Leica Q2 Jpeg

[ravinj]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

To the OP:

JPEGS are neither good nor bad. Same for RAW. If you like either/none/both, great.

For compact cameras, I have used Fuji X100V, Leica Q, Leica Q2 and Sony RX100VI. I have the Q2 and Sony now. While Fuji JPGs sometimes seem "better", I always got much results when using RAWs. Sharpness, colors, everything superior in RAWs. This is true for both Fuji and Leica. In fact if you like "Fuji colors" and Fuji film simulations, shoot RAW and then apply the simulation in Lightroom. That's an eye opener. 

The Fuji JPGs with nostalgic faded look or hyper saturated colors (Velvia) gets boring soon. 

Some of the the best JPGs I have seen (outside of GFX 50R which I don't have anymore) are from a tiny powerhouse that is neither APS-C nor FF - is it the Sony RX100VI.

With all that said, there is little practical difference in IQ between the X100V vs Q/Q2. Both can produce solid output and you can match Fuji's output to the Leica with some processing, though the lens in Q is hard to beat in overall brilliance which to my eyes, is evident in images I see on my monitor. 

 

Edited March 23, 2021 by ravinj

[Griffonan]

Regarding your question about the Leica Q2 JPEGs, it's been a while since this thread started, but I can share some insights. The Q2's JPEG rendering has seen improvements over the years, with firmware updates and advancements in post-processing software. While it may not have matched the Fuji's signature JPEG look straight out of the camera back then, there have likely been developments since.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[RSH-Photo]

On 4/27/2020 at 10:40 PM, piblondin said:

This is simply not true. Post-processing is not at all what makes a photographer. 

Henri Cartier-Bresson "had no interest in darkroom work," according to the Art Institute of Chicago. 

https://archive.artic.edu/cartier-bresson/prints/#:~:text=Cartier-Bresson loved exploring the,page by editors and designers.

 

[GREG PLAT]

On 3/23/2021 at 1:45 AM, A2_Foto said:

Ok folks! I decided to rent a Q2 instead of a Q (from the first pictures) - and with the updated Firmware 3.0 . 
I have to say that now, for my taste it is really working for me 🙃 - and I can see it now as my replacement for the Fuji X100V. 

I mean... after having it for a week, the image quality just blew me away. After returning the Q2, I did more pictures with my Fuji, but man... I took the red pill. It's hard to go back. I placed an order to buy it 😬

Normally, 50 MP is too much, but I've found it very handy for cropping, and I really like using the 28mm angle of view. I have to say it also gives a good bokeh and subject separation (If you're close enough). I would avoid close-ups when the subject is on the corner because of the wide angle distortion. 

Here are more examples. These are directly edited JPGs in Lightroom. 

LIGHTROOM ALBUM    - Random pictures, but cool
LIGHTROOM ALBUM 2  - Photo session with model. In my opinion skin colors look great after Firmware 3.0  

I know - I should use RAW. I should probably only adjust the exposure and so on. But I have a personal take on the color grading and some texture in the pictures. This is just my personal taste & touch, coming from the Fujifilm world, and I'm sure many have been there asking themselves the same question. My workflow does not consist in storing endless amounts of huge RAW files, and travel around with several SSD drives. I mostly share my content to my clients via Lightroom and I don't want the hassle that the DNGs involve. 

I'm not claiming to be an expert on the matter, I just wanted to share my two bits of experience and this could help people take a decision. 

My main advices coming from the Fuji x100 series: 
1) If you're not sure, rent the camera. I'm sure it's possible in some stores. 
2) It's bigger, heavier and bulkier than the Fuji. I don't mind, but it will NOT fit in your pocket. 
3) You will loose a lot of personalization options - Fuji allows you to do so many edits on the camera that the SOOC Jpgs barely need any extra work. 
4) But you're getting an extremely, extremely good lens and it's a very flexible camera. I don't crop much to be honest, but it comes handy.   

What else can I say - experience beats a lot of theory. So after reading forums for a couple of weeks (5k is a lot of money) I decided to try it out myself and for me it's a good enough camera to do the jump, and try to use it as my only camera. 

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!

 

I am now in the sane dilemma you was. Leica Q3 or Fuji x100VI? I like 28mm and i am shooting RAW and JPEG but i usually 95% not edit my photos. I have FUJI XT3 and XT5 with 5 lenses and RICOH GRII. I do most street photography and i like very much Fuji JPEGS

As you said you dont like edit JPEG like me but you changed and you bought Q2.

Why you changed and what you suggest to me? I never had a Leica

[jaapv]

If you shoot raw and JPG you’ll have the best of two worlds…

[GREG PLAT]

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

If you shoot raw and JPG you’ll have the best of two worlds…

jaapv you are everywhere everytime, like the Leica spirit...

[Griffonan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 2/27/2024 at 1:43 PM, Griffonan said:

Regarding your question about the Leica Q2 JPEGs, it's been a while since this thread started, but I can share some insights. The Q2's JPEG rendering has seen improvements over the years, with firmware updates and advancements in post-processing software. While it may not have matched the Fuji's signature JPEG look straight out of the camera back then, there have likely been developments since.

One technique you might want to explore is compressing your images using online tools like compress image. Even though the thread's a bit dated, this method can still help fine-tune the colors and sharpness to get closer to your preferred aesthetic.