Jump to content
jonatdonuts

Q2 is coming...

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I’ve come really close to buying a Q multiple times, but the 28mm lens always holds me back. Make the Q2 lens a 35mm f/2 in similar size and I’d buy it in a heartbeat.

 

 

I have owned the Q twice (and have one now). It's a very good camera, but (for me) would be a great camera if it were either 50mm f/2 (first choice), 40mm f/2 (second choice), or 35mm f/2 (third choice). Shooting exclusively at 28mm has been a sound learning experience for me and lots of fun, but it'll never be my "sweet spot."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chiming in here. I have the Q and I absolutely love it! I've long been a fan of the 28mm focal length, so it's perfect. 

 

However, it would be perfectly complemented with a 50mm Q! But I'm not optimistic. 

 

Monochrom would be nice, too, but in addition to, not instead of. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love the  Leica Q, continue to be impressed with the photographic opportunities that this camera offers, and I would love a Q monochrome  for those situations when I do not want to carry the Leica M246 Monochrome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the Q3 will have 42MP when everyone else has 100MP. Keep up the good work Leica I owned two Q's and the love was not there. 24MP does not cut it today anymore than 12MP cut it two or three years ago. To all the Leica water drinkers who feel otherwise I would reiterate that until you have used 42MP for three years I would not be so quick to tell others or believe the 24MP is enough.

 

You all must be looking at your images on computer screens that are also ten years behind the times. 24MP looks pretty good on lo rez screens.

Edited by trstahly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Together with many other photographers, I do not need enormous files from my cameras. 24mp is plenty for me. Oh, and I do try to fill my frame so that cropping is rarely needed. It all depends on your planned use for your pictures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Maybe the Q3 will have 42MP when everyone else has 100MP. Keep up the good work Leica I owned two Q's and the love was not there. 24MP does not cut it today anymore than 12MP cut it two or three years ago. To all the Leica water drinkers who feel otherwise I would reiterate that until you have used 42MP for three years I would not be so quick to tell others or believe the 24MP is enough.

 

You all must be looking at your images on computer screens that are also ten years behind the times. 24MP looks pretty good on lo rez screens.

Glad you’ve found cameras that meet your needs. The Q makes me work a little hsrder, but its very satisfying and brings me back to my roots in photographing 60 years ago. I’d much more like to see weatherproofing on a next gen Q than more resolution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad you’ve found cameras that meet your needs. The Q makes me work a little hsrder, but its very satisfying and brings me back to my roots in photographing 60 years ago. I’d much more like to see weatherproofing on a next gen Q than more resolution.

 

My question is have you owned, lived with and used a 42mp 35mm camera with highly resolving lenses and what is the resolution of the montior you view them at and what resolution do you view them at?

 

Even a Leica person has to or should admit that if have no first hand knowledge your opinion is rather worthless on the matter becaue you would not know what you are talking about. 

 

I too am glad you are happy with yesteryears gear. Leica may have once been a leader in the camera world but they no longer are and have not been for a long time. They have brainwashed their loyal followers into believing it should take more work to achieve results. Using manual exposure and and or a fixed lens on any camera can help a person become more involved in the process but the majority of owners have chosen the latter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My question is have you owned, lived with and used a 42mp 35mm camera with highly resolving lenses and what is the resolution of the montior you view them at and what resolution do you view them at?

 

Even a Leica person has to or should admit that if have no first hand knowledge your opinion is rather worthless on the matter becaue you would not know what you are talking about. 

 

I too am glad you are happy with yesteryears gear. Leica may have once been a leader in the camera world but they no longer are and have not been for a long time. They have brainwashed their loyal followers into believing it should take more work to achieve results. Using manual exposure and and or a fixed lens on any camera can help a person become more involved in the process but the majority of owners have chosen the latter.

pretty strong language. I think the photos on this website are on par with or superior to anything I see anywhere, and for me that's all I need to know. I'm happy for you that you're so sure about everything. So, maybe you'll just let the rest of us be happy as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My question is have you owned, lived with and used a 42mp 35mm camera with highly resolving lenses and what is the resolution of the montior you view them at and what resolution do you view them at?

 

Even a Leica person has to or should admit that if have no first hand knowledge your opinion is rather worthless on the matter becaue you would not know what you are talking about.

