Leica CL & Elmarit to be announced on 11/21/17

I wonder if it's part manufactured / designed by Panasonic? Lens finish & style looks very Panasonic-ish... seeing as, stylistically, the Pana versions are always more ugly I wonder how bad that will look :D
 
Corran said:
Yeah, screw the plebs who can't afford the Red Dot, right?

Who cares what the camera brings to the table in terms of capabilities or quality of output - if you've got the money, obviously you buy the Leica. A Fuji is just so pedestrian.

FWIW I wouldn't buy either.
Click to expand...

Yes, screw all the people who desperately want a Leica at a Fuji price. Who cares about them? All they do is complain anyway.

I've had the luxury of buying almost any camera I wanted over the past fifty years. I buy Leicas because they work very well, they keep working well, they hold their value well, and I've had very few to no problems with them. When I have had problems, Leica has taken care of them efficiently for me. I don't really care much whether Leica innovates all the time ... I don't buy a camera to show off to other photographers what new features it has. I buy a camera to make photographs with, and my needs for doing that haven't changed in many many years.
 
Godfrey said:
Yes, screw all the people who desperately want a Leica at a Fuji price. Who cares about them? All they do is complain anyway.

I've had the luxury of buying almost any camera I wanted over the past fifty years. I buy Leicas because they work very well, they keep working well, they hold their value well, and I've had very few to no problems with them. When I have had problems, Leica has taken care of them efficiently for me. I don't really care much whether Leica innovates all the time ... I don't buy a camera to show off to other photographers what new features it has. I buy a camera to make photographs with, and my needs for doing that haven't changed in many many years.
Click to expand...

Like Godfrey, I buy a camera to make photographs with. And I'll point out a camera that is silly expensive for what it does. Doesn't mean I desperately want a Leica at a Fuji price. Leica makes wonderful rangefinder cameras. It's other offerings are flotsom and jetsam.
 
ptpdprinter said:
Like Godfrey, I buy a camera to make photographs with. And I'll point out a camera that is silly expensive for what it does. Doesn't mean I desperately want a Leica at a Fuji price. Leica makes a wonderful rangefinder cameras. It's other offerings are flotsom and jetsam.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's what I was getting at.

Since this camera is not a rangefinder, my question is always "what does this bring to the table that other cameras do not?"

As for this statement:

Godfrey said:
I buy Leicas because they work very well, they keep working well, they hold their value well, and I've had very few to no problems with them.
Click to expand...

Well I think it's demonstrably false to say that Leica cameras "keep working well" in the digital age. While maybe you've been lucky (or upgraded fast enough to avoid issues) the M8/M9 have proven to not exactly be long-lasting tools. Yes they do hold their value, primarily due to the cache of the brand, not the quality. The long-term viability of any digital camera has not been proven - we'll see.

I bought an M9 because it's a digital RF. Otherwise there is not much of an argument to own one IMO.
 
I don't think it's ugly at all, I think it looks nice and stylish. If this is ugly, point out a Japanese digi cam that is good looking. It's not as nice looking as an M, but what is?
:)

This bit sells it for me as I would use it with mf Leica lenses:


"I made some detailed comparisons between the Fuji X-T2, the Leica M10, SL and the CL using the new version of the 28 M Summicron Asph and the 50 M Summilux Asph. Images from the CL did very well with both lenses with minimum vignetting and no visible smearing. Very comparable to those from the Leica SL and nearly as good as those from the Leica M10. In comparison, the Fuji images were poor, even on the 50 ‘lux; the centre was sharp, but smearing was very evident away from the centre of the image. Leica have obviously worked hard to make the camera do well with M lenses.

I have had a long discussion with Sean Reid at ReidReviews about this and he agrees with me. He feels that the issue is largely to do with the thickness of the cover glass (the CL does not have an AA filter). Of course, Fujifilm have other priorities, and you wouldn’t expect them to spend a lot of time and money compromising their sensor design for other manufacturers to sell more lenses!"

The price of $2800 puts it close to the used price of the M240. But this thing is smaller, is new, has a higher max shutter speed of 1/8000 sec for all those daylight wide open shooting junkies, and has a warranty.


One thing, Slack mentions "It has a built in EVF (not the same as the Visoflex) ", yet Leica's specs show it has the same resolution as the Visoflex, which is 2.4-ish mp which is about half of the SL. I find it hard to believe it is not the same as offered with the M10. It is also much less than the 3.7mp offered in the Q. The Leica Q is much more expensive (but that price includes the 28mm lens and is a FF camera), but it still is disappointing that this all new Leica camera gets some seriously old tech inside it. And this is not some innocuous that most wouldn't 'see', this is the viewfinder.
And herein lies the rub that I have with new digital Leica cameras. They are always way behind the curve with the latest tech. They have it (see the vf in the Q and the SL), but choose to introduce new models with tech that is 5 years old. No Japanese mfg would ever do that. They wouldn't survive. But Leica does that because, unfortunately, people buy them - let's be honest here - because of the badge.

I was 'this close' to considering this CL due to its size and lens compatibility with my M glass. But seeing that EVF in it. What a disappointment.
 
