Jump to content
Johno

Anyone Else Staying with Q over Q2?

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just now, camnh said:

I love my Q -- I've been using it more than my M or my other cameras. It works well for me so I don't see a reason to upgrade.

That's interesting. Why do you use the Q more than the M? Just curious.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About my personal experience. 

My wife love to use the Q and now the Q2. She also likes to use CL, but really prefer the Q. 

But she never used any of my previous Ms M9, M Monochrom, M (typ 262)

A little bit of data :

In 4 years my Q produced 56,000 photos  

In 1.5 year my CL produces 21,500 photos 

In 4 years all my Ms combined produces 24,000 photos  

 

Q and CL are far more practical. Therefore, far more used  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tough call - I'll probably keep the Q2 - and maybe I'll start seeing the benefits (beyond the astonishing resolution).  But I'm not as blown away as I was hoping to be. 

The resolution is a beast!  Being able to zoom in 2:1 in Lightroom and see incredible detail is impressive!

The power switch is better, but the Q was not terrible.

I hope the EVF has better shielding from light so I don't have to block the side with my hand. With the Q, it can be pretty bad if there's bright light on the left.

The locking diopter adjustment is really welcomed. 

I don't care for the new DELETE  implementation - way too easy to delete something - maybe I get used to it.  Delete button was better.

New battery - might be nice if I could get a spare.  And at $250, you'd think they be glad to sell as many as possible.  I thought the old Panasonic budget battery was fine.

I don't like not being able to resize the Field Focus square like I could do with the Q. Hope they firmware/fix that.

I could easily see keeping the Q or, for those still wanting to buy, getting a Q or Q-P. 

Off to shoot some more photos and think about it.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GFX 50R + GF 50 pancake lens (fall 2019) make more sense to me if I want + - 50mp of resolution in a small package. I think the price will be close to the same – essentially a medium format Q minus the macro function. I'm going to be pairing this combo with my Q-P for travel.

The Q DNG sizes are already as large as my GFX lossless-compressed RAW files, so I'm not wanting DNG files of over 80mb with the Q2 – that's getting close to the GFX 100 lossless-compressed RAW sizes.

And honestly, how much can you improve the IQ of the original Q from an overall standpoint? It was and is exceptional.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Advertisement (gone after registration)

23 minutes ago, nicci78 said:

https://camerasize.com/compact/#805,820,ha,f

Please check your facts. GFX-50R without lens is way bigger and heavier than Q2. No comparison really.

Price is around the same for GFX without lens against Q2.

I apologize if it sounded like I was saying the 50R and Q are the same size. I was trying to say it's essentially a larger, medium-format Q when paired with the upcoming GF 50 pancake lens.

Edited by hdmesa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/4/2019 at 3:02 PM, Overpowered by Funk said:

Why do you use the Q more than the M? Just curious.

For me the answer is easy.  I find the 28mm focal length of the Q a better fit for whatever it is I'm shooting more often than the 75mm lens I keep on my M.  But when I want 75mm I'm very happy I have the M.  In the last 3 years I've used the Q about twice as often as the M.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A wonderful friend let my try his Q2 for an hour or so.  The images were amazing.

The Q has treated my like royalty (and has earned a royalty or two!) for over three years and thousands of images.

My brand C mirrorless is delivering phenomenal RAW images that react to my wishes in Lightroom Classic to render exactly what I want in large prints.

The Q2 fixes a few annoyances of the Q but the upgrade just does not make financial sense.

My adding a Leica M lens adapter to the Brand C mirrorless is tempting me artistically.  I'll soon be shooting M without straining these tired old eyes staring at a rangefinder patch.

Q forever...  M lenses forever...  I've very happy with my current kits!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You should try CL, best match with your Q. 

CL + M-Adapter-L is excellent with M lenses.

Leica’s bodies are the best for M and R lenses :

- lens recognition, through 6-bit coding, menu choice or ROM reader.  Much needed software corrections are applied on camera  

- über thin sensor filter with specific offset micro-lenses array are the best to use initially made for film lenses. Especially with wider than 50mm lenses. 

Others brands do not bother to be used with Leica lenses. Corners are usually really soft. And weird colour cast can appear. 