 

I too am glad you are happy with yesteryears gear. Leica may have once been a leader in the camera world but they no longer are and have not been for a long time. They have brainwashed their loyal followers into believing it should take more work to achieve results. Using manual exposure and and or a fixed lens on any camera can help a person become more involved in the process but the majority of owners have chosen the latter.

You sound quite bitter about your experience with Leica and wishing to drag more of us over to your side. As for me, I could not care less about having more megapixels. Is 42 Mp really enough. Why not a 100 Mp with a Phase One or a Hasselblad? Or why not a GigaPixel image like we’ve seen demonstrated on the Washington Mall.

 

Photographing for me is not chasing the latest technical advancement, but much more in the pleasure of the hunt. My images satisfy my needs and appear to give some enjoyment to others. Is that wrong? More megapixeks will do little if any to improve my personal enjoyment.

 

Good luck on your quest.

Dan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

pretty strong language. I think the photos on this website are on par with or superior to anything I see anywhere, and for me that's all I need to know. I'm happy for you that you're so sure about everything. So, maybe you'll just let the rest of us be happy as well.

 

agreed but most web sites are a pretty lousy place to judge IQ at what resolution are they displayed. I know on DPreview the photo galleries even at 4,000 pixels full screen are not even close to what was uploaded. Facebook is a prime example or that and many others. If this site is showing images in their full glory and these images are 4,000 pixel it is one thing but do you know if they are?

 

I am also not naive enough to know that resolution, microcontrast, DR and other techincal aspects are the end all when it comes to wonderful images but few images suffer from better quality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You sound quite bitter about your experience with Leica and wishing to drag more of us over to your side. As for me, I could not care less about having more megapixels. Is 42 Mp really enough. Why not a 100 Mp with a Phase One or a Hasselblad? Or why not a GigaPixel image like we’ve seen demonstrated on the Washington Mall.

 

Photographing for me is not chasing the latest technical advancement, but much more in the pleasure of the hunt. My images satisfy my needs and appear to give some enjoyment to others. Is that wrong? More megapixeks will do little if any to improve my personal enjoyment.

 

Good luck on your quest.

Dan

I am not bitter at all but I along with more people than you think feel a lot of folks have been hoodwinked so to say by Leica and the mystic that surrounds Leica. What confounds us why we joke about Leica folks is their staunch defense against outdated equipment and willingness to stay five to ten years in the past. It is like when Leica finally upgrades to level II everyone else is on level III with level IV around the corner. It confounds one's mind, like I said I bought two new Q's trying to figure out what is so special and I will admit it was kind of cool using a Leica after hearing so much about them for forty-five years but 24MP just doesn't cut it when you are use to almost twice that. It is not just cropping that is a small part the images just have more pop and wow to them, when you downsample from 7,952 pixels instead of 6,000 pixels the noise and sharpness looks better, I can hardly wait for 80MP so that part of it becomes even better and affords even higher ISO's and noise reduction hence IQ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not bitter at all but I along with more people than you think feel a lot of folks have been hoodwinked so to say by Leica and the mystic that surrounds Leica. What confounds us why we joke about Leica folks is their staunch defense against outdated equipment and willingness to stay five to ten years in the past. It is like when Leica finally upgrades to level II everyone else is on level III with level IV around the corner. It confounds one's mind, like I said I bought two new Q's trying to figure out what is so special and I will admit it was kind of cool using a Leica after hearing so much about them for forty-five years but 24MP just doesn't cut it when you are use to almost twice that. It is not just cropping that is a small part the images just have more pop and wow to them, when you downsample from 7,952 pixels instead of 6,000 pixels the noise and sharpness looks better, I can hardly wait for 80MP so that part of it becomes even better and affords even higher ISO's and noise reduction hence IQ.

It is interesting to me- that after you sold your Q you have not moved on and left the Q forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is interesting to me- that after you sold your Q you have not moved on and left the Q forum.

 

I did for many months but somewhere I ran across some recent comments on the Q2 and in almost unanimous unison like sheep everyone was saying I am perfectly happy with 24MP while the rest of the world is marching towards three times that and I had to chuckle. It reminded me of my time on this forum and I had to come back for some more laughs see you in another year when the Q2 comes out. I am sure everyone will still be saying 24MP is perfect who wants those big huge files.

