Jump to content

Options to replace the CL


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

35 minutes ago, Louis said:

I have used 60TL and I know how good it is for macro; although not much control of the background for other than macro.

I have a few TL lenses and would love to use them on another body if Leica really drops CL. But unfortunately, I don't see much choice!... I just  don't find any interest on any other  of them! The sensor on SL2-S becomes really small with the crop with TL lenses; so, I was wondering about the IQ for prints!

 

From memory I think that its 6mp.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 168
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

All shot on the SL2S with the TL 55 =135 .

iso 1600 and above .... slight crop and reduced to 4mp for this forum .

Edited by Michael Markey
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Louis said:

Michael, thank you for the samples. The focus seem a little too soft to my eyes; maybe its me! ;) 

If I am not wrong, the sensor of SL2-S becomes around 10mp with TL lenses.

Yes ...I find that a constant problem with the SL2s .

I`ve tried just about every focus combination and still I`m not happy.

Never experienced this in a camera before .

I often shoot low light and often fast `ish moving subjects .

Never had a problem with the Sony bodies and they were old bodies or even the Canon 5D3/4 .

I sold a number of good cameras to jump into this system .

Very demoralising  but I see it in other posts too .

I`m loathe to ditch it but I`m not liking what I`m seeing .

The CL is fine .

Ps Your going to tell me that you use one and your Insta stream is spot on  :)

 

Edited by Michael Markey
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is why SL2-s is not in my list and SL2 is still too expensive to replace CL. This little CL is so good and really impossible to replace: I sincerely hope Leica would not stop the continuation; it would really be stupid and if they need cash,  nothing could replace the popular  CL. If they need to be considered as a serious camera maker, they need to have  a APS-c.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 minute ago, Louis said:

This is why SL2-s is not in my list and SL2 is still too expensive to replace CL. This little CL is so good and really impossible to replace: I sincerely hope Leica would not stop the continuation; it would really be stupid and if they need cash,  nothing could replace the popular  CL. If they need to be considered as a serious camera maker, they need to have  a APS-c.

I feel exactly the same way .

The CL with the 55 -135 is more effective than the SL2s with the 70 -200 .

Ah well .... I`ll give the S another run and then if its not coming to it`ll be back to the CL and I`ll get something else for the sports shots .

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, jaapv said:

Panasonic S5, various Nikon and Canon mirrorless - there is a lot to choose from.

S5 is a couple of sizes up, and heavier proportionately (heavier than the M10R). Nikon Z5/Z6, Canon R5/6 ditto. Perhaps I should add the Canon R to the list - looks lighter and less ugly than the Nikon, though I'm not enthused.

When I asked for small and light, I was thinking of size and weight of the digital CL, and the screw mount Leica. The M is already too heavy for a lightweight camera. I accept more weight in the SL2-S, but when I hand a M to a non-photographic friend their first comment is how heavy it is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see any risk for Leica to not continue the CL line.   

The CL already has enough pixels to make very large prints.  Improvements such as IBIS, high ISO may be more meaningful for a camera of this size than an increase in resolution. 

I'm perfectly happy with the current CL.  If a replacement comes out I will most likely skip it as I think digital has reached a level of maturity where skipping every other generation makes sense for many users.  I have an SL which I am totally happy with and didn't see enough of a reason to opt for the SL2, for example.  And of all of SL2's improvements, IBIS is what to me would be the most important (to help manual focusing of long teles).

 

Edited by cpclee
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, LocalHero1953 said:

I know there are many people satisfied by the CL, as am I in many ways, but the question at the top of the thread was about what could be considered as an alternative in the same niche. 

Well the *obvious* alternative is Sony APS-C or the a7C, but I've tried a gazillion times to switch to a Sony system and have never managed to make myself like it. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

I know there are many people satisfied by the CL, as am I in many ways, but the question at the top of the thread was about what could be considered as an alternative in the same niche. 

I don't think you can improve much in the APS-C world.  In fact even in the full frame world systems that are constrained by legacy mounts (Leica M, traditional DSLRs, etc) aren't going to be much of an improvement over the CL.  (The TL lens system was very much engineered to rival the image quality of these legacy systems while staying within the APS-C footprint.) The SL2 will be a meaningful IQ improvement but the size/weight penalty is considerable.

Perhaps the Hasselblad X1D system is worth a consideration as it is the most compact system I can think of that offers a very significant IQ upgrade. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great question and I'd like to know the answer, too. I'm looking for the best back up for my M10 and also want something reasonably compact and definitely Leica-like. I have tried the X Vario and X 113 but they are a bit long in the tooth. Unsure about the CL but the Q looks like one of the best choices.

One thing I really like is the M design with analog dials so that's an important criterion for me. Fuji is about the only direct competitor. A shame there is no Panasonic GX 85 update.

What are the main factors you find that matter: IQ, sensor size, lens choice, controls, body size? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

I am thinking about alternatives if there is to be no CL2 (which remains a matter of speculation).
I asked: what's the solution, if you want a small, light, high quality modern camera, of simple, easily controlled design, that can bear comparison with the latest sensor technology for IQ?

Current Leica CL. Best APS-C body for my M lenses. I don't need more. FF cameras are another story.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Paul, I chose and ended up with the CL after using seriously (and for paid work) a rather large number of other cameras. As far as I'm concerned, there is no "better alternative" with an APS-C sensor. Period. I went to medium format digital to get something that is actually noticeably better performing with respect to image quality.

The only alternative to the CL for my use, at present, is another CL for backup. That's my opinion, and I'm sticking to it. 

G

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, NZDavid said:

What are the main factors you find that matter: IQ, sensor size, lens choice, controls, body size? 

IQ (not megapixels), body size and controls, in that order

 

 

Edit. In fact what I would immediately buy is just a CL with an updated sensor. There are other things I would like, but IQ is the only thing making me look elsewhere.

Edited by LocalHero1953
Link to post
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

IQ (not megapixels), body size and controls, in that order

Have you considered the new Nikon Zfc? It's small, with a classic / retro design, and the Nikon sensor plays really well with most M lenses. No IBIS though. Reviews are good, but I haven't had the chance to see one in person yet. I'd buy this over a Fuji.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Simone_DF said:

Have you considered the new Nikon Zfc? It's small, with a classic / retro design, and the Nikon sensor plays really well with most M lenses. No IBIS though. Reviews are good, but I haven't had the chance to see one in person yet. I'd buy this over a Fuji.

 

I had forgotten about the Nikon Z fc, and will add it to the list of options. I don't want a large range of lenses, but I would like the ones I have to be of similar IQ to Leica's.

I would like simple controls, but they don't have to be explicitly analogue. I shoot mostly in A mode with Auto ISO; with both CL and SL2-S I set the dial that falls naturally under my thumb to exposure compensation, and the other to shutter speed. I am happy for the dials to remain unlabelled. (My next most frequently used control is switching between focusing modes - usually face recognition to spot and back again. Sadly, Leica does not implement such 'toggle' button options in its interfaces.)

This shows a big benefit of staying in the Leica ecosystem - the cameras work in very similar ways. Even though I use the Sigma fp mainly for video, and I like its interface and controls, there are certain ways of doing things that I have to keep reminding myself. E.g. set a user profile on the Sigma, make some changes to the camera settings on the fly, switch off the camera, and when you switch on again, the same user profile is reloaded; do the same with a Leica and it starts up with the same settings as when you switched it off. Neither is right or wrong, they are just different. 

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.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...