Jump to content
ravinj

Cropping - "Feature" or a Marketing Gimmick?

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have a crop of 1700x1700 pixels that, after uprezing, makes a beautiful 24" square print. You do what you can with the tools that you have. I don't see the point of crop modes, but cropping is one of the few (IMHO, unless you print more than 4' wide) advantages of extra MP. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, cp995 said:

I'm a 35mm shooter too! So I thought about a Sony RX1RII first.
But sometimes I need a bit more WA and/or 50mm.

So for me the Q2 would be perfekt (nearly), as I get a 35mm crop with 30MP resolution, which would be enough ...

 

Yes, and with similar depth of field properties, as 35/28 * 1.7 = 2.1. So, the Q2 at 35mm and f1.7 should give  similar look to the RXRII at 35mm and f2.0 (except the resolution of course)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

People who like 35mm will also like 28mm and vice versa. In other words: You will probaly use a 28mm lens not diffenrently to 35mm or the 35mm not differently to the 28mm. In other words again: When I own a 28mm lens on a camera that allows me to change lenses then there is no need to buy a 35mm as the difference is not too relevant. And if you own already the 35mm lens then you probably will not go to buy an 28mm as alternative.

Finally I do not think that I would buy an Q2 because I will be able to crop to 35mm. That is not really a difference. I would buy the Q2 if I could crop to 50 ot 75mm. But as the maths shows us we will have lost almost all our data. This is not worth buying the Q2.

As a consequence the Cropping-feature is probably more like a gimmick unless you could really use the 50 and 75mm as well.

Edited by Alex U.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Thanks for tolerating my earlier rant about the EVF. The Q, no matter the iteration, is a wonderful camera. It's just not the 3 prime kit I was dreaming of, which wasn't a realistic expectation to begin with.

The frame lines are cool. I get it. But my eyes would prefer a full zoom EVF.

I've ordered instead the bargain $423 Sony 28mm f/2 for my A7III, the main reason I bought a system camera to begin with. I was also pleased to learn (thanks to KR) that Sony makes two converters for the lens, a 21mm and a 16mm fisheye, for $273 and $223 respectively. I may actually have a use for one or both.

I really wouldn't want to give up the Zony 55mm f/1.8, or the A7III for that matter, which would be necessary to justify a Q2. I was tempted by a used Q however. Two with accessories went for around $2500 each, just yesterday.

Enjoy your camera, whether it be an A, a Q, or a Z.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by galavanter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I think the cropping function is both a marketing gimmick and a useful feature.  I wish the Q2 would have had a 35mm lens, as I'm not overly fond of 28mm. I don't do landscapes, and am wary of distortion with a wide angle lens. It's true that the crop mode doesn't simulate the other focal lengths, as the characteristics of the shot will be the same characteristics as using a 28mm (bokeh, possible distortion, etc).  However, for me, as I only use 35mm except in rare situations, the crop mode helps me frame the image to my preferred view. With the increased resolution of the Q2, the 35mm crop mode is much more useful than with the Q1 (about 15mp).  With the 28mm on the Q's, one can't argue with Leica's success, as they are extremely popular cameras.  While to me, the Q family is a 'triple', a home run would have been with a 35mm lens. But, the most popular cameras in the world are about 28mm (smart phones), and a 'reportage' camera, and landscape camera may often prefer a wider angle.  I'm strictly a street shooter and only do 'still life'. If the Q family did not have the crop modes, I'm not so sure it would have been so successful.  I know I wouldn't have bought it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can crop with your feet, too.  When using a 28mm lens - any 28mm - step forward one yard/meter. There's your 35mm field of view.  Yes, I know - you can't step forward if you are photographing at the rim of the Grand Canyon or at the summit of Everest without killing yourself.  But a lot of times you can.  Just step forward - (imaginary) problem solved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Advertisement (gone after registration)

16 minutes ago, Herr Barnack said:

You can crop with your feet, too.  When using a 28mm lens - any 28mm - step forward one yard/meter. There's your 35mm field of view.  Yes, I know - you can't step forward if you are photographing at the rim of the Grand Canyon or at the summit of Everest without killing yourself.  But a lot of times you can.  Just step forward - (imaginary) problem solved.

