Does the digital CL feel like a "real" Leica?

ptpdprinter said:
Except that the Leica film CL didn't have 28mm frame lines, just 40, 50 and 90.
Click to expand...

Of course, the digital CL doesn't need or use frame lines at all. What Cal was getting at is that the digital CL fitted with a compact 28mm lens presents just about the same FoV and is about the same physical size and weight as the film CL.

So much palaver over this. Sheesh. It's a nice, sensibly sized camera with a quality feel, with good controls, and it is well optimized to use with a huge range of new and existing Leica lenses of three different types: TL-, R-, and M-mount. It produces a 24 Mpixel image with outstanding color, dynamic range, and acutance. Because of the excellent TTL viewfinder, it can be configured to do a much wider, more versatile range of things than any rangefinder camera can approach. And it has the same quality feel as other Leica cameras. It is NOT an M, a film CL, an S, an R, or an SL camera. It's not a T, TL, or TL2 either ... different control design. And it has interchangeable lenses so it's not a Q, X, or any other fixed lens camera either.

What's not to like? If you don't like it, don't buy it: move on. Whatever.

G
 
karateisland said:
... If I mount a manual focus lens on it, will it feel like a "real" Leica? Will buying into a CL system mean that I am missing out on what makes a Leica special? ...

... If you had to start buying Leica TODAY, ...?

Other points, just in case they come up:
* The M9 feels like a risky buy if I want to develop my own color-processing style, the M240 is too bulky for my taste, ...
Click to expand...
It really depends on your perception of what makes a Leica "special".

If I were entering the Leica world today, I'd be shopping for a clean M9 with a factory replaced sensor. The color renderings I got from my M9 were far superior to those from my M-P 240.

And FWIW, the dimensions (height and width) on an M240 are identical to that of an M9.
 
But the M240 is a full 0.5 mm thicker than the M9. Enough to start an Internet myth, it appears.:rolleyes:
 
jaapv said:
But the M240 is a full 0.5 mm thicker than the M9. Enough to start an Internet myth, it appears.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
That 0.5 mm is the small thumb bump on the back of the camera which has a dial in it.

Otherwise the dimensions of an M240 are identcal to that of an M9.

However, the M240 is about 90 grams heavier - just in case you want to go there.
 
0,5 mm? The bump is a bit more than that... :lpl:

half a millimeter is the actual thickness difference :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom