jaapv Posted June 20, 2015 Share #101 Posted June 20, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Yes, the technical means to separate the two parts of the correction are available. However, it does not make sense to do so, as the imaging chain was designed as a unit. The thing to judge is the final output. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 20, 2015 Posted June 20, 2015 Hi jaapv, Take a look here Puts weighs in on Q…and more. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
alee Posted June 20, 2015 Share #102 Posted June 20, 2015 If you never saw the uncorrected image, and only saw the output as it was intended by Leica via the DNG file, would you say the lens was good or bad? 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 20, 2015 Share #103 Posted June 20, 2015 Well, most reviewers seem to come down on the side of good, rather proving the nonsense of trying to break up the process. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted June 20, 2015 Share #104 Posted June 20, 2015 The Q lens isn't of the same standards of a Leica M or R lens, that's obvious. I find the optical/digital design choices really interesting, and if the end result is great then it really doesn't matter. The 'imperfections' are designed in if you like. There's no reason why Leica shouldn't design a range of digital only M lenses, it would enable them to offer lenses at a lower price point and potentially better performance than lenses which rely on optical correction alone. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Livingston Posted June 20, 2015 Share #105 Posted June 20, 2015 I say again... Why are you so concerned about this? Leica is perfectly capable of designing and manufacturing lenses that are the best in class, if the decision is taken to marry good correction algorithms alongside good optics, designed to work together to produce a quality output that improves upon what would otherwise be available, why wouldn't you embrace the possibilities this now gives? A great EVF, superb AF and capable of producing superb results, from Leica... and you STILL want to find negatives? Of course it isn't a six grand Summilux M... but it's a fabulous use of two distinct disciplines and shows there is a real future for Leica. It's time some of their so called Leica enthusiasts stopped holding the company back and trying to keep it like it was they their dad was a boy. It's 2015, there are people out there who wouldn't consider a Leica camera who maybe now will start to think again... I'm looking forward to the next iteration of the M... I hope they have the courage to make it the best they can and not be held back by the few who would rather live in the fifties and realise there are young photographers coming up who need a real camera for real photography... Not test shots of fruit or lens charts and pictures of the owners cats... and a permanent homage to the M3. That was a step change when it arrived in 1954 in terms of freeing the photographer to focus on the image and not the camera. This is a step forward again... It's the same in most worlds... anglers who fish with cane rods and eschew any modern technique, HiFi enthusiasts who listen to valve amplifiers and record players and camera enthusiasts who shoot in black and white film and that's fine... There is room for everyone. I have a1957 cane rod, I have film cameras and I worked for Linn for over twenty years... we made the Linn Sondek LP12 for any of those HiFi enthusiasts out there... But I mostly listen to streamed HD music nowadays, (Naim NDS/555) have my own HiFi distribution company and still fish, with both cane on those odd summer evenings when I feel like it and modern carbon rods when I'm being serious about it... Its 2015 and we have choices. I would buy a Leica Q if I didn't have an M... And if the new M takes on board a lot of the changes the Q has shown them capable of, I'll buy that... I can't wait...! 9 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitalfx Posted June 20, 2015 Share #106 Posted June 20, 2015 If you never saw the uncorrected image, and only saw the output as it was intended by Leica via the DNG file, would you say the lens was good or bad? I say its great. You can't have my Q if thats what your getting at Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alee Posted June 20, 2015 Share #107 Posted June 20, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) I say its great. You can't have my Q if thats what your getting at Sigh. Still waiting. I was coincidentally (or maybe not so coincidentally) at the Leica store again this afternoon when they got their UPS shipment. They still have not received their second batch. On the upside, they know me by name now at the Leica store, and as of today, they just hand me the Q as soon as I come in the door so I can cuddle it. Still nobody wants to come into the store to look at anything else other than the Q. And the list is almost 60 people deep now. 60 x $4250 USD = $255K USD. Not bad for just over a week of sales, for one store. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted June 20, 2015 Share #108 Posted June 20, 2015 I'm with Livingston on this - what matters is the final image quality. I really like Digitalfx's portraits (I assume of your son?). I still can't really see soft corners - I tend not to put the subject in the corner, and it is subjects that this camera is really about, I'd have thought. I'm not in the market for it, though. I have my film M cameras and my Monochrom and M Edition 60. 28mm is my favourite focal length (along with 50 & 75, oh and 21 & 90 ...) so I'm more likely to stick with the M series and add the 28 Summilux. I really can't see another camera coming along that will tempt me away from what I have, unless the sensor cancer hits my Monochrom and Leica can't (won't) fix it. My pick is that we're going to soon see a new camera based on the Q, but with a T mount. I don't know what the image circle is with the existing T lenses, but I guess (like the Nikon cameras) if you mount an existing T lens on it, the software will default to APS-C. We will be able to use the M and R adapters on this new camera, and there will be a new line of autofocus full frame QT lenses. That camera might interest me as a walk around, fully electronic camera I can take into the outdoors with me. Ideally, I'd like it weather sealed, and made of carbon fibre ... If it's the same form factor as the M cameras, I'll probably pass as it will need to offer something quite different to what I already have, but enable me to use my M lenses. It is that goal which has taken me through Nex 5-n, A7r, D800E (I'm traditionally a Nikon users, but the lenses were just too big), and last the T. My current expectation is that I will just stick with what I have as they are very very good! Cheers John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted June 20, 2015 Share #109 Posted June 20, 2015 (edited) I say again... Why are you so concerned about this? Leica is perfectly capable of designing and manufacturing lenses that are the best in class, if the decision is taken to marry good correction algorithms alongside good optics, designed to work together to produce a quality output that improves upon what would otherwise be available, why wouldn't you embrace the possibilities this now gives? ... I'm not sure who you're addressing all of this to, but if it's me you've got the wrong guy. I'm not "concerned about this" as you say. I'm all in favor of the concept that the image is what matters. But I was responding to the guy in this thread and others who've said elsewhere something along the lines of: "Buying the Q is like buying a Summilux and getting the camera for free." That's sales talk — but it's a bit of fluff and doesn't hold up to scrutiny. Setting that aside, the Q is a beautiful camera and is definitely a step forward. I think it'll be a great success. Edited to add: I'm also pointing out that this is a paradigm shift of sorts. If someone had suggested on this forum, say, 10 years ago, that Leica should build a full-frame digital camera with a SUMMILUX lens whose distortion and black corners were severe enough to absolutely require software correction, it would have sounded somewhat ridiculous and probably been the subject of some ridicule. Now that this lens is a reality, it is glossed over as the self-evident next step, so obvious that it's odd to even make a note of it. Edited June 20, 2015 by zlatkob Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
imants Posted June 20, 2015 Share #110 Posted June 20, 2015 On the upside, they know me by name now at the Leica store, and as of today, they just hand me the Q as soon as I come in the door so I can cuddle it. Still nobody wants to come into the store to look at anything else other than the Q. And the list is almost 60 people deep now. 60 x $4250 USD = $255K USD. Not bad for just over a week of sales, for one store. Just goes to show how the X, T and Vario were a waste of time Leica should have been on this path 10 years ago Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted June 20, 2015 Share #111 Posted June 20, 2015 Even the digital M cameras apply some digital corrections to the image, though, hopefully, not for geometry. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bernie.lcf Posted June 20, 2015 Share #112 Posted June 20, 2015 Even the digital M cameras apply some digital corrections to the image, though, hopefully, not for geometry. of course they do, which is what the 6-Bit stuff is all about. There will be lens correction for the corners: lighten up and remove any color shifts. For M8 models, this will take into account the UV/IR filter installed (as the filter does have a slight magenta hue) However, there has not been any distortion correction so far. Adobe provides additional profiles for a list of M lenses (>20) by Leica and Voigtländer. Unlike the embedded profile of the Leica Q (embedded in the DNG), these profiles sit in Lightroom and can be activated or not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
