It would make strategic sense to go down the L route for the M cameras.
After all ,they abandoned the screw mount and moved with the times back in the day.
They`ll probably bring it out as a variant if they chose to take that route .
From what I`ve seen (briefly testing a CL) the L lenses are very good and a dare say cheaper to produce than the M line.
It also opens up the market for their bodies .
Michael,
The APO Crons are not inexpensive, although the APO 50 Cron-L is less expensive than the APO 50 Cron-M.
I do know that the "L" mount has less design restrictions, and Leica is not shy about making full frame "L" lenses huge and heavy, but it is clear to me that when you compare the M lenses, even APO lenses, against the L APO lenses the L glass wins.
In fewer words the APO L lenses are more highly corrected and closer to perfection. Read Jono Slack's reviews where he compares the APO 50 Cron-M against the new APO 50 Cron-L. The APO 50 Cron-L wins.
Who else is making APO wides? I can tell you that the APO 35 Cron is beyond being just a great lens (I own one). Nothing like it in the M-line as far as wides. More APO wides are coming...
I think the single restraint that would limit the adaptation of a "L" mount to a M-body is the physical short distance between the lens and the sensor in rangefinders. A larger diameter mount changes nothing. The laws of physics cannot be changed.
Clear to me that the "L" mount and the SL and SL2 are more open to exploiting more performance. Whether or not this performance is required or needed in one's photography is a separate issue. Is it worth the premium? Depends...
As far as premium goes are people looking into the simple elegant interface? Are people overlooking that the SL and SL2 are weather sealed, as well as the native SL lenses.
If people want to exploit their Leica glass is that easy to do without the menues of profiles? Isn't that the point of using profiles (to optimize the performance of lenses)?
I will say this: I love my SL; I have used it heavily for 4-5 years; but the new SL2 seems to me like a big advance. It will give me crazy capabilities as far as speed and performance with IBIS.
The ugly is that the premium is high, already the word is out that battery consumption is high (two batteries required for a day's worth of shooting, three if for video), and there are less expensive and very capable alternatives out there.
If anything, I think more cameras like the Q2 will come out. BTW I had someone connected to Leica tell me the Q's lens is already "future proofed" to 80 MP. Perhaps a Q3 will be a step closer in that direction.
As far as the current Leica L-mount glass it is likely future proofed out to 3-4 generations or at least 100 MP.
Also I own a CL. I love the interface: simple; and elegant. In comparing files of course the full frame is better. Also it seems that even when I use my APO 35 Cron and 50 Lux-L on the CL that the SL brings out the best. The 23 Cron-TL kinda gets crushed buy the "L" glass. Not a fair fight at all.
Cal
