CL - The Image Thread

[LocalHero1953]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Very nice, you seem to enjoy your CL very much. Mine is ready for collection, I should have it in my hands in the next couple of days

I'm waiting for the 18mm, but meanwhile it's fun to try some others. 

[Bohns]

To be honnest, I am not really convinced by the pictures I saw on this thread...

 

I don’t know whether it is because of a somewhat « aggressive » bokeh, or the transitions between what is sharp and what is soft, but I did not push my usual « wow ! » after viewing the first shots from a new Leica camera.

 

Sorry to break a little the ongoing enthusiasm. Maybe more time will solve my blasé attitude...

Edited November 26, 2017 by Bohns

[LocalHero1953]

To be honnest, I am not really convinced by the pictures I saw on this thread...

 

I don’t know whether it is because of a somewhat « aggressive » bokeh, or the transitions between what is sharp and what is soft, but I did not push my usual « wow ! » after viewing the first shots from a new Leica camera.

 

Sorry to break a little the ongoing enthusiasm. Maybe more time will solve my blasé attitude...

No worries! I'm neither trying to sell the CL, nor am I trying to tell anyone the IQ is better than any competition. My comments refer mostly to the usability of the camera - responsiveness, AF etc.

But I think you're misleading yourself if you expect to be convinced by downsized images on a screen. If you're buying a camera based on IQ, then you need to take your own test shots or find some raws you can analyse.

 

Edit: I'm sure you realise bokeh and transitions between sharp and soft, are more a function of the lens than the camera.

Edited November 26, 2017 by LocalHero1953

[microview]

Post 58 "had a chance to grab the CL for a few minutes , took a couple of shots indoors and had a walk around the block  with  a couple of vintage lenses". The two with the v1 35 Summilux very nice – and thanks for allowing download jpgs.

[jonoslack]

Anyone using the WATE on the CL.  I'd be interested to see how the two go together.  I'm almost tempted by a CL as a lightweight travel carry all the time complement to my M10 based system.

 

Hi There Chris

I haven't tried it - but I certainly will, and report back. 

I don't usually bother with wides on APS-C, but I can  see that 24mm is relevant.

. . . mind you, you could always buy the (really) excellent 11-23

[scott kirkpatrick]

The truly cantankerous can see how the hulking great 18 SEM compares with the new 18 pancake.  Or work with the no longer so little Voightlaender wides:  15, 12, and 10 in the M mount.  They are relatively big lenses, so corner problems might be under control.  I'd expect both Sean Reid and Vieri Bottazzini to have something to say about the latter set.  Personally, I'll try the TL 23/2.0 and both the wide and the long TL zooms. The 35/1.4 is tempting, but I have too many 50's already.

[thighslapper]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The Voigts work excellently (I have the 10&12) on the SL and TL2 so no reason to expect the Cl to be any different.

[Bohns]

No worries! I'm neither trying to sell the CL, nor am I trying to tell anyone the IQ is better than any competition. My comments refer mostly to the usability of the camera - responsiveness, AF etc.

But I think you're misleading yourself if you expect to be convinced by downsized images on a screen. If you're buying a camera based on IQ, then you need to take your own test shots or find some raws you can analyse.

For sure ! But even though, I find the posted files not at the level of the ones which were posted at the time SL or M10 were released.

Additionally, I am not a big fan of « pay per view » when the ticket to see is over 3000 €...

 

Edit: I'm sure you realise bokeh and transitions between sharp and soft, are more a function of the lens than the camera.

Of course, I know that ! And you are right to insist on it. But it needs as well to be considered that DOF on APS-C is not similar to DOF on FF, which is not similar to DOF on MF at the same focal length and the same aperture.

 

Don’t make me wrong : I may agree that this camera is certainly a good hit for travel and portability, with a very good IQ for APS-C. Moreover, it is allowing the use of M, R, TL and SL lenses, which is not true for any other Leica camera but the T’s. But it is not relevant to compare it to a M, nor is it fair to call it « mini M ». Just my 2 cents.

Edited November 27, 2017 by Bohns

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[chris_tribble]

Hi There Chris

I haven't tried it - but I certainly will, and report back. 

I don't usually bother with wides on APS-C, but I can  see that 24mm is relevant.

. . . mind you, you could always buy the (really) excellent 11-23

Jono - greetings reciprocated... Interested to see results.  I have the WATE (which I do like - but don't use so often) so am balancing whether long term, holding on to the 21 SEM (which is really lovely) and using the WATE money for a CL with an AF zoom as this might be an interesting way of extending the system.  Not really thinking of using M lenses on it that much as the TL lenses seem remarkably good...

