Leica Q -general-

[Guest]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

You've read your Hegel, Steve

 

Kind regards

Simon

Edited June 2, 2015 by tri

[IkarusJohn]

I have one safe prediction: The camera is going to be lambasted for being too expensive in comparison with "the same" cameras of other brands, having insufficient pixels, a too slow/digitally corrected lens, firmware bugs, poor noise performance, poor AWB, etc. and slowly over a year or so it will emerge that when it comes to picture-taking it is the best in class....

 

You also missed the one about Leica competing directly with Sony ...

 

32 months after the Rx-1 was released, Leica also releases a full frame fixed lens compact (a digital version of my Canonet?); so, the idea isn't new (I do wonder how many potential buyers are left after Sony has already released its update of what is apparently a very good camera); what will Leica bring to the party?  CMOSIS sensor (very good, very true); Leica lenses (made of plastic in Japan, not quite so convincing); a Leica EVF (oooer, I hope like hell its as good as the one for the T); and, wait for it, Leica FIRMWARE!  Yay!

 

Alternatively, Leica joining the competition almost three years too late with ... leading edge technology, and proven world breaking firmware ...

 

For Leica's sake, I hope it is very good and not priced out of what market there is for this product.  It needs to be more than the members here, and it needs to knock the socks off the Rx-1.  I actually don't mind Leica taking on Sony (it's just about impossible for Leica to produce any product where it won't, Sony has got so big) - but it needs to do so with a coherent strategy.  Its lenses and the full frame CMOSIS sensor has to be a good start - but its electronics have to be exemplary.  If the camera is a dud (crap electronics, poor firmware support, yesteryear EVF), then the lens and sensor go into the bin with the rest of the camera.

 

Here's hoping.  The Leica T is indicative of what Leica can do with electronics, and perhaps that is where it's going.  In the Meister sketch, if the proportions are right, the lens is huge (another zoom?) and those two other spots are interesting.  The Leica T has one such spot - for AF support ...

Edited June 2, 2015 by IkarusJohn

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[IkarusJohn]

Interesting that Leica Rumours website is completely silent on this.  Maybe they know something, and now can't say?

[CheshireCat]

Underperforming the RX1's autofocus??

And how old is that chip?

 

Which chip ? All chips in Sony cameras are usually a couple generations ahead of Leica's.

I don't think AF speed matters much in such a camera. When I need AF speed, I reach for my 1Dx.

[jaapv]

Interestingly Leica uses Sony sensors when possible like the X series, and look elsewhere when Sony is unable to offer a fitting product (like the M240 sensor, Sony was approached first and unable to offer a suitable one)

So “generations ahead" rather misses the mark.

[CheshireCat]

Interestingly Leica uses Sony sensors when possible like the X series, and look elsewhere when Sony is unable to offer a fitting product (like the M240 sensor, Sony was approached first and unable to offer a suitable one) So “generations ahead" rather misses the mark.

 

When I say "chips", it is not only the sensor.

 

In any case, the new camera does not need to be compatible with M lenses, therefore Sony could have certainly be able to provide a suitable one.

[menos I M6]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

That rumored fast, fixed 28mm camera sounds interesting (not for Leica M users who have a 28 Summicron or ordered their 28 Summilux already though).

 

It will be interesting for people who are not willing to pony up the cash for a digital Leica M body + a 28 Summicron or Summilux but can settle for a fixed lens body for less the price than just a Leica M body.

 

The downside is the unknown finder solution for this one. If it is a crutch as the Sony RX-1 for us people who live with the luxury of using the best optical RF in the world, it is very limiting indeed (excusing the large cost differential to buying a Leica M equivalent).

 

Personally I have absolutely zero interest in anything lesser than the current optical Leica RF finder solution.

Anything without a finder must not apply - I rather use my iPhone in such situations.

Anything with an EVF must not apply until the technology has matured into being able to successfully trick my eye into believing to look through an optical finder (give that a few more decades I guess).

Anything hybrid, adding digital crutches, only working with camera switched on and batteries charged, throwing menus at me even through the tiny viewfinder must not apply (I am looking not for complicating my life, but for innovative solutions to make it easier - tech gizmos do not fit into the latter category).

