Jump to content

Leica Q -general-


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My preference is for 28/50, but when I'm traveling I usually use the M9 + 35/1.4 at night because it is the widest and most compact fast lens I have, but I would prefer something wider.  A 28/1.7 on a full frame sensor would be just grand for an everyday camera.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if there is, let's hope it is buried deeply in the menu. But no big deal either way. Nobody will be forcing you to use it.

True, and let's hope the menu isn't too deep anyway. If it has a digital zoom it implies that the perceived market for the camera is not the pro / advanced amateur. I'm hoping for a groundbreaking camera from Leica. 

 

Mike.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

Then comes this one!!!!....

In the leaked pictures, the red dot is on the left side of the camera; but in this photo, it is on the right!!!...

I wonder what  this one is?... I hope another camera and interchangeable lens!...

Edited by Louis2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well the other advantage is what appears to be it's diminutive size.

 

FF, 28mm (I'm OK with that), and compact  enough for my wife not so say 'are you really taking that bloody big camera out with us yet again?' - Priceless. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well the other advantage is what appears to be it's diminutive size.

 

FF, 28mm (I'm OK with that), and compact  enough for my wife not so say 'are you really taking that bloody big camera out with us yet again?' - Priceless. 

Mark, I wonder what your wife would say if you had a Nikon or Canon almost twice that size!?... ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Perfect for photogs composing in the dark room. Not my cup of tea.

 

 

True if one likes the 28mm DoF. From time to time i don't mind but for day to day photos, big noses and so on, thanks no thanks. YMMV.

If you crop down to 35 mm the image will be the same as an actual 35 mm one, provided  you don't change position. This goes for all focal lengths. Noses (AKA perspective) and DOF (more or less) will be the same.

The only difference will be the resolution.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you crop down to 35 mm the image will be the same as an actual 35 mm one, provided  you don't change position. This goes for all focal lengths. Noses (AKA perspective) and DOF (more or less) will be the same.

The only difference will be the resolution.

 

Digital zooming can hardly change DoF i'm afraid. Sharp backgrounds don't become blurred when cropping from 28 to 35 or 50mm FoV.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Digital zooming can hardly change DoF i'm afraid. Sharp backgrounds don't become blurred when cropping from 28 to 35 or 50mm FoV.

sorry, they do if you print to the same size.
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just try the following experiment. From the same p[osition wit the same aperture tak photos with a 28 and a 90. Crop the 28 down to the 90 FOV. Apart from the resolution, the images will be identical.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Digital zooming can hardly change DoF i'm afraid.

In that case the formulas for calculating depth of field would be wrong. In fact our very concept of depth of field would be wrong. But given that it has been around for many decades, I don’t think it is. Which implies that yes, digital zoom does change DoF.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 


Just try the following experiment. From the same p[osition wit the same aperture tak photos with a 28 and a 90. Crop the 28 down to the 90 FOV. Apart from the resolution, the images will be identical.

 

 

 

They won't my friend. Look at the backgrounds. If they are sharp at 28 they won't become blurred at 90. A 90mm lens will always have a shallower DoF, at same distance and aperture of course.

Edited by lct
Link to post
Share on other sites

On the specs it quotes 4/3 sensor. Thanks for the correction. Anyway, all the guesses and speculations could end up soon with the Q being officially announced. Usually, there are more leaks (Leica T for example) but doesn't seem to be the case this time.

Yes I believe so. The difference is due to different areas of the sensor being used for the available different proportion formats. 

I have the LX100.

3:2 for the traditional & 1:1 for Instagram...Haah!

Link to post
Share on other sites

In that case the formulas for calculating depth of field would be wrong. In fact our very concept of depth of field would be wrong. But given that it has been around for many decades, I don’t think it is. Which implies that yes, digital zoom does change DoF.

 

 

Isn't digital zoom just in-camera cropping of the whole image by the firmware?

Edited by MarkP
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

In that case the formulas for calculating depth of field would be wrong. In fact our very concept of depth of field would be wrong. But given that it has been around for many decades, I don’t think it is. Which implies that yes, digital zoom does change DoF.

 

I must confess, I've always struggled with this concept. Perhaps it's an indication of being raised on standard sized negatives - depth of field is therefore only a factor of aperture and focal length. 

 

If I understand the science, as Michael summarises it, if you have an M camera with a 50 Summilux set at f/1.4, focussed on a subject at 3 metres, the depth of field (and by necessity the extent of image blur from out of focus areas) will change if you change the sensor size. We're not talking any change to the lens, or the area of best focus. If the sensor is replaced with micro 4/3, all other things being equal, the depth of field will increase - as LCT says, things which were out of focus will become in focus.  Similarly, if the sensor is replaced with a medium format sensor, from, say the S camera, the depth of field will become shallower, despite the fact that nothing else has changed. I do seriously struggle with this concept.

 

The idea that doing the same thing in post processing has the same effect doesn't help my scepticism. I can say with some confidence that cropping an image in LightRoom has no impact at all on those items in focus and those not in focus, in the same way that stitching together 30 images to make a panorama does not reduce the depth of field, making in focus images suddenly out of focus.

 

I have come to the conclusion that we are talking at cross purposes, and that Michael really did not mean to imply that cropping an image, or even changing the sensor, if the lens, f stop and focussing distance remain the same, the depth of field changes. Logically, that makes no sense - saying that has always been the received wisdom doesn't work for me, in the same way that in history the world has been flat for far longer than it has been round (or mandarin shaped, if you prefer). 

 

I'm sure someone far smarter than me will explain - I can't guarantee I'll understand, but I will try.

 

Cheers

John

Link to post
Share on other sites

In that case the formulas for calculating depth of field would be wrong. In fact our very concept of depth of field would be wrong. But given that it has been around for many decades, I don’t think it is. Which implies that yes, digital zoom does change DoF.

 

Hi Michael, now I'm confused. DOF is (amongst other things, focal distance, COC, aperture) a property of the focal length, right? So if the camera crops a 35mm FOV out of the 28mm lens, DOF calculations for 28mm would still apply, or so I thought ... Could you please explain?

 

PS: maybe I just don't understand what digital zoom means and how it works.

 

Thanks in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

... things which were out of focus will become in focus.  (...)  cropping an image in LightRoom has no impact at all on those items in focus and those not in focus

It may come as a surprise, but depth of field has little to do with things being in or out of focus.

 

Depth of field merely expresses how far or how close a point in the scene must be in order to show as a perceptible disc on a standard sized print. Cropping a frame implies that you have to enlarge the remaining parts more for a print of the same size. Enlarging the image will enlarge the "circle of confusion", i.e. the disc which is in the frame in place of a nice sharp dot. Enlarging part of an image more makes things seem blurry which seemed to be sharp at a smaller scale.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...