Jump to content
FrozenInTime

Leica Q -general-

Recommended Posts

This is pretty interesting. A lot of good things about this.

 

... oh, and thank Gord they put a VF in the darned thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Impressive camera (and lens).

 

The price is quite reasonable, if you compare it with a M240 + 28 Summilux (or Summicron)... or with a Sony RX1 (the Leica has better specifications).

 

Wonderful camera with many improvements or refinements, and a great design. 

 

The lens is particularly striking. 

Edited by rosuna

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Attractive as the Q is, I think a fixed lens (I mean fixed to the camera, whether or not it is a zoom) in a digital camera is a huge flaw, and a barrier to its becoming a genuinely serious model...

 

 

Fixed lenses are nothing new, and they do have benefits, for example the Hasselblad SWC?  The difference with the SWC and other such cameras is, I guess, the benefit of film and the inherent flaw in digital sensors. Time will tell if, and for how long Leica will support the electronics. As mentioned many times before, it is entirely possible for Leica to repair and replace the electronics (okay, they're the same thing), provided they have the supply chain right. 

 

We would then have a 24MP camera which would take the same high quality images for as long as you want it to. Yes, there will be technology improvements, but there are plenty of photographers interested in taking photos rather than chasing their tails on the technology race - provided it is not fundamentally flawed (which it does not appear to be). 

 

I must use confess that I find the digital zoom a huge negative. I know, you don't have to use it, but I think the camera lacks clarity having this sort of rubbish. I acknowledge what people say above about the print quality of 15MP and 10MP.  So, you're going to do large prints of out of camera JPGs?  I don't think I would be. It's a tacky and pointless sap to the Rx-1 and nothing more. 

 

I think ink it will be a very good long term camera with all the benefits of a leaf shutter, and fine lens perfectly matched to the sensor which hopefully people will buy and use for as long as they want to take 28mm images. I really like using my SWC. 

 

I have zero interest in buying this camera, though I have to say. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fixed lenses are nothing new, and they do have benefits, for example the Hasselblad SWC?  The difference with the SWC and other such cameras is, I guess, the benefit of film and the inherent flaw in digital sensors. Time will tell if, and for how long Leica will support the electronics. As mentioned many times before, it is entirely possible for Leica to repair and replace the electronics (okay, they're the same thing), provided they have the supply chain right. 

 

We would then have a 24MP camera which would take the same high quality images for as long as you want it to. Yes, there will be technology improvements, but there are plenty of photographers interested in taking photos rather than chasing their tails on the technology race - provided it is not fundamentally flawed (which it does not appear to be). 

 

I must use confess that I find the digital zoom a huge negative. I know, you don't have to use it, but I think the camera lacks clarity having this sort of rubbish. I acknowledge what people say above about the print quality of 15MP and 10MP.  So, you're going to do large prints of out of camera JPGs?  I don't think I would be. It's a tacky and pointless sap to the Rx-1 and nothing more. 

 

I think ink it will be a very good long term camera with all the benefits of a leaf shutter, and fine lens perfectly matched to the sensor which hopefully people will buy and use for as long as they want to take 28mm images. I really like using my SWC. 

 

I have zero interest in buying this camera, though I have to say. 

 

Agree with all you said. Film fixed lens cameras are different because the 'sensor' can be changed continuously. I've always fancied an SWC too. 

 

I have a Canon EOS-M, the Canon 22mm M Prime lens is quite superb, a little gem. Together it makes - for me - a nice digital alternative to my M2 and 35 lens. It shares some of the features of the Q such as touch screen focus/shoot and image stabilisation. It's APS-C (about the same as the Q with 35mm digital zoom) and it cost me less than £200 new. I can fit any Canon EF or EFS lens, or Leica lenses for that matter (I have tried some LTM lenses). 

 

How could i possibly justify spending £3000 on a Q which doesn't really offer me anything more? (i hate EVF's by the way). 

 

The Q is very interesting, for Leica, and I'm sure one can produce great images with it. But it is IMHO another Leica 'nearly' camera. 

 

It seems in some ways that Leica are deliberately holding themselves back from producing something truly great. Maybe it is their desire to preserve the M's superiority, but they could be doing themselves more harm than good by that tactic. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see the Q as more of a digital reincarnation of the compact rangefinder 35s of the 1970s than the SWC.  Note that most of them had a fixed lens (typically 35mm) and a fast aperture (typically 1.4 or 1.7).

 

https://www.cameraquest.com/com35s.htm

 

Point well taken regarding the digital zoom ("crop modes" is probably a more accurate term).  But if Leica doesn't see that as natural to how a lot of people will use the Q, then it's quite surprising to me that they picked the 28 rather than the 35 as the focal length for a camera of the form factor of Q.  To me, the 28mm is more natural to a snapshooter compact P&S like the Ricoh GR*.   In other words, I think Leica picked 28mm specifically because the Q has enough resolution to shoot at both 28 and 35mm at very high quality, so why not.  

 

I will note that the Ricoh GR also features a 35mm crop mode.  A 47mm crop mode was later added via a firmware update, but with a the resulting resolution lower than 10mp I doubt a lot of people use it.

 

*I say this because the 35mm lens is suitable for a broader range of subjects and is used as a primary lens by more photographers than the 28mm.  If a camera is designed with a fixed 28mm lens, most of the time it's to serve as a snapshooter by giving a wider field of view and a greater depth of field.

 

 

Fixed lenses are nothing new, and they do have benefits, for example the Hasselblad SWC?  The difference with the SWC and other such cameras is, I guess, the benefit of film and the inherent flaw in digital sensors. Time will tell if, and for how long Leica will support the electronics. As mentioned many times before, it is entirely possible for Leica to repair and replace the electronics (okay, they're the same thing), provided they have the supply chain right. 

 

We would then have a 24MP camera which would take the same high quality images for as long as you want it to. Yes, there will be technology improvements, but there are plenty of photographers interested in taking photos rather than chasing their tails on the technology race - provided it is not fundamentally flawed (which it does not appear to be). 

 

I must use confess that I find the digital zoom a huge negative. I know, you don't have to use it, but I think the camera lacks clarity having this sort of rubbish. I acknowledge what people say above about the print quality of 15MP and 10MP.  So, you're going to do large prints of out of camera JPGs?  I don't think I would be. It's a tacky and pointless sap to the Rx-1 and nothing more. 

 

I think ink it will be a very good long term camera with all the benefits of a leaf shutter, and fine lens perfectly matched to the sensor which hopefully people will buy and use for as long as they want to take 28mm images. I really like using my SWC. 

 

I have zero interest in buying this camera, though I have to say. 

Edited by cpclee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very impressive for new Fulframe Compact Leica Camera Q116 and the next problem :

How should I do with my M240 + 28 Asph + 35 FLE + 50 Lux including the X113 ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if you are happy with Q lens you can sell the whole lot and get a Q. However, looking at your M stuff you'll maybe want to hang in there and wait for the next M that will at least include (built in or nit) the better viewfinder and a sensor upgrade.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very impressive for new Fulframe Compact Leica Camera Q116 and the next problem :

How should I do with my M240 + 28 Asph + 35 FLE + 50 Lux including the X113 ?

It is very sad, but you do not need the Q

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×