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

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 4/19/2020 at 11:46 PM, peterm1_Leica said:

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.

But there is no reason to leave it behind when preferring to shoot 50 mm. That is what the high MP count is for.

[peterm1_Leica]

17 minutes ago, jaapv said:

But there is no reason to leave it behind when preferring to shoot 50 mm. That is what the high MP count is for.

True up to a point. But even with cropping, you can't beat a longer and faster lens shot wide open for really good background separation. (And yes I agree that for a 28mm lens the one on the Q and Q2 has some pretty decent blur). But I do sometimes take it together with another camera (an M8 for example) and rather than swapping lenses I swap cameras when I want to go wider. 

[BenSh]

Am 21.4.2020 um 08:42 schrieb jaapv:

But there is no reason to leave it behind when preferring to shoot 50 mm. That is what the high MP count is for.

But a 28mm Lens will stay a 28mm Look, no matter how many Pixels we have. 

Compression and Overall Look is fixed to each Focal lenght.  You wont get nowhere near close to a 50mm Look with a 28mm Lens cropped to match the framing of a 50mm Lens.

 

 

Dont get me wrong, its nice to have the spare Pixels to get a Crop with enough Pixels to print big. But thinking a 50 or even 75 Crop out of a 28mm Lens looks the same as the real Deal is nothing but fooling yourself

[jaapv]

 That is not how crop works in these conditions.. An image cropped from 28 to 50 mm looks nothing like a 28 mm shot of the same subject. If you use the Q as a 50 mm camera you will crop, but you will also change your position to the one you would use when having a 50 mm lens mounted. That means that you alter both perspective and DOF to "50 mm". (albeit 50 mm on a smaller image format)

[sfphoto]

1 hour ago, BenSh said:

But thinking a 50 or even 75 Crop out of a 28mm Lens looks the same as the real Deal is nothing but fooling yourself

No. This has been discussed here and on the web in length: if you crop the 28mm to a 50mm equivalent you get the same field of view and perspective as an actual 50mm lens. The distance to the subject determines the "look". When you crop, you also step back from the subject to capture the same scenery and this will change your perspective.
The crop factor 50/28 also needs to be multiplied with the aperture, so the f/1.7 becomes a f/3.0 equivalent. Hence, you have the same DOF as a 50mm f/3.0.

[BenSh]

vor 46 Minuten schrieb sfphoto:

No. This has been discussed here and on the web in length: if you crop the 28mm to a 50mm equivalent you get the same field of view and perspective as an actual 50mm lens. The distance to the subject determines the "look". When you crop, you also step back from the subject to capture the same scenery and this will change your perspective.
The crop factor 50/28 also needs to be multiplied with the aperture, so the f/1.7 becomes a f/3.0 equivalent. Hence, you have the same DOF as a 50mm f/3.0.

But you're not getting the same Compression etc. Sure you can get the same field of view. But 50mm f3.0 isnt nowhere near close to 50 f1.4 etc.

You can turn it however you want , 28mm 1.7 will never look like a 50mm 1.4, period.

 

I know what you were saying and i agree on what you wrote. Dont get me wrong.

Edited April 27, 2020 by BenSh

[T25UFO]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

3 hours ago, sfphoto said:

No. This has been discussed here and on the web in length: if you crop the 28mm to a 50mm equivalent you get the same field of view and perspective as an actual 50mm lens. The distance to the subject determines the "look". When you crop, you also step back from the subject to capture the same scenery and this will change your perspective.
The crop factor 50/28 also needs to be multiplied with the aperture, so the f/1.7 becomes a f/3.0 equivalent. Hence, you have the same DOF as a 50mm f/3.0.

A question for @sfphoto: if you crop to 50mm on the Q2 and expose at, say, f5.6, will this look the same as a normal 50mm lens set to f5.6?

[sfphoto]

3 hours ago, T25UFO said:

A question for @sfphoto: if you crop to 50mm on the Q2 and expose at, say, f5.6, will this look the same as a normal 50mm lens set to f5.6?

The look of the image will be the same (perspective, size of objects, 'compression'). Resolution, noise etc. will depend on the characteristics of the lens and the chip and will be different.

A good example is a moon rise behind a tree. You can imagine what such an image looks like with a 600mm. You get this 'compression' effect where the moon looks as big as the tree. In fact, this is just a matter of your distance from the tree. You can take a 28mm lens and crop to the tree and the moon and you will get the exact same 'compression'. Of course, the resolution will be terrible but this is not the point here. Once you move closer to the tree (lets say to fill the full chip like you did with the 600mm) the tree gets bigger and bigger but the moon stays the same size.

Same effect going from a 50mm lens to a 28mm lens when taking a portrait: In order to get the full face on the chip you move closer to the face and the nose gets really big. If you step back to where you were with the 50mm lens and crop, you will get a nice portrait without the 'big nose effect' of the wide angle. Of course, this only works within limits, but the Q2 lens and chip are good enough for this in the 28-35mm or even in the 28-50mm range. But of course, if you want the shallow DOF of a 50mm/1.4, you need a dedicated lens...

[Guest]

7 hours ago, T25UFO said:

 

A question for @sfphoto: if you crop to 50mm on the Q2 and expose at, say, f5.6, will this look the same as a normal 50mm lens set to f5.6?

You should set aperture at approx f/3.1 on Q2 and crop to 50mm to get the same look as 50mm lens set to f/5.6.

[nicci78]

Q2 full frame equivalent depth of field : 
 

28mm : crop factor 1.00x = f/1.7
35mm : crop factor 1.25x = f/2.1
50mm : crop factor 1.79x = f/3.0
75mm : crop factor 2.69x = f/4.6
 

As you see 35mm crop result into very competent 35mm equivalent lens. Just slightly smaller than full frame. But bigger than APS-C. Still bigger than APS-H 1.33x sensor of M8. 

Fun fact, 35mm crop is equivalent to 35mm f/2.0 of Sony RX1 & vapourware Zeiss ZX1. 
 

So, no need for real 35mm Q2.
Where else can you get real Summilux 28 + Summicron 35 + Elmarit 50 + Elmar 75 prime lenses in one package.  
 

Do you still need slow and huge f/2.8 or f/4.0 zooms ?
Of course f/3.5-5.6 trans standard zooms are now obsolete with high MP count sensors and high quality wide angle prime lens. 
 

 

[cirke]

well ...  at the end do you think a Q50 possible in a not so far future  ?