Q&M

[xenar]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have an M Monochrom (first version) and I can make another Leica purchase. I think I'm either going to get a Q or another M lens; the idea of having a backup body is appealing and I've liked the Q for a while as it has a lot of potential (M not so great for macro work without having LV, which the first MM doesnt have), but now I'm wondering whether having an M makes the Q rather redundant?

 

Does anyone have an M and a Q and can speak to how the M and Q fit together? Or why or why not I should get a Q with my M? (Color is not a compelling point!)

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[earleygallery]

Welcome to the forum. There is a section for new members to the forum to introduce themselves - you can tell us a little about your experience and subject matter etc.

 

As for your question, quite honestly if you have to ask such a question then you have no need for the camera.

 

Keep your money in the bank until you identify an actual need for more equipment, or use it to go on a trip somewhere new, or give it to charity.

[OcchioDiLepre]

I totaly disagree with previous post.

 

I have an m9 and an m240 with many m lenses.

 

I bought the Q because Leica failed to deliver an up-to-date M; the SL is not competitive agaist pro nikon bodies and I think Leica wasted a lot of money developing this camera instead of a new M.

 

I am very happy with the new Q. These are the strong points from my perspective:

- good sensor (better than M240)

- very fast

- ability to close focus

- good out of focus (great at short distances)

 

I strongly prefer the Q over the M with a 28 lens. I still use the M9, mainly with the 18 Elmar and the M240 with longer lenses (35, 50, 90)

[marchyman]

I have the Q and an M 262.  I keep a 75mm lens on the M.  I like the two focal lengths and prefer using two cameras to switching lens.   That may be because I'm not organized and may switch back and forth many times instead of taking all the shots at one focal length before switching to another.

 

I tend to use the Q as an M, i.e. using the viewfinder instead of LCD and preferring manual to auto-focus.   If I'm only going to have one camera with me it would most likely be the Q. I like the 28mm lens.  I like having an option to use auto focus (or auto everything).  I've also used the macro mode a few times, too.

[xenar]

Interesting; I have a 35 Summicron lens on my M; it's possible that there wouldn't be enough diversity between the 35 and 28mm focal lengths to contrast in that department.

 

I'm investigating a 75mm lens for the M, so maybe after that, a Q could be more compelling...

[AndrewDD]

I have both.

There are occasions when the Q is easier - low light, crowded places etc, but most of the time I get far better results with the M. I use the Q maybe 10% of the time now.

 

I'd buy a new lens or two!

[cmod]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have an M Monochrom (first version) and I can make another Leica purchase. I think I'm either going to get a Q or another M lens; the idea of having a backup body is appealing and I've liked the Q for a while as it has a lot of potential (M not so great for macro work without having LV, which the first MM doesnt have), but now I'm wondering whether having an M makes the Q rather redundant?

 

Does anyone have an M and a Q and can speak to how the M and Q fit together? Or why or why not I should get a Q with my M? (Color is not a compelling point!)

 

 

I've used the M (246) and Q combo on a few recent trips. Some thoughts:

• They're a surprisingly wonderful pair, especially when the M is coupled with a non-28mm lens. I use a 50mm 1.4 summilux and the 50mm/28mm combo is a joy. 
• Black and white and color work far better side-by-side than you'd expect
• You begin to develop an eye for when B&W will sing or when color is needed. It's fun to jump back and forth between the cameras. 
• The feel of the M is certainly different than the Q; heavier, more solid in some ways, but I still marvel at what a beautiful piece of engineering (and light piece of engineer) the Q is. 
• Jumping between auto and manual focus is not an issue, and sometimes what you're shooting really benefits from auto
• Having a wider lens for the M might be interesting; I'm off on a 3 week job and will be testing out a wide-M/Q combo

Personally, I love the pair. YMMV. You can see some of the results in my instagram: http://instagram.com/craigmod

 

C

[Iduna]

welcome to the forum!

 

I have a Q and I am really happy with this versatile excellent camera. I do  not have an M but I use a Canon 5DMK3 and one advantage of using two cameras is that you do not have to switch lenses. In this case the Q is mostly wide enough for architecture and landscape, street and even macro, where as the other camera can be mounted with a light telelens like 90 mm. Then you are well equipped for most of the day and you can cover an enormous range of subjects.

[jmschuh]

...the SL is not competitive agaist pro nikon bodies and I think Leica wasted a lot of money developing this camera instead of a new M.

Nonsense!

 

I have two friends who went from Nikon Pro to the Leica SL and they are very happy with the SL.

[steveBK]

Agreed... I'm not in the market for an SL myself, but it's what I really wanted when I bought (and sold) my Sony A7x series camera(s).

 

I find the Leica Q's AF to be superb, fast and reliable.. And that's coming from 6 months using what's been touted as top of mirrorless XXX point / PDAF / blah blah blah spec-sheet A7rII.  The Leica Q's AF feels far more predictable and I'm not constantly fretting over whether I've picked the ideal mode/sub-mode/setting combination from the 10,000 possible Sony permutations..

 

 

Nonsense!

I have two friends who went from Nikon Pro to the Leica SL and they are very happy with the SL.

[Belle123]

I have an M Monochrom (first version) and I can make another Leica purchase. I think I'm either going to get a Q or another M lens; the idea of having a backup body is appealing and I've liked the Q for a while as it has a lot of potential (M not so great for macro work without having LV, which the first MM doesnt have), but now I'm wondering whether having an M makes the Q rather redundant?

 

Does anyone have an M and a Q and can speak to how the M and Q fit together? Or why or why not I should get a Q with my M? (Color is not a compelling point!)

I have the MM 246 and the Q.  For B/W I prefer the MM output most definitely.  So, if you are mostly shooting monochrome, you might be somewhat disappointed in the Q, IMHO.  However, the Q is a fantastic camera and I enjoy taking color or B/w with it.  It is my go to camera for color now.  I find I take more photos with it just because so easy to use, and the results do not disappoint.   It's fast and so darn quiet.  Very slick!  But speaking for the MM, not knowing what lens you are using, I would probably get another lens first if I were in your shoes.  For me, the Q was an indulgence.  Didn't really need the Q, but LIKE IT!  But having a couple lenses for the M, at minimum, I would recommend.