Jump to content

OhOh, future of CL?


PDP

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

58 minutes ago, jaapv said:

The Wiki was not there when I collected my camera… I bought it in a town where only lived for little more than a year, so I am 100% sure.  I think that the CL confusion arises from the existence of the Leitz-Minolta CL for the Japanese market (see Cameraquest)  All CL types were built by Minolta. It is not logical that they would stop building the camera for a few years and then buy the full rights. The first CLE dates from 1981.  

I have no doubt that you know when you bought your camera - that was not my point.  What seems to have been lost in the weeds is what happened between the end of the M5 (1975) and the end of the CL (1976), and the release of the M6 (1984, though you got yours in 1983).  It seems that gap was filled by the M4-2 & M4-P.  I’m not sure it really matters what Minolta was up to, as we were discussing the Leica offerings.

Relevance?  Well, that shakey period aside, Leica has maintained the M camera system since its inception in 1954.  The reflex cameras came and went, and there were a lot of compact cameras along the way; but the M system has been a constant.  The L system has only been around for 7 years or so.  I don’t think there is any doubt about Leica’s commitment to the SL line, but the TL/CL … at best, it seems to be drifting.

The others in the L Mount alliance seem to be making full frame cameras and lenses, but no one else is making APS-C cameras for the L mount.  That could be a unique marketing position, or a millstone.  My perception is that the APS-C L mount camera was centred on the T camera.  That was released prematurely (a mistake Leica was careful to avoid with the SL).  They then rebadged effectively the same camera with the TL, and that didn’t really seem to do the job.  The TL2 finally resolved those problems, but by then it seems to have been too late.

The CL was an effort to solve the TL’s major problem - traditional Leica buyers didn’t like the cellphone-esque haptics and body.  Interestingly, a less functional, but otherwise identical camera, wrapped in traditional Leica M form had some appeal to the Leica buyers.  But it was never Leica’s core intention for APS-C.  We’ve had three versions of the T format, and one CL.  I suspect there might be something else for the APS-C L mount lens owners, one day.  Or, it will quietly be dropped, and those lens owners will be told to use the SL.

Edited by IkarusJohn
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

True.  But, why have a full frame camera like an SL2, then use a crop lens?  I never use my TL lenses on my SL.

I use my TL 23 f2 on my SL2 often.. it’s a super compact 35mm equivalent and the IBIS on SL2 is a great advantage.. I passed on a 35 SL lens and kept this one instead.. I also use the TL 11-23 on my SL2 sometimes.. I don’t have the 16-35 SL so the 11-23 fills that gap for me

Edited by aksclix
Typo
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

The CL was an effort to solve the TL’s major problem - traditional Leica buyers didn’t like the cellphone-esque haptics and body.  Interestingly, a less functional, but otherwise identical camera, wrapped in traditional Leica M form had some appeal to the Leica buyers.  But it was never Leica’s core intention for APS-C.  We’ve had three versions of the T format, and one CL.  I suspect there might be something else for the APS-C L mount lens owners, one day.  Or, it will quietly be dropped, and those lens owners will be told to use the SL.

Adding an EVF, expanding the range of the menu system and speeding up AF makes the CL less functional?? (I owned the TL2 before and, later, in parallel with the CL).
I suspect the three versions of the T was as much an attempt to make it more sellable while they got a CL ready than an indication of its importance to Leica's plans.

I remember commenting after the T launch that its significance should be seen not so much in the APSC format as in (a) the mount, which was clearly designed for full frame not APSC (the SL was launched 18 months later) (b) the body, with its CNC machining from an alloy cast, a sign of future body manufacturing methods rather than sheet metal and brass and (c) the touch screen interface, which would be rolled out across other bodies to draw in a younger generation. Well, I got one of those right, one a bit right and one wrong.🙄. Nevertheless, whether the T was a success or failure as a product, Leica learned a lot from the technology it launched in 2014. 

Edited by LocalHero1953
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

.......  Or, it will quietly be dropped, and those lens owners will be told to use the SL.

I suspect this will be the outcome although given Leica`s track record I suspect that there will be little in the way of communication.

They seem to just move "forward" and don`t look back  ... 

In a way it suits me ,although I`ll be sorry to see the CL line disappear .

I already use the CL lenses on my SL2S.

The reduction in mp I can live with and the SL2s  with the 55 -135 attached can fit into a small Billingham .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Which will be less than smart. Those who  bought the CL because they thought the SL too expensive will flee to Panasonic, those who bought the CL because of size either Fuji (and sell their lenses) or the smallest Panasonic/Sigma offering they’ll find. In both cases a red dot lost.   

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Viv said:

To my own surprise, I use the CL less than the Q2.

Probably because the Q2 has better ergonomics.

