As a x100f owner, should I get the Q?

[mr_aznar]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

So what about the jpegs.. I often use jpegs on the social media.. I don't shoot raw. Are the jpegs on Q as good as the x100f's ?

i find Q jpegs are great but the dynamic range isn't its strongest suit, particularly in the shadows. Though, I feel it still better than x100f's jpeg in my opinion.

[Anika]

But you; being the users of the Q, I wanted to hear from you why should I buy the Q or why shouldn't.. 

 

 

The Q gives you all you have with your Fuji by 35mm but giving you some extra view around in viewfinder. More of that, the Q gives you the possibility to change the crop moving it up and down or more left or right  to improve your picture - you still have pixels around. You don't have to use 28mm, just use 35mm with the rangefinder feeling :-)

Edited September 24, 2017 by Anika

[Advertisement]

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

[Bolts]

I had a X100T - great camera.  But not even close to the Q in IQ and many others areas including AF.   You need to accommodate the 28mm view, sure, but I think it is versatile.

 

This reviewer loves it too:

 

[AndreasB]

So what about the jpegs.. I often use jpegs on the social media.. I don't shoot raw. Are the jpegs on Q as good as the x100f's ?

The jpeg-quality was the reason for me to sell the Q after 3months as I don't like RAW processing. They were so different to the jpegs of my X2 and X113 that I couldn' t mix them.

For me the Q jpegs look "fat" and dark, difficult to describe.

If you are jpeg based photographer I would recommend a comparison with different light conditions. I didn't like the photos especially at bright sunlight. I was not able to change the output with the camera adjustments.

 

But

 

The rest of the camera is a dream!

 

My dream for the next weeks is an APSC-Q with the jpeg output of a X1!

[theQ]

x100f is just fine, no need to update...

go for a trip to some crazy place for that kind of money...

 

 

[CosmoM3]

I recently switched over from the X100F to the Q.

 

To be honest, the Olympus PEN-F is a much better camera (in my opinion) paired with something like the PanaLeica 15mm f/1.7 than the X100F with the 23 f/2. The X100F just did nothing for me.

[Kupepe]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

No offense but neither the Q nor the F will make your photographs any special.

 

Photography is hard. Finding your personal view and make your shooting style unique is a struggle with yourself and has nothing to do with the camera.

Cameras are toys and just that. Choose your toy based on your wallet but that won't help you with your photography. 

Street photography is a nice genre and you can do amazing things with it. But if you check major publishing houses new printed  books are moving away from street photography. Find your style, work on a project that intrigues the eye ...with whatever camera you want. 

Be patient

 

 

[PhotoCruiser]

If you are willing to fork out 4300€ i would fork out 5000€ and got the better Q2.
The Q/Q2 is certainly the best camera of it's class, but you need to have a photographer's eye to unleash the power of it.
Considering the more than excellent 28mm lens the Q/Q2 has and the price for only the lens, the Q is a very good - but expensive - deal.
Chris

 

 

 

[marchyman]

1 hour ago, Kupepe said:

... but that won't help you with your photography. 

I have a very slight disagreement with that statement.  The ergonomics of the camera may be important.  If the camera doesn't "fit" the photographer may be thinking more about the annoyances of the camera than the image s/he is trying to capture. That can have negative consequences.  Of course proper ergonomics is a matter of opinion.

[PhotoCruiser]

vor 12 Minuten schrieb marchyman:

I have a very slight disagreement with that statement.  The ergonomics of the camera may be important.  If the camera doesn't "fit" the photographer may be thinking more about the annoyances of the camera than the image s/he is trying to capture. That can have negative consequences.  Of course proper ergonomics is a matter of opinion.

This is true,
having a camera i hate or i find "boring"will certainly not produce good photos,
while if i have a camera i love usually people tend to photograph more and study to produce better photos.
Ergonomy of a camera is a very subjective argument and i find that ergonomics are not particulary good on leica cameras.
But i rather have a camera who i love and she pushes me to take more and better photos than one who fit my hand like a glove but i don't like the photos coming out.

However, the "fit like a glove ergonomics" are considerable better using the hand grip and thumb rest together,.

But that's me...

Chris

 

[Herr Barnack]

Quote

...some say x100f and the Q are almost the same cameras... But you; being the users of the Q, I wanted to hear from you why should I buy the Q or why shouldn't...

I have an X100F and an M-P 240.  Both have sat idle since my Q2 arrived.

The X100F is a good camera - there's no way around that.  But:  To say that the X100F and the Q (or Q2) are "almost the same cameras" could not be more untrue.  That is on equal footing with saying that a Honda Accord and a Mercedes S450 are "almost the same cars."

The Q is an excellent camera.  The Q2 is in another class altogether compared to the Q.  Compared to the X100F, the Q2 is light years better.

If you get the Q, you won't be disappointed.  But if you can, spend the extra money and get the Q2.  The improvements over the Q are game changers: 

 

 

Edited January 12, 2020 by Herr Barnack

[Leica Guy]

13 hours ago, Herr Barnack said:

I have an X100F and an M-P 240.  Both have sat idle since my Q2 arrived.

The X100F is a good camera - there's no way around that.  But:  To say that the X100F and the Q (or Q2) are "almost the same cameras" could not be more untrue.  That is on equal footing with saying that a Honda Accord and a Mercedes S450 are "almost the same cars."

