Jump to content

Leica Q spot focus vs. Nikon D750


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am a recent owner of the Q. Love it. This morning I went to the Holden Arboretum for a couple of hours and shot about 50 subjects at the same distance, f/4.0 and ISO at 100 for all images. Some were close ups of various colored flowers. Some were at sbubject 100 feet and some way off in the distance. Clear sunny day.

 

Conclusion:

--Both body/lens combos produce tack sharp images. (The Nikon lens has been fine tuned by me to the body.)

 

--Without exception the Nikon produced images that were warmer than the Leica and prehaps too much so. Will check my settings but these were all RAW/DNG files not JPEG and all used the same preset in Lightroom on import. Easily fixed in post, but the difference was there to be sure.

 

--I used single point focus for all shots and the Nikon focus point is way smaller than the Leica's. On one or two when I was focusing on a slender tree trunk about 50 feet away, the Nikon got the bark tack sharp and on some the Leica was soft. I assume because the Q's box for the focus point was way wider than the tree trunk. I am surprised that the Q's single point focus is such a large area. Now I am very new with the Q so I may not have discovered a setting to make it more accurate.

 

Overall I love the Q and it will be come the substitute for 50mm and shorter for my up coming trip to Europe. Yesterday did a stroll in our little town and the Q is like a stealth fighter, no one sees it coming.

 

Edit: Discovered the warmer Nikon issue. The preset I used had some warmth added to the WB. If I look at the imported but unadjusted RAW/DNG files they are very, very close on WB.

Edited by Msohio
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Thanks, I did the 2.0 update and have shrunk the single focus point. Congrats to Leica for realizing the original was too big for detail work.

 

As for my Photos, I post them to SmugMug: http://msohio.smugmug.com

 

The images I referred to are in the Ohio folder and I copied several to a new folder called Leica Q. I will leave that folder up for a week or two, or take it down sooner when you let me know you have seen them. Just seemed the easier way to show you what the Q can capture from a non-pro. They are still in the Ohio folder as well.

 

The rest are with a D750, D810 and a multitude of lenses. The birds and planes with the 300mm VR.

 

Big images may take a bit to get to final sharpness. And they are very sharp when fully loaded....Mike

Edited by Msohio
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It is unreliable trying to compare colour on different platforms. Even with embedded profiles. Not all websites read embedded profiles. What matters is how well your PP converts your raw files. Once you achieve that, simply save it as a named profile which can be used in future with all Q files. So it doesn't matter how much different cameras render colour, other than as a discussion point.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

David.....I agree with you but the newbie asked where he could see the images I mentioned in my post. SmugMug is my spot.

 

As you say, the only way would be to go out and find a scene. Set up a tripod and shoot with both cameras a series of different  scenes.Then import to Lightroom and Raw and DNG files with no adjustments. Thankfully that's not what I was asked to do. And for me to do it without his settings, not so useful for him either....Mike

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks Mike,

 

Not long after I posted I saw the footnote and had a look through your photos. Stunning images, thanks!

To be honest, I can't decide on whether to sell the D750 and buy the Q. I agree that shooting them side by side at the same scene is probably the only way I could decide.

The thing is, buying a Nikon 28mm lens similar to the Q's would almost definitely cost me more then selling the Nikon and buying the Q ;)

I have the 14-24mm f/2.8 and love it, although it's heavy and large.

 

The Leicas seem to have a punch/3D ish quality no other camera has, I've been trying to spot Leica images from non-Leica images in an almost blind test online to see if I can guess them and most of the time I prefer the Q.

 

I know I am comparing apples and oranges, but can't afford both, which would be the ideal situation.

 

Any help from someone who owns both camera would be most appreciated, thanks in anticipation!

 

And yes, I am a newb, so please excuse any naivety.

I prefer beautiful instruments to functional ones, hence my lusting for a Leica. The Nikon takes great images, but the process leaves me a little 'cold'?!

 

Cheers.

Edited by hornedrum
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree there is a Leica Look. can be recreated in Lightroom off a Nikon RAW file but comes as SOP out of the Q. I have never owned another Leica, wanted a good small camera as a walkabout for travel on addition to my Nikon gear. I have a closet at home my wife thinks is a Nikon distribution center.

 

My travel kit includes the Q, but my main purpose is using longer focal length lenses that the Q has. That said, it perfectly fits as the wide end of my travel photos.

 

Final comment, if I was told I had to have only two bodies, I'd ditch the D750 and keep the D810, and ditch the Q and keep the D500.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Wise words, appreciate it Mike.

Just out of curiosity, I use LR too, are there general settings you use for getting the Leica effect out a Nikon RAW?

 

Fastest lens I have is the 50mm f/1.8, everything else is f/2.8, so I know I am a bit away from the Q in that respect.

