The CL and Q3

[Rosebud55]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have just decided to trade in my CL for a Q2M. I haven’t been using the CL for a while now as I am very fond of my Fujis for apsc. I do have a M246 but find I am wanting autofocus because of eye problems and the Q2M hopefully will be better for me. I will try it first before I sell off my M lenses and M246.

the CL is a great little camera but I have too many cameras too. Also the weather sealing on the Q is attractive, especially with the UK climate, though not at the moment!
 

rosie

[mikeLD]

On 5/10/2023 at 7:03 PM, DenverSteve said:

 

Yes, I had a Q2 and was unhappy waiting in the Q3 line.  I missed my former CL and found a like new one.  Got a 23mm lens and and a 18-56mm tele.  Now I remember what i loved about the CL, everything.  So goodby to the Q2 before the market crashed.  I forqot the CL has two crop zooms 1.3x and 1.7x so the Q2 isn't missed at all. Now that the CL is "obsolete" but does get 6 years of continued support, I feel kind of special !!!!  Just to be complete, my always backup camera is a Panasonic LX100m2!!!!!  Just can't let go of it.  I tried a Leica D-Lux 7 (clone of the LX100m2) but was never comfortable with it and went back.  

Edited July 10, 2023 by mikeLD

[Torpille]

Am 10.5.2023 um 16:27 schrieb Le Chef:

Much discussion and conjecture about the forthcoming Q3 - 60MP sensor, PDAF, better EVF, flippy-flappy LCD etc.

But one thing caught my eye: the possibility of a 90mm crop.

At what point do you buy a Q3 (funds permitting) and sell the CL because it has become redundant? I’m loathed to do that (apart from selling a kidney to pay for the Q3) as it still delivers good IQ, and with denoise software that capability stretches a little further.

What are your thoughts?

comparing these 2 cameras is tricky.

yes the Q2/Q3 is magnificent a 28mm point and shoot.
it makes everyone envious, but let's not forget that the crop function is just marketing. 

The simulated 35mm or 50mm rendering is just an image within an image.
so either we love 28mm and use the digital zoom from time to time, but why exactly?

Or change your lens and compression and adopt a new perspective!

The CL is still excellent, it really zooms in if you want it to, and it's extremely compact if you need it to be... so when I see your seaside images posted a few days ago, I'd say that the Q3 as only camera can't do the job.

i think a new lens for the CL could bring you a lot of pleasure and enhance your images. 

The TL35mm is the rolls royce of the TL line and with the 1.7x digital zoom you can get an excellent 85mm (simulated of course) and for 1/6 the price of the Q3.

 

[mikeLD]

4 minutes ago, Torpille said:

comparing these 2 cameras is tricky.

yes the Q2/Q3 is magnificent a 28mm point and shoot.
it makes everyone envious, but let's not forget that the crop function is just marketing. 

The simulated 35mm or 50mm rendering is just an image within an image.
so either we love 28mm and use the digital zoom from time to time, but why exactly?

Or change your lens and compression and adopt a new perspective!

The CL is still excellent, it really zooms in if you want it to, and it's extremely compact if you need it to be... so when I see your seaside images posted a few days ago, I'd say that the Q3 as only camera can't do the job.

i think a new lens for the CL could bring you a lot of pleasure and enhance your images. 

The TL35mm is the rolls royce of the TL line and with the 1.7x digital zoom you can get an excellent 85mm (simulated of course) and for 1/6 the price of the Q3.

 

 

4 minutes ago, Torpille said:

comparing these 2 cameras is tricky.

yes the Q2/Q3 is magnificent a 28mm point and shoot.
it makes everyone envious, but let's not forget that the crop function is just marketing. 

The simulated 35mm or 50mm rendering is just an image within an image.
so either we love 28mm and use the digital zoom from time to time, but why exactly?

Or change your lens and compression and adopt a new perspective!

The CL is still excellent, it really zooms in if you want it to, and it's extremely compact if you need it to be... so when I see your seaside images posted a few days ago, I'd say that the Q3 as only camera can't do the job.

i think a new lens for the CL could bring you a lot of pleasure and enhance your images. 

The TL35mm is the rolls royce of the TL line and with the 1.7x digital zoom you can get an excellent 85mm (simulated of course) and for 1/6 the price of the Q3.

 

Perhaps I am a bit lazy but the TL 35 seems a bit too large and heavy for me on my CL.  Since so recently returning to my beloved CL, I've kitted up with a TL 23mm F2, and an18-56mm TL Zoom as my walk arounds.  I also picked up Sigma 56mm F1.4 for "special occasions.  I have no regrets from selling my Q2.  I had an 18mm TL pancake that came with the CL but after a few rounds of shooting with it as my walkaround, I was not pleased with results.  So still feeling that the Sigm 56mm is still a outlier, what do you think about the choices for my 23mm + 18-56mm outfit??  No ego here, in the past it has taken me as much as a year to settle into a niche for my kit.  Am I missing something?  Background note, my favorite use is street shooting and my favorite photographers are Joel Marowitz and Heni Cartier Bresson.  

