Comparing the new Leica Q2 to the Leica M10

[Rhyman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I just finished about 5 weeks of testing the new Leica Q2 compared with my trusted and loved M10. I wrote this comparison review complete with many comparison images. In short, they are both great cameras. Each has a place in my bag. You can read the review here.

Tell me what you think. Are there others on this forum that have both cameras?

[Advertisement]

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

[Vov]

Thank you for the excellent write up. Having had the Q2 for a similar amount of time it is a pleasure reading your comparison. One day (M11?) I am sure I will find owning both a joy particularly with regards to taking pictures with my significant other. 

[sturkel]

Excellent review and thoughtful comments. Thank you

[microview]

Very considered overview. Mostly I preferred the M10 images until the food bottles where the sharpness and colours with the Q2 seemed better resolved.

[bags27]

A wonderful evaluation and terrific photos (especially the night shots). Thanks so much! 

Despite the Q2 having a newer and denser sensor, to my mind the M still outperforms. How can that be? Is there secret sauce in the processor that Leica is not putting in its mirrorless cameras? (I prefer the output from the SL to the Q/Q2 as well, but the difference is not nearly as significant.) Somehow, the M10 seems to maintain an aesthetic reference to film that the mirrorless do not, though maybe that's just in my mind, because why/how would that be so?

[hcklr]

1 hour ago, bags27 said:

A wonderful evaluation and terrific photos (especially the night shots). Thanks so much! 

Despite the Q2 having a newer and denser sensor, to my mind the M still outperforms. How can that be? Is there secret sauce in the processor that Leica is not putting in its mirrorless cameras? (I prefer the output from the SL to the Q/Q2 as well, but the difference is not nearly as significant.) Somehow, the M10 seems to maintain an aesthetic reference to film that the mirrorless do not, though maybe that's just in my mind, because why/how would that be so?

I agree with this. I have a QP and an M10 - and the images just simply feel different to me. The M10 is more moody and more film like. 

[38wadcutter]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

What do you mean by "moody"? We're talking about a digital camera, not a human .

[Tamhk]

22 hours ago, Rhyman said:

I just finished about 5 weeks of testing the new Leica Q2 compared with my trusted and loved M10. I wrote this comparison review complete with many comparison images. In short, they are both great cameras. Each has a place in my bag. You can read the review here.

Tell me what you think. Are there others on this forum that have both cameras?

fantastic well written review!! thx for sharing.

[bags27]

25 minutes ago, 38wadcutter said:

What do you mean by "moody"? We're talking about a digital camera, not a human .

Something in the M's sensor/processor seems to give subtler gradations of color and perhaps just takes a bit of the bite off the digital sharpness. Similarly older versions of the 35mm Summicron, especially v. 2, are considered classically to give a moody or glowing draw, whether on a film or digital camera, certainly as compared to (say) the Summilux FLE. I have the Zeiss 50 f/1.5 Sonnar for a similar reason. To some (including me) it's not "clinical" but rather "warmer" even though it's on my digital CL (a camera which I think creates a bit less digital aesthetic than my Q). It's just a sense that some folks have about aesthetics: sort of like the difference between a California Cabernet and a left bank Bordeaux: all in good fun!

Edited May 6, 2019 by bags27

[hcklr]

1 hour ago, 38wadcutter said:

What do you mean by "moody"? We're talking about a digital camera, not a human .

It's obviously all subjective - the M10 give a dark tone to the shadows and has more contrast. A quality that I find in film more than digital. The M10 shares this quality. You can call it whatever you want.

[ramarren]

12 hours ago, bags27 said:

A wonderful evaluation and terrific photos (especially the night shots). Thanks so much! 

Despite the Q2 having a newer and denser sensor, to my mind the M still outperforms. How can that be? Is there secret sauce in the processor that Leica is not putting in its mirrorless cameras? (I prefer the output from the SL to the Q/Q2 as well, but the difference is not nearly as significant.) Somehow, the M10 seems to maintain an aesthetic reference to film that the mirrorless do not, though maybe that's just in my mind, because why/how would that be so?

It is most likely the lenses more than anything else. 

[Nuggie]

Hello 😃

Hope all you M and Q2 users here might be able to help here? 

The problem that I have with the Auto ISO with the Q is very different from the M10 (M240 as well) and Dlux 7. 

With the aperture set manually, max ISO 6400, max shutter speed 1/250, what happens with the other cameras is once both limits are reached, the shutter speed would drop until the exposure is correct may it be as low as 1/8. 

However, now the Q just stops dead at the limited shutter speed and as a result the image is under exposed. 

I find this a problem as now I would have to manually adjust the shutter speed each time. 

Not quite sure why they would change the way the auto iso's behaviour from camera to camera. Have written to Leica and they said that they would inform the techs. 

Anyone have multiple Leica cameras who might have noticed this anomaly? 

Thank you very much 😃

[gotium]

4 hours ago, ramarren said:

It is most likely the lenses more than anything else. 

This.

Stick a 28 lux on an M10 and you’ll see the difference compared with the Q.

[ramarren]

On 5/6/2019 at 6:37 PM, Nuggie said:

Hello 😃

Hope all you M and Q2 users here might be able to help here? 

The problem that I have with the Auto ISO with the Q is very different from the M10 (M240 as well) and Dlux 7. 

With the aperture set manually, max ISO 6400, max shutter speed 1/250, what happens with the other cameras is once both limits are reached, the shutter speed would drop until the exposure is correct may it be as low as 1/8. 

However, now the Q just stops dead at the limited shutter speed and as a result the image is under exposed. 

I find this a problem as now I would have to manually adjust the shutter speed each time. 

