The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Fun With the Leica CL

Godfrey

Well-known member
I have not been there for the last 4 years - did traffic really become that bad nowadays? Good to know when I once come back in a few years what to expect ....
It's now quite horrid. Once upon a time, I could get nearly anywhere from San Mateo to San Jose, from the Bay to Los Gatos, point to point in about 20-30 minutes, at nearly any time of day and night. And from Santa Clara to SF in about 45 minutes most times outside of an hour or so in the morning and evenings due to commute traffic. Nowadays, there are huge portions of the day when the highways are literally large, serially organized parking lots, you're forced onto surface streets, and the surface streets are mostly choked three quarters of the day in all directions as commute, school open and out moments, lunch, and evening "rush to entertain yourself" consume all available driving space. When I was still working at Apple (two and some years ago now!) five miles away, there were times when the 5.25 mile commute to my office there would take over an hour. It's gotten worse.

Nowadays, if I want to pop down to San Jose for a nice cup of coffee and pastry in my favorite cafe—a distance of 4.5 miles from my home—I can get there with the bicycle in 21 minutes nearly any time, in about a half hour to an hour in my car (including parking time), and in about 45 minutes or so on the motorcycle (same as the car, plus 10-15 minutes due to getting gear on and off at each end). It's absurd; I take the bicycle nearly all the time now...

The Anti Destination League struck again today, so I've deferred my trip to SF until tomorrow or Wednesday. :D

G
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
It's now quite horrid. Once upon a time, I could get nearly anywhere from San Mateo to San Jose, from the Bay to Los Gatos, point to point in about 20-30 minutes, at nearly any time of day and night. And from Santa Clara to SF in about 45 minutes most times outside of an hour or so in the morning and evenings due to commute traffic. Nowadays, there are huge portions of the day when the highways are literally large, serially organized parking lots, you're forced onto surface streets, and the surface streets are mostly choked three quarters of the day in all directions as commute, school open and out moments, lunch, and evening "rush to entertain yourself" consume all available driving space. When I was still working at Apple (two and some years ago now!) five miles away, there were times when the 5.25 mile commute to my office there would take over an hour. It's gotten worse.

Nowadays, if I want to pop down to San Jose for a nice cup of coffee and pastry in my favorite cafe—a distance of 4.5 miles from my home—I can get there with the bicycle in 21 minutes nearly any time, in about a half hour to an hour in my car (including parking time), and in about 45 minutes or so on the motorcycle (same as the car, plus 10-15 minutes due to getting gear on and off at each end). It's absurd; I take the bicycle nearly all the time now...

The Anti Destination League struck again today, so I've deferred my trip to SF until tomorrow or Wednesday. :D

G
Godfrey,

Thanks for the update. That sounds really horrible! Not sure where that will evolve into :cool:

To come back to the original post - would really be interested in your thoughts on the CL as this is currently the closest I could get with any Leica camera.

Peter
 

jdphoto

Well-known member
I had the CL, the 23mm f/2 and the Leica adapter to M. Initially, I enjoyed it. The build quality seemed better than the Q. The EVF is outstanding under normal shooting; better than the Q, imo. Very fast AF with the ability to change lenses was a huge plus for Leica. However, the interface is not as intuitive as one might think. The dials shutter/aperture functions are opposite to the readout in the EVF, so left dial controls right EVF readout and right controls left. This is a glaring mistake that hopefully could be remedied with a firmware upgrade. The 23mm f/2 while a decent lens, does not have the build quality you'd expect. Very light, plasticky construction and the worst flare of any lens i've ever used. Also, the connection between the camera and lens does not have the tolerances one would expect from Leica with axial movements around the sensor. With a new Leica FF with AF and interchangeable lenses coming soon, I'd say the CL will be a good bargain on the used market if Leica keeps the new camera pricing under the M10. Although, the CL is a quirky camera, it does have that signature Maestro look, but lacks the intuitiveness and utility of other cameras. I hope Leica incorporates a hybrid finder utilizing both OVF and EVF in a new camera like the Fuji X100f/xpro2. It would give you options when shooting in bright outdoor conditions such as snow, beach, etc. where EVF are not as bright for composing.
 

