Any Regrets with Your Leica Q?

[lencap]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Greetings -

 

This may be a strange comment to make given the title of my post, but I just bought a mint condition Titanium Q from a well known Leica dealer and should have delivery early next week.  I've been looking at this camera for quite some time, and decided to make the purchase despite the cost (which has been my primary objection).  I've read lots of reviews with generally favorable opinions, but some less so.  I'm not interested in DXO ratings or other highly technical comparisons. 

I've owned Leica M7, M9, and M-A cameras.  I generally love the "feel" of these cameras, but find my eyesight less precise than in my youth (I'm a "senior citizen" - aka Geezer), and wear progressive lens eyeglasses out of necessity (lots of astigmatism and other issues).  The shifting focus of progressive lenses makes it hard to keep sharp focus with the manual Lecia M cameras, and that's my primary reason for the Q, along with the FF sensor & single fixed lens.  (I don't mind 28mm FL, and even if I crop I rarely print larger than 11x14).  For all of these reasons I expect the Q to do all I want it to do, while providing me the "Leica look" that I prefer.

 

The question I started with - regrets - has more to do with things that don't quite work as well as expected, causing you to miss a shot, or to have excessive post processing challenges.  I'm not very skillful on PhotoShop, but I'm more than willing to learn, and have also explored specialized training.

 

I intend to keep this camera forever - I'm not looking for regrets with the intent of finding problems, but rather with the intent of identifying areas that I can be improved by better technique, training, or other solutions. 

I intend to use the Q for just about everything, and will keep my Nikon D5500 (an inexpensive, but surprisingly capable camera) in reserve for times when long lenses are needed.

 

Thanks in advance for your comments - the members of this forum are the reason I started with Leica over a decade ago.  It was your encouragement, thoughtful posts, and exceptional knowledge and friendliness that made it as easy choice for me.  Thanks for that help as well.

[falcon468]

Ok, thanks.  I have the Nikon D7000, and a full suite of lenses that it can use.  I also bought into the Lumix M4/3 with the GX1 and several prime lenses, including the Pana/Leica 25MM 1.4. I bought the Q in late March and recently took it on a European vacation, taking almost 1,400 shots.  One camera is all I took. No regrets at all, it is perfect for the style of shot that I take, travel photos, cityscape and landscape. I use my other stuff as well, but the Q is the dominant factor.  Use it and enjoy it, you will be richly rewarded.

[Advertisement]

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

[SonomaBear]

You and me... 72 year old eyes with far too many years experience!

28mm is a great perspective t be mastered. The Summcron 28/1.7 May be the finest general lens ever!

The Q s my primary camera, always with me, Canon DSLR and L glass in the bag...

Seriously, I often use the 35 or 50 simulation just for composition. I only shoot RAW.

Imported into Lightroom Classic on Mac, or LR CC on laptops, iPads, even phone, I can make adjustments to RAWs that are needed.

Even the 50mm crops print to 13”/19” paper nicely.

[Leica Guy]

I have owned the Q for two years and have I’d guess near 20,000 photos taken with it. No regrets at all, but nothing’s perfect. I’m in your age bracket, retired. Plenty of professional Canon lenses and have owned numerous DSLR’s. Still have a 5D Mk III for serious wildlife and super wide angle cathedral shots. My travel camera is definitively the Q. I love it.

 

Things to watch out for that I’ve struggled with is focus mode. In the past I always used a single point focus. I’m finding with the Q I personally get a higher percentage sharp shots using the multi-Point mode. It just works and is very fast. I occasionally use my SF-40 flash. It works, but is a bit quirky in my hands. I’ve had the most success using it as a bounce flash both in manual mode and in TTL mode. Controlling the power or compensation using the dial on the flash. I don’t use OIS very much. I just haven’t seen the need. I have not used the lens cap in two years. I do use a UV filter, B&W, in front of the lens. The hood protects the front lens element perfectly. I’ve just never seen the need for the cap and it looks like far more trouble than it’s worth. I only carry a 6-stop ND filter for long exposures of flowing water and a Circular polarizer. That’s all. I do keep an 70mm Arca Swiss base handy to attach to the base so I can use my Gitzo Traveler Tripod which I almost always have with me. I use a Lowepro Adventure SH 120 II case. It works well. Slightly oversize for the camera so very easy in and out. It’s not nearly as nice or fancy as many cases you’ll read about on here, but it works well and is both rugged and reasonably inconspicuous. Last, I stuff a shower cap from a hotel in the bottom of the case, so I can grab it if it starts to rain. Easy peasy. Cheap.

