Took the plunge - Q2 as ‘only’ camera

[Guest]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I use my 35mm f1.4 lens on my leica m262 for 90% of my pictures.

I feel it helps me to get an identity and continuity in my images especially with my long term project of recording my four grand children's life when staying with me.

For me keeping it simple and mostly with one lens works very well .

For a photographer that likes a 28mm lens the Q is a good option for this one lens philosophy in my view.

[Advertisement]

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

[LondonL]

23 hours ago, Steven said:

 

-The M is the camera that I use when I want to feel good and look good. It's got style, and it makes you feel like a real photographer. It also produces a sublime image. But at the end of the day, when I really go out to take photos, it doesn't suit my style that well. It's not reactive enough. It makes me miss opportunities, it makes me miss focus (obviously), and it makes me miss the right composition way too often. I could only seriously rely on it for careless photo walks or 10% of what I like to shoot. Landscapes and composites. 

Fantastic honesty. Not many people would admit to this having bought an M10. It also makes me consider whether an M series digital camera is for me over a Q.

Personally I’m searching for that perfect setup of gear which is as minimal as possible. Too much gear is annoying me at the moment!

[Herr Barnack]

In looking at the portfolios that are presented in LFI magazine, I have noticed that more than a few are made with only one M camera and one M lens, or with a Q or Q2 which is again a one camera one lens setup.

My experience has been that the more gear I drag around with me, the less photos I come back with.  That's counterproductive when viewed in light of my photographic desires/goals/intentions.  So I quit. 

I have come to realize that if I have a 28mm and a 50mm lens, I can do pretty much anything I want in terms of making images.  My 90mm f/2 APO is great to have in specific situations, but I could live without it.  I'd just have to put my 50mm on the camera and make myself get closer to my subject.

More lenses give us more options; the key is in having the insight to know which ones to take and for what purpose.  If a person has 12 M lenses and brings them all, they might as well be dragging a complete medium format kit around.  Been there, done that, never again.

It takes a lot of nerve - not to mention photographic know how - to spend thousands of dollars, travel halfway around the world and bring only one camera and one (or two) lenses, but light and fast wins every time in terms of image making.  I have not yet taken that one camera, two lenses approach, but I am beginning to see how it makes sense and how it is possible to do so and return home with a great body of work.

There's nothing wrong with building a comprehensive Leica kit, or even being a Leica collector.  Just don't bring everything when you go out to make images.  Separate the collector impulse from the image maker ethos.

Edit

Regarding the Q2 platform, I can easily see how the color Q2 or the Q2 Monochrom could be the one camera one lens kit for most photographic endeavors.  But then I am a fan of the 28mm lens and would take it over the much loved 35mm as a do it all or all around focal length.  IMHO it is about impossible to go wrong with the Q2 or Q2M, if you do not need long lenses as wildlife and sports photographers do.

Edited December 9, 2020 by Herr Barnack

[Jeff S]

On 12/8/2020 at 3:10 PM, Steven said:

...it makes me miss focus (obviously), and it makes me miss the right composition way too often. 

-

Not obvious to me.  I like to use an M in part because it provides quick and accurate focusing (especially static subjects), as well as zone/hyperfocal focus using M lenses. It’s just as quick as using AF on my SL2, although I restrict M use to 28/35/50,  no ultra-fast lenses, and use RF only.

I wonder if your vision is corrected optimally for M focusing, and whether your camera/lenses are well calibrated.

Composition is another matter, as precise framing is not an M hallmark. But after lots of practice, visualizing results can become second nature.  At least that’s my experience, which has been echoed by many here.  But I can understand that first time and only occasional use can lead to frustration.

Good that there area so many terrific options to suit all.

Jeff

Edited December 10, 2020 by Jeff S

[iRandom]

I've been using the Q/Q2 as my only camera for a couple of years now. Along with the ubiquitous phone camera. I sometimes find I can't do everything I was able to do before, but that doesn't really bother me. My GAS got redirected to photography accessories but I'm getting that under control since I don't really need a lot of accessories for one camera with a fixed lens.

[plantagoo]

Am 8.12.2020 um 21:10 schrieb Steven:

-The M is the camera that I use when I want to feel good and look good. It's got style, and it makes you feel like a real photographer. It also produces a sublime image. But at the end of the day, when I really go out to take photos, it doesn't suit my style that well. It's not reactive enough. It makes me miss opportunities, it makes me miss focus (obviously), and it makes me miss the right composition way too often. I could only seriously rely on it for careless photo walks or 10% of what I like to shoot. Landscapes and composites. 

