Jump to content

Mr.Q

Members
  • Content Count

    556
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Mr.Q

  • Rank
    Erfahrener Benutzer

Profile Information

  • Country
    USA

Recent Profile Visitors

155 profile views
  1. Mr.Q

    EVF or rangfinder on M10

    I use the EVF for the 21mm Super-Elmar and 90mm Macro-Elmar. I use the rangefinder for the 35 Summicron and 50 Summilux.
  2. Yeah the Summicron is already a great lens.... the differences are subtle at best. Too see real world differences (not an optical test bench) there's always the Summilux and Noctilux
  3. Yeah, after shooting with the Q (near silent), SL (quiet), and M10-P (very quiet) it's hard to go back to cameras with loud shutters.
  4. Mr.Q

    Leica CL substitute for Leica Q?

    Congrats! Getting both works too
  5. Mr.Q

    Leica CL substitute for Leica Q?

    In that case. I wouldn't buy the Q. 35mm is quite similar to 50mm, but 28mm produces a totally different look.
  6. Mr.Q

    Leica CL substitute for Leica Q?

    Sure it would. But that's a 75mm FOV lens on the CL. I shoot mostly in the 28-35mm focal range and I found that there were no options with the CL that gave me a similar output to the Q. Maybe a 21mm or 24mm Summilux-M on the CL..... but then it becomes bigger than the Q while losing AF. So what's the point? I'd rather shoot with the 35mm FLE on a rangefinder.
  7. Mr.Q

    Leica CL substitute for Leica Q?

    No, I've owned both as well. First, you are comparing a 28mm FOV lens to a 52.5mm FOV lens, so that's a stop difference in one's ability to hand-hold. Add in OIS and there's another 2 to 3 stops. Second, the Q can focus in near pitch dark conditions. That's not possible with the CL.
  8. Mr.Q

    Leica CL substitute for Leica Q?

    In my opinion, the Q is the best digital Leica camera in production. Don't be fooled by specs. The 23/2 TL lens is no match for the 28/1.7 Summilux. The Q has a very cinematic and pleasing quality to it's rendering. The 18/2.8 and 23/2 TL lenses can produce sharp photos as well, but they lack the smoothness and tonal range that the Summilux has to it's images. As for the camera itself, the Q has a superior AF system and it's a better low light camera, due to the F1.7 lens and OIS combo. The Q can focus down to 17cm in macro mode. Also, don't forget that the Q has a near silent leaf shutter. (I really dislike the shutter sound of the CL.... worst out of the current digital Leica's imo) I agree with Rob that the only advantage of the CL is it's versatility to use other lenses.
  9. Mr.Q

    Zeiss ZX1 vs Leica Q

    Seems like a glorified smartphone to me. They might as well feature a SIM slot for web browsing as well. Sometimes there's no need to reinvent the wheel.
  10. Mr.Q

    Heart says buy an SL, Head says not ???

    Buy used and sell for a small loss if it doesn't work. It's cheaper than renting. And keep your M240 to fall back on.
  11. Mr.Q

    Heart says buy an SL, Head says not ???

    As much as I love the SL, I would not buy one new this far into it's production cycle. I'd look to buy used.
  12. Mr.Q

    Reason why TL lenses do not have IS

    The point is that the Fuji zoom features OIS and 4 more elements while maintaining a similar size. Not to mention that the Fuji is a 1/2 stop to a stop faster throughout it's range.
  13. Mr.Q

    Reason why TL lenses do not have IS

    Perhaps.... Leica 18-56 f3.5-5.6 Fuji 18-55 f2.8-4.0
  14. Mr.Q

    Am I missing something?

    That happens under 2 conditions: 1. The lens isn't 6-bit coded without a lens profile assigned in camera (or you aren't using the Leica adapter) 2. Auto ISO minimum shutter speed set up to 1/F You need to assign a lens profile or set up the minimum shutter to anything other than 1/F.
  15. Mr.Q

    The SL Within A Robust Competitive Landscape

    I'm not leaving I don't shoot in the studio nor am I serious enough about landscapes to switch to medium format. I'm just stating my case of why a lot of landscape photographers would consider the Fuji's to be a more competent system. Having said that, I'd like to have more megapixels. I currently have four 24MP cameras in the Q, M10P, SL and X-T2 which is starting to make me feel like the SL is a bit redundant. At the same resolution and sensor tech, the IQ coming out of the SL (even with the SL primes) isn't much better than the M10 or Q, so it's hard to justify the extra weight for hiking, travelling, or just for general use. 40+MP and no LENR would differentiate the SL from the rest of the pack. It will be camera I'll use when printing large is a possibility.
×