Not quite sure why they would change the way the auto iso's behaviour from camera to camera. Have written to Leica and they said that they would inform the techs. 

Anyone have multiple Leica cameras who might have noticed this anomaly? 

Thank you very much 😃

Same for the X113, SL, and CL (probably T/TL/TL2 as well). AutoISO enforces the shortest exposure time limit on these cameras; a half-press on the shutter release tells you whether the exposure is at the limits because the live preview goes dark. I just switch to a fixed (and appropriately high) ISO setting in these circumstances and keep my eye on the shutter time so that I don't introduce too much camera motion blur.

Edited May 8, 2019 by ramarren

[db24fps]

Many thanks for the excellent review. As far as noise is concerned, it's what I was expecting given the vast increase in megapixels. It's quite rare I ever push my M10-P beyond 6400 as I to tend to like things to fall off into darkness in a frame, and 6400 still seems decent on the Q2 even if behind on its predecessor and the M10.

Did you find the Q2 getting warm at all? (this question applies to anyone else who owns or has spent a lengthy period with the Q2). I do find my M10-P gets warm during lengthy indoor use, not to an alarming degree, and not even unsurprising given the depth of the camera body and all the processing inside, but I wondered if the Q2 suffered similarly given the CPU power needed to assist the 47mp sensor. I don't recall my Q mk1 getting warm, but I was using it predominantly outdoors. 

The Q2 is tempting. I admired the Q for its versatility with the macro switching, the leaf shutter (and very high flash sync speed one gets as a consequence). 28mm was a rather exciting and eye opening experience on my old Q. As a glasses wearer I stick to a 50mm on an M as I struggle to comfortably see framelines of 35mm and wider, and while 50 is generally my focal length of choice the higher resolution of the Q2 does seem to make the cropping options more appealing should one require them (though, obviously, it's not akin to swapping out actual focal lengths as far as dof is concerned).

 

 

 

[sturkel]

As an FYI I have not seen any heat issues with the Q2.  It seems to be fine in this regard.

 

[indergaard]

On 5/6/2019 at 2:52 PM, hcklr said:

I agree with this. I have a QP and an M10 - and the images just simply feel different to me. The M10 is more moody and more film like. 

I think what you're mainly seeing is the difference between multi-matrix scene metering versus center-weighted metering.
The M10 (and all M cameras) tend to expose to the left more so than to the right. This creates images that look darker and more "moody" out of the camera, with richer contrast and colors. But it's simply because the exposure of the M10 is far more conservative, often under-exposed. Modern cameras with matrix metering and scene metering tend to give a more balanced exposure, which often can make the colors and contrast seem washed out at first glance... But all you need to do is reduce the exposure in post and voila...

Also, it is impossible for the M10 (or any digital M) to correct for lens vignetting. There is no way for the digital M to know exactly what f-stop you are at, so the vignetting correction applied in-camera is highly conservative. On the Q and most other digital cameras it is very easy for the camera to apply vignetting correction, since the camera knows exactly what f-stop the lens is at at all times.

I think these two factors are what you experience as "moody and more film like" images.

The M10's metering might look nicer straight out of the camera for some scenes, but raising shadows in post introduces noise. It is better to shoot to the right and reduce exposure in post, as this reduces noise, especially in darker areas of the scene. Oh and the M10 applies the equivalent of between +10 to +15 vibrancy to the images, as well as about +10 to +15 white adjustment to the files in-camera, to give out-of-camera files, even DNG's, a bit more "pop". In addition to that, the "Daylight" white-balance preset on the M10 is about +300 kelvin too warm compared to any other camera out there. Again, this is a deliberate choice to make the images more "pleasing" at any given white-balance preset. Basically, the M10 is configured to give images that look pleasing straight out of the camera, rather than giving images that are neutral and correct.

You can get pretty matching files from ANY camera if you simply apply +15 vibrance, +15 whites, lower the exposure to match that of the M10, match the white-balances, as well as turn off vignetting correction. Quite easy.

Edited May 12, 2019 by indergaard

[lanetomlane]

Thanks for posting ..... an excellent read.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[Leica Guy]

3 hours ago, lanetomlane said:

Thanks for posting ..... an excellent read.

+1 Thanks. 

[Nuggie]

On 5/8/2019 at 11:27 PM, db24fps said:

Many thanks for the excellent review. As far as noise is concerned, it's what I was expecting given the vast increase in megapixels. It's quite rare I ever push my M10-P beyond 6400 as I to tend to like things to fall off into darkness in a frame, and 6400 still seems decent on the Q2 even if behind on its predecessor and the M10.

Did you find the Q2 getting warm at all? (this question applies to anyone else who owns or has spent a lengthy period with the Q2). I do find my M10-P gets warm during lengthy indoor use, not to an alarming degree, and not even unsurprising given the depth of the camera body and all the processing inside, but I wondered if the Q2 suffered similarly given the CPU power needed to assist the 47mp sensor. I don't recall my Q mk1 getting warm, but I was using it predominantly outdoors. 

The Q2 is tempting. I admired the Q for its versatility with the macro switching, the leaf shutter (and very high flash sync speed one gets as a consequence). 28mm was a rather exciting and eye opening experience on my old Q. As a glasses wearer I stick to a 50mm on an M as I struggle to comfortably see framelines of 35mm and wider, and while 50 is generally my focal length of choice the higher resolution of the Q2 does seem to make the cropping options more appealing should one require them (though, obviously, it's not akin to swapping out actual focal lengths as far as dof is concerned).

 

 

 

Hi... The only times that I find the Q2 getting really warm was when I was using the WiFi to download images down to my tab. It can get really warm and the battery also drains quickly then. 

Otherwise, the heat isn't much of an issue on the Q2.