Leica Q -general-

[eckart]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

But you forgot that M8 is 10 MP and M9 is 18 MP, with the same pixel pitch, so the conversion factor is 1:1.8

This is a misunderstanding.

Framevise a 28mm lens on a M8 behave like a 35mm and the factor to full frame is 1:1.33.

As I already said this was not science, just a short way to calculate, blurry and maybe wrong.

Edited June 7, 2015 by eckart

[IkarusJohn]

And the circle of confusion continues to grow ...

 

One other thing I've learned over the years - the more you blow an image up, the blurrier it gets!

Edited June 7, 2015 by IkarusJohn

[Advertisement]

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

[pop]

1.33 * 1.33 = 1.7689

 

The diagonal is 1.33 times larger. The area is 1.77 times larger. The crop factor refers to the diagonal. The pixel count refers to the area.

[Mike Rawcs]

Unless I've missed something I haven't seen information as to how focus of the lens is achieved. Obviously the lens can be focussed manually, but is AF possible, and how will manual focus work, focus confirmation dot or old-fashioned visual?

 

Mike.

[pop]

Unless I've missed something I haven't seen information as to how focus of the lens is achieved. Obviously the lens can be focussed manually, but is AF possible, and how will manual focus work, focus confirmation dot or old-fashioned visual?

 

Mike.

AF seems to be built in; turn the focusing ring past the infinity mark to "AF". The D2 used to do that, too.

[MarkP]

I'm getting progressively more interested in this camera.

[earleygallery]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Focus peaking (in MF) has been mentioned somewhere. Would seem logical.

[colonel]

Looks a fabulous camera. Bit disappointed as 28mm isn't my most popular FL

[AndreasAM]

I am following the discussion in this thread about FOV and the potential digital zoom in the Q with interest, but I can't help feeling that for Leica a choice for digital zoom in the Q would be below par in quality. This is, in my opinion, not a solution for a complete digital camera which can standup (over time) against the competition and (maybe in the future) replace or coexist next to the M with a RF.

 

I think that the aim for Leica with the Q is/should be:

- Smaller/lighter format than the M, reintroducing a M3 experience;

- Cheaper to produce, for increased marketshare and fence of competition (hence no RF);

- Keep the "feel" of an rangefinder experience, although with a EVF, when using the Q.

- Test the waters with idea's for a new concept paradigm for the future system camera's. (therefore a fixed lens)

 

So far I see two important objections/questions ventilated about the known rumors on the Q :

1. The 28 mm. is an akward choice for the lens, why not use the more obvious 35 mm. or 50 mm.

2. How can a EVF compare in quality of use with a RF.

 

For me (thinking out of the box here) the solution could be:

- Use the 28 mm. DOF of the lens for the projecting the image in the EVF, hence the large format and 3,5 mill MP.  

- project a 35 mm. FOV frame line in the EVF

- Use the FF/24 Mp, 24x36 mm sensor, to capture a 35 mm. FOV "cropped" image (by optical quality).

 

This would address the two main objections and incorporating the aims, stated above.

 

Advantages:

- Introducing a rangefinder experience in an EVF,  by being able to look "around" the 35 mm. frame.

- Having a "optical" quality 35 mm. FOV image in FF/24 Mp.

- Being able to crop to 50 mm. FOV, with a reasonable resolution.

 

This would be a real electronic rangefinder camera for the streets and quite unique in the market. 

 

Is this a plausible strategy/solution incorporated in the upcoming Q, or is this technical impossible?

Edited June 7, 2015 by AndrewAM

[pico]

 

 

 

 

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.

 

 

That is just so incorrect. Cropping a 90mm frame from 28mm will show just how blurred (or not) the 28mm segment really is.

.

[pico]

Circle of confusion is specific to the lens, not the sensor - changing the sensor will only have an effect if the same field of view is maintained.

 

 

Not quite. Circle of Confusion (CoC) is a factor chosen by the photographer as the maximum size CoC he finds acceptable at a certain print size and viewing distance. The CoC presumed in DoF charts is a rule-of-thumb for a standard viewing distance & print size.

 

An example for the excellent Hasselblad SWC, 38mm Biogon lens. Hasselblad suggests that if one is going to print large for a standard viewing distance, then the on-lens DoF scale should be read as if the lens were one stop farther open. IOW, if shooting at F:8, read the scale for F:5.6.

 

Sometimes the foreground can seem more acceptably sharp simply because it is larger than the background. The image below was print 40x40" and survived well. F:16.  A SWC photo of my former workplace shortly after construction was completed.

Edited June 7, 2015 by pico

[hiepphotog]

 

I'm no techie at all but DoF formulas are based on actual focal lengths aren't they? Just look at the background (no tripod here sorry). 

 

Elmarit 90/2.8, f/2.8:

90_M2409101_web.jpg

 

Elmarit 28/2.8 asph, f/2.8, cropped to 90mm FoV:

28-90_M2409099_web.jpg

 

 

If you stop your Elmarit 90 down to roughly f/32, you would get a similar look. This has to do more with equivalent DOF instead of perspective distortion. But overall, I agree with you, standing in one place, digital zoom/cropping would not change the perspective distortion, since this depends on the distance between the camera and the subject. However, your cropped 28 picture to a 35 would not have more perspective distortion (i.e. bigger nose) than a 35 with the same framing cause the distance is effectively the same. Of course, optical distortion of each lens would contribute to minor difference; well-corrected optical distortion would result in more exaggerated perspective distortion. 

[colonel]

Circle of confusion

 

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!

Edited June 7, 2015 by colonel

[Mike Rawcs]

Looks a fabulous camera. Bit disappointed as 28mm isn't my most popular FL

Looks good, doesn't it Harold? I don't usually use a 28mm either, but whichever focal length was chosen, someone would rather it was another. 

 

Mike.

[erlingmm]

Digital zoom, as opposed to optical zoom?  You can do that more effectively in LightRoom. 

 

This is the new trend in drone cameras and conference cameras: A strong wide angle, a good sensor, digital zoom in any part of the picture and distortion correction to focus on topic of interest, resolution on chip and lens is sufficient for this within certain limits. No pan/tilt mechanics.

 

This new camera is obviously not for the LR crowd primarily, more JPEG right out of camera. Digital zoom from 28 to 35 or 50 should work well, very interesting : Convenience, convenience, convenience

Edited June 7, 2015 by erlingmm

[spylaw4]

I am following the discussion in this thread about FOV and the potential digital zoom in the Q with interest, but I can't help feeling that for Leica a choice for digital zoom in the Q would be below par in quality. This is, in my opinion, not a solution for a complete digital camera which can standup (over time) against the competition and (maybe in the future) replace or coexist next to the M with a RF.

 

I think that the aim for Leica with the Q is/should be:

- Smaller/lighter format than the M, reintroducing a M3 experience;

- Cheaper to produce, for increased marketshare and fence of competition (hence no RF);

- Keep the "feel" of an rangefinder experience, although with a EVF, when using the Q.

- Test the waters with idea's for a new concept paradigm for the future system camera's. (therefore a fixed lens)

 

So far I see two important objections/questions ventilated about the known rumors on the Q :

1. The 28 mm. is an akward choice for the lens, why not use the more obvious 35 mm. or 50 mm.

2. How can a EVF compare in quality of use with a RF.

 

For me (thinking out of the box here) the solution could be:

- Use the 28 mm. DOF of the lens for the projecting the image in the EVF, hence the large format and 3,5 mill MP.  

- project a 35 mm. FOV frame line in the EVF

- Use the FF/24 Mp, 24x36 mm sensor, to capture a 35 mm. FOV "cropped" image (by optical quality).

 

This would address the two main objections and incorporating the aims, stated above.

 

Advantages:

- Introducing a rangefinder experience in an EVF,  by being able to look "around" the 35 mm. frame.

- Having a "optical" quality 35 mm. FOV image in FF/24 Mp.

- Being able to crop to 50 mm. FOV, with a reasonable resolution.

 

This would be a real electronic rangefinder camera for the streets and quite unique in the market. 

 

Is this a plausible strategy/solution incorporated in the upcoming Q, or is this technical impossible?

 

Isn't it a bit late now to be suggesting what Leica might/should have done?  After all the Q's released on Wednesday, and we'll all find out the full details then!

 

Patience, grasshoppers!

Edited June 7, 2015 by spylaw4

[AndreasAM]

Or is it credible that they have done it?

I am just thinking out loud.

Edited June 7, 2015 by AndrewAM

[peterv]

Could someone please be so kind to clarify what digital zoom actually does and how it works? I think I know but I'll refrain from stating my interpretation so as not to spread more confusion in this thread. Thanks!

[earleygallery]

Could someone please be so kind to clarify what digital zoom actually does and how it works? I think I know but I'll refrain from stating my interpretation so as not to spread more confusion in this thread. Thanks!

 

It's basically cropping. Instead of you cropping the image in PP, the camera will crop i.e. only use part of the image/sensor area. Cheap P&S cameras use it to boast say a '10 X zoom' when in fact it's a 3 X optical zoom and the rest is progressively cropping the image - which of course means lower image quality/fewer Megapickles. 

 

Digital zoom isn't something I expected Leica to embrace, I can only imagine if Canon made that a feature of their new 5D what the comments would be, but let's see what the actual specs are. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[IkarusJohn]

Could someone please be so kind to clarify what digital zoom actually does and how it works? I think I know but I'll refrain from stating my interpretation so as not to spread more confusion in this thread. Thanks!

 

Crops the image on the sensor.  So, with an optical zoom, the image projected onto the sensor uses the entire sensor, whereas with digital zoom the software crops the image in camera.  So, without going through the maths, a 50mm lens on an M(240) gives a 24MP image.  If the Q camera digitally crops the image to 50mm equivalent, the full sized image will only be somewhere around 8MP, as it is just cropping off the sensor.

 

On another thread, the comment was made that if you have a good sensor with plenty of resolution, digital zoom saves on complex mechanical adjustments in zoom lenses.  I'm sure this is true, but images I've seen with digital zoom (usually once you've past the optical zoom on compacts like the Canon G10), image quality falls off very quickly.

 

Cheers

John

 

PS - Ah, I see James beat me to it.  What he said, except to add that I think the Rx-1 offers digital zoom, or at least digitally aping longer focal lengths by simply cropping the sensor.

Edited June 7, 2015 by IkarusJohn