Q IQ Versus Fuji X

[Sapphie]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi all Q lovers.

So I have browsed through several threads where people say the Q is a vast improvement over the Fuji X100 series. Fair enough but I am curious about what former Fuji X users feel about the IQ differences compared with say the latest Fujis - X100F, X-Pro2, X-T2/3 etc? I mainly shoot scenics/landscapes and currently run Fuji X100 (original), X-Pro 1 and X-Pro 2.

I am also curious about the quality of the Q EVF compared, say, with the X-Pro2 and X-T2?

Thanks

Lee

P.S. if anyone has any sample DNG landscape files they wouldn't mind sharing for download, that would be a bonus

[Advertisement]

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

[MLochmansPhoto]

Hi Lee,

All cameras you mention are good on their own right. If you are contemplating a Q there are other reasons at play beside IQ.

I have owned the `Fuji X100 and the Leica Q . The latter I have sold recently but not because I didn't like it. The IQ of the lens is fabulous  and the combination with a full frame sensor and EVF makes it a wonderful camera. What I remember of the Fuji X 100 is that I loved the Hybrid OVF/EVF. Comparing both EVF systems I like the one of the Q better though. But like so many Japanese cameras I hated the menu and overload of buttons.........Which imho are a very important reason to considder a Q or any Leica for that matter. The choice is between a computer that happens to take pictures or a camera that makes you take pictures with a real shutter dial, aperture ring and the simplest menu system on the market. Also the Q has a substantial "heft" to it, what makes it a joy in handling.

On the other side...The the X-Pro and XT series give you an interchangeable lens system , and Fuji lenses are good. But.... not as good as Leica, but at a price.

If you decide on a Q a small warning. The Q is considered a gateway drug to the Leica M system.....believe me. The Q hooked me, and while I have sold it last week, I now own a CL and a beautiful Black Paint M240 in mint condition with two lovely summicrons. So...I am lost (forever) 😉 As for the Q as a landscape / scenic camera? If you force yourself to work with a fixed focal length camera (28mm) no problem. Visit my website, all the pictures there are from the Q. Last warning.........If you buy the Q........Your Fuji system WILL feel lonely and neglected! 😉

[IamTheDistance]

Hi! I have the x100f since May and I bought a Q one month ago. Also I have a M10. In my Instagram account (@tengu_ig) I have pictures shot with those three cameras and also some of them are shot on iPhone 6s. Most of the times is hard to difference what camera did I use, can you? Of course, it's Instagram so the images lost quality. Comparing the x100f and Q images on my computer, the Q images have richer colors and they are more pleasing to my eyes. That fixed 28mm is soooo good. The images have a beautiful 3D look even at f/8. For landscapes, I think 28mm is better than the 23mm (35mm equivalent) on the x100 series. Both autofocus and manual focus are better on the Q. Battery life is also better on the Q. For me, the Q has a better handling even without a thumb rest. I prefer the Q and the M in almost all aspects but the x100f has tons of configurations and function buttons. I have a wide adapter for the x100f that turns the lens in a 28mm equivalent so I would like to do a test comparing those two cameras. 

Edited January 14, 2019 by IamTheDistance

[mschoe]

My experience as a Q, M9-P and Fuji X-Pro2 (w/ XF23F2 and XF23F1.4) user:

• Build quality: M > Q > X-Pro2
• JPEG (Color output): X-Pro2 > Q > M
• RAW (Color output): X-Pro2|Q > M
• IQ (summary): M > Q > X-Pro2
• AF performance: X-Pro2(XF23F2) > Q > X-Pro2 (XF23F1.4)
• 3D Pop: M|Q > X-Pro2
• Firmware support (frequent updates): X-Pro2 > Q, (M9 is EoL)
• Menu system: Q > X-Pro2 (LOVE the clean Leica font)
• Smartphone App (iOS): Leica >> Fujifilm
• EVF: -draw- (Q is bigger/brighter, X-Pro2 no smearing and no halo around frame due to OLED)
• Battery life: -draw- (X-Pro2 displays percentage left, what I like more than "full", "some power left", "almost empty", "off")

What I really like about the Q is the whole industrial design, the AF/MF switch on the lens and the recessed thumb rest.

What I really like about the Fujifilms is the JPEG rendering - especially "Classic Chrome"! 

Edited January 14, 2019 by mschoe

[colonel]

As a former user, I don't think the x100f build compares to the Q, so on IQ only:

 

Q+

• Sharpness, colour depth, ISO, dynamic range, acuity, micro-contrast (pop !!), close sharpness and infinity sharpness, detail, no requirement for x-trans translation

X100F+

• JPGs still industry leading. People colours wonderful out of the box.

 

Saying all that, the X100F is excellent and whether the 3x price of the Q is worth 3x the IQ of the X100F it definitely isn't

Lastly you can't underestimate 28mm vs 35mm. For me, 28mm is the highest I can go with a minimum general use camera and I can do most pictures with 28mm and crop, but I can never recover angle of 28mm with 35mm, if you see what I mean.

 

rgds

 

[ramosa]

I had the Q twice and the X100t once (not the X100F). Given its having a full-frame sensor, I’d go with the Q any time. It’s not close. (I only shoot RAW.) And, given that I have never liked the X-Trans sensor rendering (e.g., when it comes to skin), I’m confident I’d feel the same way about the X100F.

