Jump to content

Leica Q 2?


kelseyh

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Could also be an addiction. A very expensive and superficial one at that.

And it's odd that he really doesn't seem to have an interest in photography or taking photos. I think he just likes gadgets and gets a buzz from researching and acquiring. It's as though he wants to be prepared for some fantasy moment that might occur when he's got his camera in his hand.

Pete

Link to post
Share on other sites

The part that seems to have escaped you, and that you might have realized had you read the forum a little more carefully before posting, is that many Q owners like the camera precisely because it doesn't have all the tech that companies like Sony throw at their cameras. It's a simple camera, albeit maddeningly quirky, that can take astonishingly gorgeous photos. Frankly, I'm not sure I'd look twice at a Q that was more like a Sony; that would be a misstep on Leica's part in my opinion. I'd much rather have stellar manual focusing, as the Q does, than eye tracking. And if you poll the users here, it seems almost no one wants video at all, much less 4K. Not how we roll.

 

As it stands, the Q has a narrow market, but for the people who love it, it is the best camera in the world. I think I can speak for other users when I say we see the Q as a creative tool, not a spec sheet or a status symbol. I urge you to use your Q a little more before your next post and try to be a little more thoughtful and respectful when posting. This is one of the best, most polite forums I've ever experienced. You can find a lot of help here, but bulls in a china shop aren't well tolerated.

 

Ultimately, the Q may not be your cup of tea, in which case you can drink gallons and gallons of the stuff Sony serves. Because that is what Sony does, throw tons of tech at their products, it seems like every 6 months. Eighteen months from now, Sony will have the A7RIVa and Leica will still have the Q and the Q will probably be backordered and we'll all still be waiting on a firmware upgrade. Welcome to Leica World.

 

 

I spent the past week and a half shooting the RX1R II and Q (rented) side by side in Turks and Caicos.  They're both great cameras, albeit very different.  

 

Low Light Performance with the RX1R II

low light, lower ISO shooting at higher shutter speeds - ability to pull up content from very low light is beyond impressive. 

low light, higher ISO shooting at higher shutter speeds - low noise impressive to 6400-12800 ISO

low light, lower ISO shooting at slower shutter speeds - high potential for camera shake in images

low light colors OOC - seem to lean towards the warmer side, skin tones have a more red/orange cast

 

Low Light Performance with the Q

low light, lower ISO shooting at higher shutter speeds - less potential to pull content from shadows than RX1R II

low light, higher ISO shooting at higher shutter speeds - noise starts to become more apparent around 3200 ISO

low light, lower ISO shooting at slower shutter speeds - no worries at all.  With OIS on, handheld to 1/8 sec looks great.

low light colors OOC - seem to be neutral, skin tones extremely accurate

 

Daylight performance:

RX1RII - Max shutter speed of 1/2000 at f/2 pretty much requires ND filter to avoid overexposure in bright light, colors doesn't appear to have as much contrast as the Q.

Q - Incredibly high shutter speeds makes shooting in bright daylight a non-issue for great images OOC.  Colors are true to life, vibrant, and have a good deal of contrast. 

 

Manual Focus:

RX1R II - laggy focus by wire system.  Non linear performance of focus ring.

Q - Seems like a 1:1 relationship with focus ring

 

Camera Control:

Q more direct via control wheels, RX1R II requires more setup in menus

 

Focal Length

28 vs 35.  Take your pic.  Q can be cropped to 35, RX1R II can never be a 28

 

Autofocus:

RX1R II - really shines in continuous mode, especially in low light.  Continuous focusing drains the battery quicker - and battery life isn't the Sony's strong point.  Eye AF - nice feature, but in low light even Eye AF sometimes misses focus when square is clearly locked onto a subject's eye.  Could have been the sample I was using, though.

Q - AF is faster with single focus.  Touch focus is a nice feature to have.  I felt more comfortable using the flexible pot on the Q than the Sony.

 

Image quality:

RX1R II - when in focus it is stunning.  Super sharp images and 42 MP lets you crop to your heart's content.  Lots of Dynamic Range to work with.  Shadows and highlights have a tremendous amount of information that can be manipulated in LR.

