympus made a 150mm f/2, a 12-35mm f/2, and Voigtländer makes f/0.95 lenses in 12 (?), 17, 25, 42, and (coming soon) 60ish mm focal lengths. 

I had both the Summilux-D 25mm f/1.4 ASPH for FourThirds SLR and the later Summilux-DG 25mm f/1.4 ASPH for Micro-FourThirds mounts. Both superb lenses, and amongst my most-used at the time I was in that format. The Nocticron post-dated my time with Micro-FourThirds system, but I recommended it to a good friend who is in love with it. I also had the Macro-Elmarit-DG 45mm f/2.8 ASPH ... a truly superb lens in every way. If I were to invest in more Micro-FourThirds equipment, I'd buy the full complement of Voigtländer f/0.95 lenses ... because they really work beautifully for the format and allow the focus zone control that's needed. 

But I went the other way and went for a big sensor camera in the Hasselblad 907x. It was a choice, and I decided this had more value for me. Now, the larger problem is having to stop down farther to get what I want in focus zone. 

G

[bherman01545]

Stefan Daniel had also mentioned on last week's LHSA call that some of the gaps in their lens line 'may' be filled by "L Mount Alliance" partners.

We will see...

[jaapv]

19 minutes ago, ramarren said:

 

I had both the Summilux-D 25mm f/1.4 ASPH for FourThirds SLR and the later Summilux-DG 25mm f/1.4 ASPH for Micro-FourThirds mounts. Both superb lenses, and amongst my most-used at the time I was in that format.

Yes, the DG Summilux 25 and DG Summilux 15 are my standard MFT combo.

[jaapv]

This 2018 interview with Maike Harberts answers the original question rather well.

https://www.reddotforum.com/content/2018/09/photokina-2018-the-leica-cl-and-future-of-aps-c/

[lct]

43 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Are you. REALLY going to see the difference between  4.0 and 3.5-5.6?

Sure i am. All things equal, f/5.6 on APS-C is like f/8 on FF, as far as DoF is concerned i mean. Definitely not an aperture i use for anything else than landscapes personally. YMMV.

[jaapv]

You were comparing the WATE with the 18-56 ON THE CL.  Don't dodge  the question by dragging full frame into it. Are you going to see a difference between 3.5-5.6 and 4.0 on the same sensor? Especially when the 18-56 has smoother Bokeh than the WATE.

[lct]

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

You were comparing the WATE with the 18-56 ON THE CL.  Don't dodge  the question by dragging full frame into it. Are you going to see a difference between 3.5-5.6 and 4.0 on the same sensor? Especially when the 18-56 has smoother Bokeh than the WATE.

I was not comparing the WATE i have no experience with. I was just saying that the MATE is not erectile and has a constant f/4, which is a compromise, but f/5.6 is definitely too slow for anything else than landscapes on APS-C to me. I would rather use the f/1.7 lens of my Lx100 but YYMM as usual . 

[ramarren]

3 hours ago, lct said:

I was not comparing the WATE i have no experience with. I was just saying that the MATE is not erectile and has a constant f/4, which is a compromise, but f/5.6 is definitely too slow for anything else than landscapes on APS-C to me. I would rather use the f/1.7 lens of my Lx100 but YYMM as usual . 

I don't know what the bolded statement above means. Huh?

 

[nicci78]

12 hours ago, cp995 said:

No, MFT has a lot less than 10% market share and APS-C (DSLR) is the most shrinking market due to the SPs.
You have to look for the revenue numbers

You should look at CIPA figures. Those figures are accurate. Even though m4/3 is indeed diminishing towards 10% market share (value or unit) APS-C has the lion share with more than 3/4 of the market in value. Even more in unit. 
With BCN figures, you will notice that only one full frame made up into top 20 of best selling cameras : Sony A7 III. All others are APS-C or m4/3. 

They want you to believe that the future is full frame. But it is not in reality. It will never be, according to CIPA forecasts. 

Nikon was happy to launch Z50 an APS-C mirrorless. Canon still launch new EOS-M and APS-C DSLR cameras. Sony has success with its extensive line of A6x00 even though they are almost all identical. 
Only Fujifilm got smart and really embrace APS-C only. With great success. They are not outselling m4/3. 
Pentax will release an APS-C flagship for its 100 years. Not a new full frame. 
 

This is why Leica cannot leave APS-C, it is where most of the sales are made.  But they should embraced the system with more lenses. 

Leica should sell way more CL than Q2, M10 or SL. Not the other way around. An underperforming TL/CL only means lost sales for Leica. They should sell 3-4 APS-C for one full frame body. 
 

Don’t get upset about my opinions over TL 18, 23, 18-56. They are fine. But they do not worth their pay grade. That’s it. They do not make people dreaming about TL system. Just like X Vario slow lens put every potential buyers away. 

Please take into consideration that Q2 makes all three irrelevant now. Making the lens situation even worst now. 

Edited May 20, 2020 by nicci78

[pop]

vor 4 Minuten schrieb nicci78:

Just like X Vario slow lens put every potential buyers away. 

Did not put the real buyers away, though. Many people are quite happy with this little lens and camera.

[jaapv]

Nor was it the lens that made the camera unbeloved.  It was the mistaken marketing at introduction and the correspondingly wrong pricing that made the Internet geek community judge it wrongly. Whether it put off the real target customer group is known only to Leica.

I really feel  stupid. I have no idea of Leica's sales targets for the cameras they sell and whether they are met or not. Yet others must have, as they are able to  pronounce each and every model a "sales failure" because Leica got it wrong.

[jaapv]

6 hours ago, lct said:

I was not comparing the WATE i have no experience with. I was just saying that the MATE is not erectile and has a constant f/4, which is a compromise, but f/5.6 is definitely too slow for anything else than landscapes on APS-C to me. I would rather use the f/1.7 lens of my Lx100 but YYMM as usual . 

This is the first time I have heard the MATE being advocated as a suitable lens for shallow-DOF photography.  And certainly a first to have this rather unusual optical property being ascribed to any lens.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Boojay]

4 hours ago, pop said:

Did not put the real buyers away, though. Many people are quite happy with this little lens and camera.

I loved the X-Vario, don't remember any worries about "slow lens"  I just never really like adding the EVF which was why I moved to the CL and sold mine.  Often look back at images from it and think I should have kept it.