Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by acg69

  1. The Q/Q2 is certainly capable of great macro photography by virtue of its great lens, with or without the ELPRO macro lens. There are tons of images in here that are tack sharp. Of course the 28 is not the best for taking pictures of insects for example, but for more static objects, it works. Then it's up to the photographer.

  2. First of all: beautiful images on your site, congratulations!

    You mentioned that the 1.7 is not a 1.4 and that the former doesn't have the focus fall-off of the latter, which is probably true, but can you actually see the difference in the images and are you sure it should be attributed to the difference in maximum aperture and not in the different design of the lenses?

  3. On 9/12/2021 at 5:25 AM, rpoppes said:

    F/16 for 1/250 sec at 50 ISO

    Click for better quality

    Great shot, love it! Quick question that I have posted here on the forum before but got no real answer...: I see that you are getting the same spots around the sun as I am when shooting against it. In color they look greenish/aqua and you can reduce them a bit in LR but not completely. I was wondering if you know what they are, how to get rid of them completely or avoid having them in the first place. Thanks!


  4. The 32 images I just posted are the latest batch from my August vacation. They were all shot with the Q2, which is the only camera I am using these days. I hope you like them and I am open to constructive comments and criticism. If anyone is interested in seeing more of my work, please go to my website (write light.net) or my Facebook Page with the same name. Thanks!

  5. 16 minutes ago, Ba Erv said:

    With LR’s recent updates its also possible to just use Enhance and Super Resolution option without all the other fiddling to get an equivalent higher pixel image.  I haven’t tested this method with the Q2 but I have compared it with Multi-shot in the SL2-S and see no significant difference in image quality.  I think the LR algorithm is equal to or perhaps even slightly better than the in-camera Multi-shot in some scenes.

    Unfortunately, LR doesn’t support the Q2Mono sensor for the Enhance function.  The Super Resolution option is supported but I found the results undesirable with horrible areas of pixelation.

    I tried it once on my MacBook Pro (retina, older model) and it took an eternity and a half... Never tried it again:/

  6. 2 hours ago, T25UFO said:

    Not sure if I agree with that.  The 75 frame lines in the Q2 are similar to the 90 frame lines in the M10.  I would say completely usable, although the 135 frame lines are challenging.  Given the choice, I would still the viewfinder to zoom.  An easy thing to request, but perhaps a lot more complicated to achieve.  But what do I know?  I'm not an optical engineer.

    Not familiar with the M10 at all. What I do know is that the 75 frame lines create an extremely small window for any meaningful composition to be facilitated. On the M, obviously this is a necessity die to the OVF, but on the Q2 is an anachronism and it just irks me that the only reason they are doing it is the M legacy... If someone wanted an M, they would get an M. I am not a rangefinder guy and that's why I chose the Q2, among other reasons. Also, it is not hard to achieve because (a) virtually all other companies are doing it and (b) it is already there in a way, i.e. when you shoot JPG+RAW and use the digital zoom, the image is previewed in the EVF zoomed in, not with the frame lines.

  7. You are certainly not alone! This has been my main beef with the Q2 since day 1. I have tried to make the point here in the forum and gain some traction, so that we can ask Leica to at least offer this is a menu option with a future f/w upgrade. Some people say that this a legacy issue, i.e. makes the Q2 feel more like an M, but, if you ask me, this is   a very impractical implementation that makes the digital zoom hard to use, ir not completely unusable (at 75mm). So, please voice your opinion loud and clear and maybe we can be heard:)

  8. The following images were shot during the month of July with a Leica Q2. You can see them in full resolution and captions along with more of my work at my website: writelight.net, at the Latest section or in their respective thematic albums. Any comments welcome!

  9. 11 hours ago, jefe said:

    Hi Craig, I bought a Q2M but had to return it after a month as the camera rendered sunbursts very poorly ....... rather than rays I got a grid-like pattern that looked like  reflection off the sensor or focusing grid. I loved the Q2M otherwise but given this significant issue I determined that the M was perhaps not ready for prime-time. So I am looking for a Q2 if you want to sell yours. Please let me know. Thanks, Jeff

    I sometimes get the same “grid” on the Q2. Haven’t been able to make it go away yet or isolate the cause. 

  10. 2 minutes ago, T25UFO said:

    Think I like the third photo best.  Nice subject, nice composition, nice sky, just about the right balance of shadow detail.  I would probably have straightened the verticals, but that's just me. 

    Thank you. I see your point about the verticals - I did straighten the horizon (look at where the sea meets the sky).

    The point I am trying to make is how the same (sort of) subject can be conveyed in both color and B&W depending on the story one wants to tell and I believe that this is doable in the mind of the photographer without any external help, save for looking at a B&W EVF for finetuning.

