Leica SL-C

[Winedemonium]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I thought about posting this in an M forum, but I realise after some thought that this is where it belongs. Without changing the regular SL, or its lens line up, and without removing the essential optical rangefinder/viewfinder of the M system, I'd love for Leica to give us one hybrid camera. It would be smaller and lighter than the SL3 - keep the L mount, but come with two upgrades to allow more functionality with M lenses - 

1. An upgrade to the Leica M-Adapter L, to offer - like the Tech Art adapters - autofocus with M-mount lenses.

2. A firmware implementation that allows these lenses (Leica could publish a list of recommended, acceptable, and unsuitable lenses) to be profiled in the camera - supporting profile corrections, IBIS support, etc. 

Alongside this feature, the SL3-C (or SL-C or whatever) could be launched with a couple of new L-mount f/2.8 compact autofocus primes aimed at the market for this smaller, lighter body (or even just rework Sigma's most compact L-mount primes into Leica-sleeved examples).

I imagine this would find its way into the bag of both M and SL users, and the CL/TL line retirement has left a gap. For me, I love the M above all, but as I age, and in certain use cases, I still want compact, still want quality, still want focal length flexibility, but could do with EVF and AF as well.

NB - these are just my ideas, but I would be surprised if I am being original here, so apologies any or all of this has been discussed already in the many 'wishlist' type threads that exist on this forum, and you posted an idea like this before me. I posted it as a new topic because I'd love to see your comments on this hybrid idea specifically. Would such a camera be for you?

[Advertisement]

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

[Winedemonium]

( point #2 - I'm aware the current SL firmware allows for automated (6-bit) or manual selection of M lenses with the Leica M-Adapter L. What I'm really getting at here is a firmware upgrade specifically to identify and enhance the functionality of a native Leica L-mount autofocus adapter, rather than just a 'dumb' adapter).

[FrozenInTime]

The M-L adapter is shouting out for an upgrade that includes a RF cam driven position resolver that feeds the focus distance back to the body.

This would allow the option of live view zoom-in initiated by lens movement, as well as additional information that could help a focus indicator algorithm.

 I'm not convinced of the need to auto-focus M lenses with a motorised helicoid adapter, so it would probably still be better to have a dedicated EVF-M body.

[Stuart Richardson]

I think this is what Leica was trying to address with the Q cameras and even the SL, and that is why I think it will be an uphill battle getting it made. The fact that it is the middle ground makes it harder to find a sales differentiation point. 

Edited February 5 by Stuart Richardson

[hoolyproductions]

Yes this is a recurring theme. Leica have 'surprised' us before but I somehow doubt we will see anything like an "SL light" in the near future. Also when I look at the weight/dimensions of (flagship) Nikon/Sony/Canon bodies the weight is basically the same and the bulk only slightly less. I guess A7C proves it can be made smaller - but I would not buy one: fiddly, relatively small viewfinder, other compromises to get the size and weight down.

For me the SL is a perfect size "in my hands" whilst being sometimes (depending on my activity) a bit too bulky to carry around with a set of lenses. In those situations I use my Q3 43 and find the change refreshing (whilst missing the fuller feature set of the SL).

I'm pretty sure that if an "SL light" would exist I would continue with the regular SLs because the extra size, robustness and features that make them a dream to operate (for me).

 

[LD_50]

I don’t think there is any chance Leica offers an AF adapter like a techart. It requires you move the entire lens to focus and this eliminates the benefit of floating lens elements from the optical formula at different focal lengths. 

Are you essentially asking for a Panasonic S9 clone?

Edited February 5 by LD_50

[Winedemonium]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

5 minutes ago, LD_50 said:

I don’t think there is any chance Leica offers an AF adapter like a techart. It requires you move the entire lens to focus and this eliminates the benefit of floating lens elements from the optical formula at different focal lengths. 

This is a very good point. And FLE for improved close focus performance seems to be a design priority for Leica. Having not used the Techart adapter I don't have any experience of how degraded the image is in close focus range (i.e. does the non-activation of the FLE via the helicoid turning to that range merely lose the benefit of the FLE, or does it cause other focusing problems?). 

