Leica Q - the image thread

[CharlesL]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well, you passed the monochrome class with top marks. Off-center composition is dynamic. Excellent range of exposure. Camera JPG? Or tell us something about post-process?

[Advertisement]

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

[beauport]

Thank you

 

I processed the DNG in PS/ACR as I am more accustomed to PS than I am LR.  ISO 100, 1/500 at F8.  I'm pretty sure this will be one very enjoyable camera. 

[Guest jvansmit]

@ KTV bar, Phnom Penh

 

50mm crop at ISO 1600 (1/30th sec...I didn't pause long enough while walking by so some camera shake)

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!

[@McLeica]

Took the Q out and about at night in Madrid to get used to the focus settings and to see the results. ISO100 1/60s wide open.

 

I was looking forward to dinner very soon after! 

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!

Edited October 21, 2015 by Rapierwitman

[viramati]

Man leaves trunk behind by Viramati, on Flickr

[pop]

We'd prefer if you posted your pictures here instead of posting links to external sources. Please see here for instructions: 

Leica Forum FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions)

 

[j0e_5]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

We'd prefer if you posted your pictures here instead of posting links to external sources. Please see here for instructions: 

Leica Forum FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions)

 

I fully understand that there are still places around the world where a fast internet connection is, unfortunately, not the norm. But IMHO it does feel a bit weird, that on a forum dedicated mostly to cameras, forum members aren't encourage to post photos of the highest quality possible...

 

Like in this thread for example. I would say there's a huge difference when looking at a photo that has almost no size limit, HQ = linked to an image hosting site, v.s a 500kb photo that is instead uploaded to this site. But perhaps that's only me? (it's a little bit like test driving a car, and then using only third gear. Not sure how exciting that would be.)

 

Again, I know that not everyone out there has access to high speed internet. But isn't it then better to not look at threads like this one e.g. knowing that this is probably going to be a bit to slow for me. So instead of focusing on showing what a camera, in this case the Q, really can do when it comes to producing high quality photos, we should focus on keeping the quality of the photo on an "average/lower" level so that everyone can enjoy browsing the site/thread. Not sure I see the logic in this?

Edited October 21, 2015 by j0e_5

[pop]

I fully understand that there are still places around the world where a fast internet connection is, unfortunately, not the norm. 

Those places include large parts of the U.S.A, England, most European countries outside of the agglomerations plus all people using mobile connections; I wouldn't know about other continents. Besides, including links from foreign servers exposes our users to an increased risk of encountering malware.

[j0e_5]

Those places include large parts of the U.S.A, England, most European countries outside of the agglomerations plus all people using mobile connections; I wouldn't know about other continents. Besides, including links from foreign servers exposes our users to an increased risk of encountering malware.

 

Alright, I'm not going to start arguing with you here. But encountering malware from sites like e.g.: Flickr and 500px, do sound a bit far fetch.

 

Yes, and to repeat myself, again, I do understand that. But this is a site dedicated to cameras (and it's "surroundings"). The basic fact here is that all of us, I guess, buy our cameras to produce photos with them. If I'm interested in knowing how good, e.g. the Monochrom is when being used by "normal people" (meaning not a professional reviewer), I would most likely prefer to see photos where the quality is at its best. No? If one has a slow internet connection, perhaps a site/thread dedicated to photos is not the best one to brows around on. Or?

 

Just as an example: 

The average broadband speed for residential consumers across the UK was 18.7Mbps in May 2014

In the first quarter of 2015, Akamai said, the average U.S. Internet connection speed was 11.9Mbps

Romania, being a country outside of the agglomerations, has a average speed of 58.7Mbps. Latvia, 58.1Mbps, Hungary 35.9Mbps, etc. The average speed in Europe is around 20Mbps. I'm in Hong Kong, where we enjoy one of the fastest internet connections in the world. However, I have a 30Mbps connection, that drops pretty significantly ones browsing sites outside Hong Kong, and sites like Flickr, etc, loads just fine.

Edited October 21, 2015 by j0e_5

[pop]

Alright, I'm not going to start arguing with you here. But encountering malware from sites like e.g.: Flickr and 500px, do sound a bit far fetch.

Last time I looked, there were links to more servers than just from those two providers.

[thighslapper]

Again, I know that not everyone out there has access to high speed internet. But isn't it then better to not look at threads like this one e.g. knowing that this is probably going to be a bit to slow for me. So instead of focusing on showing what a camera, in this case the Q, really can do when it comes to producing high quality photos, we should focus on keeping the quality of the photo on an "average/lower" level so that everyone can enjoy browsing the site/thread. Not sure I see the logic in this?

 

I live 3km from a major town in the UK and 1km from the UK's main Signals Regiment Military base which is festooned with Comms Equipment .... but my Internet connection is still the humble copper wire and it is crap.

 

If you want to show full res. images post links to them and stick them in a Dropbox Public Folder or similar. Thats what I have done in the past. 

 

Hogging bandwidth with huge image posts is selfish and is not the point of the forum anyway ......... pixel peeping may be interesting but is not the actual point of photography ........ its the overall image that counts ....... and if you want to show something you can post an additional 100% crop of part of the image to illustrate a point ..... 

[j0e_5]

Interesting how different one can look at things.

 

Personally, I would definitely say that the overall image is effected when it comes to the quality of the uploaded file. (when being viewed digitally). Call it "pixel peeping" or whatever you like. But a pixelated photo doesn't say very much, and can very often ruin the experience looking at the image in the first place. But again, perhaps this is just me?

 

Also, how can it be selfish to link to another site, in this case an image hosting site, where one can look at the photo in a much higher quality?

 

I edited my previous post with some average speeds.

Edited October 21, 2015 by j0e_5

[dancook]

L1020428 by dancook1982, on Flickr

 

L1020417 by dancook1982, on Flickr

 

L1020297 by dancook1982, on Flickr

 

L1020368 by dancook1982, on Flickr

 

L1020346 by dancook1982, on Flickr

 

L1020408 by dancook1982, on Flickr

[@McLeica]

Madrid - ISO640, wide open.

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!

[BJN]

"One of the Family" Frederick George Cotman (1850-1920)

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!

[@McLeica]

Madrid ISO1000, wide open.

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!

[dancook]

L1040464 by dancook1982, on Flickr

[doomin]

iso 100; 1/500s; f/4

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[@McLeica]

L1040464 by dancook1982, on Flickr

 

Loving the colour!

[@McLeica]

While we're on the subject!  

 

ISO640. Wide open. 1/60s.

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!

Edited October 22, 2015 by Rapierwitman