  11. I have set the User Profiles on the Q2 in terms of what I usually shoot:


    1. Standard (all purpose): AFs, Field, Single Shot, Spot metering, AWB, DNG - A mode

    2. Macro: AFs (C for critters only), Spot AF, Burst, Multifield metering, AWB, DNG - A mode

    3. High Speed (moving subjects): AFc, Tracking AF, Hispeed burst, multi field metering, AWB, DNG - S mode

    4. Zero Light: AFs, Field, single shot, spot metering, AWB, DNG, Auto ISO

    5. Portrait: AFc, Face detection AF,  HI speed burst, Mutifield metering, AWB, DNG - A mode

    6. Monochrome: AFs, field AF, single shot, BW NAT, Spot metering, AWB, L-jpg/DNG - A mode


    Hope that helps!

  12. 5 hours ago, hdmesa said:

    That would put you well behind most of us here, wouldn't it? 🤫


    Possibly. The point being...?

    If you feel you can put your experience to good use and show me what is meant here by the hypothesis that a monochrome camera somehow influences the input by enabling (or any other verb you prefer) the shooter to see / think in B&W, I would kindly ask you to do so. I mean this, so we can hopefully move beyond the smartass remarks and actually learn something.

    I still maintain that the monochrome is only about the output for technical reasons that we all know. If a photographer has been shooting B&W long enough, he or she knows if a story is better told in color or B&W without even using the camera to decide on the composition. Then, by using any camera and setting it to show a B&W image in the EVF or LCD, they can fill in the gaps of their imagination and fine-tune the process.

    I am attaching an image I took (albeit not with a Leica) some years ago, when doing a series on the ancient Temple of Poseidon at Cape Sounio in Greece. This image was conceived as a b&W from the beginning. The story is the light through the columns and to bring it forward without distractions (e.g. from the sky), B&W was the way to go.

    The other two images are from the same set but they were conceived as color shots. The story is the simplicity of the columns (in form and color) vs. the light play of the clouds in the sky. Obviously, this story is better told in color, at least for my taste.

    What I am saying is that if I had a Q2M in hand that day, that first shot may have been better in terms of tonality and overall IQ, but I do not see how and in what way it would have helped my thinking process in deciding which story is better told in what way. Can someone please show what they mean or at least try to describe it in a way that will make it easier to comprehend?

    Again - I am not here to argue for the sake of arguing guys. We share the same passion and we can disagree on issues, but I find it way more interesting to explore what each other has to say so that we can all get better. I, with my 40 years of photography and possibly you too with your many years more too:) (this is a joke, no need to comment on this, really!)


  13. Gee, you boys saw right through me! Interesting how you need a Q2M to see in B&W... Show images. Not words. (incidentally you are not really good with words, hope you are better with images).

    Being in Athens, I will go to sleep now to feed my NPD, but I guess you know that already. And as for Greek tragedy, did you get the wikipedia definition? 

    Images gentlemen, show your work with the tolls you have and leave the battles or wits to others.

    Good night;)

  14. 9 minutes ago, Richard K said:

    Terrific thoughtful post. Appreciated! And, BTW, I am nowhere near rich! I don’t smoke or drink etc. (that’s a standard rationalization too!) so I can easily convince myself of purity of motive and justification... ☺️ Thank you!

    You are welcome! Now let's get back to the business of taking enlightened B&W photographs with our beloved toys, shall we? 

    I am making a point that, I realize, is hard to accept. Didn't have any illusions about that. In any case, let's agree to disagree and let's all get out and make images (B&W or color) with whatever we happen to be carrying at the time. And let's share images so we can prove the points we are making and drive the collective knowledge here higher. Not interested to argue with you or anyone else for that matter. Happy shooting:)

  15. 48 minutes ago, T25UFO said:


    I hate this type of sarcasm - seemingly apologising for having an infinitely superior level of intelligence.  Not clever, not clever at all.


    Well, let us all be thankful for that.  Now perhaps we can all get back to doing what people on this forum actually like to do - taking photographs.


    Yeah, whatever:)

  16. 2 hours ago, Herr Barnack said:

    Dear acg69,

    You are either confused or engaging in projection, and I don't think it's confused.  It is not I who is the purveyor of horse droppings.

    Another example of your horse droppings -

    You are operating from a position of total ignorance with regard to the finances of others on this forum, yet you make sweeping generalizations and stereotype those who have more than one Leica as supposed "wealthy individuals" - as if those who have been able to create financial independence for themselves and their families are worthy of contempt.  They are not.

    Even if there are people on this forum who have money to burn, as long as it was obtained by lawful and ethical means - AKA years of hard work, thrift and savvy investing -  what business is that of yours? 

    Perhaps it is time to stop judging people who have more than one Leica camera and lens or whom you suspect of being financially prosperous.  Such thinking is irrational, silly and pointless.

    That's all I have.  Now can we all just get along?

