Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Not apples to apples, but the new sensor makes the Q2 a much more flexible camera than before IMO (I had a Q previously). You essentially have a 35 and a 50 without needing to change the lens or buy them (though without the natural compression a longer focal length would give you). 75 gets a little small in the megapixel number but possibly still useable, especially for the web / mobile. Weight is lighter than the CL + 18 to 56 and faster lens. Weather and dust sealed as well.

Certainly makes a compelling case for the Q2, at least for a compact travel camera (if you need something specific like portraits or wildlife, then probably not)...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without meaning to state the obvious, there is no ‘natural compression’,  the location of the lens is all that effects perspective, not focal length.

But yes it certainly makes a reasonable alternative to a CL and equivalent focal length lenses for example.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I meant was if you shoot a 35 and a 75 from the same location, you will have different depth compression (the background will appear differently). You won’t get that difference with the Q2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, TheEyesHaveIt said:

if you shoot a 35 and a 75 from the same location, you will have different depth compression

You should try and do that. Then you might see that the two focal lenghts offer different fields of view but exactly the same "depth compression". The sense of depth is produced by the distance from the scene, as monther above already said. Depth of field is another story, however.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Q2 does not change anything. 

If you need to change lenses : CL 

If you want to use your M lenses : CL 

if you need weather sealing : Q2

If you need fast 28mm : Q2

if you need 47MP : Q2

if you want real zooms : CL

If you want longer and wider focal length : CL. Yes 50mm and 75mm equivalent lenses will be better with CL  

 if you want smallest form factor : CL with TL 2,8/18mm or 2/23mm 

Q is a dual-Summilux-Q 1,7/28-35mm. 50mm for emergency 

Q2 is now a tri-Summilux-Q 1,7/28-35-50mm. 75mm for emergency. 

 Honestly 50 and even worst 75mm frame lines are way too small, for proper composition and precise focusing. Making them hard to use properly or almost impossible with 75mm crop

Edited by nicci78

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, nicci78 said:

Q2 does not change anything. 

If you need to change lenses : CL 

If you want to use your M lenses : CL 

if you need weather sealing : Q2

If you need fast 28mm : Q2

if you need 47MP : Q2

if you want real zooms : CL

If you want longer and wider focal length : CL. Yes 50mm and 75mm equivalent lenses will be better with CL  

 if you want smallest form factor : CL with TL 2,8/18mm or 2/23mm 

Q is a dual-Summilux-Q 1,7/28-35mm. 50mm for emergency 

Q2 is now a tri-Summilux-Q 1,7/28-35-50mm. 75mm for emergency. 

 Honestly 50 and even worst 75mm frame lines are way too small, for proper composition and precise focusing. Making them hard to use properly or almost impossible with 75mm crop

I agree with most of the list, but not that 47MP and weather sealing do not change anything (for those who like more cropping flexibility and piece of mind).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, nicci78 said:

Yes that’s right. Tough choice. Get both : same UI, so it is easy to use together. 

CL is not for me. I looked at it closely before I bought the Q but much prefered the Q. I have recently also purchased Fuji GFX 50R with few great GF lenses and am really enjoying that system so far. By  the way, CL was not an option for me because I don't like APS-C and also find the system too small - even though I love my Q after using it for about a year or so I have learned that I much prefer larger cameras to comfortably shoot so decided I'm willing to live with carrying around DSLR sized equipment again to get better ergonomics).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The CL gives you up to 200mm (35mm equiv) with the 55-135 so if you want a long zoom that’s the way to go. The Q2 seems to cover 28mm-50mm with pixels to spare. CL image quality is really very nice but there’s no fast wide angle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that APS-C got undeserved bad press. It is very nice.

I even discovered that T 16MP images are very lovely. 

By the way Leica is telling us that 16MP and APS-C  is actually more than adequate, by advocating for 50mm Q2 crop. Which is smaller than APS-C size sensor and only 14MP.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, nicci78 said:

I think that APS-C got undeserved bad press. It is very nice.

