I ordered a CL today.

[wda]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

17 minutes ago, rob_w said:

I did consider the zoom option but (a) not confident that the widest aperture is wide enough and (b) would prefer image stabilisation at the long end.  Neither of these excludes the zoom of course.  I happily used an 80-200 f4 zoom on my R Leicas many moons ago, when image stabilisation was but a dream.

.....

Rob, two comments. One, get used to using higher shutter speeds at the long end. Two, Electronic shutter is superb for eliminating shutter vibration in standard lighting. Some users report artefacts in artificial lighting, but that has not affected my results. The only downside to using the electronic shutter is that it is silent. (it might be possible to engage artificial sound, but I have needed to do that) Certainly it is a great aid to stability when working at the long end of the zoom.

[Boojay]

7 hours ago, rob_w said:

 

Thanks Jayne.  Great sample pics.  I am not too fussed about sharpness or contrast, both of which I could be lower for a portrait lens.  Modern lenses are SO sharp, they often miss the micro-gradations which make the Leica 50 and 75 special - although even the 75 Summicron was criticised by some as too sharp when it was first released.  If you have any people portraits with the Sigma 56 you are happy to share it would be great to see them.

Well you might have realised by now Rob, portraits (well of people anyway) are not really my thing... now if it's hairy and has four legs you may be in luck😄.  No, it's more that I just don't use my CL for portraits, if people are involved it's going to be candid grabs of our grandkids, and for goodness sake, who doesn't prefer a cat.

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!

 

 

 

The above will just have had my normal amount of processing which is minimal highlights/shadows sliders.. if colour wb checks,  if b&w, tweaks to embedded b&w in Lightroom.

[Advertisement]

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

[rob_w]

18 hours ago, Boojay said:

Well you might have realised by now Rob, portraits (well of people anyway) are not really my thing...

Thanks Jayne.  Perhaps portraits should be your friend!  These are lovely, and a good indication of what the Sigma 56 can do.  I appreciate you for taking the time to find and post them.

Most of my favourite portraits have been (relatively) candid so that I can capture natural expressions rather than faces prepared for the camera.  Looks like you have done the same with these examples.

For candid photos I find timing is critically important - e.g. so as not to catch someone in mid-blink.  Most subjects assume a succession of fixed expressions when they are active and if I pick the right moment a typical natural expression is the result.  I do struggle with the EVF refresh speed of the CL (most of all versus the zero latency of the M camera's OVF).  The only other person I know who complains about this is Sean Reid, who still prefers OVF cameras for the same reason.  Sometimes I am tempted to abandon the CL in favour of something faster - these days the SL2 perhaps or (shock, horror!) a Canon R5.  But of course there are other disadvantages.  I do hope there will be a faster CL2 in due course.

The other challenge with candid photos is having virtually no control over the background.  So the ability to throw the background out of focus is important IMHO.  Sometimes I can be shrewd about positioning, but mostly I have to take what I can find.  Over the years it has worked well and I have a wonderful collection of personal and family photos which everyone treasures.

It certainly seems like the Sigma 56 is a good choice.  Hopefully I will get to a photo shop in the next few weeks, try one out in person and make a decision!

 

[oldwino]

I tried the 56, and ended up returning it as I found the autofocus to be very slow and unreliable. I may have gotten a bad copy, I don't know. 

I've since picked up the Sigma 65, and I think its pretty terrific. Fast focus, nice focal length, and the added bonus in that if I want to use it on a full frame camera, I can. It is heavier though.

[Driften]

1 hour ago, oldwino said:

I tried the 56, and ended up returning it as I found the autofocus to be very slow and unreliable. I may have gotten a bad copy, I don't know. 

I've since picked up the Sigma 65, and I think its pretty terrific. Fast focus, nice focal length, and the added bonus in that if I want to use it on a full frame camera, I can. It is heavier though.

I wonder if it just needed a firmware patch. I picked up a used Sigma 45mm and it was at version 1.1 and patch 1.4 said it improved autofocus performance.

[rob_w]

On 8/14/2021 at 2:37 AM, oldwino said:

I tried the 56, and ended up returning it as I found the autofocus to be very slow and unreliable.

I realise the thread has drifted well off topic but thought I would close out this particular topic here.  I tried the Sigma 56 over the weekend.  As Oldwino (love the name!) says, I too found the focus slow and unreliable.  Too slow for candid shots of people - I had a lot of misses and some that the camera thought were in focus and fired, but were OOF right across the image when viewed in Lightroom.  Does not stand comparison with my TL lenses I'm afraid.  I did upgrade the firmware via Sigma's support page, but there was no improvement.  I realise the camera itself is no star when it comes to AF and probably contributed, but the lens did not do well.

IQ was pretty good in daylight at f2.8 or smaller.  I was able to reproduce the sort of shots Jayne and others have shared.   The shot of the bee and flower below was fine tuned with manual focus (as you can see, I do need reliable autofocus!).   Indoors in low light the IQ deteriorated quite noticeably.  Images were flat and colour and contrast reduced.  At f1.4 I could not get accurately focused shots in many cases.  Disappointing for an f1.4 lens.  I guess there is no such thing as a bargain, really - when it comes to lenses, you get what you pay for.

So now I am debating what to do next.  Splash out for the TL60, which would be a huge further commitment to the CL system when there is no CL2 in sight.  And the TL2 range is end-of-life.  Try another 3rd party portrait lens?  Switch to another camera system?  I'm not really happy with where Leica has left me at this point in time.

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 August 16, 2021 by rob_w

[Boojay]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, rob_w said:

I realise the thread has drifted well off topic but thought I would close out this particular topic here.  I tried the Sigma 56 over the weekend.  As Oldwino (love the name!) says, I too found the focus slow and unreliable.  Too slow for candid shots of people - I had a lot of misses and some that the camera thought were in focus and fired, but were OOF right across the image when viewed in Lightroom.  Does not stand comparison with my TL lenses I'm afraid.  I did upgrade the firmware via Sigma's support page, but there was no improvement.  I realise the camera itself is no star when it comes to AF and probably contributed, but the lens did not do well.

IQ was pretty good in daylight at f2.8 or smaller.  I was able to reproduce the sort of shots Jayne and others have shared.   The shot of the bee and flower below was fine tuned with manual focus (as you can see, I do need reliable autofocus!).   Indoors in low light the IQ deteriorated quite noticeably.  Images were flat and colour and contrast reduced.  At f1.4 I could not get accurately focused shots in many cases.  Disappointing for an f1.4 lens.  I guess there is no such thing as a bargain, really - when it comes to lenses, you get what you pay for.

So now I am debating what to do next.  Splash out for the TL60, which would be a huge further commitment to the CL system when there is no CL2 in sight.  And the TL2 range is end-of-life.  Try another 3rd party portrait lens?  Switch to another camera system?  I'm not really happy with where Leica has left me at this point in time.

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!

Hmmm, strange.. when I read oldwino's comment about the 56 Sigma  at the time I had the 18-56 mounted, did a few sweeps around my kitchen with the zoom then swapped to the 56 - if any difference in AF speed (or accuracy) in was imperceptible to me.  Again having just read your comment Rob, I did the same again only had the 18TL mounted at the time.. same result.  Now, if you are both up to date with firmware, the only thing I can think is I got "sample" lucky.   I will agree, colour and contrast are not at the same level as the TL lenses, but I wouldn't expect that given the price differential, and it's a couple of sliders in Lightroom to fix, having a lightweight AF lens in this focal length is useful for me.  

With regard to where Leica is with APS-c offerings, it feels like we are all in the dark.. and as an SL2 user with no delivery of promised firmware update for AF improvements a la SL2's, even realising that it's not that exciting an improvement, I share your feelings😒.   I'm in no doubt my CL stays with me, so useful as a travel companion, daily pop in any bag camera, vehicle for my m lenses etc etc, but as far as continuing my journey with L mount....not sure.   As far your need is concerned Rob, have you tried the Sigma 45 2.8 - lots of very satisfied users of that one, not me, I can't help there but Michali and Marac (I think)  have posted some fine shots.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[wda]

2 hours ago, rob_w said:

I realise the thread has drifted well off topic but thought I would close out this particular topic here.  I tried the Sigma 56 over the weekend.  As Oldwino (love the name!) says, I too found the focus slow and unreliable.  Too slow for candid shots of people - I had a lot of misses and some that the camera thought were in focus and fired, but were OOF right across the image when viewed in Lightroom.  Does not stand comparison with my TL lenses I'm afraid.  I did upgrade the firmware via Sigma's support page, but there was no improvement.  I realise the camera itself is no star when it comes to AF and probably contributed, but the lens did not do well.

IQ was pretty good in daylight at f2.8 or smaller.  I was able to reproduce the sort of shots Jayne and others have shared.   The shot of the bee and flower below was fine tuned with manual focus (as you can see, I do need reliable autofocus!).   Indoors in low light the IQ deteriorated quite noticeably.  Images were flat and colour and contrast reduced.  At f1.4 I could not get accurately focused shots in many cases.  Disappointing for an f1.4 lens.  I guess there is no such thing as a bargain, really - when it comes to lenses, you get what you pay for.

So now I am debating what to do next.  Splash out for the TL60, which would be a huge further commitment to the CL system when there is no CL2 in sight.  And the TL2 range is end-of-life.  Try another 3rd party portrait lens?  Switch to another camera system?  I'm not really happy with where Leica has left me at this point in time.

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!

Rob, interesting to read of your experience. Considering your interest in close distance subjects, you might be interested in the Sigma 70mm macro lens, which equates to 105mm in full-frame terms. It is one of the bargains in the range, is beautifully made and slick in auto-focus mode. The only negative is size. Unless majoring on botanical subjects, I probably would not travel with it. My 75mm Summarit , with M-adapter, would be my first choice alternative lens for travel in that focal-length range..

[oldwino]

As I (think I) said, the 65mm full frame lens is just fine on the CL. And the 30/1.4 is absolutely great. 
I did try the 45 Sigma, but the copy I got was in poor shape and wouldn’t focus beyond 10’ or so.