Jump to content

Ok, maybe I was wrong.....


Guest

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Looking back on my posts on the Q that started soon after I got mine in early August I find that I was pretty critical of the camera, at times seriously wondering if I'd keep it........Things have changed.

 

I am now very happy with this jewel...........Sure there's still the same firmware upgrade wishes that I do hope Leica finds the time soon to get to, but that's all, primarily just "fixable" firmware stuff.

I am loving the "look" of the sensor and the overall handling of the camera. I still baulk some at using the EVF, but that's just me and EVF's and anyway when that gets up my nose the 28mm VC clip-on optical finder solves that issue just fine.

The battery issues have been addressed by buying four third party batteries and just taking a couple of charged spares out with me plus the one in the camera. Job done, inexpensively too.

 

The other thing the Q has done for me is to appreciate even more my M240 and the MM kits and how the Q does indeed compliment them. I have no good reason or desire to "move up" to the SL. Small is beautiful with these two systems. When I need anything, longer, larger, faster I solve those needs outside the Leica world, Nikon SLR.....But that's rare.

 

Now, if Leica can put the Q's sensor into a new M, make the camera slim again like the the M9's, and NOT lose the RF / OVF, then maybe I'll dig into the wallet once more, but for now all's good.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still thinking about it... Whenever I use both the M and my Q, the results from the M are in a different league. I find the Q constantly disappointing, particularly with distortion & colour balance. Trouble is, I've probaby left it too long to get my money back by selling it now!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Distortion? I don't get any in my shots, can you post an example or comparison?

I've never had an M but I see that the colours are rendered differently by looking at other ppl's pics. It's still in high demand, you can get most of your money back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What I struggle with, and honestly it's a non-issue now because I gave my old camera to my girlfriend...  What I struggle with is whether or not it's $3000 more valuable than my X100s.  Truth be told, I love the X100s, and the Q is definitely the camera for me (because it's so similar to what I loved about the Fuji). Whether or not it delivers that much more value to me is hard to say in my case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes the banding is there and is really the only issue i sometimes have with the camera and luckily it can be sorted Dfine2 

How good does it work (any image degrading?) and how long does it take to remove the banding?  I know it's not a good habit but I like to really push my shadows in post.

 

Thanks!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still thinking about it... Whenever I use both the M and my Q, the results from the M are in a different league. I find the Q constantly disappointing, particularly with distortion & colour balance. Trouble is, I've probaby left it too long to get my money back by selling it now!

really interesting, because i found the distortion is almost "too good to be true" for a wide angle lens...

color balance is another story, it depends heavily on every person's taste and preference.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Distortion? I don't get any in my shots, can you post an example or comparison?

I've never had an M but I see that the colours are rendered differently by looking at other ppl's pics. It's still in high demand, you can get most of your money back.

I don't see much point in posting bad pictures. You can see plenty of examples of distortion on the "Q image" thread. I find I have to be bang square on to the subject, and keep it well away from the edges (especially the corners) to get anything like an acceptable image - and that's not how I take my pictures.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see much point in posting bad pictures. You can see plenty of examples of distortion on the "Q image" thread. I find I have to be bang square on to the subject, and keep it well away from the edges (especially the corners) to get anything like an acceptable image - and that's not how I take my pictures.

 

Hi Andrew! Can you please at least point out distortion in some specific images from "Q image" thread then? Also, where can I find your good photos, just to see what kind of images are you making, so your comments will make more sense to me? I tried briefly to look at M side of the forum, but could not easily locate their "image" thread (M8, etc.). Thank you!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Andrew

i wouldn't dare suggest that you are wrong about what you are seeing, but it does seem to some us that your expectation of the output from the Q with its wide angle lens isn't what many others expect or accept.  Until my Q arrived, I used a 21mm SEM heavily on all my travels and the effects of wide angle lens distortion are exactly what I want. I stopped using my 24mm on my M9 because it is corrected , unchallenging and rather uninteresting.    Perfectly straight views of life are all too common.  It seems that you really don't want extremism or a personal interpretation of a scene and you aren't going to be happy with your purchase.    Have you considered using the perspective corrections in Lightroom.  I know they don't counter all W-A distortions. 

It would help if you could let us see an image which represents the distortion that you consider unacceptable although I don't expect that your Q is performing differently from anyone else's.

 

I'm happy with a result such this. The style may not be to your taste.  The perspective has been further exaggerated during post-processing in LR.  

 

Leica M9 + 21SEM

 

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Andrew

i wouldn't dare suggest that you are wrong about what you are seeing, but it does seem to some us that your expectation of the output from the Q with its wide angle lens isn't what many others expect or accept.  Until my Q arrived, I used a 21mm SEM heavily on all my travels and the effects of wide angle lens distortion are exactly what I want. I stopped using my 24mm on my M9 because it is corrected , unchallenging and rather uninteresting.    Perfectly straight views of life are all too common.  It seems that you really don't want extremism or a personal interpretation of a scene and you aren't going to be happy with your purchase.    Have you considered using the perspective corrections in Lightroom.  I know they don't counter all W-A distortions. 

It would help if you could let us see an image which represents the distortion that you consider unacceptable although I don't expect that your Q is performing differently from anyone else's.

 

I'm happy with a result such this. The style may not be to your taste.  The perspective has been further exaggerated during post-processing in LR.  

 

Leica M9 + 21SEM

 

attachicon.gifimage.jpeg

 

I cannot be 100% sure, of course, but I think Andrew is concerned about distortion artifacts introduced by software correction of the image inside the camera, not distortion resulting from optical design of the lens. Now, if the software corrects "undesirable" wide angle lens look it can on surface look like optically corrected lens, but I remember early Leica Q buyers discussing more software like kind of distortions as well as other problems, potentially introduced by turning on image stabilizer, etc. So far, I did not see/recognize any artificial looking distortions in my images, but that can be because of my style of shooting. I am not implying that Andrew is seeing things...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry everyone!  I may be barking up the wrong tree in responding to Andrews comments.  I'll follow the debate with an open mind.  I'd like to be able to visually recognise the perceived problem if anyone can show an example.    As far as using image stabilisation, I understood that he facility is designed to be used when shooting video.  I haven't used it on stills.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...