 

If Leica can pull of a full frame version of a Ricoh GR with a competent finder and a price tag lower than buying a Leica M body or a 28 Summicron-M lens new, it will be a great camera for people who love 28mm.

 

I read a lot of the same arguments about this rumored camera and the 28mm fixed lens choice, I read when the Ricoh GR was a big buzz.

Well, I went through three generations of the Ricoh GR and ABSOLUTELY LOVED this little camera (part of which will not be possible with the rumored Leica FF camera, as it will be much larger).

 

My point: 28mm is not just a lens/ camera choice for specialized people - it can be a fantastic tool for anybody willing to experience 28mm longer than trying to swap their 50mm or 35mm lens on a Leica M for a 28mm and switch back a few shots later …

[IkarusJohn]

Interestingly Leica uses Sony sensors when possible like the X series, and look elsewhere when Sony is unable to offer a fitting product (like the M240 sensor, Sony was approached first and unable to offer a suitable one) So “generations ahead" rather misses the mark.

 

Funny!

 

Sure, Leica's CMOSIS sensor is ahead of the mark in terms of what Sony would offer Leica as an alternative; I'm not sure that means that what Leica offers (in terms of the M(240) sensor) is generations ahead of what Sony offers in its cameras!

 

I'm quite sure that the Sony sensors Sony offers in its cameras are almost certainly generations ahead of what Sony might offer Leica.  As I understand it, Sony is reasonably careful to ensure that it reserves it's best tech for its own products.  That said, Nikon must have ordered a significant number of sensors for the D800 and D800E from Sony to get that quality.

 

Put another way, Jaap; the fact that Leica was able to design and get fabricated a sensor for the M camera which suited its lenses, and Sony couldn't or more likely wouldn't make the sensor, does not mean that Leica's sensor is more technologically advanced than Sony's sensora - it just means that sensor is better suited, and probably better in all ways relevant to the M camera, than a Sony offering.

 

Sorry if that distinction is too subtle ...

Edited June 3, 2015 by IkarusJohn

[-Lss-]

I don't think AF speed matters much in such a camera. When I need AF speed, I reach for my 1Dx.

 

It matters greatly. How could it not? So does the AF accuracy which is dismal on the Sony.

[Archiver]

For me, there are pros and cons around such a camera.  A slimmer body like a film M, or the X Vario or 113 would be fantastic.  A 28/1.7 lens on the CMOSIS sensor would be a super combination, as would a good (better make that excellent) EVF.  I could very well use this as a general purpose travel camera with a zoom camera as complementary.

 

On the other hand, I've been moving away from using my M9 on account of the weight and size, preferring to use a Ricoh GR and a Panasonic GM1 with Olympus 25/1.8 as a much lighter and more flexible setup.  As much as I love my M9, it is a fair chunk of weight compared with these two much smaller cameras.  The GR comes close to the M9 in image quality and the GM1 is fine for general purpose shooting, so I (somewhat disturbingly) don't miss the M9 in my bag as much as all that.  A new fixed-lens camera that is about the size of a film M would almost be a step backwards for me at this time.

 

But that is just my preference.  There are a great number of people who would welcome a full frame fixed lens camera from Leica that is like a film M in size and slimness.  If they can keep the weight down in the region of the X 113, that would be even more enticing, at least for me.

[jaapv]

Funny!

 

Sure, Leica's CMOSIS sensor is ahead of the mark in terms of what Sony would offer Leica as an alternative; I'm not sure that means that what Leica offers (in terms of the M(240) sensor) is generations ahead of what Sony offers in its cameras!

 

I'm quite sure that the Sony sensors Sony offers in its cameras are almost certainly generations ahead of what Sony might offer Leica.  As I understand it, Sony is reasonably careful to ensure that it reserves it's best tech for its own products.  That said, Nikon must have ordered a significant number of sensors for the D800 and D800E from Sony to get that quality.

 

Put another way, Jaap; the fact that Leica was able to design and get fabricated a sensor for the M camera which suited its lenses, and Sony couldn't or more likely wouldn't make the sensor, does not mean that Leica's sensor is more technologically advanced than Sony's sensora - it just means that sensor is better suited, and probably better in all ways relevant to the M camera, than a Sony offering.

 

Sorry if that distinction is too subtle ...

