My Q2 Review :(

[Miltz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

People have been waiting for months for the Leica Q2, and it’s backordered until who knows when. Well I ordered the camera 3 days after launch, got it a few weeks ago and ended up returning it. I’m actually extremely disappointed I couldn’t keep it as I wanted this camera even before it was announced. I had the original Q which I liked. I’m not going to list specs or anything like that, I’m sure you know what they are by now. This isn’t that kind of review. So why did I return the Leica Q2? Let me tell you. (I apologize for any typos in advance)

 

I currently shoot with an Olympus EM1 Mark II with all the PRO lenses. Best camera I ever owned, and there isn’t anything it can’t shoot. I wanted to replace my wide angle glass with the Leica Q2 and I wanted a second camera for my shoots. Basically I figured I would go from 28mm to about 40mm with cropping. Switching between primes during a shoot isn’t always an option and I wanted something with higher resolution and better image quality for certain situations. I was super excited when I received it. The packaging as you might have seen is really nice, but as I unwrapped my camera I was surprised to see the lens had a grease stain on the left side and the viewfinder had more oil on it from a finger print. No, the camera didn’t appear to be used or opened by anyone other than me. I was quite surprised as I never in 15 years got a new camera and have it dirty out of the box. But I kept cool and cleaned it and it was fine, still not what I expected for $5,000. Leica needs to step on their quality control check points as the camera should have never left the factory that way. 

Now that that’s over I was excited to use it. Menu is similar to previous Q and pretty simple to use and setup. The first thing I noticed is that the rear screen isn’t that great. The screen on my Olympus looks better, yeah shocking but true. Fortunately the viewfinder looked great and was easy to use even with my glasses. When I took it outside, the Leica Q2’s rear screen looked even worse in direct sunlight, not good for a $5000 camera. I immediately started using it on my first assignment. The camera felt great, it was nearly silent and was lighter and smaller than my EM1 Mark II with 17mm F1.2 lens. That’s pretty crazy to comprehend that a full frame 47 megapixel camera is smaller and lighter than a 20 megapixel micro four thirds camera. I was very happy about that. I did notice that the Leica’s lens made much more noise when focusing than the Olympus, but nothing overbearing. It’s extremely well balanced in the hand and it felt great to shoot with. So how did it do on my first assignment? Eh, not so good. You see, I’ve been spoiled with the amazing, accurate and lighting quick autofocus on the Olympus, and now with firmware 3.0 it’s in the same league as the Sony A9. The Leica Q2’s autofocus was decent, but not great. Face detection works okay, but not great. Continuous autofocus was poor. Tracking? forget it. In low light the Olympus destroys it. Disappointment filled my heart as the day went on. I left like I was using a camera from 2014. I missed a lot of shots that I would have nailed with my Olympus. I customized the camera so I could quickly change autofocus modes without having to diving into the menu. I quickly realized, there’s not quick way to do it. The camera has only two custom buttons and they can be used for everything, unfortunately there isn’t enough on the camera. So not matter what I did I had to stop, and take a lot of time to change things like ISO, exposure compensation, autofocus mode, and autofocus points, etc. The fact that you can’t customize the zoom button is a mistake as the Q2 needs the extra button. This camera isn’t really designed for a professional who needs to change things quickly for various subjects, situations and lighting. Ironically, I always felt the Olympus had too many buttons, but after using the Q2, I appreciated every one of them. Even the ones I didn’t use. I realized, I can’t use this camera for all my shoots which was a real punch in the gut. You can’t tell your client, hey hold on, I gotta change some settings give me a minute. Something that’s extremely stupid is if you have face detection on, if the camera doesn’t find a face it switches to multi-point automatically and you can’t touch to focus in this mode. So basically it ensures your subject will not be in focus, so you have to stop, go into the settings, change it to spot, and then tap to focus. But now it’s too late because the moment is gone. On my Olympus in the extremely rare case it doesn’t find a face, I can control where the camera focuses, not so on the Leica. No wonder Leica fired a bunch of people and is hiring new ones. When I got home and looked at the images on my computer my heart sunk. I had a bunch of important group shots that were shot at shutter of 1/250 that were blurry! The subjects were completely static so it made no sense. It wasn’t motion blur, the entire image was blurry, yet the next 10-15 were fine and then you’d getting another blurry one. Needless to say I was furious. Someone in a forum told me to make sure image stabilization is on Auto rather than on. So I did that on my next shoot. I was still getting shots that were blurry. Shocking on 28mm with a leaf shutter. Never had this issue with any other camera, ever. I also noticed on some images the camera didn’t nail focus. Also 50 ISO should be a part of the auto ISO option since it provides better image quality than 100 ISO. 

