Jump to content
reynoldsyoung

CL vs Q2...from what we know

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I owned the Q and loved it.  I moved to the CL because of its size and the 35 f1.4.   The rumored Q2 and its sensor are really getting my attention.  But, that's what the Leica marketers are hoping for, right?  What do you folks think about returning to the "simple life"?  Or, am I just a "gear slut"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As you parted with your Q, I suggest you continue to enjoy your CL, adding another lens to widen its scope. You don't mention missing full-frame. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As Jaap (I think) has said before, the Q is a dead end camera. You buy it and apart from filters, straps and bags you’re done. Buy into a CL/TL and you’re buying into a system that is to all intents open ended. You add lenses, you change the body and keep the “old” lenses. In the end you have to know what works best for you. And in terms of IQ and resolution, how much do you actually need for how you share your images?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When the Q came out, I still had the X 113. As a fixed lens camera, it was nearly perfect: I was not interested in another. After I bought the SL, and then the M-D, the X113 stopped being used because the M-D with Summilux 35 was very nearly as light and compact as the X was, and was much more versatile if I wanted another FoV. I sold the X soon thereafter. 

After I retired, I saw my use of the SL drop off to virtually nothing other than the niche technical needs of copy work and tabletop photography. I could not see having so much money tied up in that body and its zoom lenses if all I was going to do was fit an R macro lens to it, so I sold the SL and both zooms and bought a CL body for that niche work figuring I'd use the M-D most of the time for general photography. Well, I underestimated the CL: over the ensuing half a year plus, I find I use the CL most of the time for everything and only rarely pull out the M-D. I use all of my M-Mount and R-Mount lenses with it and it produces results on par with the M-D and SL except at the very extremes of sensitivity and light. It's easier to focus, with the R lenses fitted it focuses close, with the M lenses fitted it is smaller and lighter, and so forth. Extreme versatility, compactness, super image performance... It (and the Light L16) have become the only digital cameras I use frequently now.

Along the way I met someone who had a Q and loved it. He let me play with it for a little bit. People love the Q and speak of it as a fixed lens M. Frankly, I was underwhelmed with its EVF compared to the CL, the lens and sensor seem on par, and I wouldn't want to be locked to only a 28mm FoV, etc. I'm happier with what I have.  

If you want simplicity, just keep using your CL and that lovely APO-Summilux-TL 35mm. It's more than good enough IMO. If you want to expand your photographic options, buy another lens. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ricoh GR III is perhaps an option now if you want something smaller and lighter than a Q.

The MTFs look better than the TL18mm and the new GR has built in macro mode.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have the CL, the zooms, Panasonic and M cameras and lenses. This produces images that are far beyond my needs. I can concentrate on content without any thought about my gear. So, I am sure that both the near and far future will produce amazing equipment - but why should I spend a single dollar on it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a CL and a T, and just bought a Q-P. Why? 

The 28 1.7. The CL has no fast wide angle. The Q, with that lens and a larger sensor, is brilliant. For the photography I do these days, the CL is my primary landscape camera (23, 18-56 and 55-135), the T is a backup body (cheap!). But I found the CL and 23 not that engaging, and I’ll likely sell the 23mm shortly now I have the Q-P.

I could have waited for the Q2, but I got a cracking deal on the Q-P, and I don’t really need 47mp. The 35mm crop on the Q-P looks great to me. And the Q-P is lovely in matt black.

I don’t miss my M10 and M lenses at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Q + CL are perfect match. They share the essential : batteries, flash, etc 

And they complement each other : Fast full frame fixed 28mm vs versatile APS-C with interchangeable TL or M lenses.  

IQ are the same, easy to mix and march together. 

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...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue., Read more about our Privacy Policy