Q2 plus one

[paul.bridges.3388]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi There,

The Q2 is a supremely versatile camera.  But, if you could add one spare body/lens....what would it be?

Perhaps the SL with fast portrait prime would be helpful.  Say, the 50/1.4 SL.  Having the advantage of fast low light and sharing a battery.  Especially as there’s some good deals on the ageing SL one. Still expensive for a “niche” lens backup though.

So....what would would others choose?

Paul

[Advertisement]

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

[wda]

Paul what did you have and still possess before buying a Q2? That should inform you as to a  possible partner body/systems. In lower bulk and peformance terms, you might consider the CL especially if you already have some M lenses.

[ramarren]

I already have 'the other camera(s)' ... Leica CL and Leica M-D ... along with a full complement of M and R lenses. I'm looking at the Q2 as a one-lens, one-body compact alternative for when I don't want to carry a kit of lenses and if I also want the capability of AF. (I don't want to buy dedicated AF lenses for the CL; I prefer that my lens kit be shared between multiple bodies. The cost of a Q2 is barely more than the cost of two TL series lenses, or one SL series lens...)

[wda]

It seems to me that you have already made up your mind. 

[marchyman]

Next to my Q is an M 262 w/75mm lens.   That covers most situations.   Once in a while I'll replace the M with a Canon 7D w/24-70 lens.  That typically happens when I know I'm going to be shooting lots of flash in an indoor setting.

[paul.bridges.3388]

1 hour ago, wda said:

Paul what did you have and still possess before buying a Q2? That should inform you as to a  possible partner body/systems. In lower bulk and peformance terms, you might consider the CL especially if you already have some M lenses.

I had a SL 24-90, which was stolen.  I don’t miss the zoom, but I’m missing it’s indoor close portrait ability.  Hence my question. 😊

[dancook]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

SL+75mm f2?

[paul.bridges.3388]

6 hours ago, wda said:

It seems to me that you have already made up your mind. 

No.  That’s why I’m canvassing opinion.  I like the SL but reluctant to drop £8k to replace it (a 4 year old camera) without checking the market.

Edited May 28, 2019 by paul.bridges.3388

[paul.bridges.3388]

4 hours ago, dancook said:

SL+75mm f2?

I like your thinking. Although, I do have a legacy Batis 85/1.8 E mount....and the A7III looks superb value.  I’m used to the Sony menus etc. so wondered if this might be a better option. At least until the SL2 drops.

Edited May 28, 2019 by paul.bridges.3388

[Bjoernyy]

I think the Sony a7 III is much better in low light as the SL and much cheaper. 

Until today I have a a7 III with 24/1.4 GM and 50/1.4 Art. A 85mm is not my focal length. 

So, I will sell the 24 GM and buy a Q2, if it is in stock. And as a second camera I will use the a7 III with 50/1.4 Art. It‘s a chame, that the lense is so heavy.

[pharyngula]

M246 + 50mm Cron Apo

[nicci78]

CL will give you same user interface. Same overall size.

And it provides you longer and wider field of view at 24 MP.

11-23 & 55-135 are gorgeous lenses. 

Summilux-TL 35mm will complement well as a 50mm equivalent. 

 

 

If you really want to share the same battery. SL + APO-Summicron-SL 75mm seems to be the best match for portraits.

Edited May 29, 2019 by nicci78

[paul.bridges.3388]

3 minutes ago, nicci78 said:

If you really want to share the same battery. SL + APO-Summicron-SL 75mm seems to be the best match for portraits.

Well, the battery convenience is a distant second consideration.

[paul.bridges.3388]

16 minutes ago, nicci78 said:

CL will give you same user interface. Same overall size.

And it provides you longer and wider field of view at 24 MP.

11-23 & 55-135 are gorgeous lenses. 

Summilux-TL 35mm will complement well as a 50mm 

Motivation for a second body, would be to improve performance for specific situations where the Q2 might struggle.  Would the CL, with it’s smaller sensor, really achieve this?

[nicci78]

of course, CL sensor is gorgeous, same IQ as SL, Q or M10. 

It is best in class APS-C sensor versus average 24x36 sensor. 

 

One sure thing, CL is way better than M 240/262

Edited May 29, 2019 by nicci78

[paul.bridges.3388]

16 minutes ago, nicci78 said:

CL will give you same user interface. Same overall size.

And it provides you longer and wider field of view at 24 MP.

11-23 & 55-135 are gorgeous lenses. 

Summilux-TL 35mm will complement well as a 50mm 

Motivation for a second body, would be to improve performance for specific situations where the Q2 might struggle.  Would the CL, with it’s smaller sensor, really achieve this?

[wda]

9 minutes ago, paul.bridges.3388 said:

Motivation for a second body, would be to improve performance for specific situations where the Q2 might struggle.  Would the CL, with it’s smaller sensor, really achieve this?

Yes, save for exceptional purposes, e.g. large size prints or extreme crops. But for most personal applications the CL is more than adequate and a pleasure to use once you understand and can use the soft wheels instinctively.

[nicci78]

Q2 starts to break appart at 50mm crop and even more at 75mm :

• At 50mm only 14.7 MP with 1.79x crop sensor. So it is equivalent to 50mm f/3
• At 75mm only 6.6 MP with 2.68x crop sensor (same as 1 inch sensor) . Equivalent to 75mm f/4.6

CL is a 24MP with a 1.5x crop sensor : 

• Summilux-TL 35 is equivalent to 50mm f/2.1 
• Summilux-M 50 with M-Adapter-L is equivalent to 75mm f/2.1

Edited May 29, 2019 by nicci78

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[paul.bridges.3388]

42 minutes ago, nicci78 said:

Q2 starts to break appart at 50mm crop. Only a 14.7 MP with a 1.79x crop sensor. So it is equivalent to 50mm f/3

CL is a 24MP with a 1.5x crop sensor. Summilux-TL 35 is equivalent to 50mm f/2.1 

Thanks for your guidance!

Forgive this newbie, but I don’t understand the f-stop comparison here.

I understand the resolution advantage of CL @35mm vs Q2 @50mm.  But, why is the Q2 (shot wide open f1.7 and 50mm cropped) equivalent to F/3?  Isn’t the same amount of light (i.e. more than the slower CL) falling on the cropped area of the Q2 sensor?  That is, cropping doesn’t change the amount of light collected on the cropped part of the sensor and so the faster Q2 advantage remains.

Again, I’m on a steep learning curve so could be way off base...

Edited May 29, 2019 by paul.bridges.3388

[nicci78]

Same amount of light of course. 

Aperture equivalency is just for easy depth of field comparison, between all sensor format. 

 

 But image quality will be better with faster aperture equivalent. Because, you will sample the photo from a bigger equivalent sensor

Edited May 29, 2019 by nicci78