It’s just a lovely camera and the one I have with me now on a 4 day trip away

I like the freedom of not being able to change lenses sometimes 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

I have no doubt that you know when you bought your camera - that was not my point.  What seems to have been lost in the weeds is what happened between the end of the M5 (1975) and the end of the CL (1976), and the release of the M6 (1984, though you got yours in 1983).  It seems that gap was filled by the M4-2 & M4-P.  I’m not sure it really matters what Minolta was up to, as we were discussing the Leica offerings.

Relevance?  Well, that shakey period aside, Leica has maintained the M camera system since its inception in 1954.  The reflex cameras came and went, and there were a lot of compact cameras along the way; but the M system has been a constant.  The L system has only been around for 7 years or so.  I don’t think there is any doubt about Leica’s commitment to the SL line, but the TL/CL … at best, it seems to be drifting.

The others in the L Mount alliance seem to be making full frame cameras and lenses, but no one else is making APS-C cameras for the L mount.  That could be a unique marketing position, or a millstone.  My perception is that the APS-C L mount camera was centred on the T camera.  That was released prematurely (a mistake Leica was careful to avoid with the SL).  They then rebadged effectively the same camera with the TL, and that didn’t really seem to do the job.  The TL2 finally resolved those problems, but by then it seems to have been too late.

The CL was an effort to solve the TL’s major problem - traditional Leica buyers didn’t like the cellphone-esque haptics and body.  Interestingly, a less functional, but otherwise identical camera, wrapped in traditional Leica M form had some appeal to the Leica buyers.  But it was never Leica’s core intention for APS-C.  We’ve had three versions of the T format, and one CL.  I suspect there might be something else for the APS-C L mount lens owners, one day.  Or, it will quietly be dropped, and those lens owners will be told to use the SL.

The competitive landscape has changed since the release of the CL, including competition coming from Leica's own SL line.  Back then, the 24mp SL was priced at about $6500; the price was later reduced to $4500 or so which is where the SL2-S got priced.  Quite plausibly, the economics (both in terms of the manufacturing cost and the consumers' willingness to pay for an APS-C camera in 2022) will compel Leica to avoid making a $2500 CL2 and instead go for a $3500-$4000 full frame EVF L mount body that is basically a 24mp Q body sans lens.  Such a body may just make more economic sense for Leica and it ain't so bad for the Leica photographer either.  The camera is FF but you decide whether you want to mount a FF or APS-C L mount lens (or an M lens via an adapter.)  Such a camera serves CL clientele as well as users currently resorting to M + Visoflex.

Personally I can be happy with either outcome. 

Edited by cpclee
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, cpclee said:

The competitive landscape has changed since the release of the CL, including competition coming from Leica's own SL line.  Back then, the 24mp SL was priced at about $6500; the price was later reduced to $4500 or so which is where the SL2-S got priced.  Quite plausibly, the economics (both in terms of the manufacturing cost and the consumers' willingness to pay for an APS-C camera in 2022) will compel Leica to avoid making a $2500 CL2 and instead go for a $3500-$4000 full frame EVF L mount body that is basically a 24mp Q body sans lens.  Such a body may just make more economic sense for Leica and it ain't so bad for the Leica photographer either.  The camera is FF but you decide whether you want to mount a FF or APS-C L mount lens (or an M lens via an adapter.)  Such a camera serves CL clientele as well as users currently resorting to M + Visoflex.

Personally I can be happy with either outcome. 

I'm also implying here that Leica doesn't seem to have the kind of pricing power with L mount products as they do M mount.  You see that in their needing to reduce the price on the SL when the Panasonic S1 with more pixels and a lower price.  So if their pricing power cannot lead to an APS-C product with an attractive margin, their next best bet will be to go slightly higher spec, eg fullframe.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, cpclee said:

 Quite plausibly, the economics (both in terms of the manufacturing cost and the consumers' willingness to pay for an APS-C camera in 2022) will compel Leica to avoid making a $2500 CL2 and instead go for a $3500-$4000 full frame EVF L mount body that is basically a 24mp Q body sans lens.  Such a body may just make more economic sense for Leica and it ain't so bad for the Leica photographer either.  The camera is FF but you decide whether you want to mount a FF or APS-C L mount lens (or an M lens via an adapter.)  Such a camera serves CL clientele as well as users currently resorting to M + Visoflex.

Personally I can be happy with either outcome. 

That's a good point about the lesser  bargaining power of Leica for those hoping for a new ASPC CL2. It's hard for consumers to justify  the extra price when there is cheaper FF options in the the market...Doesn't make sense for a CL2

Why not a CL like a minilux. A compact FF 40mm with AF 😍

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course Leica can produce a CL2 at a 2000-2500 price point. Just not in Germany. 
It is not just about the margin on a specific camera body. It is also about keeping customers in the brand, selling them lenses, accessories and the next model, even upselling to another line in the future. Companies like Leica thrive on continuity.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

Of course Leica can produce a CL2 at a 2000-2500 price point. Just not in Germany. 
It is not just about the margin on a specific camera body. It is also about keeping customers in the brand, selling them lenses, accessories and the next model, even upselling to another line in the future. Companies like Leica thrive on continuity.

