Stealth3kpl Posted October 19, 2016 Share #1 Posted October 19, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) My Q arrived today so I ran out to see how it compares with the M-P and 28mm Summicron Asph. I'm posting this here because I bet there are a few out there wondering whether to get a Q to run alongside an M with a 50 summilux or Summicron. First, it won't have escaped many of you that I'm not a proper photographer or camera tester. Secondly, these are quite evidently test shots that I've messed about with to try to get the colours of the M and Q files as similar as an uneducated Lightroom user can. I want to see if I can get a look from the files that my wife and I like and I'm really not bothered about what others think of their aesthetic. My initial impression is that the Q is a great little camera, and I surprised my Luddite self by really liking the touch-the-screen focus-and-release-the-shutter option. Also, if Leica ever bring out a 50mm version - my oh my, perfect travel companions. I'm really posting just to say I have the impression the lens is sharper than the 28 Summicron asph (which might be focus error on my part) and seems to have a touch wider view. That said, something about the rendering of the Summicron has me preferring the latter, and to me the separation achieved with the Summicron at f2 seems more pronounced than that of the Q's Summilux. I had to add a lot of light falloff to imitate the Summicron files. The M240 files seem richer to me but that might be my post processing or Adobe's available profiles for the M and Q. I found the red of the jacket in the images hard to match but could get fairly close to the M's look overall. The red jacket files are both at 1600iso, and it seems to me that the Q file has more noise (but perhaps I inadvertently introduced that in PP). I'm quite excited about the idea of running the Q alongside the M and, at this stage (day 1) wouldn't put anyone off from going for it. Although the M initially felt very dated compared to the Q, I found I could use them side by side with little thought but I find myself this evening, once again, appreciating what a wonderful tool is the Leica M-P 240. Pete M and 28 Summicron: 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 Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/265670-leica-m-p-vs-leica-q/?do=findComment&comment=3131912'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 19, 2016 Posted October 19, 2016 Hi Stealth3kpl, Take a look here Leica M-P vs Leica Q. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Stealth3kpl Posted October 19, 2016 Author Share #2 Posted October 19, 2016 1600 iso M file 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 Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/265670-leica-m-p-vs-leica-q/?do=findComment&comment=3131914'>More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted October 19, 2016 Author Share #3 Posted October 19, 2016 Q file 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 Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/265670-leica-m-p-vs-leica-q/?do=findComment&comment=3131915'>More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted October 19, 2016 Author Share #4 Posted October 19, 2016 Q crop 1600 iso 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 Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/265670-leica-m-p-vs-leica-q/?do=findComment&comment=3131916'>More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted October 19, 2016 Author Share #5 Posted October 19, 2016 3 D quality of 28 Summicron Asph 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 Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/265670-leica-m-p-vs-leica-q/?do=findComment&comment=3131917'>More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted October 19, 2016 Author Share #6 Posted October 19, 2016 Less so with Q? Light fall off added 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 Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/265670-leica-m-p-vs-leica-q/?do=findComment&comment=3131918'>More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted October 19, 2016 Author Share #7 Posted October 19, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) M file 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 Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/265670-leica-m-p-vs-leica-q/?do=findComment&comment=3131919'>More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted October 19, 2016 Author Share #8 Posted October 19, 2016 Q file 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 Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/265670-leica-m-p-vs-leica-q/?do=findComment&comment=3131920'>More sharing options...