 

It made my day so long for now gents! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not bitter at all but I along with more people than you think feel a lot of folks have been hoodwinked so to say by Leica and the mystic that surrounds Leica. What confounds us why we joke about Leica folks is their staunch defense against outdated equipment and willingness to stay five to ten years in the past. It is like when Leica finally upgrades to level II everyone else is on level III with level IV around the corner. It confounds one's mind, like I said I bought two new Q's trying to figure out what is so special and I will admit it was kind of cool using a Leica after hearing so much about them for forty-five years but 24MP just doesn't cut it when you are use to almost twice that. It is not just cropping that is a small part the images just have more pop and wow to them, when you downsample from 7,952 pixels instead of 6,000 pixels the noise and sharpness looks better, I can hardly wait for 80MP so that part of it becomes even better and affords even higher ISO's and noise reduction hence IQ.

 

 

I do wish you well in your search for the holy grail.  We all love huge pixel numbers but then some of us actually use our cameras in the field.  

Comparing the 5D-III (23mp) versus 5DS (50mp) a few years ago, I was astounded at the sluggish performance of 50mp in real field use -- even thought the 5DS has TWO processors instead on one.

Then the hard reality of selling pictures comes into my mind.  I've never sold for a billboard or fashion magazine cover.  But sold large prints from my puny 24mp Q and some of those were cropped.  Yes, I felt lucky when I sold, about 5 years ago, a print from a 8mp digital negative.

I have tried the wonderful Fuji GFX with 50mp and hated the handling while loving the RAW files.

 

Cameras are far more than life support systems for sensors.

Edited by SonomaBear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My question is have you owned, lived with and used a 42mp 35mm camera with highly resolving lenses and what is the resolution of the montior you view them at and what resolution do you view them at?

 

Even a Leica person has to or should admit that if have no first hand knowledge your opinion is rather worthless on the matter becaue you would not know what you are talking about. 

 

I too am glad you are happy with yesteryears gear. Leica may have once been a leader in the camera world but they no longer are and have not been for a long time. They have brainwashed their loyal followers into believing it should take more work to achieve results. Using manual exposure and and or a fixed lens on any camera can help a person become more involved in the process but the majority of owners have chosen the latter.

 

I was one of the few folks that paid $8k for a Nikon 3DX with 24 mb which was insanely large back then and there was a tremendous uproar about huge files and slow computers, etc. (let alone cost). I have used D800, D810, and D850 for many years with 36+mb files (along with Sony a7Rll with 36 mb). Love the D850 for the focus stacking, but I do not need the large files. I much prefer to use my Leicas (Q, 246, and SL) that all have a measly 24mb.

 

Would love a higher mb SL and better weather sealed Q, but I certainly don't select my 36+mb cameras for their increased resolution in preference over the excellent haptics and lenses of the Leicas (and I have Otui also).

 

I have also used film cameras in the old days for at least a decade or more without feeling the need to update to latest technology; seems that digital may be approaching a plateau anyways.

 

I am sure we all know that it is very challenging to be as good as most cameras/lens are capable of, especially with huge mb sensors (need excellent tripod, exact manual focus, remote release, no wind or haze, and few other distractions, along with needing top notch post-processing skills to counteract increasing diffraction issues). Billboards only need about 6 mb due to viewing distance, but I am intrigued my full wall photographs in restaurants, etc., but I don't see myself trying to make one of those any time soon....

 

I believe that better IQ (and enjoyment of photography for us amateurs that are not focussed on rate of return) is a function of many things, not just mbs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess it depends upon your use. 

 

Take two full frame 24 MP and 42 MP cameras, take the same shot in the same light with the same lens at the same settings, edit the pictures the same way, then print to 16x24. Stand 2 feet away and I very much doubt you would be able to tell the difference as to which photo was taken with which camera. Unless you are printing to an ultra size, or standing up close with a magnifying glass, 24MP is plenty. 

 

If we are being honest with ourselves even a cheap USD 800 APSC camera today is technically superior to the cameras that were used to create masterpieces 30 years ago. I think the vast majority of us reached the point of MP saturation, perhaps even technology saturation, years ago. Better tech is always appreciated, but in no way can we use it as an excuse for bad pictures these days. 

 

The fact that Magnum galleries and photobooks often mix film, digital, and iphone pictures speak volumes. 

 

You are obviously a dem

Share this post


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.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...