Jump to content
LUF Admin

Leica Q2 with 47 MP – Improved in all aspects

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

12 hours ago, brickftl said:

I have the Sony 24/1.4GM that I use on my A7iii, and I also have the Q2 (having sold the Q that I loved). For me the Sony is perfect for studio portraits and live stage work, and I especially appreciate the wider faster lens than the Q2. And of course the A7iii face/eye detect and AF in general (as you well know from your A9) is far superior to that of the Q/Q2/ See these images I recently shot using the Sony combo which, given the atrocious light wouldn't have been possible with the Q. https://brick.smugmug.com/Photography/2019-6-19-Terpsicorps-dress-rehearsal-samples/

 

That said, the Q2 is my go to camera for all else, reportage, street work, casual environmental portraits, travel, etc. In other words, these 2 cameras perfectly cover all my photographic needs.

Beautiful picture. The pictures are a little “unreal” sharp to me. It maybe due to I use my phone to view the photos. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I studied the pictures and realize the outline of peoples are extremely sharp and make me feel the objects standing out from background. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I definitely wouldn't say it's improved in all respects. I had the camera and returned it. Face Detection doesn't work well at all. I was getting blurry shots at 1/250 and 1/160 which should never be on a 28mm lens with static subjects. The Dynamic range is worse at 200-400 ISO, and you are limited in long exposures. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Miltz said:

I definitely wouldn't say it's improved in all respects. I had the camera and returned it. Face Detection doesn't work well at all. I was getting blurry shots at 1/250 and 1/160 which should never be on a 28mm lens with static subjects. The Dynamic range is worse at 200-400 ISO, and you are limited in long exposures. 

Sorry to hear it didn’t work out for you.  You are right that face detection is poor.  I haven’t seen any camera motion blur at 1/250s or 1/160s, though.  Not even sure how that could happen as OIS would typically be turned off at those speeds since it isn’t necessary.  Thy dynamic range I haven’t checked at those particular ISO’s yet, so can’t say whether your experience is typical.  The long exposure limits implemented by Leica are very annoying, but hardly unique to the Q2. No excuse for those, though. I don’t need Leica protecting me from poor image quality due to thermal noise—either by limiting exposure or by forcing me to use LENR.

In any event, sorry you were disappointed by the camera.  I have not found any areas where it is worse than the original Q except per-pixel noise at higher ISO’s, extra weight from the bigger battery, and the placement of the exposure adjustment wheel under your right thumb being more awkward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/20/2019 at 11:37 AM, Miltz said:

I definitely wouldn't say it's improved in all respects. I had the camera and returned it. Face Detection doesn't work well at all. I was getting blurry shots at 1/250 and 1/160 which should never be on a 28mm lens with static subjects. The Dynamic range is worse at 200-400 ISO, and you are limited in long exposures. 

I've experienced the same but I decided to steady myself just before the shots. It helped enormously. At 47 mp, any movement on my part or the subject will register. Secondly, the image stabilisation needs a bit of time to work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, lx1713 said:

At 47 mp, any movement on my part or the subject will register.

Sure it can register but you won't see it when viewed at normal viewing distance. You might see it on a monitor when viewed at actual pixels, but when will you ever print so large and view at much closer than normal viewing distance? Never.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

9 hours ago, pico said:

Sure it can register but you won't see it when viewed at normal viewing distance. You might see it on a monitor when viewed at actual pixels, but when will you ever print so large and view at much closer than normal viewing distance? Never.

I understand. It's not a complaint on my part but shot discipline means getting the most out of my equipment on a consistent basis so I need to up my game to get it right. Else I might as well pick a 24 mp camera. It's just two little steps to the workflow : ) A fraction of a second to add to the moment.

47 mp files demand more time commitment in my process stage so being sloppy at capture time is just sad for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, lx1713 said:

47 mp files demand more time commitment in my process stage

It might be interesting to compare over time the increase in file size to increased computer performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, pico said:

It might be interesting to compare over time the increase in file size to increased computer performance.

Not for me 😂   For myself, 47 mp is really when I need the details. The Q2 is a great stealth camera but I'm really deploying it in a commercial setting with tripod and lights. Usage wise, I really enjoy working with it for journalistic style of shooting but I just clocked 16 gb DNG + JPGs thereabouts for about 160 shots. That's a bit much 😉

I just ordered an iMac Pro so maybe that answers my problem 😅 I don't yet know until I run with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, lx1713 said:

I just ordered an iMac Pro so maybe that answers my problem 😅 I don't yet know until I run with it.

Awesome! If you can, please share your experience with it, and its configuration. My impression is that since our application is largely 2D, and if we use Photoshop we can expect performance to be 2X that of an iMac. As Photoshop uses the GPU more for compute intensive routines it can only get better as Adobe codes new versions. One concern is download speeds from our SD* cards, but that's still not discouraging.

Thank you for replying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

config:

iMac Pro

Hardware:

  • 3.0GHz 10-core Intel Xeon W processor, Turbo Boost up to 4.5GHz
  • 64GB 2666MHz DDR4 ECC memory
  • 2TB SSD storage
  • Radeon Pro Vega 64 with 16GB of HBM2 memory
  • Magic Mouse 2 + Magic Trackpad 2 - Space Grey
  • Magic Keyboard with Numeric Keypad - US English - Space Grey

It's a bit more than I really need as far as speed is concerned. I want it for the bandwidth for processing lots of files. I shoot excessively, I'm afraid, so I need to be much more disciplined in using the Q2. I usually don't upgrade my machines much so the replacement is about 7-8 years for a pro desktop and 5 years for a laptop.

I've gotten into doing video editing on FCP so it's for that too. As you mentioned about 2D usage, that's true.

I'm using the Sandisk cards rated at 170 mb/s or the 300mb/s ones so the download speeds are comfortable for a couple of thousand shots. Enough time for me to catch dinner or a shower.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

moved

 

 

 

Edited by MEB
posted in wrong section

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Alain88 said:

Do you need to tape the mic holes to avoid bust inside or is it safe enough?

Was thinking about that too to be honest. So far it’s not taped haven’t seen anything on the sensor (fingers crossed)

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