Let’s talking about image quality. The Colors on the Leica are fantastic straight in RAW without any adjustments needed. Everything was accurate and beautiful. Definitely a nice and noticeable upgrade from the Olympus. I was like thank god, something positive. Of course the resolution is much higher as well and I really liked how it rendered everything. Skin tones looked excellent and accurate. The jpegs are atrocious, without question the worse jpegs I’ve seen on a modern camera. You might be saying, just shoot RAW, and I was a guy who never shot jpeg. But, when you become a pro and the client wants images instantly without editing you have to shoot jpeg. The Olympus has fantastic jpegs, the best in the market in my opinion and it has saved me on my shoots where I needed hundreds of great images immediately that need to go to press. High ISO image quality is better on the Leica Q2 but not by the amount you’d expect. Since the Q2 tends to under exposure compared to the Olympus, when you equalize the images the difference kind of evaporates. Shadow recovery is pretty much identical on both cameras throughout the ISO range. Shockingly the dynamic range is identical between both cameras as well. The Leica Q2’s Lens is sharp in the center, but when it comes to the corners the Olympus 17mm F1.2 is without question sharper in the corners when both lenses are stopped down to the same equivalent F stop and the Olympus more consistent throughout the frame with much less distortion. The final issue I ran into is that the spare batteries are completely sold out everywhere. I need 1-2 spares for a full day of work, and since they are unavailable it makes it impossible to use for a long shoot. The batteries are $250 each, so you'd spend $500 for two spare batteries. I tried to bring the charger with me on location, but it was impractical. 

What a two weeks it’s been. Talk about not appreciating what you have till it’s gone. I used the Leica Q2 as my main work camera for all my assignments and as every day ended I realized how amazing the Olympus is for a camera that came out in 2016 compared to this brand new ultra high end 2019 luxury camera. I’m actually surprised and sad. Because I realized my dream camera didn’t do really anything better and my older camera. Seriously, the only real upgrade is the color quality at Low ISO, higher resolution, and that the camera is smaller and lighter. The Leica Q2 was a huge downgrade in autofocus performance, and functionality. Is that worth $5,000? People kept asking me if I’m shooting film and it looked better on me, but getting the shot is more important than looks and comments. I decided to return the camera, but I’m happy I bought it because it made me appreciate what I have and how great it is. The fact that micro four thirds camera from 2016 has better auto focus, better functionality, the same dynamic range, and shadow recovery as a new $5,000 is pretty sweet. 

[kyriacos]

I agree with all your points unfortunately

There are improvements that could come from the firmware upgrades to a lot of those if Leica gets around to doing that. 

While i was actually waiting for my Q2 i ended up purchasing a Nikon Z7. Used that for 2 months and i can tell you i was spoiled. The EVF is fantastic and the IBIS is amazing. Also it's very very responsive. 

In contrast with the Q2 i am digging through the menus, EVF is not as good as everyone would let you believe (IMHO) compared to any 2018/9 camera, more like 2014 EVF. Does the job but meh. Pixelated and low res when shooting. And it's 'laggy'.

I know it is not and will never be a Nikon, Canon, Sony and that's not what i wanted but i was also surprised to see that it operates more like a previous generation camera with the exception of the sensor.

And i also noticed that at 1/250 i get blurred shots. With the IBIS, without and on Auto. It's weird. I think the IBIS is slow to settle. Tried the electronic shutter and i can't tell if that's better yet or not. Noticed that i have to go 1/320s and over to be sure. And yes, noisy lens...

Sometimes also it just doesn't take the photo. I have to unpress the shutter refocus and then it lets me. Even in manual focus i had it set on Low speed and i thought i took 3 shots and none of them actually got taken. (maybe it takes them and skips writing them back to the card?  )

I think they went 2 buttons too little. It is after-all a digital autofocus photo/video camera. That would make some settings easier to access and change on the fly.

Decided i am keeping it for now and see in a year how i feel. I got it for family snapshots and traveling and just hope that with some future firmware upgrades we get some of the quirks dealt with (except adding more buttons heh). I am loving the cropability and single camera.

 

Anyway thank you for posting this. 

(Also thinking of preparing a short review as well with some images)

 

[Advertisement]

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

[Miltz]

You’re welcome.... thank you for providing your feedback as well, and that I know my camera isn’t defective since you had the same issues. 

[Mr.Q]

I understand your reasons for selling the camera, but the Q/Q2 was never really intended to be a "pro" camera.  Of course it can be done, but there are compromises and workarounds that you need to be prepared for. 