You miss the point. It is not a matter of technologically advanced. In fact I suspect that the sensor designers of this world are more or less abreast in technology. After all, the machines these sensors are made on mainly come from one producer. The differences are in the designs themselves, and it is all too easy to analyze the work of the competition, making the leapfrog hops short ones.

The point I was making is called horses for courses. If Leica designs a dedicated sensor for their M camera system because nobody else is making one, that means that sensor is the most advanced one for their purpose. If they buy the most suitable Sony one for their X system, that one is ahead for that purpose. Etc. It makes no sense to call either one more advanced.

Being the most technologically advanced is not a meaningful paramater. Being the best suited for the purpose is.

 

[earleygallery]

So it's sounding much like a grown up X camera - fixed 'Summilux' lens (which will probably have a smaller aperture at closer distances as per the X) and a clip on EVF or use the LCD. Underwhelming to me, sorry.

[IkarusJohn]

No, that's not really the point you were making - that would imply that the best sensor is the one which fits the housing. What would be the point in that.

 

I agree the M(240) sensor is very good. Almost certainly the best sensor for an M camera with M lenses. But to say that makes it the most technologically advanced or the best sensor is just silly.

 

Your point is that you've already decided on an M camera, therefore the best sensor is the one the camera has. Silly. We know you like your Leicas. We all do. That's why we're here. But let's not allow that passion to obscure relatively simple reason, shall we?

[lct]

I will be interested by a "generations ahead" sensor when it fits a camera giving "generations aheads" IQ. Foveon and CMOSIS will remain my favorites until then.

[imants]

a 52mm fixed lens would have been great thus a real niche camera ...................like a a niche in the wall     interesting and curious

[peterv]

Though I understand what Jaap is trying to say from a practical point of view, I have to agree that there's more to choosing and rating sensors. Dynamic range/full well capacity/high ISO/noise etc. can be measured. 

 

Jaap, could you please merge all the Q threads, like this one:

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/241783-leica-q-series-typ-116/

 

of which I personally like the thread-title much better.

 

As for the upcoming Q, I'm really looking forward to this camera if it's a Leica version of the RX1. I like that concept very much and I agree that such a camera is typical Leica territory. After PK '12 I advised this camera to a friend of mine and he is still very happy with the IQ, size and weight of the little gem.

 

I agree with Jaap further up in this thread where he says:

 

I have one safe prediction: The camera is going to be lambasted for being too expensive in comparison with "the same" cameras of other brands, having insufficient pixels, a too slow/digitally corrected lens, firmware bugs, poor noise performance, poor AWB, etc. and slowly over a year or so it will emerge that when it comes to picture-taking it is the best in class....

 

I admit I was one of the nay-sayers when the X Vario came out, but I'm a member of the X Vario user group on Facebook and I really enjoy looking at the photos made with this camera, which IMO has outstanding colours, corner to corner sharpness and very good tonality.

 

If the Q is going to be like the X Vario - IQ-wise - it's going to be very hard to resist.

[stevelap]

+ 1 on the multiple threads merge please.

 

I know the rumours say to expect a fixed single focal length lens, but what if the Q were to have a fixed zoom lens.  In other words a full-frame take on the X-Vario concept......it would at least be unique (I think?).  Oh and please let the VF (optical, EVF or hybrid) be built-in.

Edited June 3, 2015 by stevelap

[jaapv]

No, that's not really the point you were making - that would imply that the best sensor is the one which fits the housing. What would be the point in that.

 

I agree the M(240) sensor is very good. Almost certainly the best sensor for an M camera with M lenses. But to say that makes it the most technologically advanced or the best sensor is just silly.

 

Your point is that you've already decided on an M camera, therefore the best sensor is the one the camera has. Silly. We know you like your Leicas. We all do. That's why we're here. But let's not allow that passion to obscure relatively simple reason, shall we?

Not fits the housing. Fits the technical requirements. Something quite different, don't you think? The physical housing has nothing to do with it.

[mod2001]

...and a clip on EVF o

 

Hopefully internal, on the other hand, as clip on is maybe the only chance for Leica to get a close to state of art EVF 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[lct]

An internal EVF + a 28/1.7 lens in a compact FF camera? Sounds impossible to me but i may be wrong.