Advice before buying a Q

[bykatt]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I shouldn't have looked through every one of the 113 pages in the Leica Q image thread - slightly obsessed now! 

 

Joking aside: I'm currently between cameras, just have a Canon Gx7 as a temp solution. My previous camera, Canon M, was too unreliable to AF + it lacked a macro option (EF-S 60mm not working for me at all).

 

I am just a hobby photographer, but still on the quest for the best possible image quality in a small package within my budget. The Q pushes it, but is within range, depending on my priorities. I have tried a number of different cameras before, and have noticed how the "feeling" of handling a camera is affecting how much I use it. So I am willing to pay extra for something solid and beautiful. Enter the Q...

 

My preferred local length is approx 50mm, but I got used to the 35mm field of view with the Canon M, and am sure I'll adapt to 28mm as well.

 

I shoot mostly street, architecture, a bit of landscape, social gatherings, so I think the Q will be OK for 90% of what I shoot. However, I like to shoot flowers close up (examples https://www.flickr.com/photos/bykatt/albums/72157648638626290 ), and I am not sure the Q macro mode will be sufficient.

 

I would be hoping the Q could cover my photography needs, that would justify the cost. However, I am also prepared to plan for something additional in the future - once my wallet recovers...

 

Any comments on what I'm thinking to use the Q for, and my flower photography shooting with the Q?

 

Or thoughts on additional camera/photo equipment I could consider?

 

Or examples of what you can't use your Q for, and have (or wish you had) an another camera for?

 

TIA!

[microview]

After a great deal of dithering (!) I found a Q at Park Cameras London shop and cannot tell you how delighted I am with it. The auto focus is seemingly instant and the exposures almost always correct. Fine for architecture because you can see the crosshairs of levelling in both directions, thereby reducing any converging verticals: 28mm not the easiest lens to use to avoid these otherwise. However, I don't think the macro is all that wonderful for flowers, but you can decide from the wealth of images posted at Leica Forum Q. I get sharper pics with an M9 and 90mm M lenses. That's my only caveat. I recommend the Leica grip for handling, even though you need unscrew it to get at battery/SD card.

 

[Voxen]

The Q is the best camera I ever had for street photography. Simple to use and incredible image quality.

You may need to have a secondary camera for other kind of photography though, I have a Fuji XT1 but don't use it much since I purchased the Q.

[dkCambridgeshire]

The Q with its fixed 28mm lens is not the best camera for flower photography - unless you want to record a lot of background / habitat detail e.g. wildflower in habitat studies. Maybe consider using a Leica T with its standard zoom lens plus an achromatic supplementary close-up lens - on the T sub-forum you'll find lots of flower studies taken with this combination. Some might dismiss supplementary close-up lenses - but many photographers have never used them and are unaware of the quality results obtainable.   You could also consider a Leica X Vario with a supplementary achromatic close-up lens - there are lots of flower study photos on the X sub forum; the XV is my chosen 'grab and go' camera for close-up photography. There are some bargain X Vario deals available at Leica dealers both new and secondhand. 

 

dunk

[wda]

The Q would work well for general photography but I would suggest a Dlux for closeup work and occasional tele subjects.

[nawoo]

Doesn't the Q have a macro mode with 0.17 focusing distance? Wouldn't that make it good for closeup work?

[Leica Guy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Without a doubt the Leica Q is the most fun, satisfying, pure photography tool that I've ever used. Ever! 58 years of being an amateur / hobbyist photographer. I sold a Fuji X100T and bought the Q. What a difference! Everytine I pick up the Q, its a joy. The feel in the hands is superb. The operation, while taking a little time to learn the subtleties, is a joy. Always having the macro with you is a huge plus. Yes, the 28 mm focal length is not the best for close up work and creating nice bokeh in the backgroubd, but every combination is a bunch of tradeoffs. This is the PERFECT travel camera. Focus is fast. Sharp. IQ is stunning because of the combination of the very capable sensor and very sharp 28 mm Summilux f/1.7 lens. This camera has brought excitement and pure photography back to my life. I love it. I guess you can detect that from this post. Get one. Get out. Get focused. Get great images!

 

A friend took this yesterday of me with the Q. I normally don't like photos of me, but this looks great because of the camera.

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!

[wda]

Doesn't the Q have a macro mode with 0.17 focusing distance? Wouldn't that make it good for closeup work?

Yes it does but getting too close can introduce fresh problems, such as distortion and false or undesirable prespective. .

[Orguy]

I echo what the others have said: yes, it is my favorite camera ever (after being a photographer for decades!), yes adequate for a travel-only camera (just came back from 2 overseas trips and didn't miss my Nikon SLR), wonderfully fun to use and will enhance your joy of photography. However I would make one caveat...

 

**Consider ** ordering only the basic camera first (ok, extra battery yes, screen protector maybe) and see how you do. I know this comment is highly debatable, but I love the camera as is, and not all "tarted up" with numerous accessories. Many are bulky, expensive, and just extra stuff you don't need IMO. I do just fine without grips, cases, extra straps, $300 leather bags etc. All I added was the battery, a screen protector (I would be heart broken with a scratched back screen!), and a cheapie lens cap keeper. I use the lens cap over the Leica lens hood and hate not having it tethered to the camera. Look, we all know the camera does have limitations but the beauty of the Q is how small and light and Bauhaus-like elegant it is right out of the box. That's what I have done and don't regret not having all the extra cases, grips, straps....

 

Oh yeah, one more thing: to carry it I bought an inexpensive Lowepro neoprene case (subject I discussed in another thread) which just fits the camera and it then fits in a fanny pack or knapsack easily and gives complete protection. That's it. 

[Peter L]

just buy the darn thing

[XVarior]

Talking about flowers, here's a sneak peak from my coming short review of the Q. For what you said above, I think the Q will fits you well but also does the XVario with some edge to the Q in some areas like flash for night and backlit scene scenarios, a 35, 50 and 70mm capabilities all that at almost a third of the Q price tag.

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!

difference.

 

 

The XVarior

[bykatt]

Thanks for your input, guys. Makes me want the Q even more.

 

I'll save up for the Q, and follow the advice of starting with "just" the Q. Then I'll see how it works for me. It will be a while before I can afford anything else, anyway...

 

If anyone else has any experience in using the Q to shoot flowers, please share!

[Orguy]

Thanks for your input, guys. Makes me want the Q even more.

 

I'll save up for the Q, and follow the advice of starting with "just" the Q. Then I'll see how it works for me. It will be a while before I can afford anything else, anyway...

 

If anyone else has any experience in using the Q to shoot flowers, please share!

[microview]

could be adequately sharp for foliage etc, brick size = 3inches, of course. This (honeysuckle leaves) was 1/1000sec f5.6 iso 200.

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!

[ramosa]

Don't do it ... unless you love--and live at--28mm! Like you, my favorite FoV is 50, followed by 35. I tried out a Q for a couple weeks, and there was no way it was going to work. Aside from FoV, it'd be a great camera for me--but FoV is critical. Thus, I hope for a Q50 or Q35.

[Herve5]

for flowers macro is good as long as you consider reasonably-sized flowers, like 5cm : you won't get the pistil alone, but this little bunch of cherry flowers yes.

Then you have

1) macro correction if need be -this I find one can really deal with any reasonable image processor (I don't talk about Adobe that I don't use, but all open-source ones allow barrel corrections, and most others too, and with a fixed focal you need to record the right setting only once)

2) background issues : that, is the main point I'd say. You'll HAVE to think about the background, or, potentially, crop some of it (remember you get a real lot of pixels)

[adamdewilde]

I like the Q for flowers. I like the Q macro mode a lot actually. 

I think it would be suitable for most of your needs. But 28mm is really far off from 50mm and crop mode doesn't do anyone any good. 

 

In fact, 28mm is so far off from 50mm that I have had a one camera M kit with 28/50/90 and felt that the spacing was perfect for me actually wanting to switch lenses. 

Though if I'm using two bodies, I prefer 35/75. 

 

If Leica made another Q today exactly the same as the 28mm but w/50 or 75mm I'd buy it instantly as a companion to the 28Q and sell everything else off

[bykatt]

Thanks for all your comments!

 

The good news is it sounds like the Q works fine for the kind of flower photography I like, with the macro function.

 

The bad is that I probably should check out the FoV a bit more. I thought I just would get used to it, like I did the from 50mm to 35mm. In numbers the difference between 28mm and 35mm sounds significantly less of a difference... Guess I'll force myself to use my compact on the equivalent to 28mm for a few photo walks.

[kikouyou]

The Q pushes you to be more creative. It is addicting. One of the new capabilities versus the M is a workable macro mode. It works well, but the 28 will force you to make more efforts, get closer. When the subject is low on the floor, you will have to go on the floor. Finding an angle finder like the old Leitz does help.

Distortion is very well corrected by the in camera software which improves the usefulness of this lens in a great way. If you like bokeh, and with Leica you should! you will have to get closer to your subjects. I find the Q to be a great complement to the M with its added capabilities. Leica with the Q remain a set of tools to re-discover photography and focus on the essential. Less is more.

But the best kept secret are the way the Leica lenses perform. This rapid decrease of contrast from the focus point is giving a creamy look on the out of focus areas of the pictures that increases the value of the tack sharp areas in focus. That is only one dimension, you could add color rendering, micro contrast, performance wide open...

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[Herve5]

The bad is that I probably should check out the FoV a bit more.

One thing I forgot to say is that given the very large potential aperture, you can really play with the blurring.

 

For flowers I generally end with two or three shots, trading the DoF with a more or less blurred background, and really, even in macro (where the best aperture is reduced a little bit) the effect is very significant.

 

You can vastly improve the backgrounds by blurring them ;-)

 

Two quick examples (I'm away and getting these url out of a phone, so it may be clunky):

http://m.ipernity.com/#/doc/herve_s/41550418

http://m.ipernity.com/#/doc/herve_s/41496902