I don't have a crystal ball and I'm just guessing like everyone else.  All I'm saying is as a firm they may have multiple angles to consider.  But whether they come out with a CL2 or fullframe EVF L mount camera, I don't necessarily see there is much to fear in us getting abandoned.  I don't see them leaving this constituency unserved even if the economics and competitive landscape have changed somewhat. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 11/4/2021 at 5:44 PM, SoCalLeicanator said:

Does anyone else agree with me that dpreview deserves a little blame in this?  They completely panned the CL and didn't even bother doing a full review.  I would imagine they are the most visited review site.  

SoCal,

I agree with you.  And you struck a fun nerve.

I love my CL, and would be excited for a CL2.  It's always exciting to see new stuff.  My only fear is what happens down the road if it breaks and I can't buy a replacement new.  I have a Nikon 1 AW1 that I adore and is almost always sitting in the sand next to me when we go to the beach, but if it breaks, well, I'm out of luck.  You can't perch a Leica CL in the dry sand next to your beach chair.  Or, at least I don't do that.

DPR.  Not everyone takes what they read on that site with a grain of salt like they are supposed to.  I frequent that site--mostly for a chuckle.  I am entertained by the crazy back and forth in the discussions about Sony versus everyone else.  And ANY article with the work Leica in it, spins way too many people into a frothy rage in the discussions comparing shear specs of a Leica to say, a Sony A1 or Nikon D850--mostly the Sony goons stirring trouble though;) Some of it is in good fun, but more and more of it lately is down right rude, and the stuff you probably wouldn't say in person.  It ain't just about the specs, you basement nerds.  I've so often just wanted to pipe in and ask, "have you actually shot with a Leica...or even held one in your hand?"  Most comments are along the lines of "you can have so much more camera in another brand for the money..."  I also get people telling me I could get so much more house for my money if I moved out to the far out suburbs, too.  Well, I like my Leicas because of the pictures they make, the way they feel in my hands, and they just make me happy.  Just like my 1930's old brick house that I paid three times more for than I should have.

DPR didn't do a full review of the CL, but there's an old YouTube video review done by The Camera Store--the dude who is now the video review guy at DPR.  Chris is his name.  He really didn't like the CL--I did yell at the TV and told him to read the damned manual and do a firmware update!  But the video is from a while back, so he didn't hear me.  Chris loved the Q2, and Q2M, so it's a little weird he hated all the controls of the CL, etc., when they aren't too different?  Like with my Nikons, you learn one, the others fit the muscle memory pretty well. I can go from an F6 to a Df and my fingers don't get lost.  And the Leica experience is even tighter.  Reading the SL2 manual almost feels like they copied and pasted a whole bunch of stuff between camera manuals--because they can--they're so similar across the brand in terms of where stuff is and how it works.  And that's elegant and hard to do if you think about it.  Shoot...line up a CL, SL2 and Q2 side by side and look at the backs...almost identical:)

DPR is a good resource for great close up pics of the new gear, and the spec write ups are very nice when they do a full review.  But for truly great write ups about the whole package, there are far better sources--particularly for Leica and Nikon.  This forum for example, is a tremendous resource for Leica.

Sorry for the soapbox rant, but I took your bait and ran with it when I saw the mention of DPR:) DPR is different now than it was when it first started.  It feels like Sony has dirty pictures of someone on the staff at DPR tucked away in a manila envelope somewhere;). If you're a Leica or Nikon guy and post at DPR, you're like that guy in shiny leathers riding a BMW motorcycle who walks into a dusty Harley biker bar late at night and orders a glass of white wine at the bar and complains about the cigarette smoke...(the BMW guy is the Leica guy, the Harley guys are the Sony guys.)

That was fun.

Jcalchi

  • Like 4
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, dkCambridgeshire said:

Q&A session at Leica Duke St 11 Nov 2021:

"Leica Camera has a roadmap ... the future is full fame mirrorless GPS ..." 

No hints or rumours about APS-C 

I also inhabit a parallel universe; there Leica has published its roadmap for all to see. Sorry, I can't tell you any more. NDA. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

In my parallel universe the CL owners migrate to Sigma and Fuji without ever looking back at the train wreck of poor communication from the likes of Stefan Daniel. No NDA can change that. In a Fortune 100 company Stefan Daniel would have been fired for poor communication to customers and consequent loss of revenue. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, jaapv said:

Of course Leica can produce a CL2 at a 2000-2500 price point. Just not in Germany. 
It is not just about the margin on a specific camera body. It is also about keeping customers in the brand, selling them lenses, accessories and the next model, even upselling to another line in the future. Companies like Leica thrive on continuity.

No, they thrive on sales.

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.

×
×
  • Create New...