    Dear Herr Barnack,

    Although I am oh so tempted to tear those childish arguments apart (I am talking early childhood here...), I will not. As I said before, "over and out". I suspect that if you had trouble understanding that, it is conceivable that my other points would indeed be above your comprehension level, for which I apologise. Mea Culpa.

    You did say one good thing though: Can we all get along? Yes, if we refrain from calling other people's opinions "horse droppings" which you did and I obviously had to reply. As to the $64,000 question: can you show me how the Q2M or other Monochrome camera helps you in the way you describe? Can you show me images made this way?

    If not, please, say what you will if you must have the last word (in true kindergarten playground fashion) but I will not engage in this anymore. Not interesting and not interested;)

  17. Dear Herr Barnack,

    Your comments may indeed be horse droppings and that’s your prerogative obviously. They do not insult me of course because I just take them as such:) 

    I still maintain that if you carefully read the statement I made, you will not be insulted, as I am not accusing anyone of "not being there". I am merely saying that someone who cannot think or see in B&W without the trivial (at best) help of a prop (a camera IN HAND that will magically condition/force/enable you to see/think in B&W) you do not need it, because your mastery of the art is at a lower level than the one that can make use of a purpose made tool such as the Q2M. For example, I do not consider myself at a level of photography that I need an S3 with an assortment of lenses because anything else just cramps my style. Of course, you may be the new HCB in which case, please teach me how to hold the Q2M (which I will promptly buy) so I can see/think in B&W better than I can now. What the heck, I will pay too:)

    You can be offended by my personal opinion, but please refrain from leaving any more horse droppings;)

    Over and out. Really.

  18. Such a heated discussion... Jeez:)

    So let me add to the heat a bit if I may! My comments are not meant to be inflammatory or insulting, but if you take them as such, please know that this is NOT my intention.

    To answer the initial question: For someone who has the money to spend on this question, the real answer is get whatever trips your trigger, i.e. whatever makes you fell better about yourself and makes you pick up the camera and have it with you at all times. For the rest of us common folk, we have to make do with possibly one camera and probably stretch a bit to buy any Leica, but I understand that this is not anybody else's problem but ours (common folk that is!).

    If someone is shooting ONLY B&W, then yes, the Q2M is a purpose made tool and its output (as Le Chef has been arguing all along) will be better, although it really depends on the use case and the ability of the shooter, i.e. if they know how to make it tick, which if course is true of any camera or tool for that matter. If one is doing both color and B&W and (common folk again) money is an issue, then I would argue that the Q2 or the RX1 or any camera will serve them extremely well, because they are not giving up anything major (i.e. the ability to shoot both color and B&W) for trivial gains (again, they have to really know what they are doing) in IQ on one of their domain, that is the B&W. 

    The Monochrome does NOT help anyone see or think in B&W, this is just a rationalisation for people who want to buy one. It sounds like a good justification to others (especially wives: dear, it is a game changer, it will help me advance my photography to a whole different level blah blah blah), but, let's be frank here among us boys, there is no magic way to see / think in B&W that can be attributed to a camera, when one can replicate the stimulus on the EVF/LCD by choosing to see in B&W through the settings of the Q2.

    I would go a bit further to suggest something even more radical: if one cannot see / think in B&W without holding (HOLDING) a dedicated Monochrome camera in their hands (since we all agree that it is not the EVF that does the trick but the whole mentality that is afforded  to a photographer by merely buying a Q2M), please do yourselves a favour and save your money - you do not NEED a Monochrome camera, you are not there yet and you can certainly work on B&W with whatever camera you have in your hands and still produce great or mediocre results.

    This is becoming a discussion among wealthy individuals who CAN own multiple Leica cameras and are trying to justify the purchase to themselves and/or others, which takes me full circle to my first point above.

    I have been photographing for 40 years now and I can say with certainty that holding a monochrome camera won't help ANYONE see / think in B&W, the same way that HOLDING a camera with a 28 mm lens won't help you see the world in that field of view. It is through years of experience (regardless of camera in hand, but very much depending on camera next to your eye) that one learns to see in 28, 35, 50 or whatever. Seeing and thinking in terms of B&W is a learned trait but if you are expecting to learn it because you spent 6k on a camera, you've got another think coming...

    Last but not least... cameras are primarily tools and yes, they can be our little babies too, I can understand that. BUT please, let's make points with our images to prove them, because otherwise it is just heat and a bit of show-offism... We can argue until the cows come home about the Q2M helping us see / think in B&W but the real test would be to see images that somehow exude that native, from zero to infinity, B&W mentality exclusively afforded to the photographer because they were HOLDING a monochrome camera:)

    Again, I sincerely apologise if anyone is offended by my comments, certainly this was not my intention. We are here to talk and help each other and share experiences and showcase our work with our tools of choice. To that end, my work (recently with the Q2 and before that with many other cameras mentioned on my site) can be seen at writelight.net, among other places.

    Happy shooting (with whatever you happen to be carrying!)

  • Create New...