markgc Posted March 19, 2019 Share #1 Posted March 19, 2019 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hello all, First post here but have learned a great deal from reading. I had a Q for a short time a year or so ago and loved it but had hoped it could be a one camera solution which it wasn't for me. I now have the SL with 24-90 which is fabulous for all my needs but of course the size has to be considered. I would like something smaller for travel though so have ordered a Q2. I have a trip coming up shortly and had hoped the Q2 would arrive in time but its doubtful. My question is, do you think it would be foolish to purchase a QP (currently about $4400) or better to wait for the Q2. I do not print often and for the types of shots I would anticipate from my intended use, wouldn't be large prints in any case. Thus the increase in megapixels isn't a huge deal. Do you expect that they will continue to make the original Q or just sell out what's on hand. I have little experience with their model strategy. Another option I have considered is a 35mm summicron M for the SL to make a more manageable travel size. I would be open to other suggestions on a lens for the SL as I wonder if the cron would be awkwardly small on the SL. Cost is a consideration but not a deal breaker as I expect to keep whatever I buy long term. Thanks for your thoughts. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 19, 2019 Posted March 19, 2019 Hi markgc, Take a look here Q/Q2 decision. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
dancook Posted March 20, 2019 Share #2 Posted March 20, 2019 Considered the CL? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted March 20, 2019 Share #3 Posted March 20, 2019 Mark, welcome to the forum. I echo Dan Cook's question above. The CL is perfect as a low-weight low-bulk camera and is most versatile; even capable of using lenses you have for your SL Research of many relevant threads on this forum would help you decide the way forward. As for buying a Q-P, surely that will not work well for you as you have already proved when owning the Q. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
T.J. Posted March 20, 2019 Share #4 Posted March 20, 2019 Remember, Q2 shares the same battery as SL which would be really convenient for traveling. Buying a 35mm lens for the SL still makes for a good size camera compared to the Q2. Finally, having a Q2 along with your SL provides a nice backup in the event of a failure. Just my 2 cents. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OHW Posted March 20, 2019 Share #5 Posted March 20, 2019 Steve Huff: I also shot the Q2 at one of my low light concert locations this past weekend and it did not do well in low light. The JPEGs were pretty mushy and it couldn’t seem to handle the lower light as well as the Canon EOS-R (which is not a low light champ itself). Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted March 20, 2019 Share #6 Posted March 20, 2019 33 minutes ago, OHW said: Steve Huff: I also shot the Q2 at one of my low light concert locations this past weekend and it did not do well in low light. The JPEGs were pretty mushy and it couldn’t seem to handle the lower light as well as the Canon EOS-R (which is not a low light champ itself). Mushy JPEGs are typically a sign of too aggressive noise reduction. Why would he shoot JPEG instead of RAW? In contrast to many other cameras, Q2's raw format was supported by Adobe from day one. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OHW Posted March 20, 2019 Share #7 Posted March 20, 2019 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) Leica Q2 sensor measurements published at PhotonsToPhotos (compared with Leica M10, SL, Nikon D850)Read more: https://leicarumors.com/2019/03/20/leica-q2-sensor-measurements-published-at-photonstophotos-compared-with-leica-m10-sl-nikon-d850.aspx/#ixzz5ikQSl3X1 The Q2 is pretty noisy or?? Edited March 20, 2019 by OHW Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted March 20, 2019 Share #8 Posted March 20, 2019 34 minutes ago, OHW said: Leica Q2 sensor measurements published at PhotonsToPhotos (compared with Leica M10, SL, Nikon D850)Read more: https://leicarumors.com/2019/03/20/leica-q2-sensor-measurements-published-at-photonstophotos-compared-with-leica-m10-sl-nikon-d850.aspx/#ixzz5ikQSl3X1 The Q2 is pretty noisy or?? How did you deduct that? The graphs listed do not show it as they cannot be used to compare different cameras. The source of the shared data (http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/RN_ADU.htm) states explicitly: "These raw values are not appropriate for comparing camera models because they are not adjusted for gain or area." Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricky1981 Posted March 20, 2019 Share #9 Posted March 20, 2019 1 hour ago, SrMi said: Mushy JPEGs are typically a sign of too aggressive noise reduction. Why would he shoot JPEG instead of RAW? In contrast to many other cameras, Q2's raw format was supported by Adobe from day one. Think of Steve Huff as an entertaining blogger/promoter rather than a serious reviewer, as others have mentioned you're better off checking out reidreviews , it's not free but if you're going to spend $5k on a camera then it's possibly worth it. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicci78 Posted March 21, 2019 Share #10 Posted March 21, 2019 http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Leica Q (Typ 116),Leica Q2 Almost the same between Q2 and Q, except Q2 has 50 ISO Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/295383-qq2-decision/?do=findComment&comment=3706733'>More sharing options...
nicci78 Posted March 21, 2019 Share #11 Posted March 21, 2019 How similar it is between Q2 and CL Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/295383-qq2-decision/?do=findComment&comment=3706735'>More sharing options...
markgc Posted March 22, 2019 Author Share #12 Posted March 22, 2019 Thank you all for the replies. I have considered the CL for it's size/weight but am not as keen on the control setup. I've gotten very used to the SL interface and of course the Q is pretty much self explanatory. I am curious if anyone has reservations about the Q2 file sizes vs the Q. Seems to me it could be a drawback except in those instances where you have a heavy crop and a large print. I do like the idea of sharing batteries with the SL and of course the other improvements are welcome. Finally, as far as a 35mm M lens of a reasonable size, is the summicron the way to go for the SL? THanks again Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicci78 Posted March 22, 2019 Share #13 Posted March 22, 2019 Q2 and CL has exactly the same UI. Except for hard engraved speed dial for the Q2 and aperture ring. You need a M lenses for aperture ring and distance scale with CL. But it is nice to share batteries between SL and Q2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted March 22, 2019 Share #14 Posted March 22, 2019 5 hours ago, nicci78 said: Q2 and CL has exactly the same UI. Except for hard engraved speed dial for the Q2 and aperture ring. You need a M lenses for aperture ring and distance scale with CL. But it is nice to share batteries between SL and Q2 One UI difference is that Q2 can/should* support back-button-focus (BBF) using the zoom button (as Q does), but CL cannot. *Q2 manual says that BBF should work but it really doesn't ... yet. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicci78 Posted March 22, 2019 Share #15 Posted March 22, 2019 Yes, but I use it as digital crop button. So no BBF for both. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
m9photo Posted March 23, 2019 Share #16 Posted March 23, 2019 If you can't wait, get a used Q and sell it afterward your travel. Unless you have to buy everything new (it's your money anyway ). 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbripley Posted March 23, 2019 Share #17 Posted March 23, 2019 I bought a used Q when it was clear the Q2 was not coming out at last years Photokina. Sold it just now when I ordered the Q2 and made my money back. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belle123 Posted March 23, 2019 Share #18 Posted March 23, 2019 The reason I am not running out to get the Q2, my original Q is just fine for travels unless the focus of the trip is photography. If you gotta have the latest and greatest, then by all means get the Q2. Its your money. But nothing wrong with original Q, CL, T, TL, for light travel. Heck, you can pick up older T for practically pennies. It’s no slouch. And wait for Q2. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.