The Q is an excellent camera.  The Q2 is in another class altogether compared to the Q.  Compared to the X100F, the Q2 is light years better.

If you get the Q, you won't be disappointed.  But if you can, spend the extra money and get the Q2.  The improvements over the Q are game changers: 

 

 

+1. I owned three of the Fuji X100 series cameras and I enjoyed using them and the images. However, once I was introduced to the Q, I sold the last one, X100T and never looked back. The image quality and ergonomics of the Q are superior. I do miss the Electronic / Optical viewfinder on the X100. It is magical. The Q2 has the Q DNA, but is improved in every respect. Sensor resolution, EVF, weather resistance, battery. 

[brunner]

Last summer I sold my x100f and my xt2 and bought a QP. Handling, picture quality and fun improved since than. The x100f is a fine camera, but I like the handling and the results of the QP more.  

[Herr Barnack]

I think I am going to keep my X100F as a backup to my Q2 and M-P 240.  It's good to have a backup when traveling.

[M11 for me]

Am 19.9.2017 um 22:13 schrieb double_0_se7en:

So what about the jpegs.. I often use jpegs on the social media.. I don't shoot raw. Are the jpegs on Q as good as the x100f's ?

Really? Then I presume that you do not need a Q but rather the X100F or the coming X100V (February 2020). 

[M11 for me]

Am 25.10.2017 um 14:00 schrieb CosmoM3:

I recently switched over from the X100F to the Q.

 

To be honest, the Olympus PEN-F is a much better camera (in my opinion) paired with something like the PanaLeica 15mm f/1.7 than the X100F with the 23 f/2. The X100F just did nothing for me.

I do not fully understand: What do you consider better? The Pen-F better that X100F or Q better than what?   

I just attended the Photo Switzerland in Zurich where a friend of mine was accepted as exhibitor. And what did he use as camera for the pictures exposed (Prints larger than 100cm long side)? Yes, the X100F (besides Fuji he is a Leica M photographer). I am not really able to follow this discussion. Most time I can not see the difference between these cameras. Its a bit in the head of the viewer. And the rest you can fix in Lightroom. You should never enter in such comparison discussions. I believe that Fuji or Panasonic have no chance agains the 3 dimensional expression of Leica lenses. I think its much cheaper to book a course for Lightroom image processing. Mainly of creating 3D impressions in lightroom 🤐

 

Edited January 12, 2020 by M10 for me

[Ko.Fe.]

On 10/25/2017 at 8:00 AM, CosmoM3 said:

I recently switched over from the X100F to the Q.

 

To be honest, the Olympus PEN-F is a much better camera (in my opinion) paired with something like the PanaLeica 15mm f/1.7 than the X100F with the 23 f/2. The X100F just did nothing for me.

Found this while doing my search about Q, Fuji and Oly.

Pen F has worse iq on high iso, x100f is not impressive either. Q is better. According to dpr’s studio test.

From real user perspective, will Pen F do any good at iso 12800 in street photography?

[bags27]

I have the original x100 which I haven't used in maybe 3 years. But I believe they are good candidates for IR conversion. They'd be a lot of fun that way, and their resale value isn't high anyway (my original isn't worth the postage).

[bags27]

On 1/12/2020 at 2:15 PM, M10 for me said:

I do not fully understand: What do you consider better? The Pen-F better that X100F or Q better than what?   

I just attended the Photo Switzerland in Zurich where a friend of mine was accepted as exhibitor. And what did he use as camera for the pictures exposed (Prints larger than 100cm long side)? Yes, the X100F (besides Fuji he is a Leica M photographer). I am not really able to follow this discussion. Most time I can not see the difference between these cameras. Its a bit in the head of the viewer. And the rest you can fix in Lightroom. You should never enter in such comparison discussions. I believe that Fuji or Panasonic have no chance agains the 3 dimensional expression of Leica lenses. I think its much cheaper to book a course for Lightroom image processing. Mainly of creating 3D impressions in lightroom 🤐

 

Of course, if it's "just" image quality, >99% of the world can't tell the difference between a photo taken with an M10M with the 50mm f/2 APO and one taken with an iphone 11. On a good day, I can. On a good day....😀

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[Ko.Fe.]

On 1/12/2020 at 2:15 PM, M10 for me said:

I do not fully understand: What do you consider better? The Pen-F better that X100F or Q better than what?   

I just attended the Photo Switzerland in Zurich where a friend of mine was accepted as exhibitor. And what did he use as camera for the pictures exposed (Prints larger than 100cm long side)? Yes, the X100F (besides Fuji he is a Leica M photographer). I am not really able to follow this discussion. Most time I can not see the difference between these cameras. Its a bit in the head of the viewer. And the rest you can fix in Lightroom. You should never enter in such comparison discussions. I believe that Fuji or Panasonic have no chance agains the 3 dimensional expression of Leica lenses. I think its much cheaper to book a course for Lightroom image processing. Mainly of creating 3D impressions in lightroom 🤐

 

For each his own. You are after some 3 dimensions of two dimensional media, it seems.  I have seen it, from Cosina made lens with Zeiss badge on it in EF mount on Canon DSLR. 3 dimensional expression, not Leica lens. No LR, just light and correct exposure. You can't fake it in LR.