A 35mm or 50mm Q? Thoughts...

[Wolfgang]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Wondering what people's thoughts are on 35mm or 50mm version of the Q. I know people are worried about the lens being longer or bigger but assuming they can figure out a work around, would people be interested in something like that? I find the current Q limiting in two ways. One, the wide angle makes it almost a necessity to carry a second camera unless you only like shooting in 28mm or cropping megapixels and two, the lack of ovf option makes it a little less stellar in my opinion for those used to a classic m. Thoughts?

[involuntarysoul]

the 35mm crop works great especially you do not see the top and bottom due to the blackbars anyway. I am more interested if Panasonic would use the Q full frame sensor on their own cameras. 

[Advertisement]

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

[brickftl]

I'd rather have the option of shooting wide or long (via cropping) vs not being able to shoot wide with the 50. I would have no interest in a 50 Q.

[Michael Kersting]

And I would be screwed, when Leica releases a Q 50mm.  No more thinking about buying a Leica M. But I love the Leica M, but yeah no more sleepless nights about pros and cons for or against being a M.  Yippieh! Like the real reportage Photographers like Nick Ut or Horst Faas. Just two bodies and 2 Lenses 28mm and 50mm. Great

[Eric8255]

I can see the attraction of native 35mm and 50mm in order to save resolution but either of the present options can print well to at least A3.

 

It might be heresy but more importantly I would like to see a flash sync point in a future model so fill flash Is possible when the thumbs up is fitted.

 

In fact Leica could also design an integral thumbs up.

 

 

Eric

[ramosa]

I have no interest in the Q28 (had one, sold it), but would love a Q35, Q40 or Q50. That would likely be my order of preference, too: 35, 40, 50.

[cirke]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Any new thoughts in 2020?

[earleygallery]

 

[PhotoCruiser]

I am more than fine with the 28mm, 35 or even worst, 50mm would be too "tele" for my need.
I prefer to have the possibility to crop than being annoyed that the scenery don't fit on the sensor.

If i should need/want a lens that allow me without moving me to frame the scenery correctly so that i don't need to crop then i would prefer a 24-70 zoom.

But as Leica stated, a longer than the 28mm lens would make the camera tippy to hold as the added weight of the longer lens will make her roll forward.
Same effect if you shoot for a long time with a heavy tele lens, your wrist will start to hurt as you need to stabilize the camera from turning downward.
A neutral "buoyant" camera is difficult to obtain on land, but underwater i had my cameras rigs so neutral that i could position them free floating in front of me.
Before i was tweaking them with floats after holding then for a hour under water and pulling constantly the camer backwards to bring the lens up i my wrist was hurting.

Also, the design of the Q/Q2 has a certain harmony in size of camera body and lens, putting a longer lens on it would make the Q/Q2 look rediculus,
somehow like some micro 3/4 who look to me as a lens with a body attached.

Chris

 

[nicci78]

Q2 with 47MP sensor proves that Leica will never release 35 or 50mm Q. Live with that. Plenty of 35 and 50mm lenses though.

Just like Ricoh only release 28mm equivalent GR cameras. 
And Fujifilm only rely on 35mm equivalent X100 cameras. 
Even Sony stay faithful to 35mm RX1. 
 

Only Sigma frayed with different focal length fixed cameras with its DP cameras. But these cameras failed miserably and those « fixed » lenses were also available as interchangeable lenses for Sony E mount and m4/3 too.

So I would not count on Sigma experience as a pattern for the rest of the industry. Being a lens manufacturers, it thinks like one. Its DP cameras are only lenses permanently attached to a body. Not a real fixed lens tailored specifically to a sensor. Such lens cannot be used as interchangeable lens. Because they feature lead shutter and the lack of mount, allows design feat impossible to made otherwise. 
 

I think that Leica, Ricoh, Sony and Fujifilm really choose the best focal length and stick with it forever. 
 

By the way, 35mm crop is so good with Q2, that Leica will never have to make a 35mm only Q. 

Edited April 5, 2020 by nicci78

[T25UFO]

1 hour ago, nicci78 said:

Q2 with 47MP sensor proves that Leica will never release 35 or 50mm Q. Live with that. Plenty of 35 and 50mm lenses though.

Just like Ricoh only release 28mm equivalent GR cameras. 
And Fujifilm only rely on 35mm equivalent X100 cameras. 
Even Sony stay faithful to 35mm RX1. 
 

Only Sigma frayed with different focal length fixed cameras with its DP cameras. But these cameras failed miserably and those « fixed » lenses were also available as interchangeable lenses for Sony E mount and m4/3 too.

So I would not count on Sigma experience as a pattern for the rest of the industry. Being a lens manufacturers, it thinks like one. Its DP cameras are only lenses permanently attached to a body. Not a real fixed lens tailored specifically to a sensor. Such lens cannot be used as interchangeable lens. Because they feature lead shutter and the lack of mount, allows design feat impossible to made otherwise. 
 

I think that Leica, Ricoh, Sony and Fujifilm really choose the best focal length and stick with it forever. 
 

By the way, 35mm crop is so good with Q2, that Leica will never have to make a 35mm only Q. 

So much has been written about a Q with a longer focal length lens.  It will never happen.  Move on.  The last comment from @nicci78 sums it up perfectly.

 

[Herr Barnack]

I am very pleased with the 28 Summilux that comes on the Q2.  It is a good all around focal length for a camera that has one lens that is permanently attached. 