scott kirkpatrick

Well-known member
I had the CL, the 23mm f/2 and the Leica adapter to M. Initially, I enjoyed it. The build quality seemed better than the Q. The EVF is outstanding under normal shooting; better than the Q, imo. Very fast AF with the ability to change lenses was a huge plus for Leica. However, the interface is not as intuitive as one might think. The dials shutter/aperture functions are opposite to the readout in the EVF, so left dial controls right EVF readout and right controls left. This is a glaring mistake that hopefully could be remedied with a firmware upgrade. .....
The dials can be assigned to left or right as you choose in the latest firmware, separately for each mode. On the other points, I differ.
 

scott kirkpatrick

Well-known member
Back to business -- Here's a nice place to stay, in an artists' house that is a popular guesthouse in Korsha, Georgia:

C1070047 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr CL 11-23@14 mm

Korsha can be reached after about three hours of pretty interesting driving (4WD recommended) and another three hours, even more interesting as you cross a 2700 m high pass, brings you to Shatili

C1070166 by scott kirkpatrick, on Flickr CL 11-23@23 mm

a medieval fortress-town, abandoned about 60 years ago, but now being reoccupied and rebuilt.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
The dials can be assigned to left or right as you choose in the latest firmware, separately for each mode. On the other points, I differ.
Made it up to Leica Store San Francisco today and had a good long look at, and made test exposures with my lenses and card with, the CL there. I also differ with JD's comments on most points: I found the body very handy and the controls easy to figure out and use, pretty convenient and logical. My projected use of the CL is somewhat different from the all-purpose camera that most on this thread seem to have in mind when referring to it.

I'll write up my impressions perhaps late this evening or tomorrow morning and will post them in a separate thread.

G
 

scott kirkpatrick

Well-known member
Made it up to Leica Store San Francisco today and had a good long look at, and made test exposures with my lenses and card with, the CL there. I also differ with JD's comments on most points: I found the body very handy and the controls easy to figure out and use, pretty convenient and logical. My projected use of the CL is somewhat different from the all-purpose camera that most on this thread seem to have in mind when referring to it.

I'll write up my impressions perhaps late this evening or tomorrow morning and will post them in a separate thread.

G
I hope you had a chance to try out the 60 CL macro and the focus magnification pathways, since I gather that product and macro shots are your intended use. But the 60 Macro is also a lovely lens for outdoor medium tele use. And the 11-23 could just give you the SWC equivalent that you have been looking for. Anyway, looking forward to your comments.
 

jdphoto

Well-known member
Good to know about the firmware upgrade and the dials. I used this camera professionally, so my critique is based on certain variables. I had contacted Leica about the 23mm f/2 flare issues and lens to camera tolerances and this was their response...

I finally received some feedback from Germany relative to the concerns you had. About the dot pattern, this was written:

“The red dots occur by interferences on the micro lenses of the sensor due to bad conditions like intensity, angle of dip etc. These interferences are technical nature and cannot be avoided in that particular matter”

The matter about comparing the fit of lenses between systems they thought might be subjective in nature. From their perspective there can be a perceived difference in the feel but they have not found a cause for concern at this point.


For me, the 23mmf/2 has a design flaw that allows the micro lenses to reflect much more than any other lens. Perhaps more baffling or flocking is needed. I'm curious about the new M AF lenses from Leica. I also think it's kinda of annoying to announce a new camera system so close to the launch of the CL.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
... Perhaps more baffling or flocking is needed. I'm curious about the new M AF lenses from Leica. I also think it's kinda of annoying to announce a new camera system so close to the launch of the CL.
Baffling or flocking is never going to solve sensor-micro-lens v lens interaction problems. This will never be a problem for the vast majority of photographers ... just don't point the camera into the sun.

What "new camera system" are you talking about? Leica hasn't announced any new camera system that I can discover, certainly not since the the CL was announced.

