My Take on the Leica CL

[scott kirkpatrick]

I'm currently using the CL as if it were a smaller, faster M10. "A" mode with auto ISO. AF for the AF lenses unless I am focusing close and on a tripod, and MF for M lenses. Factory defaults for the two buttons that offer ISO override and shift into self-timer. Set menus stuff in the menus and leave them there until they need to be changed. The business of pushing a button to look into submenus and then selecting one, then pushing that same button again to exploit its new function just leaves me cold. I think setting up user profiles might be easier than that sequence.

 

[Reynolds]

First of all, thank you, Jono, for the terrific review and, to you all for such thoughtful comments about the CL. I have had mine (and, 35mm f1.4) for a few weeks now and am totally captivated by it. I have been through most great digital Leicas over the years (Leica 8, 8.2, 9) until manual focusing became an issue. Then, to Sony and Fuji for their autofocus. Came back to Leica with the Q and, now, this great little machine. The size means it goes everywhere with me...and, that means many opportunities for my learning to continue.

Don't get too caught up in the details of the CL's competitors. This little gem works....have fun with it!!

And, a Happy New Year to you all!!!

Reynolds
Arlington, VA

 

[tashley]

Okay, decision made: Not going for it just yet. I thanked my dealer friend and told him if things changed after the holidays I'd be in touch.

I remain interested in the CL, just like I remain interested in the Hasselblad X1D, but not quite interested enough at the moment to punch the buy button. This could change next year ... either of these cameras would be fun to work with.

G

They both are... ! I am currently using them both a lot and my A7RIII, which I resentfully purchased because I have a carefully curated selection of lenses for that mount, languishes in a cupboard because it just feels like a computer....

 

[Godfrey]

A month and some later ... Much as I like the CL concept and am attracted to the camera, I'm not going to go for one. Another passes by the board ...

After two and half weeks of traveling with my Leica M-D, Summicron 50 and Summilux 35, I realized that that really is just about as perfect a light camera as I have any desire for, and I'd lose too much by selling my Leica SL (not speaking monetarily...). It came to me that there's no situation where one or the other of those two cameras won't do the job I want perfectly, so why let go of either of them? I simply wouldn't, won't, buy another $3000 camera without selling one of them. It would be ridiculous for me.

The biggest handicap to carrying the SL and the SL90-280 lens is its size and weight: it's too heavy for a shoulder bag and my Pelican 1510 wheeled case is simply too unwieldy to work well for how I'd like to carry the camera in the field for a casual shoot. As I was thinking about this yesterday, I received an email from Adorama offering me $100 off on the Think Tank Trifecta 10 photo backpack. I'd studied that some time ago and am convinced that that is a near perfect solution to what I want to be able to carry in the field ... and for $60 including shipping, it's stupid to not just give it a try. I'll let you know how that works out (probably in a Leica SL thread rather than this one).

The CL is a "just right" sort of size/weight/capability camera and is an immediate draw for me ... But so is my Leica M-D, and I'm just not going to give up any of my current cameras for the CL.

onwards,
G

 

[scott kirkpatrick]

I tend to find the CL and the TL family of lenses fit well with my most common photo activity -- stealing a few minutes to an hour or two away from work or from family. I take off with a camera in one hand, at most another lens in a jacket pocket, and see what I can find. I could work this way with the M10 and either its 28/2.8 asph, or the equally tiny APO 50/2.0. I used to use a Fuji X-Pro2 with a 35/2.0 for this type of shooting, but the CL's lenses are much better. The SL, and the M10 with big serious M lenses are reserved for more planned out activities.

Here's a CL grabshot taken while checking on some local construction activities:

C1000876 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr TL 55-135@55

scott

 

[jdphoto]

Leica has never really been about a value proposition and it certainly lacks many features of other cameras. So, why is it I can't stop thinking about it? The Q was one of my favorite cameras, but I needed a portrait lens. Now comes this little camera with an undeniable Leica gestalt that fills my need for an APS-C camera. I could use my current M lenses and justify it that way or I can use this camera whose simple design and feature set would encourage me to take more photographs. I would like to know more about using M lenses on the CL and if you can turn off a live preview so you can use peaking while still being stopped down to say f/8.

 

[jdphoto]

Another perspective from some reviewers I trust a bit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JljuqkmF6D8&t=616s

He didn't quite like it, due to UI/usability issues. When I tried it I didn't pay attention to switching different modes and different focus modes, but I can see if that's some more menu involvement it could be a bit annoying. But as far as having it say "on shutter priority" and the focus mode you wanted already set, it didn't strike me as a problem.

