What I really want, I guess is a digital Barnack and the CL seemed like an actual Leica branded way to do it, perhaps better than the E-PL1 I have now for that purpose. It looks like this isn't really the best way to approach it.
So, the search continues ... APS-C, built in VF, cheap and higher...
I was pondering today if the digial CL would work well with old LTM lenses via stacked adaptors? LTM -> M -> L ?
Anyone tried this? I'm still trying to find a digital equal to my old IIIf and Summitar. I love my Nikons but miss a certain something about Leica.
There is also the G lens issues. I'm not as annoyed as some by the lack of an actual aperture ring since it can be done by the dials on the camera but by the same token I don't care to lose the options.
I've been finding that I like the older AF/AF-D lenses better than the newer AF-S lenses. Not sure why - a little smaller, yet feel better made than the super light plastic fantastic. OTOH, I can't complain optically - the 35/1.8 DG is amazing.
I owned Leica in the past and loved the IIIf...
Heh. Had to go do a lookup on the differences between CCD & CMOS in this situation. Turns out the first digital I bought - a Canon A590 had a 8mp CCD in it but you couldn't have told the difference by me. It was for ebay and other such stuff, not "real" photography. Really wasn't that bad a...
Bah, physics. Who needs that? :laugh:
More seriously, I think you explained that once over at RFF and I had forgotten. But it makes sense that there was some real reason for it given the skill of the Nippon Kogaku & Zeiss optical people.
If you decide you want a Leica lens let me suggest the single finest one I ever used - The Summitar 50/2. Summicron like stopped down, capable of almost crazy and soft wide open. I regret selling that lens more than any other.