kkonkkrete Posted October 19, 2016 Share #9 Posted October 19, 2016 Q is an amazing camera as testified by the image thread on this very site. Having said that, there is still something about the M lenses that just goes one step beyond in terms of raw artistic rendition. Both cameras in the right hands are capable of works of stupendous art. For me the best thing about the Q is the lighting fast autofocus. Personally I would love to see a paired down point-an-shoot based on the Q sensor and processor, at a lower price, with no EVF and slightly smaller: like a full frame version of the Leica X cameras. That would be a perfect companion for an M with a different focal lens (e.g., I'd love an M with 35 summilux + either 21mm or 70mm Q-based point and shoot) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kkonkkrete Posted October 19, 2016 Share #10 Posted October 19, 2016 In that latest pair, the Q exposes better than the M. They are both excellent. It's hair splitting to compare! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted October 19, 2016 Author Share #11 Posted October 19, 2016 Yes, the Q seems to expose much brighter than the M. Bear in mind these were DNG files and I may have altered the general exposure in trying to match the Q to the M. Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted October 20, 2016 Share #12 Posted October 20, 2016 The Q is a very fine camera. Nonetheless I prefer a second M body. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkmoore Posted October 20, 2016 Share #13 Posted October 20, 2016 Looks like less noise in the M240 pictures. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted October 20, 2016 Author Share #14 Posted October 20, 2016 The Q is a very fine camera. Nonetheless I prefer a second M body. Yes, I struggled over an M262 or the Q to run alongside my M240. The lighter weight of the Q and its macro mode at a cheaper price than the M 262 is winning for me at the moment. If someone in the UK would like to do a straight swap of their M262 for my Q I'm all ears. I purchased it used from Red Dot with 4 batteries for £2900 or £2950, something like that and as it's mint, boxed with Passport and the grip, I think it was a good deal. It is going to be an ideal travel camera for me either on its own or with the M. It's a great bit of kit. Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
epand56 Posted October 26, 2016 Share #15 Posted October 26, 2016 I think that being the Q and the M two completely different cameras in terms of philosophy, would be more proper and interesting a comparison between a Q and another auto-focus camera such like Sony or Fuji or Olympus or any other mirrorless and DSLR. Or you should compare the lenses, but this is not possible given that you can't dismount it from the Q. You choose to buy an M or a Q according with the kind of photography you want to perform rather than the quality of the pictures. If I wanted an auto-focus camera I'm not sure I would buy a Q. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveBK Posted October 26, 2016 Share #16 Posted October 26, 2016 After ~15 years of M use, I really love my Q. It's like an AF camera for people who hate modern cameras :-). Want to quickly jump out of Auto Focus/Aperture/Shutter? Twist the corresponding mechanical ring. No Fn buttons to program, no menus to dive into, no conditional mode-dependent dial/button behavior. The luddite in me (and I'm a software dev..) never got my head around all these menus & submenus that other brands love. I tried Sony, twice, no dice. The only Fuji's I liked are the ones that ape Leica design. I tolerate Panasonic but have to turn lots of stuff off to keep features out of my way. I also love that the touch-screen stays out of the way. I cannot believe how many touch implementations (Panasonic, Sony, etc) leave me accidentally changing modes/focus/etc either a) with nose while using EVF or with my body as the camera is at my side while I walk. Outside of touch-to-focus mode, the touch screen is useful for image review/zoom/etc, but stays out of the way. It follows my first rule of camera features - do no harm. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tmuussoni Posted October 26, 2016 Share #17 Posted October 26, 2016 I assume OP is using 28mm Summicron Asph version #1. I very much would like to see the same test repeated with 28mm Summicron Asph version #2. I have the latter and it slightly improves wide open performance over version #1. Which would probably give the overall edge to M + Cron 28 V2 over the Q. But still they are very, very close. Anyway, thank you for the test. It's very interesting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted October 26, 2016 Author Share #18 Posted October 26, 2016 I assume OP is using 28mm Summicron Asph version #1. Yes it's #1. Epand56, I'm comparing them because they are my cameras that I have started to run side by side and I wanted to see if I could get the Q's files to look like those of the M as I've grown fond of them. I will use the M with a 50 summilux or summicron. sjg284. I'm also pleased with the Q. I have set one user setting to auto iso maxing out at 1600 with the shutter speed not falling below 1/60, and with the touch focus/release activated. This will be a killer setting for market stalls and street photography. It's very impressive. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
microview Posted October 27, 2016 Share #19 Posted October 27, 2016 I'm really posting just to say I have the impression the lens is sharper than the 28 Summicron asph (which might be focus error on my part) and seems to have a touch wider view. That said, something about the rendering of the Summicron has me preferring the latter, and to me the separation achieved with the Summicron at f2 seems more pronounced than that of the Q's Summilux. I had to add a lot of light falloff to imitate the Summicron files. The M240 files seem richer to me but that might be my post processing or Adobe's available profiles for the M and Q. Pete I'd agree: the Q images are clear watercolours where the M's have the richness of oils - albeit it's fairly subtle. My just-sold v4 28 Elmarit was obviously outresolved by the Q but the image quality was still rather pleasing. Tempts me to get the new 28 Summicron before Leica prices go up! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belle123 Posted October 27, 2016 Share #20 Posted October 27, 2016 Having both a Q and M, my preference is the M. Can always do a bit better with the M. It sometimes takes more work to get it right, of course but that is the fun of the M. Plus just simply having the creative control in choice of lenses that all have unique character. The Q is way more convenient and I tend to let it focus but manually set everything else and I do better that way. You can fiddle too with the various settings on the Q more to correct the exposure if you want to go more auto. The defaults to me are a bit off for my tastes. Would I recommend a Q? Absolutely. Great for situations where you don't have the time to focus. I used it recently at a wedding, not as the wedding photographer. Very pleased with the results. If I had taken the M, wouldn't have gotten half those shots. And it was so quiet and stealth. But if I am going out to take some serious time taking photos.....the M. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.