Leica APS-C -- No more!

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

16 minutes ago, elambo said:

A recent post with a pic of a Leica competitor's camera, illustrated as *valid* context amidst a Leica camera thread, is admonished as off-topic, but this clearly off-topic sidetrip is allowed because a mod is participating? Rules here appear to have a duality that I don't understand.

Has nothing to do with duality. Threads do wander all the time, but we  try to keep non-Leica discussions in one place as much as possible.

[Advertisement]

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

[kodachrome]

On 6/1/2022 at 4:51 AM, nicci78 said:

I don't see fantastic SL lenses nor Lumix S optics. Only humongous ones. Especially next to way smaller but as competent Sony G Master series. 

Like Sigma did for its DSLR Art series, it is easy to make excellent but huge lenses. But very hard to make very good and small ones. Sadly Leica got lazy and choose the easy path of huge optics. Quite a disappointment. 

Really take a look at Sony GM lenses. 

The Sigma APS-C lens for L-mount are wider apertures, physically much smaller, and a fraction of the price. I love them all. Yes, there is a difference in some color contrast or the edge sharpness, but at the price point being 1/2 to a 1/5 the price for the same focal lengths. When it comes to reason for purchase it was the size that got me more than other factors, It keeps the whole system small, in a small bag for lots of options. 

With L-mount full frame everything is BIG. The highest grade lens I get, but the good average lens are too. Such as a comparison between Sony 55mm f/1.8 verse the Panasonic 50mm f/1.8

[nicci78]

Except that Sigma APS-C DC DN lenses are not L-mount exclusive !! 
available in Canon EF-M, Sony E and Fujifilm X-mount. 
So no real advantage for Leica. 

[elambo]

18 hours ago, kodachrome said:

When it comes to reason for purchase it was the size that got me more than other factors, It keeps the whole system small, in a small bag for lots of options. 

Honestly, that was a major factor in my decision as well. All else was relatively equal, so it came down to the Sigma having slower focus times (a clear negative), but that was offset by the price and size.

[gotium]

So (drumroll....) my CL replacement is a Ricoh kit: the III, the IIIx and the teleconverter. So far so excellent, really. 

What is *really* surprising me is (1) that the IIIx gives me more pleasing results than my Q2 in crop mode, and (2) just how close the IIIx comes to an M-mount 50 mm lens (f/2 apo no less) - barring high ISO, where there really is a sensor difference, it's on a pixel-peeping level. Food for thought. 

[IkarusJohn]

Did your CL stop working?

[Archiver]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 3/5/2022 at 3:50 AM, lct said:

The next SL2S could perfectly be smaller, the same way as my compact R4S compared to the R3. Won't happen tomorrow for sure but in 2024 or 2025 why not?

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!

Leica would need to weigh up the costs of producing a completely new body vs the possible sales that may come from a smaller and lighter camera. I'd buy a smaller SL2-S descendant, but I already have a Panasonic S5.

[Archiver]

3 hours ago, gotium said:

So (drumroll....) my CL replacement is a Ricoh kit: the III, the IIIx and the teleconverter. So far so excellent, really. 

What is *really* surprising me is (1) that the IIIx gives me more pleasing results than my Q2 in crop mode, and (2) just how close the IIIx comes to an M-mount 50 mm lens (f/2 apo no less) - barring high ISO, where there really is a sensor difference, it's on a pixel-peeping level. Food for thought. 

I still use my Ricoh GXR kit when I want something small with high quality images. The sealed aps-c modules like 28 and 50 have excellent optical quality, and the M mount module gives access to the widest aperture lenses from any manual focus SLR or M mount system. For a 12mp camera from the early 2010s, this camera does very well today. Its only drawback is the long shot to shot time, and the small buffer. Ricoh make wonderful cameras, but I hope the shutter assembly of the GR III variants are more robust than earlier versions.

[gotium]

34 minutes ago, IkarusJohn said:

Did your CL stop working?

No, it got sold.

[IkarusJohn]

52 minutes ago, gotium said:

No, it got sold.

It’s a serious question.  You bought it for a purpose, was it still fulfilling that purpose? Or does your new camera fill your needs better …

[gotium]

8 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

It’s a serious question.  You bought it for a purpose, was it still fulfilling that purpose? Or does your new camera fill your needs better …

I was really still in the process of building a CL kit - I would have wanted to add more lenses, but stopped when it looked like they might drop the line. So I had kind of a "half kit" that I didn't feel like adding to. 

The Ricoh is already ahead of the CL in several ways important to me anyway - smaller, much quieter, much better face and eye AF, and significantly better IQ than the CL with the TL18, my most-used focal length. 

But I did fiddle and vacillate for a few months before moving fully over. Now that I'm here, though, it's making me really think about the rest of my (non-CL) kit. I think I've been too precious about Leica gear. 

