Yeah, silly.
Hands on CL test - jpg vs RAW w/ MF lenses
- Thread starter Huss
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 82
- Views 11K
Yeah, silly.
Ken Ford
Refuses to suffer fools
*Fingers in ears* Lalalalalala...
Godfrey
somewhat colored
He lost me when he went on about how stylish and beautiful it was six times in the first 18 seconds. 🙁
Huss
Veteran
He lost me when he was swirling a whiskey talking about how handsome George Clooney is.
Huss
Veteran
Ken, Ken, KEN!!!
It's really nice! Think about it this way, it's much smaller than the old M8, has a similar size sensor but with waaaay more resolution, has a huge ISO range, uses all the same lenses with no need for external VFs, does not need IR filters, is cheaper, etc etc...
😀
Emile de Leon
Well-known
Would you like Brad Pitt better..😀
Huss
Veteran
aizan
Veteran
how was the evf and autofocus?
Huss
Veteran
EVF was 'ok', seemed the same as stuff that is in the Sony A6xx series.
Wished it was better as Leica has better ones in the Q and SL.
If you're ok with the ones in the Sony A6xx series, you'd be ok with this one.
AF ? - I did not pay much attention to it as I used the camera with MF lenses. Sorry.
Chemophilic
Established
This morning I had a chance to handle the CL a bit at the Leica SF store. I went with the intention to see how the CL stacked up against my Pen-F.
(Taken with the Pen-F)
Size-wise they are almost the same in my hands. The viewfinder placement and resolution are almost identical. The controls only took me about a minute to figure out. For me the handling for both cameras are quite similar. The CL is certainly quite nice to handle, and to me feels similar to the Pen-F.
The AF was able to focus quite fast inside the store and I did not feel much difference comparing to the AF speed of my Pen-F.
Finally, I took the same scene with both cameras. On my screen, except for the color, distortions, and slight framing differences, I am just not seeing a big difference in the final output. I was looking for a certain "crispness" that I saw with the Leica Q. Maybe I spent too little time with the camera, or internally tried to justify why I don't need this. But here are the results:
(Taken with CL + 23mm, f2, 1/160, iso400, taken as DNG and WB match with the Pen-F, no other adjustments)
(Taken with Pen-F + 15mm, f2, 1/100, iso200, taken as DNG and WB match with the CL, no other adjustments)
If you want to take a look at the exported jpeg at full resolution, the link to the album is here
(Taken with the Pen-F)
Size-wise they are almost the same in my hands. The viewfinder placement and resolution are almost identical. The controls only took me about a minute to figure out. For me the handling for both cameras are quite similar. The CL is certainly quite nice to handle, and to me feels similar to the Pen-F.
The AF was able to focus quite fast inside the store and I did not feel much difference comparing to the AF speed of my Pen-F.
Finally, I took the same scene with both cameras. On my screen, except for the color, distortions, and slight framing differences, I am just not seeing a big difference in the final output. I was looking for a certain "crispness" that I saw with the Leica Q. Maybe I spent too little time with the camera, or internally tried to justify why I don't need this. But here are the results:
(Taken with CL + 23mm, f2, 1/160, iso400, taken as DNG and WB match with the Pen-F, no other adjustments)
(Taken with Pen-F + 15mm, f2, 1/100, iso200, taken as DNG and WB match with the CL, no other adjustments)
If you want to take a look at the exported jpeg at full resolution, the link to the album is here
Huss
Veteran
Color is way better with the Leica, that is something I noticed immediately. Not even close. And the contrast is much better - check out the pic frames and mats. The Olympus pic seems blue and murky in comparison.
I'm actually surprised by how much better the top pic looks.
I'm actually surprised by how much better the top pic looks.
I think you may have expected too much here...
Chemophilic
Established
Huss you are right.. at first I thought that the color difference is due to the white balance. Even though I put down both as 3300k in LR, the final WB still look different.
For both pictures I can recover the highlight at the bottom right corner, so I felt that's a draw.
In any event, they won't have the CL and 18mm in stock until early next year, and the salesperson told me they had more preorder than the cameras they can actually get, so I think I am safe for now!
For both pictures I can recover the highlight at the bottom right corner, so I felt that's a draw.
In any event, they won't have the CL and 18mm in stock until early next year, and the salesperson told me they had more preorder than the cameras they can actually get, so I think I am safe for now!
ptpdprinter
Veteran
I don't remember the coloring of the brick in the SF Leica store. It's been several months since I've been in. So I don't know which color is more accurate. The Leica image is definitely warmer.
By the way, I don't really trust the color temperature numbers in LR. I don't think they are consistent. I would set white balance using the eyedropper tool on one of the white mats in the image. I think you'll find you get different numbers.
As far as sharpness and contrast, it's a little hard to tell looking at jpgs at 96 resolution.
That being said, I would expect image quality to be better with the Leica. I would hope so. Larger sensor and all that.
Huss
Veteran
I don't think the colour is warmer, but better. I examined the larger versions that Chemo provided links to, and when u look at the picture mats, the temp seems to be accurate. There is no warm tone to it (as far as I can judge sitting here). The Leica clearly has much better colour.
p.s. I'm not a Leica fan boy, for this money I'm getting a Nikon D850 for my gallery work (as a scanner).
aizan
Veteran
how did you match the white balance? the cl shot looks warmer, but that's about it.
BlackXList
Well-known
It's APS-C Vs M4/3, it should look better in this instance.
Huss
Veteran
Chemophilic
Established
I use the eyedrop tool to select the white mat part of the CL picture to do a customize WB, take the temp (number), and then put that in the WB temp for the Pen-F.
@ptpdprinter. I did what you suggested, and the WB temp differ by 50K so not a big difference, and the results still look quite similar. Maybe I should have checked if the settings on the CL and the Pen-F were all at default.
@BlackXList. I chose this comparison because if I was to buy the CL, it will be to replace the Pen-F because of the similarity in size and also of focal length that I like. My justification to get the CL would be because of IQ. Thus the comparison...
@ptpdprinter. I did what you suggested, and the WB temp differ by 50K so not a big difference, and the results still look quite similar. Maybe I should have checked if the settings on the CL and the Pen-F were all at default.
@BlackXList. I chose this comparison because if I was to buy the CL, it will be to replace the Pen-F because of the similarity in size and also of focal length that I like. My justification to get the CL would be because of IQ. Thus the comparison...
Huss
Veteran
If the justification is IQ, then a Sony A6xxx would make much more sense.
My justification for the CL is IQ/M lens compatibility/fantastic design that makes me want to use it.
Similar threads