1 hour ago, hoolyproductions said:

I guess A7C proves it can be made smaller - but I would not buy one: fiddly, relatively small viewfinder, other compromises to get the size and weight down.

For sure, yes, there would be compromises to reduce the size - and that won't suit everyone. But the tech is progressing to cram a lot in (as the A7C line does show). The Leica CL showed a Leica-style implementation is possible when the retail price supports it. Some of Sony's compromises are perhaps there to hit a lower price point than the A7 line. Leica could deliver something nicer, something closer to the Q3, with the L-mount.

 

[keeping_a_balance]

I love the idea, but as other have stated see it hard to come to fruition. 

I  would be happy with basically the current Q body that allows interchangeable M lenses.  (Yes I love flippy screen and find the EVF decent enough).

I have the A7Cii for exactly the reason you state in the OP for, but 1 find the EVF quite bad and the screen is not great.  AF and lenses are great (but not perfect), and it's not really that fun to use.  I use it exclusively for a travel camera. 

I used the techartii adapter on a Zf when I owned it.  While it was decent would not say it was great, and with that added weight on it, made it unpleasant to carry.  You use M glass as is intended and you will realize you do not need AF. 

 

[BernardC]

I'm sure that Leica will eventually offer a smaller body in the SL lineup. It's not a priority, but it's the type of thing they've done in the past. I would love to see S9 internals with a TL-like interface, but that kind of package wouldn't make sense commercially without at-least one small zoom.

As far as an AF M adapter, I'm not convinced. It goes against the high-quality image of the whole Leica lineup. Issues with parallelism can be engineered-out, at a cost, but they still have to contend with very slow AF, and incompatibility with modern internal-focus M lenses.

These issues are not show stoppers, but I can see how Leica might want to allocate resources elsewhere. Your best bet is to wait for a third party to offer such an adapter in L mount, or just buy a cheap camera from a competing system that allows third-party adapters.

[Stuart Richardson]

I don't see any reason why they would ever do that. If it diminishes the performance of the lenses, they never will make it. Their response would be "we already make L mount lenses that work perfectly, please buy one of those. If those don't work, please just use the regular M mount adapter. If that does not work, please use the R mount adapter. If that does not work, please buy a Panasonic or Sigma lens." I think their concession to this line of thinking was that the SL3 was made smaller and compact to the SL2, and even that was not to universal fanfare. A number of people who loved the SL and SL2 body size and shape were not happy with the smaller, chunkier body. I am one of them.

[jaapv]

i prefer the SL2/SL2S size and shape. Just right for my hands. Same with M. I prefer the M8,M9, M240 body size over the M10/11 and film. If it must be small and dainty there is the CL. Although I have always used it with a grip and Thumbie. 

[Winedemonium]

2 hours ago, jaapv said:

If it must be small and dainty there is the CL.

I suppose this is part of the gap created by the demise of that system. I never owned the CL. I briefly owned an original T, but never had any of the TL lenses. Many raved about this system - its size, weight, and the quality of the camera and lenses. Your comment @jaapv reminded me that I could buy and mount some TL lenses on my SL2. 

For the many good reasons raised by commenters here in this thread, I can see why in-house AF adaptation for M glass would be a non-starter. (One can dream!). But I'd still love to see an SLC, and re-sleeving the compact Sigma I-series lenses would provide the lenses for it without the R&D costs of a ground up lens or lens set. Leica and others will know better than me if there is sufficient market to tap into to put resources there. But it's on my wish list.

[LocalHero1953]

1 hour ago, Winedemonium said:

Your comment @jaapv reminded me that I could buy and mount some TL lenses on my SL2. 

Why not buy a CL? It's still a great camera with great lenses - for photographers, not technical nerds.

Edited February 5 by LocalHero1953

[wjdrijfhout]

If compact is the goal, TL lenses on an SL are a great solution. And saves a lot more weight and size than replacing aluminum for magnesium and redistributing a few mm’s to make a chunky camera, like they did with the SL3. 
But perhaps if Leica feels confident enough with a stacked sensor/global shutter, a full frame TL2 might be a dream come through. Call it an fp ‘Leica style’. 
Bear in mind, this comes from someone who just bought a used SL again to complement his SL3. The sensor in the SL3 is fantastic, but design-wise it does not come close to the original SL. 

[dsalamena]

I use TL lenses on the SL2S, they work great and are very well balanced. TL zooms, in particular, allow a significant reduction of weight compared to full frame equivalent options. 

I've used also the CL, great camera, but missed the image stabilization. A modern full frame CL-style camera (24mpx, IBIS and a good EVF) would sell really well in my opinion. I know we have the SL3s option, but I believe it is too large and heavy for most amateur photographs which represents the majority of Leica clients I suppose.

Edited February 6 by dsalamena

[Chris Nebard]

9 hours ago, dsalamena said:

I use TL lenses on the SL2S, they work great and are very well balanced. TL zooms, in particular, allow a significant reduction of weight compared to full frame equivalent options. 

I've used also the CL, great camera, but missed the image stabilization. A modern full frame CL-style camera (24mpx, IBIS and a good EVF) would sell really well in my opinion. I know we have the SL3s option, but I believe it is too large and heavy for most amateur photographs which represents the majority of Leica clients I suppose.

I agree. I absolutely love the SL2-S (almost 4 years in and counting) but a Q or CL sized, 24mp f/f, stills only L Mount body would be pretty compelling to me.  Good to hear that you rate the TL lenses on the SL2-S and don’t miss the megapixels of a bigger sensor. I might just give that a go. 

[Winedemonium]

14 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

Why not buy a CL? It's still a great camera with great lenses - for photographers, not technical nerds.

The CL form factor and quality look beyond reproach to my eyes. I also don't mind an APSC sensor for this use case (though the Sigma Fp and the Lumix S9 show FF is possible in this size, and Sigma have shown with the I series that compact lenses are also possible, FF, and could be turned into Leica versions easily). 

I don't need to check the imaging quality, as 24mm x Leica lenses will be more than sufficient. 

I'm also not against old tech where the new tech doesn't matter. I haven't been tempted to ditch my M10R and M10M for M11 variants for example (buying both after the M11 was released, and buying my SL2 last year after the SL3 was released). I think I could live with the resolutions of both the EVF and screen on the CL, even though they are lower (the screen esp.) than today's offerings. The lack of IBIS would feel a pity, as I am now used to having the advantages that brings. The bit I don't know - and this I would welcome feedback on, is how good the autofocus system is. I'm not doing sports, and don't need animal eye detect, etc, but I can see myself using this type of camera for short bursts of continuous autofocus/capture on moving people.

So please, CL users, I know a 2017 Leica CL is not going to compare in autofocus to a 2025 Sony/Canon, etc, but does it do the sort of autofocus I need? I see it has 'face detection', but does it adjust and track a person that is moving?

 

[LocalHero1953]

18 minutes ago, Winedemonium said:

So please, CL users, I know a 2017 Leica CL is not going to compare in autofocus to a 2025 Sony/Canon, etc, but does it do the sort of autofocus I need? I see it has 'face detection', but does it adjust and track a person that is moving?

I sold mine a couple of years ago for a Q2, so I'm an unreliable reporter. IIRC it has face detection and tracking, but it's nowhere near as good as more modern implementation. I didn't need it much for that, so it didn't worry me. I believe it was fine for following a child in a room, but not for a running child in a larger space or in a group.

Edited February 6 by LocalHero1953

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[jaapv]

I find AF quite usable in all “normal “ shooting situations. In its day it was considered quite good. 

[Chris Nebard]

Ok, could you all please stop giving me GAS for a mint CL in silver with a 23 Summicron, 35 Summilux and 18-55 Elmar. It’s not funny and it’s not clever 😂😂