Jump to content

In praise of that digital zoom


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It took a while but I have come to appreciate the digital zoom.  Most comments seem to dismiss this feature of the Q, as did I for almost two years, but now use it and like it.  It's an old topic but I thought at least someone might find my experience of value.

Like many of us, I don't feel comfortable with 28mm.  I like 35mm and have since my first M2 many years ago.  But everything else about the Q is so good I though I should persevere.    But I reached the stage where I just couldn't adapt and the Q was spending too much time on the shelf.  I actually had it up for sale but before selling it I thought I should give the digital zoom a better try.   After several weeks (and an attitude change) the Q is back.  

First, for any M user, the viewfinder frame lines for the 35mm are very familiar.  It's terrific seeing outside the lines.

Second, the cropped 35mm file is big enough - same as my X Vario or Pentax K5.  Big enough for a lot of us I suspect.

Third, and here is the kicker, when you open up the raw file in Lightroom, you see the cropped version BUT, want to adjust the framing a bit, you can.  Cheating maybe for the purists but it's a very nice cushion.  

Fourth, if the scene needs a 28mm, just shoot.  You can see the image in the viewfinder and know that the raw file has it all.  No menu change necessary.

I was quick to dismiss this feature as a gimmick and my sense is that that attitude is widely prevalent.  But I am thinking now it was pretty clever but not well sold.  

I only use the 35mm crop.

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 10/16/2018 at 11:35 PM, pwsmith said:

It took a while but I have come to appreciate the digital zoom.  Most comments seem to dismiss this feature of the Q, as did I for almost two years, but now use it and like it.  It's an old topic but I thought at least someone might find my experience of value.

Like many of us, I don't feel comfortable with 28mm.  I like 35mm and have since my first M2 many years ago.  But everything else about the Q is so good I though I should persevere.    But I reached the stage where I just couldn't adapt and the Q was spending too much time on the shelf.  I actually had it up for sale but before selling it I thought I should give the digital zoom a better try.   After several weeks (and an attitude change) the Q is back.  

First, for any M user, the viewfinder frame lines for the 35mm are very familiar.  It's terrific seeing outside the lines.

Second, the cropped 35mm file is big enough - same as my X Vario or Pentax K5.  Big enough for a lot of us I suspect.

Third, and here is the kicker, when you open up the raw file in Lightroom, you see the cropped version BUT, want to adjust the framing a bit, you can.  Cheating maybe for the purists but it's a very nice cushion.  

Fourth, if the scene needs a 28mm, just shoot.  You can see the image in the viewfinder and know that the raw file has it all.  No menu change necessary.

I was quick to dismiss this feature as a gimmick and my sense is that that attitude is widely prevalent.  But I am thinking now it was pretty clever but not well sold.  

I only use the 35mm crop.

 

 

+ 1

I absolutely agree. It's said that Leica over engineered the Summilux F1,7 for that purpose. And it works IMHO.

I have used the 50 mm crop several times and those 8MB files give excellent print results. I can easily print up to A3. LR gives me 192DPI@295mm x 395mm.

Which is more than enough. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would love to see a Q with the exact same Summilux lens as now, but with a higher MP Back Side Illuminated sensor. That would allow using the crop mode and ending up with greater than 10MP cropped images. Its clearly not an absolute requirement, but a want. The BSI sensor would greatly improve low light shadow performance as we see on Sony and Nikon high-end cameras. Adding some weather sealing to the camera and that’s all I need. Maybe some gold foil to guild the lily. 🙂

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 10/18/2018 at 8:59 AM, Infiniumguy said:

I would love to see a Q with the exact same Summilux lens as now, but with a higher MP Back Side Illuminated sensor. That would allow using the crop mode and ending up with greater than 10MP cropped images. Its clearly not an absolute requirement, but a want. The BSI sensor would greatly improve low light shadow performance as we see on Sony and Nikon high-end cameras. Adding some weather sealing to the camera and that’s all I need. Maybe some gold foil to guild the lily. 🙂

agreed on all points but would reserve the golden lily for a special edition only

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 10/18/2018 at 9:59 AM, Infiniumguy said:

I would love to see a Q with the exact same Summilux lens as now, but with a higher MP Back Side Illuminated sensor. That would allow using the crop mode and ending up with greater than 10MP cropped images. Its clearly not an absolute requirement, but a want. The BSI sensor would greatly improve low light shadow performance as we see on Sony and Nikon high-end cameras. Adding some weather sealing to the camera and that’s all I need. Maybe some gold foil to guild the lily. 🙂

Just an aside . . . Pentax DSLR's have seriously outstanding low light shadow performance, clearly beating both Nikon and Sony as far as I have experienced. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
vor 5 Stunden schrieb RSH-Photo:

Here's a professional photographer who reviewed the Leica Q and found the digital zoom "immensely useful."

http://www.minimallyminimal.com/blog/leica-q

I must say that I never saw the cropping option like that and I imagine that with some experience I would probably like to use it as well. And in LR I would still have the 28mm DNG available. The latter I did not fully understand I must admit. When shooting DNG only and cropping to lets say 50mm, do you then get a 50mm image onto the LR screen and at the same time you could uncrop?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't the D-Lux 109 use a sensor which is larger than the "effective" sensor and then just use different parts of the sensors for various formats? That is an interesting take on the "digital zoom". Even so, I feel like I want to get the benefit of the whole sensor.

The getting back the whole picture in LR (or presumably any raw reader?) is also interesting. Like when I set my camera to RAW+JPG in monochrome and when I read the image in Aperture, the jpeg associated with the raw is initially black and white but then turns to color as the program recreates an embedded jpeg. Naturally the JPG stays black and white.

Hey Infiniumguy, I spent 4 very good years in Colorado Springs in 1979-83 when I was in the Air Force. I worked at Cheyenne Mountain. I understand NORAD moved out of the mountain and I'm not sure anyone uses it these days. I lived on Peterson AFB. Loved going to Garden of the Gods.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats a variable aspect ratio sensor, a completely different beast.

Whats discussed here is a "digital zoom", which means you only use the increasingly small central area of the sensor.

Meaning you buy a really expensive $4k 24 Megapixel full frame sensor camera with a 28mm equiv lens just to use the almost Micro Four Thirds sized small central area of the sensor to get a 50mm camera with very low resolution.

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, LichtUndDunkelheit said:

Thats a variable aspect ratio sensor, a completely different beast.

Whats discussed here is a "digital zoom", which means you only use the increasingly small central area of the sensor.

Meaning you buy a really expensive $4k 24 Megapixel full frame sensor camera with a 28mm equiv lens just to use the almost Micro Four Thirds sized small central area of the sensor to get a 50mm camera with very low resolution.

have you seen some of images from m43's and aps-c cameras?  have you seen the images from the Q cropped to 35 and 50 FOV crops?

i may not print them to 36" x24'" but for 11" x 14" or even 20" x 30"... they are very good.  I have an image that i took with my crop sensor leica c (typ112) that is printed to 20" x 30" and hangs in my weekend house...  (would that image look good at 24 x 36 --- no-- but i am not pixel peeping and images are meant to be viewed at a distance greater than 1 inch

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

For those who count pixels, there is absolutely no winning the argument that enough is enough. Despite the incredible sharpness of all sensors and the computational software that improves even that, there are folks who just insist that more is better. Of course, there will always be more, so, for them, there will always be better. Sort of like those who think a 500 hp car is "better" than a finely-tuned 280 hp car with terrific suspension. They both have to drive on the roads and stop at lights. But somehow, more is better.

  • Like 3
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...