- Ricardo

Nothing in that YouTube review surprised me, but that's not stopping me from wanting one. What camera becomes intuitive in just a three minute video review? Most of his gripes were about UI and the lack of IBIS, whereas most of the issues could be fixed with firmware. IBIS is not required for most photographers who don't mind working a bit for their craft; It's actually more rewarding. IBIS also generates heat which equates to noise and battery consumption and yet even more tech. The CL photos were stunning nonetheless, and that's what counts most. Leica has a distinct signature that i've noticed starting with the M9 and up to the Q. It's a quality, or character with a kind of micro contrast that I just don't get with any other camera and I am not a Leica fanboy in any sense; but it is something I've noticed when shooting their cameras. I'm also amazed at how lazy digital photographers have become in regards to this video. Also, I don't feel the pull of planned obsolescence shooting with Leica. GAS seems subdued because with simple Leica cameras you want to actually go and shoot photos instead off watching these YouTube reviews. I don't own a digital camera now, but have owned and used most, but I got bored with their designs and never quite bonded with any of them. That's a primary reason of my going back to film. Although, I miss my M9 and Q and would trade any digital from Hasselblad, Sony or Fuji to get them. They were just tools, but trust me when I say, when you feel a connection to your gear or having a camera thats's a natural extension of your art, you'll have something much more then just a camera tool. Leica does that for me. Thanks to Jono for taking months to review this camera and give a fair assessment of its abilities and quirks. The colors are rich and detailed with that classic Leica signature and that's the part of any review of any camera that means the most to me.

 

[MGrayson]

A question for anyone who has used the 90-280 SL on the CL:

I use the TL2 for the superb 11-23 WA cityscape/landscapes, but it's also my longest reach setup with the 90-280 due to its smaller pixel size. In good light, I have no trouble using AF, although the IS keeps turning off and MF is unusable, but the results are good.

At night, however, I can't get the TL2/90-280 combo to focus on anything. The full moon was impossible. With the SL, instant focus.

Can anyone comment on the low light focussing of the CL with the 90-280? Apologies if this was covered in detail in a review. I haven't thought about the CL until this minute.

Thank you,

Matt

(I also confess I'm more an S/SL UI person and the TL2 is a bit frustrating that way.)

 

[Godfrey]

Leica has never really been about a value proposition ...

I disagree. Leicas are very expensive but are without a doubt worth every penny I've paid for them. I've had many excellent cameras that were far cheaper. But note: Had is the operative word in that sentence!

G

 

[Paratom]

Leica has never really been about a value proposition and it certainly lacks many features of other cameras. So, why is it I can't stop thinking about it? The Q was one of my favorite cameras, but I needed a portrait lens. Now comes this little camera with an undeniable Leica gestalt that fills my need for an APS-C camera. I could use my current M lenses and justify it that way or I can use this camera whose simple design and feature set would encourage me to take more photographs. I would like to know more about using M lenses on the CL and if you can turn off a live preview so you can use peaking while still being stopped down to say f/8.

If value is only measured by number of functions and pixels then Leica is expensive.
If user interface, handling, joy to use, simplicity, good IQ out of the cameras are also of value then price-value of some Leica porducts is not bad at all.
However IMO The CL or TL2 make sense if you also buy native lenses. M lenses work but for me M lenses on the M (or SL) and native lenses on the CL/TL2.

 

[jdphoto]

Let me try this again...
Perhaps my "value proposition" comment was an incorrect choice of words because Leica does in fact, offer improvements in their products and design. The obvious benefit is to make me a better photographer. This is something tangible when I shoot with a Leica, but I'm always more deliberate and mindful of the composition. From my experience with many, many digital cameras, only Leica does this for me. My original point was intended to convey the dramatic depreciation of digital photography with endless upgrades and obsolescence. The Leica S and MFD cameras are good examples of this. However, to their credit, Leica seems to surpass most companies when design flaws have been addressed and remedies the known issues. So, to my original intent... How come with all the incredible technology offered in todays digital cameras do I only want to shoot with the one that slows down the process and makes it a more intuitive, fluid extension of my creative process. That's what Leica does for me.

 

[Godfrey]

...
However IMO The CL or TL2 make sense if you also buy native lenses. M lenses work but for me M lenses on the M (or SL) and native lenses on the CL/TL2.

I feel similarly about the SL vs M ... I prefer using M lenses exclusively on the M, and use the SL and R lenses on the SL. The CL ... well, I'll likely never own one at this point so my opinion there would be entirely conjecture.

G