 

I would also add that macro mode with manual focusing is a joy to use and always have with you.

 

I am a big user of Adobe LR and Photoshop. Highly recommend both. Definitely a learning curve. Far more with PS. Worth the investment IMHO. There are other good post processing programs. I’m not very educated about them.

 

Get out and take photos. The Q is amazing for rendering really nice, high IQ shots with the Leica colors and bokeh. Good luck.

Edited November 25, 2017 by Infiniumguy

[HighlandK]

There is little to add to the above and nothing to disagree with. I, too, fall into the age/eyesight categories referred to. Auto focus was my saviour with my Nikons and one reason I never ventured into the M world. Having said that I have found focus peaking in manual focus a revelation. In terms of focus mode I have always been in the focus and recompose school and so I still tend to use a centre point focus. Yes the odd miss but no more than one might expect. Using f/1.7 and the DoF generated by it and FF can be creative fun. As to post processing I use Lightroom Classic and shoot in RAW. I set up a preset and only minimal changes are needed - mainly lifting shadows. Initially I found I had to ease back on the amount of sharpening I used with Nikon RAWs as the resolution of the Q lens/sensor is stunning. LR has an initial learning curve which I found a challenge but once I had got my head around how it handles the import and export of images I have come to love its ease of use.

 

Absolutely no regrets. Kids well established and so no guilt at spending their inheritance!

[Stealth3kpl]

I wasn't interested in digital photography. I felt compelled to buy an M-P240 which sat on a shelf virtually unused for 9 months or so. Then a long trip came up where it was going to be inconvenient to carry a month's worth of film so I decided to try the M-P. I hate changing lenses so bought a Q last minute to run along side a 50 Summicron on the M-P. The Q is phenomenal. I can't fault anything. The images are of good contrast and sharp at f1.7. The autofocus is lightening fast. The post processing in Lightroom effortless - and I dislike post processing. You've made a good choice. I hope they will bring out a 50Lux version of the Q.

Pete

[beez]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

None. This camera is a working part of my professional kit. I've been a professional photojournalist since 1974 at the age of 23, so now I also wear progressives. I've always shot with Leicas for medium wide angle lenses (21/24/28/35mm) and Nikons for ultra wide (14/18mm) and telephotos (85/80-200/180/300/400/600mm). The camera(s) around my neck - as opposed to shoulders - is the workhorse and usually has a 28mm on it - that's what I consider as my "normal" lens. Over the years the workhorse has been M4s, M8s (21mm as a 28mm equiv), an M9, and now the Q. Have had the Q since Nov. 2015, and it has handled everything thrown it it with aplomb, many times in extremely demanding situations. I've used it just like I have my supposedly more rugged Ms, and it has never skipped a beat. In 2015 through 2016, I was on the presidential campaign trail and being able to have the Q and it's fast response was perfect. I only shoot DNGs, and what I get out of the camera is better, imho, than the RAW files from my digital Nikons (D750s, D500, D810s) in color rendition and sharpness. The Q's files are easy to color correct when necessary - I use Photoshop and ACR. The 28/1.7 on the Q is every bit a Leica Summilux, I have several others for my Ms, so I know. The macro mode is also a fun and useful addition. You've made a good choice... have fun.

Edited November 26, 2017 by beez

[lencap]

Thanks to all for the replies - much appreciated.

