bernie.lcf Posted April 5, 2016 Share #61 Posted April 5, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) - Something about the optical viewfinder I couldn't get use to. Maybe it was just me and not understanding all the tricks, but when using autofocus, the frame would jump around. I ended up shooting using the EVF the entire week I had it. That's actually a (rather good) feature that automatically compensates for parallax. It dramatically increases the accuracy of the frame lines by showing what's actually going to end up on the sensor. An EVF doesn't need that and the M doesn't do that. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 5, 2016 Posted April 5, 2016 Hi bernie.lcf, Take a look here Leica Q or Fujifilm X Pro 2?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
hawk.kat Posted April 6, 2016 Share #62 Posted April 6, 2016 I have both too. The WR is the main reason why I've bought the XP2 as a second camera. I prefer the way the Q feels in the hand but I really like the film stimulating/ jpeg settings of the Fuji which also allows back-button focusing. I can imagine my dream machine made up of the best from both. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrQ Posted December 31, 2016 Share #63 Posted December 31, 2016 I own xt2 and xpro2 which are a huge upgrade compared to the previous versions. They are awesome CA.eras from all aspects. I don't think comparing the Q to these cameras is the right way of looking at them. Probably a more appropriate comparison is the Q vs x100t. The Q wins by miles. The x100t is a great camera but the lens lets it down. Sold my x100t and bought a Q which will be good enough for me for many years to come. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MickyW Posted December 31, 2016 Share #64 Posted December 31, 2016 I own xt2 and xpro2 which are a huge upgrade compared to the previous versions. They are awesome CA.eras from all aspects. I don't think comparing the Q to these cameras is the right way of looking at them. Probably a more appropriate comparison is the Q vs x100t. The Q wins by miles. The x100t is a great camera but the lens lets it down. Sold my x100t and bought a Q which will be good enough for me for many years to come. I now have the Fuji X-T2 and the Q. Had the Q over a year now and love it to bits, The Fuji is a totally different camera ... the colours and film simulations are superb and I really would be hard pressed to have to chose between them. I really enjoy using them both ... so will continue to do so. I do a lot of motorcycle travel and so the Weather Resist of the Fuji and lenses is a big pull. We hear quite a few problems with the Q (mine has been bullet proof to date) but I've not heard of any issues with the Fuji's, I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong! From a technical point of view I can't make any observations, I'm not experienced enough, but I do know that I get immense pleasure from using them both, and I'm well pleased with the results. I guess this doesn't really help anyone make a decision 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerardjan Posted January 1, 2017 Share #65 Posted January 1, 2017 Since 2 weeks proud owner of the Q. Coming from the X PRO 2, which in my eyes is the nearly perfect camera. Yet... sigh, an affordable Leica. Being a one lens person (X Pro 2 just with the 18mm) the Q feelings I have are more philosophical. Can't even explain what I feel when handling the Q. It's a love affair. It will be my camera for the rest of my life.... I think (65 today) There's just one thing I am a little disappointed about with the Q compared to the X Pro 2. (Mind you, in MY eyes...!!) the high ISO numbers on the Q (3200/6400) are not as clean as they are on the X Pro 2. Has anybody else this feeling or shoul I have my eyes tested! Regards and everbody a very healthy and happy 2017! Gerard 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leica Guy Posted January 1, 2017 Share #66 Posted January 1, 2017 (edited) I have exactly the same "feelings" toward my Q. I cannot fully explain it but more than any other camera I've owned in my 58 years doing photography, I simply enjoy using it. I love just picking it up. I added a very nice Arte Di Mano case and a Thumbs Up. I put a protective screen on the rear LCD. I put gaffers tape on the top and hood to reduce chances of a scratch. I keep an Arca-Swiss plate handy to use on on tripod. I simply love using this camera. Now, back to your original comment about high ISO and shadow performance. I my view, it's not a camera for low light conditions. I would not try and photograph aurora borealis with it. I'd rent the latest Canon or Nikon for that. I took a photo of my house lit by Christmas lights. The shadows are very noisy and banded. Substantially worse than my Canon 5D3. No camera is perfect. I chose to enjoy the