Most of my photos seem to be fairly wide, probably 24mm is the average, so the Q is very tempting.

 

I love the romantic notion of having one camera and using my feet more. Light, travel-friendly, more stealth than a D750 with the 14-24mm or a 28mm on it.

I am a musician/music producer and firmly believe limitations bread creativity. I sound like I want the Q right? ;)

 

One more question if I may: Are the Q and 750 similar in PP  i.e. bringing up shadows in LR etc? I think the D750 has slightly more dynamic range and better high ISO performance.... what it does with shadows is incredible, but the only other cameras I have used are a D7000 and Fujifilm X100.

The only slight worry for me was the banding issues, solved with recent firmware updates?

 

Thanks for your time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the D800 and the Q and only work in RAW. I have only recently got the Q and so probably have not exploited the PP as much as I have over the years with the D800. So I stand to be corrected but the DR of the Nikon sensor is IMHO better and I can get a lot more out of the shadows. Having said that I have not discovered Mike's ability to get the "Leica look" out of a Nikon RAW (and I would like to know, Mike!). I am amazed at what I can get in all respects out of the Q DNG without very much effort. The IQ of the lens is brilliant and not much sharpening is needed. I am more than happy shooting up to ISO 3200 with the Q and I would only approach that if necessary with the D800 and then expect to denoise in PP. I am no expert just a keen amateur but have a look at my gallery. The first day with the Q is at Q Gallery and subsequent galleries of Inverewe, Orkney, Edinburgh and Whins garden follow on from when I got it in April. http://adkphotos.smugmug.com

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

In general, I find to approach the Q's Leica Look in Lightroom, I usually boost the exposure about a half stop and the Temp to at or above 6000. Highlights at about +5. If I want it to be sharp, I put in 20 points of Clarity. Then add maybe 20-25 of Vibrance and 15-20 of Saturation. The last two I think make the image get close to the Leica Look. Of all, the added Temp I notice the most in softening the look.

 

I do agree I can pull more out of the shadows with my Nikons, the D500 is #1 in that regard. That said I find with the Q and the wider FOV, I am generally not too worried about shadows. Often they add natural contrast and add visual DOF going from a three dimensional reality to a two dimensional image out of the camera....Mike

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On the latest firmware, to adjust the single focus point size:

 

Press or hold Delete --> turn the exposure compensation dial

 

Thanks for this, it's extremely useful to know.
 
Is this documented anywhere?
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the D800 and the Q and only work in RAW. I have only recently got the Q and so probably have not exploited the PP as much as I have over the years with the D800. So I stand to be corrected but the DR of the Nikon sensor is IMHO better and I can get a lot more out of the shadows. Having said that I have not discovered Mike's ability to get the "Leica look" out of a Nikon RAW (and I would like to know, Mike!). I am amazed at what I can get in all respects out of the Q DNG without very much effort. The IQ of the lens is brilliant and not much sharpening is needed. I am more than happy shooting up to ISO 3200 with the Q and I would only approach that if necessary with the D800 and then expect to denoise in PP. I am no expert just a keen amateur but have a look at my gallery. The first day with the Q is at Q Gallery and subsequent galleries of Inverewe, Orkney, Edinburgh and Whins garden follow on from when I got it in April. http://adkphotos.smugmug.com

 

 

Try a Zeiss Milvus or a Sigma Art lens on your Nikon!

 

I like to think of the "Leica look" as a combination of Zeiss' color and contrast combined with Sigma Art's clinical/cutting sharpness. Using either glass on Canon/Nikon, you can more closely replicate the Leica look in post versus using native glass. Nikon/Canon glass has its own beautiful rendering, but to me it's in a different family of "looks" than Zeiss Milvus/Sigma Art/Leica.

Edited by hdmesa
Link to post
Share on other sites

The upgrade that gives us this option was done a long time after the manual was printed. The Leica site describes it as did many, many articles on the web and various Leica sites/forums. When you bought your camera, the camera did not have the ability to do this. Thankfully now it does. I give Leica a gold star for doing a meaningful update to the firmware. Shows their support for our Q's.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree the Zeiss or Sigma give more of a Leica look. I have the Sigma Art at 35mm and 50mm and their look is a bit softer than Nikon's. That said, for wildlife and birds in flight, manual focus is very tough to pull off. For landscapes and street work, the softer look suits my eye. For a eagle or owl in flight I need AF and can add Temp in Lightroom.

 

There are trade offs with cameras and lenses. But then you can drive a Chevy Volt or a Porsche Turbo to get from here to there, and either can be black or yellow. Lots of options out there. Makes life more fun this 76 year old thinks...Mike

  • Like 2
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.

×
×
  • Create New...