 

I just got confirmation that my Q will arrive on Monday!  I'm very excited, and your posts have removed any chance of "buyer's regret".  I've been on the long road of buying/trying/being disappointed/selling and starting over again for many, many years.  I've not found "the one", but I'm pretty confident that the Q will finally be "IT".  I have an iMac 27" retina all warmed up for the files, and it seems from your comments that shooting RAW, likely using Lightroom/Photoshop, is a good way to go.  With all the Black Friday sales I'll likely get the Adobe CC version of both programs, but if you have other suggestions I welcome them.

 

I've shot a fair amount of 28mm FL perspective, but my remaining "concern" is being limited to that focal length.  You've convinced me that my "concern" is overblown.  Thank you for taking the time to help me "over the hump".  The idea of an auto-focus Leica still seems like heresy to me, but given my eyesight the timing of this particular heresy is very welcome. 

As an aside, my brother recently bought a D810 (about a year before the 850 came out), and when I played with his toy, complete with a compliment of lenses, I was really surprised with the bulk/weight and discomfort of that rig.  It did make fine images, but for me I was too far removed from the primary controls to enjoy shooting with it.  I was VERY CLOSE to buying a new Fuji X-PRO2, or perhaps the X100F, but having had the X-E1 when it first came out, I had trouble with adjusting the files due to the non standard X-Trans sensor.  OOC JPEGS were initially very pleasing, but not being able to adjust color/white balance/etc. led me to shoot in RAW.  I didn't like the way the RAW files processed, and lost interest in the camera.  Thanks for saving me from another "adventure".

 

Again, my sincere thanks, and please feel free to post any tip/tricks that will get me started with the Q.

[StilettodudeQ]

Congratulations on soon becoming a Q owner!  I too made the plunge late last summer, and have not regretted my decision for one nanosecond.  I have a Pentax K1, K5IIs, and just about every lens you could want, along with a Type 109.  Pretty lucky guy I'd say.

 

Anyhow, I typically spend the month of September photographing sporting and non-sporting events during our annual community challenge.  I normally rely solely on my Pentaxes, but this year I had my Q along.  Bottom line is that I probably shot ~1/3 of my ~5000 shots with the Q.  The speed, IQ, and low-light abilities were everything I needed to get the best shots.  A perfect complement to my DSLR's, and a constant companion from now on.

 

The downside?  Now I'm thinking M-series, or at least the new CL.  Darn you, Leica!

 

Sandy

 

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 November 26, 2017 by StilettodudeQ

[a911s]

The Q has proven to be the perfect Leica camera for me. The 28mm lens is better then the 28 Summicron on the M9-P I traded in for to get this. It's sharp to the edges, and the color is great. The DNG files can be easily cropped a bit to 32mm or so without any noticeable degradation. It is my go to camera for 28-35mm. 

[robgo2]

I, too, love my Q. It just works. My only complaint is that there can be banding in deep shadows. Mostly, these are only visible at 100%, but not always, and I have had very few photos ruined due to banding. Still, I wish that the sensor had more room on the low end.

[Sulis]

I, too, love my Q. It just works. My only complaint is that there can be banding in deep shadows. Mostly, these are only visible at 100%, but not always, and I have had very few photos ruined due to banding. Still, I wish that the sensor had more room on the low end.

Yes, the banding is much, much more annoying than just additional random noise. And it can be visible at quite low ISO values...

[seratti]

Wow, this is quite a testament to the Q. Thanks for sharing your experience. 

 

None. This camera is a working part of my professional kit. I've been a professional photojournalist since 1974 at the age of 23, so now I also wear progressives. I've always shot with Leicas for medium wide angle lenses (21/24/28/35mm) and Nikons for ultra wide (14/18mm) and telephotos (85/80-200/180/300/400/600mm). The camera(s) around my neck - as opposed to shoulders - is the workhorse and usually has a 28mm on it - that's what I consider as my "normal" lens. Over the years the workhorse has been M4s, M8s (21mm as a 28mm equiv), an M9, and now the Q. Have had the Q since Nov. 2015, and it has handled everything thrown it it with aplomb, many times in extremely demanding situations. I've used it just like I have my supposedly more rugged Ms, and it has never skipped a beat. In 2015 through 2016, I was on the presidential campaign trail and being able to have the Q and it's fast response was perfect. I only shoot DNGs, and what I get out of the camera is better, imho, than the RAW files from my digital Nikons (D750s, D500, D810s) in color rendition and sharpness. The Q's files are easy to color correct when necessary - I use Photoshop and ACR. The 28/1.7 on the Q is every bit a Leica Summilux, I have several others for my Ms, so I know. The macro mode is also a fun and useful addition. You've made a good choice... have fun.