The rumor of a "CM" ... aka, a CL body with an FF sensor ... is just that: a rumor that turned out to be (as yet) unfounded. And I suspect that any new camera system will be based on the same lens mount that the CL, TL, TL2, and SL ... and their lenses ... are already equipped with.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
I hope you had a chance to try out the 60 CL macro and the focus magnification pathways, since I gather that product and macro shots are your intended use. But the 60 Macro is also a lovely lens for outdoor medium tele use. And the 11-23 could just give you the SWC equivalent that you have been looking for. Anyway, looking forward to your comments.
I spent some time with the APO Macro-Elmarit-L 60, comparing it to the Macro-Elmarit-R 60.

I also spent some time with the WATE ... no interest in the 11-33, personally. (The WATE fitted to my M-D with the Frankenfinder is my all-digital-SWC equivalent, cropped square; it used to be the Super-Elmar-R 15mm fitted to the SL, but the WATE on M-D even with Frankenfinder is more compact and actually performs better.)

I'm just as put off by autofocus on the CL as I was with it on the SL and am with it on the Olympus E-M1 ... and every other AF camera I've owned. I'm just not an autofocus user; I find it more of a PITA to use than focusing manually with a lens that has a good, accurate distance scale and a body that has a good viewfinder. All those indicators and all the different modes of an AF system necessary to make it do what I do without even thinking about it just get in my way.

I should have time to write up my impressions of the CL this evening, later. I've been out all day riding my bicycle around the south Bay Area ... a nice 33 mile day of it! :D

G
 

jdphoto

Well-known member
Baffling and flocking are used to reduce reflections, it's pretty basic stuff. Many professionals and amateurs like to shoot with the sun as a focal point or to create mood or effect. Having to re create it with an app because the 23mm f/2 is, imo, technically flawed is not indicative of the quality and price point of this lens.

Attached is a photo of a Professional swimmer training for a solo swim across the English Channel using a Nikon camera and lenses. The flare was an essential element for her creative team. So, simply pointing your camera away from the sun to eliminate sun flare might mitigate the problem with the Leica TL 23mmf/2 lens, it also limits numerous creative options that have been intrinsic to photography since its invention. So, instead of eliminating the sun flare for lack of effect, I eliminated the 23mm f/2 from my tool kit.
 
Last edited:

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Baffling and flocking are used to reduce reflections, it's pretty basic stuff. Many professionals and amateurs like to shoot with the sun as a focal point or to create mood or effect. Having to re create it with an app because the 23mm f/2 is, imo, technically flawed is not indicative of the quality and price point of this lens.

Attached is a photo of a Professional swimmer training for a solo swim across the English Channel using a Nikon camera and lenses. The flare was an essential element for her creative team. So, simply pointing your camera away from the sun to eliminate sun flare might mitigate the problem with the Leica TL 23mmf/2 lens, it also limits numerous creative options that have been intrinsic to photography since its invention. So, instead of eliminating the sun flare for lack of effect, I eliminated the 23mm f/2 from my tool kit.
I have a simple idea how to overcome these issues - use a different camera or lens and stop asking for what is not available! :cool::cool::cool:
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
... limits numerous creative options that have been intrinsic to photography since its invention. ...
I guess photography was invented sometime around 1950 for you, since NO ONE could make photos like that with the sun in the frame without devastating flare obliterating the entire photograph before anti-reflection coatings existed, and probably not until multi-coating existed (circa 1970). Anti-reflection coatings on optics were invented in parallel by Zeiss and other optical companies on both sides of the war during the late 1930s/middle 1940s due to the needs to see through the glare of clouds and sun when targeting with optical bomb sights. Commercial use of "top secret" lens technology like this only became reasonably common post-WWII.

I've been doing photography all my life, since I was about 8 yo, sold a massive amount of photos over the years, and I've NEVER sought to put the sun in the frame other than when specifically making a photograph of a sunset. I think having the sun in the frame is ugly since it will never image as anything but an absolutely blank white space. And the diffraction and imaging of lens elements, surfaces, and aperture in residual reflections are just distractions to me, kind of a 'self-reflexive technological look-at-me!' approach to aesthetic style.