Q - Seems to get more in focus images.  Images still sharp and ability to crop is still respectable if not printing very large.  

 

Handling:

Q is a much easier, more intuitive camera to handle.

 

Verditct:

This was a tough one for me.  I really like to shoot in low light and the f/1.7 would seem to be a better choice than the f/2 of the Sony, but the DR and low noise of the Sony sensor makes up for this and surpasses the Q.  Initially I thought the 28 was too wide, but then I started to really like the ability to get more information in composing my images, telling more of a story.  For landscape the 28 was fantastic.  Colors and contrast from the Q just felt right OOC.  

 

Food photography - again, I initially liked the Sony, but found that with the macro mode on the Q I could get great shots as well.  Low light again favored the Sony a bit, but no complaints with the Q

 

Lens/sensor relationship.  Both cameras have lens/sensors pairings that work very well.  Kind of a toss up here.

 

So each had its strong and weak points, and it was very easy for me to rationalize keeping the Sony due to the detail and malleability of the files.  In the end, it came down to something very simple.  I randomized the images and then my wife and I chose the ones that most appealed to us visually.  More often than not we chose the images from the Q.  I guess that's the most important thing - how it looks to your eye.  I'm an audiophile.  I know that solid state is more accurate, has better bass, runs more efficiently and has better resolution. I'll take a 15W SET tube system over solid state every time.  It's how I like to listen.  If you don't like the images from the Q, don't buy it.  It's really that simple.  If you're waiting for a new version to come out, that's fine.  If it has a sensor that's higher MP, lower noise with higher dynamic range and it still possesses the image qualities that make the Q special, there's no faulting that and I'm sure many people would love to own it.

 

I'm buying the Q and complementing it with the M10 and APO 50mm.  That should be the perfect travel and walk around pair.  

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites

I greatly prefer my new Q over the RX1R II which I returned. It was too tiny, too front heavy and awkward and I prefer 28mm with the ability to set it to 35mm. I like the Q very much and think it offers everything a person needs and does a outstanding job. 

 

I would like personally more MP so the 35mm and occasioinal 50mm setting would have more pop and when they do update it I am sure whatever sensor technology i.e. low light, high ISO, DR will come with it and that is not a bad thing. Maybe not needed but none the less we will have an even more capable Q at that time.

 

If you are going to have video which I hardly ever use it might as well be 4k whether you shoot video or not.

 

The Leica Q will not be tainted in any unfavorable manner if and when Lecia updates the camera. It will not take anything away from the Q users or Leica way of doing things either. It is kind of like having a battery that lasts twice as long. You may not need it or want it but it does not hurt anything and there will be times or users that will benefit from it.

 

I do not think we or at least cannot see how we could disagree with this?

 

Please do not judge me by my first post I did not even have the Q yet and like so many written words people have a tendancy to read too much into them. I am not running the Q down by any means I love the camera and I have since clarified many things I am on your side guys. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

The only images that you should judge a camera by are the ones you take yourself. Don't buy any camera (or any thing) just because someone else says you "ought" to have it. And don't go just be specs - they really tell very little of the story. You are the only person who can decide if it's right for you.

 

I do like my Q, but I don't find it perfect (nothing is). I wish that it was weatherproof. I wish that it had a fixed exposure compensation dial so I can see straight away what it's set to. And I wish that it didn't tend to banding in low light at relatively low ISO levels. I even actually wish it had an onboard flash (like the Fuji X100, as the leaf shutter in both cameras makes it really useful as a fill).

 

But the handling is what (for me) makes it so much better than the Sony. Being able to flip into manual focus so easily makes a huge difference to me, and the EVF is lovely to use as well. For real-world picture taking, that makes it worth it for me. YMMV.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The only images that you should judge a camera by are the ones you take yourself. Don't buy any camera (or any thing) just because someone else says you "ought" to have it. And don't go just be specs - they really tell very little of the story. You are the only person who can decide if it's right for you.

 

I do like my Q, but I don't find it perfect (nothing is). I wish that it was weatherproof. I wish that it had a fixed exposure compensation dial so I can see straight away what it's set to. And I wish that it didn't tend to banding in low light at relatively low ISO levels. I even actually wish it had an onboard flash (like the Fuji X100, as the leaf shutter in both cameras makes it really useful as a fill).

