Love my Q2 but need CL/zoom as occasional accompaniment

[huwm]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Having ditched a TL2 and a ‘set’ of TL lenses in favour of a Q2 I’m finding my CL and 24-100 ‘overlaps’ too much without enough reach.

Very happy with the Q2 and nearly always carry it alone but on occasion, sports, wildlife I need something else in addition.

Is the lumix 70-200 a ‘goer’ on the CL?, thinking F4 as the weight of the F2.8 a bit off putting tbh

Alternatively is there aSigma version in the offing?

I have a lovely old Canon 50mm f1.4 which sort of fills the theoretical gap between Q2 and proposed 70-200mm.

 

Edited January 26, 2021 by huwm

[huwm]

maybe try CL forum? can it be moved?

[jaapv]

There is an excellent Sigma 100-400. See the threads in this forum. 

[huwm]

I’m quite tempted but it’s probably too long for my envisioned usage, will research
Although more expensive a 70-200 ( have to be 2.8?)  plus converter would give me that range?

[jaapv]

Ah, yes, but so will the Sigma give a longer range with a converter   In my experience, with wildlife, if you need a focal length above 600-800 mm, forget about getting a decent shot. Dust, haze and atmospheric heat distortion will impact image quality significatntly.

[sblitz]

I swapped my Q for a CL when I went on Safari, thanks to Jaap for advice at the time, was very happy! Still do like the CL, the form with an M lens is great. Now, you can buy some older R lenses, they work really well on the CL (I have the safari shots to prove it, though not in Jaap's league), and remember the cropped sensor gives you more reach (1.5x). Do some reading, some of these R lenses are Leica, some are really Minolta, but I got a 180 plus a 2x converter, put it on my CL, worked like a charm. 

[tommonego@gmail.com]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The 56-135 is an equivelent 80-200 on the CL or do you want an actual 70/80-200. I have used primes 90 Elmarit, 135 Tele-Elmar, 200 Telyt, 400 Telyt, probably paid less for the four than a zoom would cost. But I am thinking of the Sigma, have seen a lot of good images from that lens. I would probably keep the 90 and 135, both very nice lenses, the Telyts are OK but a modern lens would be better.

[ramarren]

I've been shooting with the CL since 2018, using only M or R mount lenses. I had it with me on a few longish trips through 2019 and use it a lot for tabletop things like copying film and small prints (using R system macro gear). It replaced my SL for the TTL viewing/focusing, and later the M-D typ 262 because of its versatility and image quality. In practical terms, it is just a hair smaller than the M and a little lighter, and you use one focal length wider lens in the M or R range with it so the size and weight savings is compounded by the smaller, lighter lens kit you need to carry. 

The Q2 has been quite interesting to me too, as a one-lens "grab and go" camera, relying upon cropping to achieve different perspectives that the high Mpixel resolution enables. The CL has advantages when considered for the longer scale of tele uses due to the smaller format (as above, smaller, faster lenses than a FF camera). I have a pair of the Olympus front element converters (WCON 08B and TCON 14B) ... They're very high quality,  I wonder how they'd perform on the Q2's lens? Someday I'll borrow a Q2 and find out ... I think I have the right step-up adapter somewhere in my box-of-miscellaneous-bits.

Since the Q2's high resolution enables a virtual 50mm lens with enough resolution for very high quality results, and even a 70mm lens with good quality results, some like the TCON 014B might be sufficient rather than carrying a second camera system, unless you really want a lot more telephoto capability. That's when I'd look at the zooms for a CL starting with 55mm at the wide end, rather than the 24-100 mm. I've used lenses R50, R60, M75, R90, R135, R180, and R180 with doubler on the CL quite a bit, with very good results, and even my ancient cheap Nikon-F-mount Sigma 600 mirror lens does a good job with some work. 

There are many ways to go with equipment. Get a clear notion of what you're after photographically to cut the choices down to a manageable level, and then you just have to go with it and see what it inspires in your picture making. 

G

[huwm]

Definitely heading towards the sigma

Is anyone carrying the flag for the s pro?

[Boojay]

I used the Panasonic 70-200 f/4 on the CL, it gave good results but once I got the Sigma 100-400 it had little use so I have since sold it.  I also have the TL 55-135 so just too much overlap going on for me.

If you can wait a little while maybe the newly announced Panasonic 70-300 would fit the bill

https://www.panasonicff.com/tag/panasonic-lumix-s-70-300mm-f-4-5-5-6-lens/

It looks an interesting prospect for L mount.

 

[huwm]

Interesting 

Not in a huge rush