I even discovered that T 16MP images are very lovely. 

By the way Leica is telling us that 16MP and APS-C  is actually more than adequate, by advocating for 50mm Q2 crop. Which is smaller than APS-C size sensor and only 14MP.  

I find that most people (including some very talented photographers I admire) agree with you about APS-C and say it's more than good enogh for most purposes. I actually had Canon APS-C DSLR's at one time but hated it - switched back to FF very quickly. Then I looked at the APS-C format again when I was thinking about the CL - but after looking at many CL and Q images in dedicated threads on this forum I much prefered the Q images. I can't tell exactly why that was the case but it was not even close for me - may be that I like the 28mm more than other focal length, or maybe I just happened to like the photographers styles/talent in the Q thread more - not sure (but it had nothing to do with number of pixels because I actually prefered the Q images even over most of the M images I have seen posted as well).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I too have generally preferred the Q images to the CL (which are very nice as well). Q2 feels like a great travel camera given the 35/50 usability now. Would be smaller and lighter than a CL kit (say 18-56 plus 23). Cheaper too.

Edited by TheEyesHaveIt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

very recently bought the CL to go with my beloved Q, and still very tentatively figuring it out, as I've been using manual focusing lenses with it until today (got the 18-56on ebay). Apples and oranges on the technical issues, as Nici78 lists.

My initial thought was that the Q's IQ is "superior." How can it not be, given the larger sensor size and the dedicated, corrected lens? But aren't we in real danger of embracing a certain developing aesthetic of digitized photos based on evolving technology? Different lenses and different film stock use to give different "looks." Folks used to debate those differences and go from one to another, trying new film stock and swapping lenses of the same focal lengths just because they have different characteristics. But with digital, the differences are narrowing dramatically, as lens resolution, sensor size (and therefore noise, dynamic range, etc), and post-processing can create just about any look you want. It used to be a latitudinal debate (technology developed slowly, and it was about widening your knowledge of what fit your current artistic vision); now it is a longitudinal debate (swapping yesterday's technology for tomorrow's).

Technical perfection is competing with artistic vision like never before. I'm looking right now at my CL and am really excited to own it! I really admire that it is a homage to the M3a. And it just feels so natural to hold--far more natural, in fact, than the more boxy Q.

By the way, Jono Slack just bought the CL, as did the 3 elephants and a blind man guy--though Jono told me he's lusting for the Q2--as am I! So, I'm not trying to throw shade on the Q.

 

Edited by bags27

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

FF versus crop frame. No contest IMHO, but depends on your use..

Edited by algrove

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Could you not say that with a CL, assuming not being a specialist, you would need a second fast lens besides the kit zoom. And now its getting difficult. When to change from kit zoom lens to the fast 24mm or even better 35mm (APS-C)? At the end you are better off with the Q2. You have one body plus lens for lanscape, travel plus inside for family etc. 

Yes I think of someone who would need something better than the iPhone . . . 🥁

Edited by Alex U.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, algrove said:

FF versus crop frame. No contest IMHO, but depends on your use..

This remark is so 2009....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the family: TL2-CL-SL and a mix of lenses. Currently using the Apo-Summicron-SL 90 on the CL, with gorgeous results:

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/279062-leica-cl-the-image-thread/?do=findComment&comment=3696651

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/279062-leica-cl-the-image-thread/?do=findComment&comment=3696657

I couldn't do that with a Q2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LocalHero1953 said:

I have the family: TL2-CL-SL and a mix of lenses. Currently using the Apo-Summicron-SL 90 on the CL, with gorgeous results:

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/279062-leica-cl-the-image-thread/?do=findComment&comment=3696651

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/279062-leica-cl-the-image-thread/?do=findComment&comment=3696657

I couldn't do that with a Q2.

those are terrific captures; the first one is absurdly great. as good as any I've seen from the SL. thanks.

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...