You've claimed to have owned the Q before, so you should have been fully aware of most of your gripes (AF performance, Controls, JPEG quality) prior to your purchase. I'm not quite sure what you were expecting. The Q2 is basically the same camera with more resolution.

[DexL]

Most know the Q2 is far from perfect but great for what it is.  Compact, minimalistic, hi-res, full frame goodness with great image quality and Leica colors at a fixed focal length with autofocus capabilities.  Sounds like this could be a case of picking  the right or mostly right camera for the wrong job.  There are many awesome images on this site from the Q/Q2 and most of your concerns are well documented here.  I truly hope you find the pro camera you are looking for.

[dusuacangmong]

This topic is well explained to me why rarely people use leica for shooting. The one you need is some camera have quick autofocus and smart, export to jpeg with high quality, but the leica don't have it all, thay why you returned it. I could see this.

 

I think Leica famous for its lens, for the M series they manual focus 100% and then they try with Q with autofocus, so the point is Leica does not "familiar with" the things call "auto focus" at beginning. So when they start make "auto focus" they 100% will not equal to other brand such like yours - Olympus.

People in M still proud that Rangefinder have super quick focus if you used to it, and starting use leica, you have to learn how to manual focus. I think so.

 

I have an Q and i'm love how it is: Compact, small, the image quality is so great, i could have great images without much effort setting tons of things like other cam, very easy to use with a beginner like me.

[AnikiMu]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I hope firmwares will come to upgrade this good hardware...

[Voxen]

1 hour ago, AnikiMu said:

I hope firmwares will come to upgrade this good hardware...

Some big issues found on the Q are still present on the Q2 and since 2015 and so many complains to Leica from users in this forum and elsewhere, they didn't fix them.

Unfortunately it seems Leica just do things the way they like and never listen to customers.

So keep hoping ;-) 

Edited August 7, 2019 by Voxen

[fupix]

vor 3 Minuten schrieb Voxen:

Some big issues found on the Q are still present on the Q2 and since 2015 and so many complains to Leica from users in this forum and elsewhere, they didn't fix them.

Unfortunately it seems Leica just do things the way they like and never listen to customers.

So keep hoping 😉

Yes, they do it, but it takes a little longer 😉

 

[4peterse]

I think I disagree with your review. I'm not saying it's wrong, or it's not important to point out shortcomings of a camera. Myself I had a hard time learning the Leica Q2 (coming from a Nikon DSLR, which – I'd say – master since a couple of years). My initial impression was that the handling of the Q2 is way too complicated and not expected from a Leica (I expected very simple operation, no need to re-configure or dig deep into menus). But I was wrong, I had to configure the camera carefully, each configurable button, all user profiles, just to be able to switch modes quickly enough for different shooting purposes.

And, yes, there are so many issues with the firmware, it's embarrassing. But after getting used to it – and that's what is needed for every new tool – handling and my photos get better and better. It just takes much more patience than I had originally anticipated.

[lpeeples]

I agree with one of the posters above. I have assignments and use my Nikon gear.  Leica, at least the Q, in my opinion, is not even close to the right camera for what you do. A Leica is all about the joy and art of photography. Taking your time to consider composition and exposure.  It’s like an m but they automated it a bit more with autofocus but they had enough sense to quickly switch back to manual focus and pop into macro when I want. I don’t want to work with my Leica, I want to relax and explore with it. 

Edited August 7, 2019 by lpeeples

[dancook]

I've tried to use the Leica Q and Q2 for professional work, but the workflow just remains easier when using my Sony A9 cameras.

For personal use I choose the Leica Q2 every time.

Edited August 7, 2019 by dancook

[prk60091]

It is all about the right tool for the right job.  What makes the Q/2 exceptional is it's lens and sensor which allows this tool to be adapted for many jobs.

 

Edited August 7, 2019 by prk60091

[tom0511]

If you are someone who wants very fast and direct access to all functions Leica is not for you.

Most Leica cameras are more about simplicity and reduction of buttons and menus - this makes working with them sometimes slower, but also sometimes the reduction is a relief (for me) compared to overloaded menues with tons of functions I only need once every 2 years. I would say it is a very personal thing. For me something in between would be ideal. Maybe a Q2 with 1 or 2 more buttons.

There is one point where I fully agree with you: When the AF does not detect a face then one should be able to move the focus point around/chosse focus point. It works very well with the Panasonic S1r for example. I also find myself switching back and forth between 1-point AF and face detection and the way Oly or also Pana do it makes much more sense for me.

