jaapv Posted July 14, 2015 Share #1 Posted July 14, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) So Leica has a winner here - and with justification, as the Q is by all accounts a wonderful camera. I guess my knee-jerk reaction was the same as everybody's elses: Get that Credit Card out (except, I guess, for the usual suspects on the Net ) But on consideration: What would I use the camera for? What would it add? I have an M240 and no focusing problems. I freely admit that its EVF is not the most modern one around, but it suffices me. I have a MM1, which I will never sell and I have an X2 for those days that I really do not want to carry a camera, but feel I should. There is very little that this newest and brightest member of the Leica family would add to my photographic experience. So ruefully I put my Credit Card back in my wallet. Am I getting old and jaded? Probably... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 14, 2015 Posted July 14, 2015 Hi jaapv, Take a look here Leica Q - Another perspective. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
bernie.lcf Posted July 14, 2015 Share #2 Posted July 14, 2015 If I had an M (240) with lenses, I would probably skip the Q unless I really wanted AF, OIS and/or the EVF. Coming from an M8.2 + 28/2.8 as the main lens, the Q was a valid and relatively cheap upgrade option along with the M9 family and the M (240). I have also been using an X-Vario and I will agree that the EVF-2 is not state of art, but it was more than adequate and did not keep me from getting some wonderful pictures. This M8.2 has only been with me for maybe half a year, but I have had an M8.2 before that I have been using extensively for almost two years. Looking back, I quite regret having traded the X-Vario to be honest. The lens is special - it may be slow, but it is special. I much less regret trading the M8.2 as I was increasingly having problems with the rangefinder (especially when I was using a Summilux 50 on the M8.2) and the low resolution. All in all, I am quite happy with the Q, but with a different background one may not be. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pop Posted July 14, 2015 Share #3 Posted July 14, 2015 ... But on consideration: What would I use the camera for? What would it add? I have an M240 and no focusing problems. I freely admit that its EVF is not the most modern one around, but it suffices me. I have a MM1, which I will never sell and I have an X2 for those days that I really do not want to carry a camera, but feel I should.... My situation is a bit similar. I handled the camera in the shop and I liked it very much. However, the only camera I can imagine that I would want right now is an upgrade for my DMC-LC1 (the sister of the Digilux 2), and the Q is not quite there. Neither is the XVario. Therefore, my credit card is quite safe for the moment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 14, 2015 Author Share #4 Posted July 14, 2015 Yes - that too - for smaller sized images I regularly grab the Digilux 2. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitalfx Posted July 14, 2015 Share #5 Posted July 14, 2015 I have the M240 with plenty of lenses and the MM. I bought the Q and am very pleased with the performance. I don't own the X or X2, so for me the Q fills that role- "those days that I really do not want to carry a camera..." Unfortunately...its been pretty much every day and the poor M240 sits in its Fogg case under appreciated. Maybe when the newness wears off, the M240 will be first choice again...but for now Im really enjoying this lightweight gem. and the AF is a nice add too Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted July 14, 2015 Share #6 Posted July 14, 2015 An interesting thread majoring on 'need' rather than that other emotional reason to buy the latest technology. I share that viewpoint too. The Q camera is rather special and seems to have a great deal going for it. But do I need a 28mm equipped camera when I already have an M+28mm? How often have I used that combination. LR stats are helpful at times like this. Anyone doubting the justification for constant 28mm shooting beg borrow or use any current or past Leica camera with a fast zoom, such as the D-Lux or older and set the zoom at 28mm on resumption. Then see how far you go before your finger itches to use the zoom lever. Even with my MATE (28+35+50), an acknowledged asset on many travel trips, analysis shows how little the 28mm setting is used; around 5% on average. Admittedly optically the widest setting does not match the current prime performance, but it there when absolutely needed. So an honest self-appraisal of need will give the best indication of the way to go. I do, however, look forward to trying one one day. But only to satisfy my curiosity. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitalfx Posted July 14, 2015 Share #7 Posted July 14, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Even with my MATE (28+35+50), an acknowledged asset on many travel trips, analysis shows how little the 28mm setting is used; around 5% on average. Admittedly optically the widest setting does not match the current prime performance, but it there when absolutely needed. Unless of course you leave for the day with only a 28mm lens on your M...or in my case with the Q. Then 100% of your images are shot on 28mm. We are creatures of habit, sometimes we get comfortable with a certain focal length...in my case 35mm. If I looked at my data, and based on your criteria I would need to sell my 50mm Noctilux, 24mm Summilux and 90mm Summicron as they are relegated to 10% of my images (as a group). Personally Id rather keep them all for the moment when they are important. For now I'm just enjoying a new focal length I haven't used since I was much younger. BTW- I find it challenging and at times liberating to leave with one lens...even more so with a lens I'm not comfortable with. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Rawcs Posted July 14, 2015 Share #8 Posted July 14, 2015 I tried the Q yesterday at Leica Manchester and thought that it was a game-changer for Leica. I have stated here that 28mm was not my preferred focal length; a little too wide for me, and that the digital crops were little more than an apology for the lens being so wide. After handling the camera I have to say that I was quite smitten: it is really well designed, the focussing is blisteringly fast, the digital crops are provided in a way that, if you did use them, allow very M-like framing and give the M advantage of being able to see outside of the crop area. The demo camera was fitted with the hand-grip and provided a really secure handling experience. I can understand someone who has an X or M camera thinking that they can pass on the Q. I see the Q as a camera that will allow you to get photographs that you would miss with the other cameras, certainly with the M. It's a camera that makes you want to go out and photograph. Much of the technology in the Q will surely make it's way into an interchangeable lens Leica camera in the future. Mike. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitalfx Posted July 14, 2015 Share #9 Posted July 14, 2015 I see the Q as a camera that will allow you to get photographs that you would miss with the other cameras, certainly with the M. It's a camera that makes you want to go out and photograph. This is key...the Q does things that are nearly impossible or very difficult with the M Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 14, 2015 Author Share #10 Posted July 14, 2015 What things? Not heckling, genuinely interested. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitalfx Posted July 14, 2015 Share #11 Posted July 14, 2015 What things? Not heckling, genuinely interested. 1- Have you ever been on vacation and someone asked if they wanted to take a photo of you and you had to spend 10 minutes explaining how to use the M...or worse, pre-focused for them only to have them step backwards? A minor thing I agree...but for the first time on vacation I have a photo of me and my wife together thanks to the Q. 2- Macro. Yes this is possible on the M...but its not as simple as a quick flick of the Q. The close focus ability is also much nicer and useful. The Q allows significantly closer focusing than any M lens. 3- AF- I have literally dozens of images from my vacation that I would have simply missed completely with the M 4- weight. Doesn't seem like much, but I have literally left the M behind because of the weight. The Q is so much lighter you don't realize its on your shoulder. 5- EVF. the EVF does add something that is in rare cases is the difference between having a shot and not. And I have the EVF on my M, but its not built in and therefore not always there when you need it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitalfx Posted July 14, 2015 Share #12 Posted July 14, 2015 6- C- continous shooting. This is a great option that is not possible with the M and again is the difference between getting a shot and getting a great shot when the subject is moving. The Q is quite fast in this regard. 7- remote shooting- although I have actually used this yet...could be very useful in the right situation. Its built into the Q and your iPhone. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
viramati Posted July 14, 2015 Share #13 Posted July 14, 2015 Well I sold my M and 28 summicron and bought the Q but then I have to add that I had almost totally abandoned the M for the Sony A7 series. I have had the Q since the 26th of June and since then I haven't touched the Sony's but then I am really a 28mm sort of Guy. What does it do that the M doesn't, a lot of things that have been listed elsewhere. Surprisingly and even though I only work in DNG I have quite enjoyed using the 35mm farmlands which then give you a remarkably RF like experience Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Rawcs Posted July 14, 2015 Share #14 Posted July 14, 2015 What things? Not heckling, genuinely interested. Jaapv, from my very brief play with the camera: speed, small size and just so much fun to use. I still haven't bought one, but I am tempted. Mike. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted July 14, 2015 Share #15 Posted July 14, 2015 People get mean with age, Jaap .... soon you will forget what a credit card is for altogether. In fact I am relying on this to prevent insolvency in my retirement ....... I posted that I couldn't see any point in this camera and would be giving it a miss ........ then bought one a few weeks later. It is an addictive little beast and very hard to take a duff photo with so it has become my 'take a camera just in case' companion and has given me a rather different perspective on the world ....... my 24/28/25 M lenses have been collecting dust for some time ...... I tend to hop from 50 apo to the 21 sem and leave out the lenses in the middle. Being forced to use 28mm has not proved much of a disadvantage at all.... and the camera is a real pleasure to use ... which in my book is the main reason I will be keeping it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawk.kat Posted July 14, 2015 Share #16 Posted July 14, 2015 I bought the Q because it's very much like the iPhone: 28mm with a touch screen. It takes rather nice pictures but I'm still learning to use it. I still haven't figured out how to make a call using the Q. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 14, 2015 Author Share #17 Posted July 14, 2015 1- Have you ever been on vacation and someone asked if they wanted to take a photo of you and you had to spend 10 minutes explaining how to use the M...or worse, pre-focused for them only to have them step backwards? A minor thing I agree...but for the first time on vacation I have a photo of me and my wife together thanks to the Q. 2- Macro. Yes this is possible on the M...but its not as simple as a quick flick of the Q. The close focus ability is also much nicer and useful. The Q allows significantly closer focusing than any M lens. 3- AF- I have literally dozens of images from my vacation that I would have simply missed completely with the M 4- weight. Doesn't seem like much, but I have literally left the M behind because of the weight. The Q is so much lighter you don't realize its on your shoulder. 5- EVF. the EVF does add something that is in rare cases is the difference between having a shot and not. And I have the EVF on my M, but its not built in and therefore not always there when you need it. Thanks I won't write an elaborate rebuttal as different strokes for different folks... My M has been my go-anywhere camera for decades and regular members do know I am one of those crazy folks that use it for the impossible - so the only thing remaining for my use is handing it to the waiter - and that is the X2... But I can see how the Q can be a most desirable machine. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 14, 2015 Author Share #18 Posted July 14, 2015 Jaapv, from my very brief play with the camera: speed, small size and just so much fun to use. I still haven't bought one, but I am tempted. Mike. Tempted I am, but I cannot stand the reproachful looks of my other cameras.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitalfx Posted July 14, 2015 Share #19 Posted July 14, 2015 Thanks I won't write an elaborate rebuttal as different strokes for different folks... My M has been my go-anywhere camera for decades and regular members do know I am one of those crazy folks that use it for the impossible - so the only thing remaining for my use is handing it to the waiter - and that is the X2... But I can see how the Q can be a most desirable machine. Ive been shooting an M camera for over 35 years...My first Leica was a IIIf, and my first M was the M3...Ive owned M3, M4, M4P, M5, M6, M8, M9, M240 and Monochrome. So no elaborate rebuttal needed. Regardless of my love for all things M, this Q is a mighty fine camera. IMO the best digital Leica ever. I can't tell you how many miles Ive carried my M's...but its a significant amount over many countries. o...I also had the X and X2 and the T...all short lived so didn't count them originally. Loved the original X...but it had many flaws. The Q solves every single one and some. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted July 14, 2015 Share #20 Posted July 14, 2015 Unless of course you leave for the day with only a 28mm lens on your M...or in my case with the Q. Then 100% of your images are shot on 28mm. We are creatures of habit, sometimes we get comfortable with a certain focal length...in my case 35mm. If I looked at my data, and based on your criteria I would need to sell my 50mm Noctilux, 24mm Summilux and 90mm Summicron as they are relegated to 10% of my images (as a group). Personally Id rather keep them all for the moment when they are important. For now I'm just enjoying a new focal length I haven't used since I was much younger. BTW- I find it challenging and at times liberating to leave with one lens...even more so with a lens I'm not comfortable with. Yes, agreed. My analysis merely shows choice when choice is relevant. It does reflect focal length preferences. I do agree about the liberating feeling of going out with one camera and one lens. Most of my photography is done this way. For sheer compactness my X1 has been one of my highest yielding cameras. It has a 35mm equivalent focal length and I suspect that a Q35 could be an interesting future option. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.