 

But the handling is what (for me) makes it so much better than the Sony. Being able to flip into manual focus so easily makes a huge difference to me, and the EVF is lovely to use as well. For real-world picture taking, that makes it worth it for me. YMMV.

+1. Agree with all you said. I’d add that having macro immediately available is also a plus. I expect a new Q within a couple years to include the rear button configuration of the M-10 and the CL.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

No problem at all. Operation and concept of a Leica camera is the opposite of a Sony camera. If you feel better with a Sony, then take the Sony. If you feel better to take a camera because other people ("Pros") believe a Leica is the wrong camera for you, then take one of the solutions that fit for you from the mainstream market.

A camera is a tool and everyone should use the right tool for his job or hobby.

Although I'm a Leica fanboy I use one of the latest Fujifilm cameras as a supplement to my Leica Q for portraits and other photography genres. That's no problem for me, it is the right tool, although it's not from Leica.

The decision for a camera manufacturer isn't a religion und "the best camera" doesn't exist. They are all different, for different perceptions, different experiences and different ideas.

The world is multicolored and the products of the different camera manufacturers are also multicolored. Just choose the right tool for you and be happy.

But: Some people are always looking for a better solution and some never find a suitable solution. And the next technical temptation is waiting at the next corner, but the photos do not get better although the manufacturers always promise that. Without this promise, the knowledge would have to mature that only the person behind the camera is responsible for taking good pictures. ;) Always.

In the hope you will be happy with Sony,

cheers,

Jens

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

All cameras are tools but some are "instruments".  

Which is which depends upon the hands holding it, the eye composing it, and the brain determining technique for each individual image.

My Canon DSLRs, with fantastic "L" lenses, is mostly a tool -- which becomes an instrument in some situations.

My Q starts as an instrument but can be used very effectively as a tool when put into automatic everything.

YMMV

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I truly feel blessed to have discovered Leica cameras. I’m a recent convert, but also still value my Canon DSLR and the myriad of lenses I own for different assignments. I’m a pro photographer and my Canon gear are tools to do a job. Albeit one I love. My Leica Q is an extension of my eye and vision I have for an image. It’s a joy to use every time I pick it up similar to my Porsche every time I drive it. I now use the Q right alongside the Canon. They complement each other although I prefer to pick up the Q.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been reading this thread with interest and the argument has merit which ever perspective you espouse. People argued long and hard about graphic equalizers vs. tube/valve amps with no tone controls. People argue about a 6-string acoustic Martin vs. a Fender Telecaster with a bank of pedals. Both work and accomplish what their users want. But we want different things and all it takes is a little recognition of this: respect our differences and embrace our shared beliefs.

 

Personally I prefer the simplicity of a camera like a Leica, with the minimum of adjustments and controls, a single lens that can be focused manually, and an uncluttered viewfinder. The alternative is not for me, but if it floats your boat, so be it, and enjoy it.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had many different digital cameras, Canon, Nikon, Fujifim, Sony.

All I can say about it is simple: before I was a computer geek spending my time dealing with menus and options.

Now I feel like a photographer.

Edited by jaapv
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, let me put it this way.

 

When you (general you, not any particular person) attack someone else's choice of camera then you are attacking that person (this goes all ways). You really can't be surprised if they respond negatively. However, to me, a particularly "loud" or vicious response indicates that the responder is not very confident in their choice, so they need to try to convince themselves, as well as others, that they have made a correct one. In other words, a vicious response tends to indicate insecurity (again, this applies to ALL sides).

 

I have no dog in this fight other than I tried a Sony RX1RM2 and am now trying both the Q and a CL. The Sony had STUNNING image quality, every time I opened a RAW file in C1 my jaw dropped (OK, maybe hyperbole). If the first thing I did was zoom in to 100% (or more) I was floored. However, when I was about to commit to the Sony I asked myself if that was the camera I wanted to "go to war" with (I have Olympus for action but this was going to be a general purpose "street" camera). I "pictured" (ha ha) myself carrying and using the Sony and I just wasn't enthused, didn't view myself as a photographer. Again, shallow, but we all have our own reality. Anyway, I returned the Sony and decided to try the Leicas. I had used a Leicaflex SL back in the 60s, taking B&W photos I developed myself, many of ice hockey games with an old Vivitar 400mm lens.