many great aspects of the Q and work around the few shortcomings. Having said all that, I still love the camera. For travel, street or landscapes reasonably well lit, it is superb. Edited January 1, 2017 by Infiniumguy 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jed Orme Posted January 1, 2017 Share #67 Posted January 1, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) When the Fuji X-100 arrived on the scene, I moved from my large & heavy Nikon D7000 gear to it, followed by the X-100S when it came out. But now I have the Q & in my opinion it is everything that was missing from the X-100/S. But over time with both systems, there were occasions when I wanted to go even wider than 28mm full frame, & I also did not want to crop any of my Q images to more than the 35mm full frame sizes. And the one thing that I absolutely missed the most about the Fuji X-100/S was the marvelous hybrid viewfinder with its optical & electronic options. So a short time ago I added the Fuji X-Pro2 with its new 35mm f2 lens (50mm full frame equivalent). And I just bought the Zeiss Touit 12mm f2.8 lens for X mount (an 18mm full frame equivalent). Hopefully this addition will solve the only limitations I have ever had with the Q. I also agree with what has been said above about the quality of the APC on the XP2, making it very much as useful as the full frame on the Q. The Q also stills feels better in my hand than any other camera I have ever used, but I am really also enjoying the optical finder on the XP2. I think they are perfectly matched together, & would not want to part with either one. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerardjan Posted January 2, 2017 Share #68 Posted January 2, 2017 I have exactly the same "feelings" toward my Q. I cannot fully explain it but more than any other camera I've owned in my 58 years doing photography, I simply enjoy using it. I love just picking it up. I added a very nice Arte Di Mano case and a Thumbs Up. I put a protective screen on the rear LCD. I put gaffers tape on the top and hood to reduce chances of a scratch. I keep an Arca-Swiss plate handy to use on on tripod. I simply love using this camera. Now, back to your original comment about high ISO and shadow performance. I my view, it's not a camera for low light conditions. I would not try and photograph aurora borealis with it. I'd rent the latest Canon or Nikon for that. I took a photo of my house lit by Christmas lights. The shadows are very noisy and banded. Substantially worse than my Canon 5D3. No camera is perfect. I chose to enjoy the many great aspects of the Q and work around the few shortcomings. Having said all that, I still love the camera. For travel, street or landscapes reasonably well lit, it is superb. Thank you for your answer. It's not my eyes then! And neither is the camera a "faulty" one( that's supposed to be a joke!) I have a very fine working de-noise machine (I hardly ever used it till now and am very very pleased how well that machine is working!!) I put a protective screen as well on the rear. Am still thinking about the thumbs up and maybe the grip. But in my eyes they may "deform" the Q. She is a masterpiece in form the way she ("she" of course, patting factor)comes out of the box.(Also perfect) Only once before I nearly, mind you - nearly felt like this. I once owned a M6 with the 1.4 35 mm. I had to turn it in and went back to a Nikon autofocus machine due to my sight getting worse. The Q gives me the same feeling and than some........ a LOT some!! Happy shooting Infiniumguy! (And everybody else of course!) Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leica Guy Posted January 2, 2017 Share #69 Posted January 2, 2017 Thank you for your answer. It's not my eyes then! And neither is the camera a "faulty" one( that's supposed to be a joke!) I have a very fine working de-noise machine (I hardly ever used it till now and am very very pleased how well that machine is working!!) I put a protective screen as well on the rear. Am still thinking about the thumbs up and maybe the grip. But in my eyes they may "deform" the Q. She is a masterpiece in form the way she ("she" of course, patting factor)comes out of the box.(Also perfect) Only once before I nearly, mind you - nearly felt like this. I once owned a M6 with the 1.4 35 mm. I had to turn it in and went back to a Nikon autofocus machine due to my sight getting worse. The Q gives me the same feeling and than some........ a LOT some!! Happy shooting Infiniumguy! (And everybody else of course!) IMHO the Thumbs Up is a big plus. In my case with the Arte Di Mano case and grip it makes holding the camera a confident joy. I have no issues pushing the zoom button on occasion and turning the thumb wheel is easy. We each find our sweet spot and for me the Q is now just ready to use. I need nothing else. I will add that I've made an adapter to use my Canon ring flash for macro work. It works very well in manual mode. Look at some of my recent photos in the macro thread and you'll see how well illuminated they are. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Q Posted January 2, 2017 Share #70 Posted January 2, 2017 Since 2 weeks proud owner of the Q. Coming from the X PRO 2, which in my eyes is the nearly perfect camera. Yet... sigh, an affordable Leica. Being a one lens person (X Pro 2 just with the 18mm) the Q feelings I have are more philosophical. Can't even explain what I feel when handling the Q. It's a love affair. It will be my camera for the rest of my life.... I think (65 today) There's just one thing I am a little disappointed about with the Q compared to the X Pro 2. (Mind you, in MY eyes...!!) the high ISO numbers on the Q (3200/6400) are not as clean as they are on the X Pro 2. Has anybody else this feeling or shoul I have my eyes tested! Regards and everbody a very healthy and happy 2017! Gerard I recently purchased a X-T2 and my impressions are the exact opposite. I've found the Q to have cleaner (less noise) files with more detail at higher ISO's. I'd say the difference is at least half a stop... but probably a lot more in real use, considering how much Fuji overrates their ISO scale. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jed Orme Posted January 2, 2017 Share #71 Posted January 2, 2017 IMHO the Thumbs Up is a big plus. In my case with the Arte Di Mano case and grip it makes holding the camera a confident joy. I have no issues pushing the zoom button on occasion and turning the thumb wheel is easy. We each find our sweet spot and for me the Q is now just ready to use. I need nothing else. +1 on the Thumbs Up, giving me a much better grip on, & control over, the Q. I also have the Leica hand grip to add a bit more to hang on to on the front of the camera. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
likealot Posted January 4, 2017 Share #72 Posted January 4, 2017 Am still thinking about the thumbs up and maybe the grip. But in my eyes they may "deform" the Q. She is a masterpiece in form the way she ("she" of course, patting factor)comes out of the box.(Also perfect) Like you I also love the shape of the Q however I did find it very uncomfortable to hold for longer than 10 minutes. I decided to get Limm's half case and grip which arrived today and it fits very nicely. It looks very nice too and most importantly it has made holding the Q a joy. It does add about 8mm to the base of the Q and as expected it does add some more weight to it however you do get easy access to the battery and sd card without having to take the case off. For me it is sufficient and I dont see the need for adding ThumbsUp too. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
millsart Posted January 4, 2017 Share #73 Posted January 4, 2017 They go together well, similar control layout, great image quality and colors on both. I like the XPro2 for ultra wide, with the 10-24 or 12/2, since that is a perspective the Q doesn't do, and likewise, on the tele end, lens like the 56/1.2 and 55-200 work great for portraits and compressed landscapes. I think the XPro2 is the best companion camera to carry with the Q and you can have the best of both worlds Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrQ Posted January 4, 2017 Share #74 Posted January 4, 2017 I sold my x100t once I bought the Q but kept the xpro2 and xt2 to compliment the set. I do think the Q has some quirks but every now and then I'll get a real keeper so I'm happy and hope that the firmware keeps coming for the Q. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.Q Posted January 4, 2017 Share #75 Posted January 4, 2017 When I had a X-Pro2 I was often asked if it was a Leica. So yes, aesthetically it serves nicely as a poor man's M until the nostalgia rubs off and you no longer use the hybrid VF. Only then do you realize that the camera is hampered with a tiny EVF and less features than other mirrorless offerings like bigger EVF's, tilting screens, 4K video, etc etc. As a snap shooter the Q is superior. It's a much more responsive and capable camera, especially in low light situations due to it's sensor size and OIS. Autofocus is blazingly fast with a proper distance scale on the lens for zone focusing. And the Summilux is a class above Fuji's wide primes. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herve5 Posted January 4, 2017 Share #76 Posted January 4, 2017 (edited) I think (65 today) There's just one thing I am a little disappointed about with the Q compared to the X Pro 2. (Mind you, in MY eyes...!!) the high ISO numbers on the Q (3200/6400) are not as clean as they are on the X Pro 2. Has anybody else this feeling or shoul I have my eyes tested! Regards and everbody a very healthy and happy 2017! There indeed is a rather well known noise banding effect at very high ISO (say, in nightskies with stars). In this area, I use the noise filtering from DarkTable which I really found vastly superior to all the other processing softwares I tried (last year, but all paid as well as the open sources) Edited January 4, 2017 by Herve5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 4, 2017 Share #77 Posted January 4, 2017 There is a considerable difference between camera makers regarding the actual sensitivity of ISO settings. If you want to compare, you should use the same exposure setting on both cameras and adjust ISO for optimal exposure disregarding the numbers. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
millsart Posted January 4, 2017 Share #78 Posted January 4, 2017 When I had a X-Pro2 I was often asked if it was a Leica. So yes, aesthetically it serves nicely as a poor man's M until the nostalgia rubs off and you no longer use the hybrid VF. Only then do you realize that the camera is hampered with a tiny EVF and less features than other mirrorless offerings like bigger EVF's, tilting screens, 4K video, etc etc. As a snap shooter the Q is superior. It's a much more responsive and capable camera, especially in low light situations due to it's sensor size and OIS. Autofocus is blazingly fast with a proper distance scale on the lens for zone focusing. And the Summilux is a class above Fuji's wide primes. I love how in the same post you bash the XPro2 because it doesn't have 4k video or a tilting screen, yet talk about how great of camera the Q is, which doesn't have 4k video or a tilting screen...... The EVF is the Xpro2 is still better than a good number of mirrorless camera's and many APS-C DSLR's. Is it the biggest and best EVF on the market ? No, but its one of the only ones that offer the hybrid finder experience, and you can call the OVF "nostalgia" aka what I'm guessing is your word for useless, but a lot of people enjoy it and actually bought it for that purpose. You my friend simply bought the camera. Its not an M, and it doesn't have a tilt screen, 4k video, or the biggest EVF on the market. If those things were important to you, why not buy a mirrorless camera that offers all that, such as say the XT2 ? I own both the XT2 and the Xpro2 and I grab the Xpro2 95% of the time. It simply feels better in my hand, I enjoy the left corner hybrid EVF, the joystick falls under my thumb better than the Xt2, the grip shape is more comfortable, and I can adjust the EC dial with my thumb, without changing my grip, which I can't do on the XT2 Oh...but there is no tilting LCD..... So what, I don't really miss a tilting LCD on my Q, so why would I miss it on the Xpro2 ?? Last but not least, why, I repeat WHY.... would someone who already owns a Q, really care about the quality of Fuji's wide angle primes ? What a newsflash you shared with us, a $4250 camera has a better lens than a Fuji 18mm costing $300, or the Fuji 16mm costing $700 (though that is actually a pretty darn good 24mm equiv) and the Fuji 14mm which cost about $500 is actually a heck of a lot better 21mm equiv..... Again though, why if you own the Q would you go and buy a Fuji 18mm which is a 28mm equiv ? You already own one of the best 28s on the market with the Q. It makes zero sense, as does you complaining about it Why not buy a 56mm f1.2 for the Xpro2 and.....wait for it........... USE IT IN ADDITION to your Q ??? How crazy is that huh ? Having more than one camera with different focal lengths so you can shoot different stuff ??? Mind blown right........ Maybe I missed the memo that said if i own a Q its my one and only camera I can own. I thought since I enjoy photography I can own several cameras of different brands, use them for different things, and enjoy shooting with all of them 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charleswolford Posted January 25, 2017 Share #79 Posted January 25, 2017 It's really not comparable. I think the closest comparison would be with the x100t, which I also own. It's a great camera and I am especially fond of the film simulation modes, but the autofocus is a bit clunky compared to the Q and at f/2 it doesn't really provide that 3-D "pop" I get from the 28mm Summilux. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
faxao Posted January 25, 2017 Share #80 Posted January 25, 2017 It's really not comparable. I think the closest comparison would be with the x100t, which I also own. It's a great camera and I am especially fond of the film simulation modes, but the autofocus is a bit clunky compared to the Q and at f/2 it doesn't really provide that 3-D "pop" I get from the 28mm Summilux. I too own both cameras (the X100T and the Q) and for some inexplicable reason I do love to shoot the X100T despite the far superior quality of the Summilux. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.