 

That said, I think there are some better sensors on the market than the Q, including even the outdated Sony RX1R. (That Sony camera had a tremendous sensor and lens, but I disliked pretty much everything else about it.) What keeps me in firmly in the Leica camp (now with my second MM) is not just the sensors, but also the lenses and haptics. There’s nothing better in the hand than a Leica …

[bags27]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 1/13/2019 at 3:42 PM, MLochmansPhoto said:

 

If you decide on a Q a small warning. The Q is considered a gateway drug to the Leica M system.....believe me. The Q hooked me, and while I have sold it last week, I now own a CL and a beautiful Black Paint M240 in mint condition with two lovely summicrons. So...I am lost (forever) 😉 As for the Q as a landscape / scenic camera? If you force yourself to work with a fixed focal length camera (28mm) no problem. Visit my website, all the pictures there are from the Q. Last warning.........If you buy the Q........Your Fuji system WILL feel lonely and neglected! 😉

I was warned about the Q being a gateway drug, too. I love my Q; not ready to part with it (maybe ever, except maybe for a Q2). But I am plotting on how to get a CL or maybe an SL2, plus lenses in addition. There is a zen-like elegance to using a Leica. The closest to that feeling was in the old film days with my Nikon (which I still sometimes use).

Edited January 16, 2019 by bags27

[LucisPictor]

Am 14.1.2019 um 16:38 schrieb mschoe:

 

• JPEG (Color output): X-Pro2 > Q > M
• RAW (Color output): X-Pro2|Q > M
• IQ (summary): M > Q > X-Pro2

Somehow I cannot see the logic behind that equation.

[colonel]

9 hours ago, ramosa said:

I had the Q twice and the X100t once (not the X100F). Given its having a full-frame sensor, I’d go with the Q any time. It’s not close. (I only shoot RAW.) And, given that I have never liked the X-Trans sensor rendering (e.g., when it comes to skin), I’m confident I’d feel the same way about the X100F.

 

That said, I think there are some better sensors on the market than the Q, including even the outdated Sony RX1R. (That Sony camera had a tremendous sensor and lens, but I disliked pretty much everything else about it.) What keeps me in firmly in the Leica camp (now with my second MM) is not just the sensors, but also the lenses and haptics. There’s nothing better in the hand than a Leica …

I also had the RX1 and RX1R

I second that, in terms of the lens and the sensor I don't think that I would even get into RX1 vs Q as they are both at the top of their game

What is a differential though is the speed and handling.  The RX1, even the RX1Rii just has auto-focus too slow for me to use, and the general button positioning is ok but not convenient

The RX1 is great for size, and its build quality is excellent. So if you must have this size and 35mm there are no flies on it (except maybe AF speed)

In terms of handling and general usage the Q is buckets ahead.

Lastly, in term of rendering, the Q sticks to Leica's ethereal Kodachromish  rendition , the RX1 is devastatingly neutral and highly detailed. The RX1 ii is knock-out.

So funnily enough, despite the RX1 being smaller I actually think its a better studio camera and the Q is a better street and travel camera

All this IMHO of course!!

[jaxon]

Hi, 

I'm a newbie around these party so go easy. I've had all iterations of the Fuji X line, including recently X-T3, X-H1 and X100F as well as a myriad of lenses (all the 1.4 / 1.2 primes). I loved them all, and could see myself shooting with the X-T3 and 23mm 1.4 and 16mm 1.4 for the rest of eternity.. but..

Then I tried the Q.. it's what I had always longed for in a camera and what took me to Fuji (from Sony many years back) - the tactile premium feeling in a camera with results that just can't be beaten. The files are just something else. This isn't to say the Fuji's are bad, very far from it, it's just the Q takes it to the next level (RAW only of course).

With Fuji you can't wifi RAW files to your phone, only JPEG, which is fine as their JPEGS are great.. but not as good as a correctly processed Q RAW file.. and that a little difference that makes a big difference in my book.

The X100F was my only camera on vacation last summer, and I loved it. I have owned sony's RXIR (and mark ii version) in the past and love the freedom provided by a fixed focal length camera. I've only just bought the Q and now I'm about to sell all my Fuji gear and let the Q be my daily driver until I can afford an M at some point in the distant future.. that's how much this little Leica has got me. I'm spending money I don't yet have.. get the divorce papers ready.

-John

[grick]

On 1/13/2019 at 12:42 PM, MLochmansPhoto said:

If you decide on a Q a small warning. The Q is considered a gateway drug to the Leica M system.....believe me. The Q hooked me, and while I have sold it last week, I now own a CL and a beautiful Black Paint M240 in mint condition with two lovely summicrons. So...I am lost (forever) 😉 

Heed MLochmanns' warning well!

Last summer I was a happy, innocent Fuji X system user - perfectly content for many years. I never once ever considered purchasing a Leica M camera. But after purchasing a Q as a replacement to the X100s I sold, I experienced the intoxication of the beautiful Leica glass. I had to see what Leica is about. Now, I must take out my recently purchased M240 and my only m mount lens, a summilux 50 f/1.4 at every opportunity. I'm hooked! I want to see how to coax the beauty out of this wonderful combination. Be forewarned! 😉

 Oh, but what fun.