IMHO, the 28mm focal length is similar to the field of view of the 35mm.  They are almost (but not quite) interchangeable; each has its own unique characteristics.  A 28mm requires more of the photographer than either a 35mm or 50mm; you must make a conscious effort to get close to your subject matter to fill the frame.

As for a 50mm on the Q2?  No, thanks.  50mm lenses have their place in the scheme of things but they almost feel like a short telephoto to me. 

If my Q2 had a 50mm lens, I would feel painted into a corner.  YMMV.

 

[Donzo98]

No interest... I'm happy with 28.

 

[brickftl]

On 4/4/2020 at 8:17 AM, cirke said:

Any new thoughts in 2020?

yes. My response to a 50mm now that I have the Q2 - yuck

[FlashGordonPhotography]

I'd be first in line for a 50mm Q. It'd go nicely with my Q2. I print big so cropping isn't an option. At the moment I have my SL2 for 50mm. When I want a small option I reach for my RX1RII. I prefer the Q2 and I'm not a particular fan of the 35mm focal length but it's closer to a 50. I don't for a second believe the BS that Leica can't make a small, fast and excellent 50mm fixed lens. They're kind of the experts in small fast and excellent 50mm lenses.

Gordon

 

[peterm1_Leica]

Being one who loves longer lenses and struggles to work with wide angles I would personally prefer a 50mm (or maybe at least a 35mm). I love many things about the Q. I love its image quality. I love its viewfinder. I love its feel in the hand and how it looks. I love the intelligent way they have implemented manual focus - wow it just works perfectly for sight challenged older guys like me. 

But having bought one  I find I keep leaving mine behind more often than I would like. Just because some situations are not right for 28mm - especially for me. 

The 28mm Leica put on this camera is superb. No doubt about it. But Leica have many superb lenses in longer focal lengths they could use as a basis for a Q with a longer lens. Would it be worth their while - probably not but for me it would be heaven.

Edited April 19, 2020 by peterm1_Leica

[PhotoCruiser]

vor 8 Stunden schrieb FlashGordonPhotography:

At the moment I have my SL2 for 50mm. When I want a small option I reach for my RX1RI

Is the SL2 with a 50mm lens so much bigger to make it "uncomfortable" to work with?

The Q2 with a 50mm lens will be as well bigger and nose heavy and that makes it uncomfortable to work with too.

I guess that most photographers use the full-frame pro grade cameras from Canon and Nikon with the according lens.
As a owner of a D800 - a bit lighter than the D4 -  i guess that the D800/D4 is not lighter or less bulky than the SL2 with a 50mm lens.
If i need to shoot longer then i would take the D800 and the right lens for the job and haul it around till i finished and for me that is for me doable.

Chris

 

[FlashGordonPhotography]

14 hours ago, PhotoCruiser said:

Is the SL2 with a 50mm lens so much bigger to make it "uncomfortable" to work with?

The Q2 with a 50mm lens will be as well bigger and nose heavy and that makes it uncomfortable to work with too.

I guess that most photographers use the full-frame pro grade cameras from Canon and Nikon with the according lens.
As a owner of a D800 - a bit lighter than the D4 -  i guess that the D800/D4 is not lighter or less bulky than the SL2 with a 50mm lens.
If i need to shoot longer then i would take the D800 and the right lens for the job and haul it around till i finished and for me that is for me doable.

Chris

 

People keep saying a 50mm Q2 will be "big and front heavy" when the evidence really suggests the opposite. A fast fixed lens camera almost always has a smaller lens unit than in interchangeable one. Foe example, the lens units on the Sony and Fuji fixed cameras are much smaller than their interchangeable compatriots. There's no mount or design constraints like an interchangeable lens and you can also have a leaf shutter unit rather than a focal plane shutter. The speculation it'll be big just isn't backed up by what's out there in 35mm cameras, or 50mm lenses for that matter (55mm Sony 1.8, anyone?). The 50mm SL Summicron is only the size it is because Leica are using the same body for several lenses as a design idea. It could be much smaller. There's only one reason Leica don't make more Q bodies. They don't want to canabalise M sales.

The SL2/50mm cron combo isn't huge. But it's not M10/Q2 sized either. The Q is a camera I sling over my shoulder as a daily walk around, except that I don't because I want a 50mm and the M10 doesn't have the resolution I require. Mostly I end up with my X1D/65mm as my daiiy walk around but I'd be happy to sacrifice a little bit of IQ to get to a Q sized camera.

Gordon

[evikne]

Even though I am mainly a 50mm shooter, I think 35mm is an even more versatile focal length. A 35/1.4 is usually smaller than a 28- or 50/1.4. So a Q with a fixed 35mm could be both a little smaller, and make a little more blurred backgrounds than the current Q, which would be a big plus for me. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[nicci78]

If you really want smallest lens possible look no further than 43mm (diagonal of 24x36mm sensor) 

In the past manufacturers produce such very high quality compacts with 40mm lens. Even interchangeable Leica CL with Summicron-C 40mm were tiny. Or just look at Pentax limited 43mm tiny full frame lens, or Canon EF 40mm pancake. 
Which makes me think that we do not need fixed lens 40-43mm camera. Because such lens can be made so small. Even with a interchangeable mount. 
By the way, Q2 cropped at 43mm will be equivalent to f/2.5 DoF and still provide you 20.8MP
FYI information Nikon is happy to sell you brand new Z50 with 20.9MP APS-C sensor.

So I really think that we should not hold our breath. Leica will never bother to produce a second Q2. Fast 28mm with very high MP count, makes most trans standard zoom irrelevant already. 
They will never jeopardise their healthy 35 and 50mm lenses lineup.