Godfrey said:
... I don't buy a camera to show off to other photographers what new features it has. I buy a camera to make photographs with, and my needs for doing that haven't changed in many many years...
Click to expand...

I respect you for buying several Leica cameras since I'm on this forum. You gave great examples from them and some of them have great reviews from you here. I was just re-reading your X review here recently.

Leica makes cameras which are different or slightly, but enough different from another brands. To me for sure. And I think, here is nothing to hide among us. Most of us here doing the same thing. Buying and trying how it is for making photographs with.

But " I buy a camera to make photographs with" doesn't need to be performed and reported every or other year, if it is strictly to make photographs. IMO. I get M-E one year ago and it still growing on me. :)
 
The venom constantly thrown at Leica on this forum is astonishing. Can’t people not care for things without denigrating them?

IMO this is what the TL should have been from day one, but I doubt the readily available EVF tech was this refined at that point. I’m not going to buy one (quite happy with my Fuji gear, thank you) but I wouldn’t mind a CL and lenses if the budget were available.
 
It actually looks like a nifty camera...
If they put better video in there..and a tilty screen...I might consider it...as it is good w/M lenses...
Leica is always giving us what seems to be..transition cameras..never 100% likeable..always something missing..always something lacking...
as in....too fat...too heavy..video not up to par...failed parts..failed service..the list goes on..
 
Huss said:
So I assume you never had a sensor failure ?
Click to expand...

Yes, I had a sensor failure with my M9 after one and a half years using it. I sent it in, they told me it needed replacement and offered me an excellent trade-in for the M-P 240. I did that and had my new camera shortly thereafter. Total time: 4 weeks from end to end. I was uninterested in repairing the M9. It was about my least favorite Leica of all the Leica cameras I've owned.

It should be noted that the M9 sensor problem never stopped my using the camera, and the M9 family sensors were/are the only sensor failures in Leica's digital camera history. None of the other digital Leica models have ever had sensor failures of any kind that I'm aware of. It was/is the first full frame Leica M digital camera ... Prior to it, the notion of building a full frame digital M was largely considered nearly impossible. I guess it was pretty hard at that. :D

I went through an M9, M-P and M-D 262. I'm content and happy with the M-D.
I also went through an X2 and an X typ 111 ... both good, the latter better than the former, but ultimately fixed lens point and shoots don't do it for me is what I decided. I bought the SL one month after the Nikon D750 ... the Nikon never got used again.

My X2 had a four way controller problem, Leica fixed that in three-four weeks. The M9 had the sensor corrosion problem, I traded it for the M-P. That took four weeks as well. Just normal problems and normal resolution. My film Leicas have required a CLA, my older lenses have needed CLA too. Again, just normal stuff.

I've sold all my other digital cameras and have just the M-D and SL now. I have absolutely zero interest in buying anything else at this point. These two cameras complement each other and just work and work and work. I still have my favorite Leicaflex SL and M4-2 as well. All totally reliable...

If I weren't so satisfied with what I have now, the CL would be a natural for me. If the T/TL had been this when it came out, I'd have sold the M9 and gone this way then. But I am satisfied and don't need anything beyond what I have. I don't need any newer tech than what i already have, I have all the lenses I need/want. There's no reason for me to want anything else.

G
 
Reckon they have the fully digital M surrounded now. Maybe another couple of years.
I'm digging the design of this camera. Not a customer though. I'm up here in the bleacher seats.
Once the thing is out in the wild for a piece I guess we'll get a better understanding of its abilities as compared to the competition.
 
I can make the CL work, I like the pancake 18mm, despite preferring 35 & 50mm, rented a leica Q and by the end of the week I enjoyed the 28mm and loved the Q but not the price thus purchased the 100f
 
Godfrey said:
None of the other digital Leica models have ever had sensor failures of any kind that I'm aware of.
Click to expand...
The M8 sensor didn't fail; it was defective from the outset, and you had to use special filters over the lenses to get acceptable color. The M9 and MM sensors corrode, and you have to wait a long time to get them repaired, particularly for the MM. Not a problem if you want to trade up ($2500-$3500) or you have already bought newer bodies ($5500-$6500) so you have backups. In those cases, having money is clearly an advantage, and can ease the pain. Not everyone does. I believe the sensors beginning with the 240 have been problem free.
 
I guess I'll sit on the fence for a while. Firstly, about Leica and almost identical cameras with different badges; I had the Panasonic LX2 and the Leica D-Lux 3 for a while and used them to compare output and couldn't see any difference in terms of use, prints and on screen pictures. The Leica's case was superior and that decided things for me.

Secondly, problems; well I had this Digilux 2 and the sensor failed dramatically but was replaced after a few weeks (and I still have the camera and still like it). And the sensor in my M9 was replaced too...

I still like their digital and film cameras but I'm not going to run out and buy anything just because it's new. Perhaps when I need one and nothing else will do...

Regards, David
 
Kai (former DigitalRev frontman) already has a 10 minute CL review on YouTube posted today.

It looks thrown together from a spare parts bin.

The EVF looks like a hot glue job with a Visoflex.

Overall it really appears to be a cobbled mess of a Leica.

Just my opinion!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom