Overgaard Posted July 20, 2015 Share #101 Posted July 20, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Did he use a prototype or a final camera? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 20, 2015 Posted July 20, 2015 Hi Overgaard, Take a look here Thoughts on DigiLLoyd's Review of the Q . I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
CheshireCat Posted July 20, 2015 Share #102 Posted July 20, 2015 Did he use a prototype or a final camera? Final camera, we must assume. He always warns the readers when testing prototypes. Anyways, it shouldn't be difficult to replicate the issue he is reporting. Anyone with a Q ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitalfx Posted July 20, 2015 Share #103 Posted July 20, 2015 Called user error. Quite embarrassing after the noise he made about the "faulty" Q (I`m a subscriber to his site). No, he didn't. He said the AF did work, but not if he toggled the display mode. He also contacted Leica, and they acknowledged the camera was not working as expected. The funny part is Leica asking him to return his camera to study the problem, as if firmware bugs could "infest" a single Q camera But you might keep bashing Lloyd because he did not spray the camera with the anti-bug product Leica recommends Im not quite sure I understand his issue, but I have had the Level turned on since I bought the camera in early June and I have zero issues with AF with either the shutter or touch screen. It also works fine in all display modes when toggling. The level does disappear, as do all the on screen graphics when you touch the shutter - this is by design, but there is no problems with AF working. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barjohn Posted July 20, 2015 Author Share #104 Posted July 20, 2015 He does say the images it produces are stunning and in looking at his images I would have to agree, especially since his site lets you see up to 200% image size. The only AF issue I have encountered is that if you select a touch point AF, for example when paired with an iPad, touching the shutter button to set AF no longer works, even if you are no longer connected to the iPad. The camera stays in touch AF and pressing the shutter button half-way does not engage AF. This is not the way several other cameras with touch screens implement AF and touch focus. They typically allow for both. However, I can understand Leica's concern that one could accidentally touch a focus area on the screen when not meaning to resulting in a missed shot on the camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted July 21, 2015 Share #105 Posted July 21, 2015 It doesn't matter how good the images are, John. You're a stunningly good engineer, and you will regret buying it. You know you will. Say after me "S O N Y" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barjohn Posted July 21, 2015 Author Share #106 Posted July 21, 2015 I'll never say never...but so far, despite some minor niggles, I am very pleased with this camera. It is by far the best that Leica has done in a while. Granted, they had some help from Panasonic but that doesn't bother me in the least. They should have done that a long time ago. This camera is very quick and that has been my major complaint with Leica for quite a while. I don't like slow computers and I don't like slow cameras. The only reason for either to be slow in this day and age is if a company uses slower and less expensive processors and memory. At Leica's prices, only the best should do. If you want less for your money, that is fine with me, it is your money. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted July 21, 2015 Share #107 Posted July 21, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) More I am using it the more I am enjoying it. Still haven't done the link to the iPhone. One last test for me is printing which I also haven't had the opportunity to do yet. Lots of shots look good on the screen only to be somewhat less so in print. And I just mean an 8x10 type of print nothing the size of a billboard Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted July 21, 2015 Share #108 Posted July 21, 2015 Granted, they had some help from Panasonic .... Whatever gave you that idea? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barjohn Posted July 21, 2015 Author Share #109 Posted July 21, 2015 Whatever gave you that idea? Perhaps you need to read more so you will know what has been stated by several people with more direct knowledge. I'm guessing you are just trying to goad me because you have nothing to contribute. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted July 21, 2015 Share #110 Posted July 21, 2015 Perhaps you need to read more so you will know what has been stated by several people with more direct knowledge. I'm guessing you are just trying to goad me because you have nothing to contribute. Not at all. Apparently this is a Leica camera through and through - nothing to do with Panasonic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricky1981 Posted July 21, 2015 Share #111 Posted July 21, 2015 Not at all. Apparently this is a Leica camera through and through - nothing to do with Panasonic. You're wrong there, the battery is a rebranded Panasonic for starters. The AF tech and some other elements have Panasonic all over them, this isn't a bad thing as they've brought some great tech to the party but this isn't a pure Leica (if that type of thing bothers you, personally I can't wait to get my Q). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted July 21, 2015 Share #112 Posted July 21, 2015 Sure, component ray from all over the place - that doesn't make it a Panasonic. I don't have one; not getting one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricky1981 Posted July 21, 2015 Share #113 Posted July 21, 2015 Hahaha you're clearly one of those people who finds it impossible to admit they're wrong so instead you deliberately misinterpret what I said. I didn't say it "was a Panasonic", you said it was "nothing to do with Panasonic" and I said that was wrong. A simple "oh I didn't realise that" would have done the trick rather than trying to act all superior after trying to belittle someone else. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted July 21, 2015 Share #114 Posted July 21, 2015 I think the Panasonic Q is a nice product, but I prefer Leica cameras. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 21, 2015 Share #115 Posted July 21, 2015 Whatever gave you that idea? Well, it was formulated a bit nastily, but Leica and Panasonic do share technology. It is a two-way street. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 21, 2015 Share #116 Posted July 21, 2015 The AF tech and some other elements have Panasonic all over them, Maybe- but I think we are seeing some S technology finding its way downwards here as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricky1981 Posted July 21, 2015 Share #117 Posted July 21, 2015 Not really - I think we are seeing some S technology finding its way downwards here. From this review, it states the AF was done by Panasonic - http://www.reddotforum.com/content/2015/06/leica-q-typ-116-review-a-full-frame-mini-m/ It was written by a chap who owns a Leica store so I'd imagine (but can't be 100% sure) it's accurate. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted July 21, 2015 Share #118 Posted July 21, 2015 Hahaha you're clearly one of those people who finds it impossible to admit they're wrong so instead you deliberately misinterpret what I said. I didn't say it "was a Panasonic", you said it was "nothing to do with Panasonic" and I said that was wrong. A simple "oh I didn't realise that" would have done the trick rather than trying to act all superior after trying to belittle someone else. Not at all - I'm frequently wrong, and not at all shy about saying so. I had misread John's comment as suggesting the Q is another Panaleica. Nothing more. Baiting John? Absolutely, after enduring his complaints about another Leica camera (I think it was the T), long after he'd got rid of it. Nasty? Why? It was an honest comment. Superior? Well, to be honest, I don't really have much to be superior about. So, yes clearly I was wrong - the Leica has Panasonic parts. My point? That doesn't make it a Panasonic. Do do I care? Not really. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterb Posted July 21, 2015 Share #119 Posted July 21, 2015 I dunno...I went down to the Leica store in DC with a blank SD card, fired off a bunch of shots with the Q creating a set of DNG files. When I returned home, fired up my mac and loaded the images in Light Room viewing them in a good graphics monitor, my jaw dropped at the initial detail. Then dropped even further when I tweaked some of the shots every so slightly. I'm getting one to be the less ISO and fluidity compromised stable mate for my DP2 Merrill. P Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted July 22, 2015 Share #120 Posted July 22, 2015 If, Barjohn thinks this is a good camera it must be fantastic. He has been one of the most critical antagonists of Leica on this forum. I almost believe he buys Leica cameras just to bash them. This is the first time he has been impressed by a modern Leica camera. John, what's up? Is it really that good? If, you ignore a few of the first design problems we might see on any new product, especially a completely new product, is it really as good as you are saying? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.