[Le Chef]

3 hours ago, Torpille said:

comparing these 2 cameras is tricky.

yes the Q2/Q3 is magnificent a 28mm point and shoot.
it makes everyone envious, but let's not forget that the crop function is just marketing. 

The simulated 35mm or 50mm rendering is just an image within an image.
so either we love 28mm and use the digital zoom from time to time, but why exactly?

Or change your lens and compression and adopt a new perspective!

The CL is still excellent, it really zooms in if you want it to, and it's extremely compact if you need it to be... so when I see your seaside images posted a few days ago, I'd say that the Q3 as only camera can't do the job.

i think a new lens for the CL could bring you a lot of pleasure and enhance your images. 

The TL35mm is the rolls royce of the TL line and with the 1.7x digital zoom you can get an excellent 85mm (simulated of course) and for 1/6 the price of the Q3.

 

Thank you! I have a bag full of lenses: TL 11-23, 18-56, 23, Sigma 30 and 56, and TL 55-135. I prefer to travel as light as possible, so a fast trIp to UK I only took the CL + 18-56. On a day back home it might be the TL 11-23 and Sigma 56, or just the TL 55-135. That investment is also why the CL will likely stay. My only possible distraction is the siren call of an M…

[Torpille]

vor 5 Stunden schrieb mikeLD:

 

Perhaps I am a bit lazy but the TL 35 seems a bit too large and heavy for me on my CL.  Since so recently returning to my beloved CL, I've kitted up with a TL 23mm F2, and an18-56mm TL Zoom as my walk arounds.  I also picked up Sigma 56mm F1.4 for "special occasions.  I have no regrets from selling my Q2.  I had an 18mm TL pancake that came with the CL but after a few rounds of shooting with it as my walkaround, I was not pleased with results.  So still feeling that the Sigm 56mm is still a outlier, what do you think about the choices for my 23mm + 18-56mm outfit??  No ego here, in the past it has taken me as much as a year to settle into a niche for my kit.  Am I missing something?  Background note, my favorite use is street shooting and my favorite photographers are Joel Marowitz and Heni Cartier Bresson.  

The tl35 isn't as compact or lightweight as the 18-56.
But it's very pleasant when you add the grip to the CL.
It changes the face of the CL.

For your choice of lens, it's clear that the 18-56mm monopolizes attention.  
Like all zoom lenses, it can be used as the sole lens.
Perfect for travel, it's less suited to street photography for me.
The tl 18 gives very good results, even if it may seem disappointing at first.
I've learned to boost it in post-production to make it even better.
The tl 23 is a very good lens with very summicron rendering, and could be an alternative to the tl 18 for the city.
The tl 35 stands out from the crowd, but you have to like 50mm.
It allows you to do everything with a very high level of rendering.

It's not like with an M: you choose your favorite lens and that's it.
The cl is a system that can be used for any purpose, which is why it's so difficult to choose.

[Torpille]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 12 Stunden schrieb Le Chef:

Thank you! I have a bag full of lenses: TL 11-23, 18-56, 23, Sigma 30 and 56, and TL 55-135. I prefer to travel as light as possible, so a fast trIp to UK I only took the CL + 18-56. On a day back home it might be the TL 11-23 and Sigma 56, or just the TL 55-135. That investment is also why the CL will likely stay. My only possible distraction is the siren call of an M…

I understand your hesitation, given that you own almost all the optics.

A system is built up over time, especially with Leica, unless you have a suitcase full of cash under your mattress.

The CL + 18-56 are perfect for travel, and they're also my first choice.
With a complementary fixed lens for the city.

The q3 can't replace your equipment, it's an illusion.
And I don't subscribe to the concept of the CL's instant obsolescence, decided when Leica stopped marketing it.

The CL will remain a benchmark for Leica and the apsc market.

But it can be a complement to a great 28mm, just like an M, allowing you to take a different approach to photography.
The M is a pretty simple idea to put into practice, because all you really need is a lens that's your favorite focal length.

but it's not for everyone, and like everything else it takes time to get the hang of it.

Edited July 18, 2023 by Torpille

[robgo2]

I own a CL, Q2 and Q2M. I can see a differences between all three. Strictly in terms of IQ, the Q2M is really in a class by itself. Between the other two, the Q2 is superior, but the flexibility of the CL is the best of the bunch. I’m glad to have all three. If I had to pick just two to keep, it would be the Q2M and the CL.