I guess we have rather different notions of aesthetics... :D

I don't know how you plan to add baffling and flocking in between the layers of the sensor stack, but I leave that technical challenge to those who design such devices.
 

jdphoto

Well-known member
I have a simple idea how to overcome these issues - use a different camera or lens and stop asking for what is not available! :cool::cool::cool:
If you had read my reply, you'd notice I did in fact, use a different camera. The Leica CL and 23mm TL f/2 were sold. My critiques were to just be a word of caution when using the CL & 23mm TL under certain conditions.
 

jdphoto

Well-known member
Hmm...post cards from the late 1800's featured many sunsets. Alfred Stieglitz took images of clouds and sunsets too. My comment should have been more specific to the the early photographers who recognized this medium as a form of Fine Art.
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
If you had read my reply, you'd notice I did in fact, use a different camera. The Leica CL and 23mm TL f/2 were sold. My critiques were to just be a word of caution when using the CL & 23mm TL under certain conditions.
I'm sorry, JD, but your 'critiques' seem quite a lot more than a word of caution to me. If that's your notion of a word of caution, I'd not look forward to your ramping up to a diatribe.

BTW: Shooting a sunset, or a sun with clouds, are, as mentioned, the only occasions when I consider putting the sun into the frame. In these cases, the sun IS the point of interest in the photograph. A postcard sunset is a standard photographic form. That's not true of the photograph you posted as an example.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
If you had read my reply, you'd notice I did in fact, use a different camera. The Leica CL and 23mm TL f/2 were sold. My critiques were to just be a word of caution when using the CL & 23mm TL under certain conditions.
We could go on for hours - or many more replies in different whatever threads - if portraits with sun in the back are something usual and appealing, so just to clarify my response a short and final answer:

Sure you can do it ( as you can do many things) and if this is what you can sell good then definitely you should go for it! Other than that I simply find these kind of photos distracting and artificial, as normally faces are dark when photographed against the direct sun and you have to use some other front lighting to make the face (person) possible to see - not how I see the world and how I prefer to shoot.

It gets different as soon as you have the sun behind the persons face in order to bring that glow to the hairs or silhouette, but then again you will not have direct sun in the picture.

Tastes and styles are obviously different :cool:
 

Godfrey

Well-known member
...
In my opinion, anecdotal first impressions of a camera after an hour or so of use are not advantageous to what a camera's limits are when paired with different lens combinations in actual real world use. ...
I think you meant "indicative" rather than "advantageous" in the above.

And I agree with that completely. A first impression report like I did yesterday is something I do simply to assess whether a camera is interesting enough for me to consider obtaining in order to start the learning and analysis process, seeing how it actually performs for my intended use and lenses. That process will now take several months of both testing and actual use.

This preliminary evaluation was to ascertain answers to simple questions:
  • Does the viewfinder allow me to focus and frame easily and accurately?
  • Are the controls arranged so that they work as described and fit my fingers?
  • Are the output files compatible with my rendering tools and do they allow consistent rendering operations to be performed without issue?
  • Is the size and weight of the package what I'm looking for?
  • To a first order approximation, do I get what I expect out of my lenses with this body?
  • Oh yes ... forgot this before: Do I like the darn thing enough to be worth my time mucking with it? :)

Higher granularity, more specific usage behavior and performance requires time to both learn and use the body and the lenses enough, but you have to start somewhere first. I've learned over time that relying solely on other people's opinions is simply not useful to me, although they establish marker points for things to consider when I do my own evaluation.
 
Last edited:

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Yes, they certainly are...thankfully.
The Creative Director would have been a little annoyed if I agreed with these assessments of when and how the sun should be used as an element in this photograph.
You are so right - thankfully they are!

WRT art directors - well, obviously also art directors can be wrong!

And sometimes it would be beneficial to educate them that they are - sorry to disturb your understanding of a perfect world!

But then, if you are successfully making money with a certain style and can save the effort of convincing art directors then you are on the right track - so don't worry ;)

Just it thankfully is not my style and taste ....
 
Top