Moving from your position changes your perspective, you might get 'about as much in' as you would a 35mm from where you stood before but the scene would change as you got closer.

If you keep getting closer to someone's face is it the same as using a 75mm lens?

 

no

Edited by dancook

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Owning a Q1:
It's not that I don't like it, but I barely use the function. If I crop, I prefer to do it in the post-processing. Maybe I should use the camera's crop more.
I do think the Q1 lacks a bit of resolution to crop a lot. On my iMac 5K I can see the photos almost 1:1.

The crop-function is falling more into place with the Q2's megapixel bump. One of the most heard critics is that people want an 35mm or 50mm version. I think we'll never see those; Leica's solution is crop-modes and offering a sensor with enough megapixel. Makes sense to me. I don't think it's just a marketing gimmick but it's well thought out.

Edited by Tom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys may have covered this somewhere in the forum...what is the advantage of cropping in the camera versus cropping in post?  I am missing something.  But, my Q2 is ordered.  Ha!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

None, except visualization.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Leica had a made a Q-V (Vario) with a 28-70 Summicron lens, you could then use the entire sensor output for each focal length.

Would the zoom lens give you the actual differences in angle of view, DOF, that the individual prime lenses give?

Other then size differences I would think a Q-V would be more readily able to replace an interchangeable lens kit than the existing Q so my vote is marketing gimmick.

Ultimately I would use this camera 100% as a 28mm and crop in PS/Lightroom if absolutely necessary. Still a fabulous camera and I loved the OG-Q.

Share this post


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

You guys may have covered this somewhere in the forum...what is the advantage of cropping in the camera versus cropping in post?  I am missing something.  But, my Q2 is ordered.  Ha!

I know if I want a '50mm' look to an image, it's hard to just guess it and crop later - particularly if you need consistency for something. It's not just a 50mm crop line, it's a 16MP one too - so it's about knowing how big the file will be when cropped.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny thing. Q success is in the same magnitude as M3 and M6. 

But in the past Leica found it necessary to produce M2 for 35mm lovers. And M6 TTL 0.58x and 0.85x for those who prefer better confort with wider lenses or longer ones. 

So why not a second version of the Q with a pancake Summicron 40mm or with  a zoom ? 

Croping is not bad, but real longer focal length is better. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

just my thoughts about the Q2 and the cropping story, perhaps it helps someone:

 

feature or gimmick:

I would not describe it as a "Crop-feature". Of course it is "only" a crop, but for me it is having one compact lens/camera with me but having the possibility to push a button and then using a pseudo 35 or 50mm lens. Being fast enough while street-photography, not changing lenses. Or even have to carry them all with me.

Resolution:

Of course you need enough pixels to print your photos large enough. Probably thats why the Q1 got no compliance for its crop feature. If you are not Andreas Gursky, the 16MP at 50mm cropmode of the Q2 are enough to print very large, especially because of the very good performance and sharpness of the 28mm lens. Be honest, who prints his photos that large, that 16MP with that good quality of a lens, are not enough?

Post cropping:

Cropping in post? Well, i learned to frame an image in camera. So for example you take a portrait, you frame it with an real 50mm lens, that the person or only the head is well fitted into the frame, in the golden cut or whatever. How can i frame that with 28mm and crop in post? Where to position your model? Who to know the needed distance? Frame your model to much at the edges of the 28mm frame will get you an egg-shaped head (physically problem of an wide angle lens). So the framelines, just like in an M-camera, help you to frame your picture as if you use a real 50 or 35mm lens. That all follows optical laws, that's why the framelines are in the center of course.

cheating?:

Who cares if it is a real 50mm lens or a crop out of an outstanding good quality sensor in combination with an outstanding good 28mm lens. No one can see this on my prints afterwards. The photo has to work, give you emotions or whatever, or just look good in the viewers opinion. I don't care how much resolution is left or how it looks at the monitor in 100%.

Advantage of the Q2:

the best innovation of the Q2 is the higher resolution, because now the crop-mode gets usable. And i hope more people will understand that mode now. Understand that its fully usable now. I admit i didn't buy the Q1 because i want to use 50mm sometimes, and the resolution of 6MP is really too low nowadays.

Tri-Elmar or other focal length:

In consideration of the compact size of the Q's, the 28mm lens with its f1.7 is fast enough but small enough. A Tri-Elmar that fast would be bigger. If you calculate around, the 35mm has an f2 and the 50mm an f2.5 approx.. The look of the 35 or 50mm crops out of the Q looks so Leica-like in relation to the bokeh. Of course no Noctilux look can be achieved, but hey, there is almost enough bokeh. I want to take only portraits with extrem bokeh? Take my Canon DSLR and my 85/1.4. But i am on vacation now, or with my bike, or walking around in cities doing street photography. Then someone of my family/friends says "wow can you please do a portrait of me here?" Than you CAN do it with your Q and still have a lovely good bokeh.

Here a little example shot with my Q2, of course down sized for the forum. Nothing special, just a horse. What focal length was it? cropped or not? Does it matter? Enough bokeh? Sharp enough? 😉

greetings Marc

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love my Q1 but unfortunatelly I feel that cropping is almost always needed when photographing people (I'm either to shy to get close enough with 28mm, or even if I do get close I feel like portraits are not very flattering when I get into someones face). This is one area where the Q cannot touch my Canon 70-200L 2.8 IS - portraits and action are two weak points of the Q, but it is near perfect for everything else and with much improved resolution and that amazing lense my guess is that Q2 may be the best FF landscape camera on the market).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Everybody talking about cropping, only of interest if you have set JPG or DNG+JPG, or am I missing something?

Can anybody recommend me how to set JPG in the menu when I want it less "flat"?

I have DNG+JPG in the menu and choice DNG / DNG+JPG / JPG under the FN button

and I have set JPG SETTINGS: 

color mgmt: srgb

contrast: standard

saturation: medium high

sharpness: satnard.

But I am not completely satisfied: it "feels" not as good as the DNG output.

Tried several other settings, but still don't have the (subjective) perfect "solution".

thanks for your help, newby

 

 

Edited by LexS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, LexS said:

Everybody talking about cropping, only of interest if you have set JPG or DNG+JPG, or am I missing something?

I only use DNG but almost always end up doing some cropping of Q images during post processing (even though I completely don't care about in camera cropping options and consider those marketing gimics as far my use case goes, it's still essential to be aware and willing to comitt to cropping if you buy into the Q 'concept' as one camera to cover most use cases).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it amusing that some folks are OK with putting their fullframe M lenses on an APS-C body but not OK with cropping a fullframe image in camera or in post, effectively doing the same thing optically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a gimmick

tonight I am making liberal use of 35mm and 50mm crop lines

i already know when it comes to processing without the soft crop my vision may be lost, because I would have so many 28mm photos that I won’t know what to do with them.

at least when I take photos with crop mode I can compose properly to those lines and keep that effort going into lightroom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/20/2019 at 10:09 AM, Mr.Q said:

I find it amusing that some folks are OK with putting their fullframe M lenses on an APS-C body but not OK with cropping a fullframe image in camera or in post, effectively doing the same thing optically.

Some folks wouldn't do so if there were equivalent lenses in the CL system. For instance a Summilux TL 24 asph. "Unfortunately" we have to use M lenses. At least we don't lose megapixels by doing so. And, at least we have a choice, and are not limited by the camera concept. For the record: I am perfectly OK with whichever way anybody uses whatever  camera. I'm just pointing out practicalities.

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...