imants Posted June 20, 2015 Share #113 Posted June 20, 2015 Even the digital M cameras apply some digital corrections to the image, though, hopefully, not for geometry. Yep it is like being in a darkroom in the film days the present for me every now and then applying all sorts of stuff ask Ansel he directed changes Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitalfx Posted June 20, 2015 Share #114 Posted June 20, 2015 Adobe provides additional profiles for a list of M lenses (>20) by Leica and Voigtländer. Unlike the embedded profile of the Leica Q (embedded in the DNG), these profiles sit in Lightroom and can be activated or not. The difference is an M lens is used across multiple systems, where the Q is fixed to a specific body. The lens is corrected for a very specific body that can't be changed. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted June 20, 2015 Author Share #115 Posted June 20, 2015 Puts adds thoughts on evaluating the Q and other modern cameras…. http://www.imx.nl/photo/blog/files/9e0e378959e655762f9751a4885eb720-9.html Jeff 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gpwhite Posted June 20, 2015 Share #116 Posted June 20, 2015 If you never saw the uncorrected image, and only saw the output as it was intended by Leica via the DNG file, would you say the lens was good or bad? Yes, that is the key decision criterion. And your pining for the Q is well worth it because the camera+lens unit is a joy to shoot and gives beautiful DNG images. The lens draws faces very nicely, or should I say the system does (is it embedded faceware)? But Jaap and colleagues-in-defense are missing my point for sure. Mastery of a tool or craft involves understanding each facet in depth. A big advantage of the M system is that one can operate in almost pure manual mode and exercise Total Picture Control, for better or worse. I have learned from this thread and my Q shooting experience so far that this new camera+lens+unmanipulatable firmware fiddles with the DNG before I get to refine it. I wish that type of intervention were not the case. It makes me feel that the Q is less predictable than the M + 28. So, they are different product classes at different price points... OK. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitalfx Posted June 20, 2015 Share #117 Posted June 20, 2015 If someone had suggested on this forum, say, 10 years ago, that Leica should build a full-frame digital camera with a SUMMILUX lens whose distortion and black corners were severe enough to absolutely require software correction, it would have sounded somewhat ridiculous and probably been the subject of some ridicule. Now that this lens is a reality, it is glossed over as the self-evident next step, so obvious that it's odd to even make a note of it. "10 years ago" is an eternity in this age of rapid technology change. Its time to look at systems as a whole, rather than the individual pieces. All that matters is the results...and in the case of the Q, the results speak for themselves. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted June 20, 2015 Share #118 Posted June 20, 2015 (edited) "10 years ago" is an eternity in this age of rapid technology change. Its time to look at systems as a whole, rather than the individual pieces. All that matters is the results...and in the case of the Q, the results speak for themselves. Right, the results speak for themselves and they are quite good from what I've seen online. I'm not looking for fault with the camera. Rather, I think the change in attitudes is interesting. Paradigm shifts occur from time to time, and they seem to happen almost without notice. We've slipped through a time hole — pushed, it seems, by rapid tech changes. The talk used to be about optical craftsmanship, as recalled in post #14's "Leica lenses are superior to any in the market". Now the talk has shifted to "All that matters is the results". Edited June 20, 2015 by zlatkob Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alee Posted June 20, 2015 Share #119 Posted June 20, 2015 Now the talk has shifted to "All that matters is the results". So what we've come back to is what photography is about! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitalfx Posted June 20, 2015 Share #120 Posted June 20, 2015 (edited) Right, the results speak for themselves and they are quite good from what I've seen online. I'm not looking for fault with the camera. Rather, I think the change in attitudes is interesting. Paradigm shifts occur from time to time, and they seem to happen almost without notice. We've slipped through a time hole — pushed, it seems, by rapid tech changes. The talk used to be about optical craftsmanship, as recalled in post #14's "Leica lenses are superior to any in the market". Now the talk has shifted to "All that matters is the results". I dont understand why this bothers you so much. We are talking about two completely different products. A $6000 lens and a lens thats part of a system who's optics cost 300% less....im not sure what you expected, but if you think Leica should be delivering a M quality Summilux in a camera that cost far less your expectations are not realistic. If you don't like what Leica is doing then don't buy it...its pretty simple. I think you made your point, time to move on rather than repeating the same thing over and over. Personally I could care less about the internal corrections, all I care about is the results...and on that note I am extremely pleased with my little $4000 camera and lens. BTW- I also have four Summilux lenses and two M bodies...there are clearly differences in what each delivers. The Q has its advantages and disadvantages as do the M240 and Monochrome...but I love all of them. Edited June 20, 2015 by digitalfx Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now