 

[bags27]

I agree with the general tone of the last few posts. It's an amateur camera, with fantastic dngs (though I still think the Q produces at least as good an output as the Q2) and terrible jpegs. If I were a professional, I'd be shooting with either the Leica SL/Panny S1R or the Nikon Z7 (acknowledging no second card slot) or for studio the Hassy. Heck, I think I'd be shooting with the Hassy for everything and just acknowledge its absurd limitations--that's how good the photos are. Make the subject conform to my artistic vision rather than my conforming to existing market expectations (of course, I'd first need to be independently wealthy! 😀)

Edited August 7, 2019 by bags27

[Viv]

The eternal question, how good is good enough.

My answer, the Q is good enough for me.

[Gethyn]

Given all the above useful comments which is a better niche camera, Q2 or Hassy X1D II?

[tom0511]

vor einer Stunde schrieb Gethyn:

Given all the above useful comments which is a better niche camera, Q2 or Hassy X1D II?

Both are not the fastest cameras to use, the Q2 is faster than the x1d (by far).

By the way I would not agree that only "fast" camera can be used professionally. It depends what you shoot and how you shoot.

 

 

[Jared]

Thanks for the review.  There is a lot I agree with in there, a few items I don’t, and a couple items that made me curious.

1) I agree AF is not at all sophisticated by current standards.  Face detect is poor.  Eye focus is non existent (reasonable on a 28mm), focus tracking is nearly worthless.  The static focus I find accurate and snappy.  For my photography that’s totally fine.  For others?  I’m sure it’s not.

2) Raw images are excellent but JPG’s are terrible.  I agree with this.  Again, a situation that doesn’t affect my photography, but if you use JPG’s much at all this is just not a good camera.  

3) Autofocus noisy—that’s one I haven’t experienced.  It’s not silent, but it’s close enough I would have no qualms using the camera in a church during a service.  The only time I have consciously noticed any noise is when it’s on continuous AF.  It has the “jitter” that seems to be common to all Panasonic derived AF contrast detect systems.  

4) ISO 50 not incorporated into auto ISO.  I have no explanation for this one.  50 is not a pull ISO, it seems.  Dynamic range is higher and noise lower.  So why not include it?  Dumb.

5) Viewfinder quality is mediocre.  This may be true, but it is good enough not to annoy me.  That definitely was NOT true for the Q.  I am very pleased with the new EVF even if it’s not at the standard set by the Leica SL or some of the newest Sony cameras.  

6) Corner performance of the lens.  I don’t own the Olympus so can’t compare at equivalent focal ratios.  I do find the Leica lens good in the corners by f/2.8, though, and excellent at f/4.  If the Olympus is better at f/1.4 and f/2 (equivalent apertures) I’m impressed.  For anyone else making comparisons, just make sure you look at equivalent fields of view, not just by zooming in to 100% or you will be doing a disservice to the higher megapixel camera.

7) Spare batteries should be available.  No question about that.  It’s not even a new battery since it’s been out for the SL for years.

😎Dynamic range, shadow recovery, etc.  I find the Q2 is no improvement over the last generation of chips but no worse, either.  That’s about what I would expect. Rather than better SNR and dynamic range you get better resolution instead.  You can trade that by down sampling, of course, but it’s certainly no “leap forward” over the Q except in resolution.  

9) Handling, menus, and the ability to get to functions quickly.  This is one of the few where I just disagree with you.  It’s one of the fastest and most intuitive cameras I have used, and I can get to everything I want to without taking my eye away from the EVF.  I just choose the right profile to start with (I’ve setup five for the various situations I run into) and I’m good to go.  I don’t however, need to mess with AF very often, and I can imagine that one being frustrating.  But everything else? Easy.  ISO? Check.  Aperture?  Yup.  Shutter? Yes.  White balance? Definitely.  Over/under exposure?  Absolutely.  Manual focus? Yes.  I don’t want anything else.  So I’m pleased not to have any more buttons.  I see this as Leica’s greatest strength.

10) Blurry images at 1/250s.  I haven’t run into this and wonder what’s going on.  It almost can’t be camera blur/motion blur with just a 28mm lens.  You said you had IS on Auto (or off) so it can’t be latency on the stabilization.  I’d love to see a sample image or two if you still have any.  Would want to try to recreate this so I can avoid it in my own pictures.

Thanks for taking the time to post your thoughts.  Sounds like this just isn’t the right camera for you.  It works well for me, but I’m not an event photographer.  If I were, I’d likely choose a different camera just as you have done.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[bags27]

2 hours ago, Gethyn said:

Given all the above useful comments which is a better niche camera, Q2 or Hassy X1D II?

horses for courses. I think the Hassy only shoots around 2 frames/second, and its MF rather than FF. But I think it renders better than any camera currently and it certainly has the best UI. I'd like to see the Hassy go against the fantastic L mount zooms and primes, if there ever is an SL2 to go with them.