[a911s]

Yes, the banding is much, much more annoying than just additional random noise. And it can be visible at quite low ISO values...

 

The key with digital is to overexpose slightly. You can recapture highlights in a DNG file in Lightroom. Harder to dig into shadows without noise.

[lencap]

My camera arrived today!   Very happy.  Topping up the battery, formatted card.  Trying to actually read the Manual before getting started, but I likely won't succeed.

 

I've owned the M7, M9 and M-A along with various lenses, typically 28/35/50 FL.  My eyesight isn't good enough to even try a 90FL, and I never really put in the time to learn the 75.  With my prior experience the Q should be right in the "comfort zone", but we'll see.

 

Any thoughts on initial camera settings?  I was surprised to see the wide range of adjustments!

 

I'll shoot in DNG format after I'm familiar with the camera, but there might be some benefit of shooting DNG and JPEG until I have more experience. 

 

Thanks again to all for the help.

 

 

PS:  I'm aware of the banding issue, but as has been suggested "exposing to the right" of the histogram may be able to avoid a lot of problems later on.  It's worked for me on my other digital cameras, no reason it won't work on the Q.

[beez]

My camera arrived today!   Very happy.  Topping up the battery, formatted card.  Trying to actually read the Manual before getting started, but I likely won't succeed.

 

I've owned the M7, M9 and M-A along with various lenses, typically 28/35/50 FL.  My eyesight isn't good enough to even try a 90FL, and I never really put in the time to learn the 75.  With my prior experience the Q should be right in the "comfort zone", but we'll see.

 

Any thoughts on initial camera settings?  I was surprised to see the wide range of adjustments!

 

I'll shoot in DNG format after I'm familiar with the camera, but there might be some benefit of shooting DNG and JPEG until I have more experience. 

 

Thanks again to all for the help.

 

 

PS:  I'm aware of the banding issue, but as has been suggested "exposing to the right" of the histogram may be able to avoid a lot of problems later on.  It's worked for me on my other digital cameras, no reason it won't work on the Q.

 

Good luck with your new Q, it will take some time to make the M-to-Q transition, but when complete, I predict you'll like )if not love) this camera. Compared to what your used to, there are more settings, but believe it or not, many on this forum say there's still not enough. Personally, I like the simplicity without five ways to accomplish the same thing, and way too many programmable buttons like my Nikons.

 

Also, the shadow banding is overblown, imho. I've had pictures from my Q with hard to notice banding in them, and it's never seen in the reproduction of the pictures, even when blown up prints 28" wide, or reproduced in high resolution (300/ppi) at 100% (6000 pixels) in coffee table books. I routinely underexpose by .3 or .7/stop and have good saturation with some dot in the highlights, than worry about a tiny bit of un-reproducable banding in the shadows.

 

Have fun with your new camera.

Edited November 28, 2017 by beez

[Tim picture taker]

A more general question on camera settings in this post as it is an excellent summary so far - you can change the in camera settings (contrast , saturation and sharpness) for JPEGs via the menu.  Am I right in saying that these changes make no difference to the RAW image that is produced for editing in say Lightroom? 

 

Thanks in anticipation.

[marcg]

  Am I right in saying that these changes make no difference to the RAW image

 

 

 

Yes

[i-Leica]

 

 

The downside?  Now I'm thinking M-series, or at least the new CL.  Darn you, Leica!

 

Sandy

 

L1010492cs.jpg

 

 

be sure you really want the Leica M - Q is so much better with 28mm and 35mm....

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[Stonewall Brigade]

My only minor complaint is that the metal lens cap will not reliably stay on the lens.  Easy to lose and expensive to replace.