Edited June 13, 2022 by gotium

[elambo]

On 6/13/2022 at 7:58 AM, gotium said:

...significantly better IQ than the CL with the TL18, my most-used focal length.

That really surprises me. A friend has the Ricoh and after shooting similar subjects -- him with the Ricoh and me with the CL -- I didn't find the Ricoh's IQ to equal the CL. I'm glad to read that it's working out for you.

[wlaidlaw]

The digital Ricoh cameras I have owned both had a problem with Chrominance noise and to a lesser extent, luminance noise, at higher ISO settings but admittedly that was a few years ago. 

Wilson

[gotium]

6 hours ago, elambo said:

That really surprises me. A friend has the Ricoh and after shooting similar subjects -- him with the Ricoh and me with the CL -- I didn't find the Ricoh's IQ to equal the CL. I'm glad to read that it's working out for you.

I would test carefully using the exact same subjects, both at inifinity focus and close-range - it’s not subtle. The TL 18, at least my (ex-) copy, is fine in the center but gets blurry pretty quickly toward the edges, not to mention the corners. The colors are lovely but the resolution I find really poor. The Ricoh lens is pretty even across the frame and really quite sharp. Not a close comparison at all. 

Edited June 15, 2022 by gotium

[gotium]

5 hours ago, wlaidlaw said:

The digital Ricoh cameras I have owned both had a problem with Chrominance noise and to a lesser extent, luminance noise, at higher ISO settings but admittedly that was a few years ago. 

Wilson

Yes, chrominance noise bothers me by 6400 on the Ricoh. I think the CL may be better in that regard. 

Edited June 15, 2022 by gotium

[SoCalLeicanator]

17 hours ago, gotium said:

I would test carefully using the exact same subjects, both at inifinity focus and close-range - it’s not subtle. The TL 18, at least my (ex-) copy, is fine in the center but gets blurry pretty quickly toward the edges, not to mention the corners. The colors are lovely but the resolution I find really poor. The Ricoh lens is pretty even across the frame and really quite sharp. Not a close comparison at all. 

I have a GRIIIx and honestly I was expecting it outperform the CL and found it not to be the case with TL 18 and 23 lenses.  I understand there is variability in the lenses so maybe I lucked out.  It also doesn't even come close to my Q2.  Is the Q2 6x better, no, but there is a big difference.

[Mr.Prime]

On 6/13/2022 at 10:58 AM, gotium said:

I was really still in the process of building a CL kit - I would have wanted to add more lenses, but stopped when it looked like they might drop the line. So I had kind of a "half kit" that I didn't feel like adding to. 

The Ricoh is already ahead of the CL in several ways important to me anyway - smaller, much quieter, much better face and eye AF, and significantly better IQ than the CL with the TL18, my most-used focal length. 

But I did fiddle and vacillate for a few months before moving fully over. Now that I'm here, though, it's making me really think about the rest of my (non-CL) kit. I think I've been too precious about Leica gear. 

This is the point for many of us, we got out of CL because we didn't want to invest further - I mean, we're all affected by GAS and if you have a 'dead end' system where's the fun? It's true that the CL doesn't suddenly stop working and those with full kits can continue to exploit them, but I got out partly because I expected the CL to be obsoleted. It's true my M3 is also obsoleted, but it's not a dead system, I still buy lenses for it and Leica still makes the M-A.

Edited June 15, 2022 by Mr.Prime

[IkarusJohn]

Where’s the fun?  Using the TL2 with the 11-23 zoom and the 35 Summilux-TL (and the 28 Summaron-M and 35 Summilux-M pre-asph).  Loads of fun and long may it last …

Edited June 15, 2022 by IkarusJohn

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[gotium]

2 hours ago, SoCalLeicanator said:

I have a GRIIIx and honestly I was expecting it outperform the CL and found it not to be the case with TL 18 and 23 lenses.  I understand there is variability in the lenses so maybe I lucked out.  It also doesn't even come close to my Q2.  Is the Q2 6x better, no, but there is a big difference.

Well that's odd. Two of you out there with better TL18 results than the GRiii. I'm tempted to upload some examples because my GRiii *clearly* outclasses my (ex) TL18. 

I agree I prefer the Q2 in every way except cost and size, in 28 mm mode. Not so much in crop mode. 

[MJB]

15 hours ago, gotium said:

 I'm tempted to upload some examples because my GRiii *clearly* outclasses my (ex) TL18. 

I personally can't take any camera without a viewfinder seriously, but even if the Ricoh did outclass the CL with the TL18, so what? Does it also outclass the 11-23, 23, 35, etc.? I myself have no objections to the performance of my TL18, but not a single person has ever claimed it to be the standout lens in the system.

Not knocking the IQ of the Ricoh, by the way.  It's just that the user experience is also important to me, and a GRIII will never handle like a CL (to me).

Edited June 16, 2022 by MJB