While in touch, if you were putting money down on a micro 4/3 system like the Olympus or going for Leica's APS-C offering, which way do you think you would jump now that the CL's here?  The only immediate big difference I can see between the systems is that the Oly glass is a bit faster.  I'm not sure if that really matters so much these days...

Any thoughts gratefuly receive!

Best

[LocalHero1953]

Jono - greetings reciprocated... Interested to see results.  I have the WATE (which I do like - but don't use so often) so am balancing whether long term, holding on to the 21 SEM (which is really lovely) and using the WATE money for a CL with an AF zoom as this might be an interesting way of extending the system.  Not really thinking of using M lenses on it that much as the TL lenses seem remarkably good...

While in touch, if you were putting money down on a micro 4/3 system like the Olympus or going for Leica's APS-C offering, which way do you think you would jump now that the CL's here?  The only immediate big difference I can see between the systems is that the Oly glass is a bit faster.  I'm not sure if that really matters so much these days...

Any thoughts gratefuly receive!

Best

The Olympus IBIS helps as well.

[chris_tribble]

The Olympus IBIS helps as well.

Good point!  Setting that aside, I'd be interested to see an objective comparison of the CL with Micro 4/3 systems.  As the APS-C sensor is larger, the 24MP CL sensor should have larger pixel sites and, therefore, better low light performance?  However - as this is an image thread, maybe I should start another thread!

[LocalHero1953]

Awkward neighbours

 

CL + 90-280SL

With full acknowledgement to Jono Slack for the idea!

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!

[Album]

... the first one from this evening ...

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!

[jonoslack]

Jono - greetings reciprocated... Interested to see results.  I have the WATE (which I do like - but don't use so often) so am balancing whether long term, holding on to the 21 SEM (which is really lovely) and using the WATE money for a CL with an AF zoom as this might be an interesting way of extending the system.  Not really thinking of using M lenses on it that much as the TL lenses seem remarkably good...

While in touch, if you were putting money down on a micro 4/3 system like the Olympus or going for Leica's APS-C offering, which way do you think you would jump now that the CL's here?  The only immediate big difference I can see between the systems is that the Oly glass is a bit faster.  I'm not sure if that really matters so much these days...

Any thoughts gratefuly receive!

Best

 

Hi There Chris

I guess I've voted with my feet (I sold my lovely µ43 gear in September). The CL has lots of advantages in practical terms (can take M lenses, can be a backup, better IQ etc.), the lenses are really nice, smaller than the pro Olympus lenses (but without IS). . . not sure if I'd sell my WATE though . . 

[SiOnara]

Just arrived via Red Dot Cameras in London.

Very solid camera apart from the rather flimsy battery cover.

Nice and light. Think it will be a great companion to the M10 etc.

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!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Ingo]

Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe. Leica CL with Apo-Vario-Elmar-TL 1:3.5-4.5 / 55-135 ASPH (what a name for a lens....) @ 55mm.

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[ijporter]

Couple of pics for you with DNGs.

 

that looks like the Sydney Leica store in the Queen Victoria Building!

[ropo54]

Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe. 

 

 

Nice perspective on the Holocaust Memorial.

Such a haunting and meaningful exhibit/sculpture.

Rob

Edited November 28, 2017 by ropo54

[Guest VVJ]

The CL has lots of advantages in practical terms (can take M lenses, can be a backup, better IQ etc.), the lenses are really nice, smaller than the pro Olympus lenses (but without IS). . . 

 

Hi Jono,

 

Any idea on what Leica's image stabilization strategy might be for APS-C cameras moving forward?

 

It seems so inconsistent that they recognized the need for OIS in the SL zooms but completely skipped it for the TL zooms...   contrary to eg.  Fuji who added OIS to 8 out of their 9 zooms...

 

For the already slow zooms the ability to gain 3-4 stops through OIS (or IBIS) could be a lifesaver in some circumstances.  I see it as a huge competitive advantage.

 

Thanks, Joris.

[chris_tribble]

Hi There Chris

I guess I've voted with my feet (I sold my lovely µ43 gear in September). The CL has lots of advantages in practical terms (can take M lenses, can be a backup, better IQ etc.), the lenses are really nice, smaller than the pro Olympus lenses (but without IS). . . not sure if I'd sell my WATE though . . 

Useful to know that the Olympus stuff has gone.  Also interesting what you say about IQ.  In my experience, this is where APS-C will always beat MFT, and why I held back on the OMD2 as a replacement for the 5DIII and L glass.

A major birthday coming up in May, so that might be the way to go (and keep the WATE)...

All good fun anyway