Einst_Stein Posted June 3, 2021 Share #1 Posted June 3, 2021 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) APS_C is meant to be smaller, lighter and cheaper than 35mm FF. Let's take a look of the sampled zoom set as a reference. 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! This quick and dirty sample data shows L mount 35mm FF is actually about 2/3 of CL (granted, some good at hair splitting may not agree), but the weight and volume is about 2X. Maybe this is the gap Leica try to keep in the newer versions, if any, including the dreamed CL2? Edited June 3, 2021 by Einst_Stein 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! This quick and dirty sample data shows L mount 35mm FF is actually about 2/3 of CL (granted, some good at hair splitting may not agree), but the weight and volume is about 2X. Maybe this is the gap Leica try to keep in the newer versions, if any, including the dreamed CL2? ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/321477-lumix-s5-and-sigma-24-70mm-f28-how-much-room-left-for-aps-c/?do=findComment&comment=4212751'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 3, 2021 Posted June 3, 2021 Hi Einst_Stein, Take a look here Lumix S5 and Sigma 24-70mm f2.8: How much room left for APS-C?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Le Chef Posted June 3, 2021 Share #2 Posted June 3, 2021 1 hour ago, Einst_Stein said: APS_C is meant to be smaller, lighter and cheaper than 35mm FF. Let's take a look of the sampled zoom set as a reference. 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! This quick and dirty sample data shows L mount 35mm FF is actually about 2/3 of CL (granted, some good at hair splitting may not agree), but the weight and volume is about 2X. Maybe this is the gap Leica try to keep in the newer versions, if any, including the dreamed CL2? So you pay a premium for lightness. Something that Ferrari and Porsche are masters of. Take weight out and pay more. Much more. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einst_Stein Posted June 3, 2021 Author Share #3 Posted June 3, 2021 58 minutes ago, Le Chef said: So you pay a premium for lightness. Something that Ferrari and Porsche are masters of. Take weight out and pay more. Much more. Apparently it makes sense for many CL users. In fact that is an important part that shines Leica M system too. I can't see anything wrong about it. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicci78 Posted June 3, 2021 Share #4 Posted June 3, 2021 (edited) Full frame is much bigger. End of discussion. If you are ready to haul a ton with you. Why not. Leica lend me for four days an SL2-S with APO-SL 35mm. At the very beginning I was pretty sure that it was not for me. After four days I was convinced : APS-C is the sweet spot. I will never trade my CL for full frame. Except for an M of course. Otherwise 24x36 mirrorless is way too big. S5 is twice as thick and almost twice as heavy as CL. Plethora of buttons that I do not care for. I love my CL for its compact size. I take it everywhere with me. I will certainly not take a full frame with me full time. Size matters more than IQ. That’s why for 99% of people : smartphones are the best cameras they ever got. It is always with them. CL + 18-56mm is manageable in a tiny bag. S5 + 24-70mm f/2.8 is not. As always there is an exception to the rule : the mighty Q2. By the way Q2 & CL are made for each other. They complement each other perfectly. Same UI make using them together a dream. Edited June 3, 2021 by nicci78 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 4, 2021 Share #5 Posted June 4, 2021 On 6/3/2021 at 5:53 AM, Einst_Stein said: In fact that is an important part that shines Leica M system too. Not really regarding weight of the body. At 660 grams the M10 is quite a dense object. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicci78 Posted June 4, 2021 Share #6 Posted June 4, 2021 True I found that M10 660g needed a handgrip or a thumb rest to be comfortable. Whereas M9 580g is more handholdable without any aid. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einst_Stein Posted June 4, 2021 Author Share #7 Posted June 4, 2021 Advertisement (gone after registration) 15 hours ago, jaapv said: Not really regarding weight of the body. At 660 grams the M10 is quite a dense object. The matter is the combination with lens(es). Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 5, 2021 Share #8 Posted June 5, 2021 True, but M lenses work just fine on L system cameras to, so we can leave that consideration out of the equation. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Le Chef Posted June 5, 2021 Share #9 Posted June 5, 2021 On 6/2/2021 at 10:53 PM, Einst_Stein said: Apparently it makes sense for many CL users. In fact that is an important part that shines Leica M system too. I can't see anything wrong about it. Agree - my point is that lightness has a value. In my case I’m happy to pay for it in the form of the CL and lenses. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted June 6, 2021 Share #10 Posted June 6, 2021 On 6/2/2021 at 5:54 PM, Einst_Stein said: APS_C is meant to be smaller, lighter and cheaper than 35mm FF. Let's take a look of the sampled zoom set as a reference. ... I think the fundamental problem is that you (and many others) take the bolded above as an axiom, where that was never really the case. But, regardless, we've been through this debate with almost every new digital camera release for the past decade and a half. The "this new watsis is more than that old watsis and doesn't cost/isn't much bigger/etc" debate, I mean. Isn't anyone else getting tired of it? I don't buy a camera because "it has a bigger sensor and is almost as small/light/cheap" as my previous camera. I buy a camera because it has some features or advancements that I think will net an advantage for what I'm intending to make photographs of. G 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
raadoo Posted June 7, 2021 Share #11 Posted June 7, 2021 A few years ago, I had set up a big sheet with all the major camera manufacturers, cameras and lenses; this wasn't a comprehensive list mind you, it was just for me to try to make sense of the landscape. I was looking to downsize but without too much compromise in terms of quality. By far, the lightest setup was the Leica APS-C system. And while also the most expensive - by quite the margin - it does show that you get a bit more (well, less weight actually) for your buckaroos than just the stellar image quality. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.