 

I love the UI on both, although I much prefer the CL to the Q, they work differently; e.g. the Fn button. I WANT to use both because I see myself using it and think (again, my reality) of myself as a photographer, trying to get the right composition. I'm not sure how the images, technically, will stack up (although I KNOW they won't be of the quality of the Sony) but, to me, there are two types of photography: Macro and micro. If you take micro photography then the first thing you do when you edit a RAW is to zoom in and examine the "quality" of the image; e.g. focus, grain, banding. If you take macro photography then the first thing you do when you open a RAW is to look at the overall composition, the subject, lighting, mood and, to some extent, color. One isn't better than the other, everyone enjoys different things, but I'm trying to go from micro to macro photography. I'm hoping that the ease of use of the Leicas (basically, I could operate both out-of-the-box, loved the feel) will encourage me to take that step, admittedly, a lateral one. As long as the IQ is reasonable for the type of photography I want to do it will be fine; I mean, if you take a marvelous (environmental) portrait or other great street scene then how much does it matter if you zoom in and there's a bit of grain, or slight banding, or the photo is just a "bit" OOF? Again, macro photography means you don't care. OTOH, if I find I prefer the micro version then I made a mistake returning the Sony.

 

If you are confident in your choice you don't need to get upset and argue. You know you made the right choice, for you.

Edited by nlk10010
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Love my Q, but confess I don’t use it as much as my other cameras....monochrome, T, X1d. But when I pick it up and start using it, is a joy. Think for me the 28mm is where I hesitate. Am hoping the q2 is 35 or 40mm. I probably won’t upgrade if still 28mm in next version. Unless they come out with a monochrome Q which would be terrific!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoy my Q as much as anybody and I really don't care for another Q as I am quite satisfied with what I have.  I took the Q on a recent European trip, exclusively, and had a great photo experience (1,100 shots). In the meantime, I do not really need another Q, as I already have it.  How so? I still have my Lumix GX1 with an assortment of primes, including the Leica 25MM 1.4.  So there you go, a perfect second camera for most, especially if you take the newer GX8 and combine it with some of the newer M4/3 Leica glass.  I can tell for a fact that there is a very similar set of DNA with the GX1 and the Leica Q with respect to the in body electronics and I would assume that the GX8 follows suit.  When I first turned on the Q, it was like, wow, this is the very similar, if not the same, as the GX1.  As I said, I have a set of primes for the GX1, and because I will be on a river cruise this year, might consider taking the GX1 and a 45mm (equal to 90mm FF) with me just to add a little reach to some of the castles that will be available on the banks as we pass by. I saw another post on this forum that gave me the idea. Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To get back to the original theme of the thread, a Q2 to be released? In the course of his review of the CL Oz Yilmaz suddenly says "in 2018 when the new Q arrives ……. yes you heard it here first" or words to that effect. But if his research [sic] is as worthy as his reviews then we are no further forward.

Link to post
Share on other sites

After removing a number of abusive and trolling posts and fighting and follow-up posts -which inevitably messed up the thread somewhat-, may I remind members that on this forum we do not abuse fellow members, nor do we attack other members for enjoying their gear and profession/hobby. This includes  a ban on Leica-bashing.

The forum is open to criticism of Leica and lively discussions but that is not a license to descend into trolling, bashing and being rude.

  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for intervening Jaap - I had given up reading the thread due to the factors you mention and only decided to look again now when I saw your name as the latest poster!

 

As to Q2 - I have had my Q for nearly two years and feel that I am still a long way from utilising/benefiting from its capabilities, so see no need (personally) to make any change.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Add a button (better yet, an actual switch) to toggle EVF & LCD mode and I'm all good for now...

 

Still, since Panasonic had made the new generation of DFD autofocus, EVF and OIS available with the GH5 & G9, we could certainly expect them to show up on the next Q.

 

With the M10 sensor (less banding) it'll be golden.

Edited by Licheus
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...