CL is even better, by cutting potentially problematic corner off. For example old Leica 28mm corners are a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did not have the old Q (although I borrowed it a few times) so went straight for the Q2

Image quality is stellar and 47 MP are nice to have for flexibility in post. I pair it with the SL and a 50 or 75 and it is great to be able to share batteries, something that you normally are not even able to do with two Ms of different generations! :)

I am not sure how the Q2 compares to the original Q in these respects, but I specifically bought it for close ups and to take pics of our kids and AF is very good by Leica standards, definitely faster than the SL with the cron

Honestly I am not sure what is not to like, but as I usually prefer to leave the house with an M and given my use I am not sure if I would have upgraded from the original

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have had the Q, CL and, now, the Q2...all marvelous machines.  Love the incredible resolution of the Q2 in post.  But, most important to me is that with the Q2, I "don't leave home without it"!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would it be a wise move to just buy the discounted Q or go with the new Q2? I am a newbie who wants to enter the leica system. What do you guys think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoy my Q.  I will never be that creative or win a National Geographic picture contest, but I enjoy the click of the button. At age 67, my life now involves a lot of travel, all over the place, so I use the Q to take great landscapes, church interiors and reportage style pictures. All I need at this point.

Share this post


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

Would it be a wise move to just buy the discounted Q or go with the new Q2? I am a newbie who wants to enter the leica system. What do you guys think?

it depends on what you mean by "Leica system". They have several (rangefinder, MF etc). Personally for me Leica means M/rangefinder, so the Q won't help you with that.

I started with an M6 and it was a great teacher

If you mean Leica world instead of system, then the Q is a great first bite

Share this post


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

it depends on what you mean by "Leica system". They have several (rangefinder, MF etc). Personally for me Leica means M/rangefinder, so the Q won't help you with that.

I started with an M6 and it was a great teacher

If you mean Leica world instead of system, then the Q is a great first bite

Sorry for making it unclear. I mean the Leica world. I first started with Nikon DSLR then shifted to fuji mirrorless. Now  I am tempted to try and enter the leica world. I am not sure about the M rangefinder as I can’t imagine the price + lens and finding out Its not for me. So in short, I am curious to enter the Leica world but with a budget in mind. Thank you!  I am learning alot here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if you are 100% happy with 28mm and don't need to crop, the Q is good enough, just IMHO

Use the extra budget to get a spare battery or two a nice case and strap etc - that is also part of the Leica world/experience ;)

 

1 minute ago, Marley said:

Sorry for making it unclear. I mean the Leica world. I first started with Nikon DSLR then shifted to fuji mirrorless. Now  I am tempted to try and enter the leica world. I am not sure about the M rangefinder as I can’t imagine the price + lens and finding out Its not for me. So in short, I am curious to enter the Leica world but with a budget in mind. Thank you!  I am learning alot here. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, Marley said:

Would it be a wise move to just buy the discounted Q or go with the new Q2? I am a newbie who wants to enter the leica system. What do you guys think?

The Q (and Q2) is an incredible camera that's a blast to shoot with. Having 4 brand choices on my shelf it's the one I picked up first.  Like the other guy said -- the Leica system is mostly referring to bodies and M lenses. I also have an M10 with three lenses. The Q and that kit are worlds different. With the M10 you get to spend at least $6000 for camera and lens to have a marriage of 1950 and modern technology.

There are a lot of lightly used Qs out there. Unless you shoot in rain or dust storms and find yourself short on pixels I feel there is no compelling  reason to get the Q2. 

I haven't perceived having too few pixels with the Q.

Edited by Johno

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting thread. I’ve read all of your posts. In the field I use a Hasselblad X1D, but carried the M10 as a backup before I bought the Q. I found that I was using my Q more than my M10. I carry it almost anywhere I go.  Sold the M10 and bought a used SL because I love the M lenses.

 I’ve been debating the purchase of a Q2. When it was introduced I said “Nice, but 24MB for 35mm format images is just about right”. The SL proves that point well. The other day my dealer called and offered me a Q2.  I’ve been debating the switch for days waiting for divine guidance. Hasn’t come so far.

Thanks again for your input.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Johno said:

The Q (and Q2) is an incredible camera that's a blast to shoot with. Having 4 brand choices on my shelf it's the one I picked up first.  Like the other guy said -- the Leica system is mostly referring to bodies and M lenses. I also have an M10 with three lenses. The Q and that kit are worlds different. With the M10 you get to spend at least $6000 for camera and lens to have a marriage of 1950 and modern technology.

There are a lot of lightly used Qs out there. Unless you shoot in rain or dust storms and find yourself short on pixels I feel there is no compelling  reason to get the Q2. 

I haven't perceived having too few pixels with the Q.

I don’t shoot in the rain so weathersealing is not important to me. I prefer the newer EVF and bigger battery. I can’t get over that If buying new, the Q is with a 4 year old technology. Also a con for me is the 80MB file. I will be watching this thread carefully. 

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...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue., Read more about our Privacy Policy