Fantastic. Never found a better and more suitable explanation about "The M". I've got somewhat of an On-Off affair with Leica (and other accompanying brands). Bought and sold several Qs. Bought and sold several Ms (and lenses). Bought and sold several Sonys, Fujis, Canons.

The M looks fantastic. It makes me feel good. It makes me want to go out and shoot. While the pictures are fantastic it's sometimes limiting especially if you want to take pictures of your very agile 1 and 3 year old kids. I felt madly in love with the M10-P Ghost and bought it - thinking it would cure my GAS. Didn't.

I LOVE the Q because of the size, the IQ, the handling, the files, the sharpness, the "I want to touch it" and "almost looks like an M" DNA. Had it in almost all incarnations black, silver, Q-P, Q2 and now the Q2M. I HATE the Q because of this 28mm. I'm more a 35mm or 50mm type. But then: I took a lot of my best pictures with a Q. For example, I went to South Africa in 2016 with a Q only (yeah... and an M4/3rds system for backup and reach) and took >95% of the images with the Q. One of them hangs on my office wall as a 3,x m x 2,x m wallpaper...  

So when I try to go to the Q exclusively I end up buying something to accompany the Q. Like a Sony A7III oder A7R4. Fantastic cameras with ZERO soul. At the moment I have a Canon R5 alongside my Q2M for color photos, video and as webcam for online meetings. While I tried the fantastic 15-35/2.8 and the 28-70/2, I have no fun using these gigantic lenses - so I always end up using primes.

The R5 has more "soul" than all of the Sonys I owned but nothing beats a Leica there.

I hope I will cure my GAS in the future. Right now the B&W process with the Q2M is fantastic. Will see how long that lasts... Maybe I will end up with 2 Qs. One for color and one for B&W... 

Greetings
Erik

Edited December 13, 2020 by plantagoo

[falcon468]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

For my travel photography, I have done quite well with using just my Q. But of one trip, a river trip on the Rhine River, I also included my trusty little M4/3 Lumix GX9 and a 45mm, 1.8 lens (90mm equivalent) such that I would have a little more reach when shooting riverside castles. During the two week trip, I used the Lumix no more than 10 shots, and that is a generous number. I plan on going back to just the Q when travel opens back up.

 

[Leica Guy]

On 12/12/2020 at 5:55 PM, plantagoo said:

Fantastic. Never found a better and more suitable explanation about "The M". I've got somewhat of an On-Off affair with Leica (and other accompanying brands). Bought and sold several Qs. Bought and sold several Ms (and lenses). Bought and sold several Sonys, Fujis, Canons.

The M looks fantastic. It makes me feel good. It makes me want to go out and shoot. While the pictures are fantastic it's sometimes limiting especially if you want to take pictures of your very agile 1 and 3 year old kids. I felt madly in love with the M10-P Ghost and bought it - thinking it would cure my GAS. Didn't.

I LOVE the Q because of the size, the IQ, the handling, the files, the sharpness, the "I want to touch it" and "almost looks like an M" DNA. Had it in almost all incarnations black, silver, Q-P, Q2 and now the Q2M. I HATE the Q because of this 28mm. I'm more a 35mm or 50mm type. But then: I took a lot of my best pictures with a Q. For example, I went to South Africa in 2016 with a Q only (yeah... and an M4/3rds system for backup and reach) and took >95% of the images with the Q. One of them hangs on my office wall as a 3,x m x 2,x m wallpaper...  

So when I try to go to the Q exclusively I end up buying something to accompany the Q. Like a Sony A7III oder A7R4. Fantastic cameras with ZERO soul. At the moment I have a Canon R5 alongside my Q2M for color photos, video and as webcam for online meetings. While I tried the fantastic 15-35/2.8 and the 28-70/2, I have no fun using these gigantic lenses - so I always end up using primes.

The R5 has more "soul" than all of the Sonys I owned but nothing beats a Leica there.

I hope I will cure my GAS in the future. Right now the B&W process with the Q2M is fantastic. Will see how long that lasts... Maybe I will end up with 2 Qs. One for color and one for B&W... 

Greetings
Erik

Your comments ring true with me. I currently have a Q2 and a Canon R5. They are very nice complements for my use. I’d rather grab the Q2 for just walking around. The camera begs to be used and definitely satisfies my need for minimalist approach.
 

The R5 is a super tool and workhorse. It definitely has “soul” compared to Sony cameras. All of my EF lenses work well. I shoot a lot of wildlife with long lenses and the R5 delivers. 

I’m tempted by the Q2M, but so far converting Q2 color DNG’s is good enough. A friend loaned me his M10M and 35 ASPH. Beautiful camera and lens. Loved it for B&W photos. Someday! 

[PhotoCruiser]

Am 10.12.2020 um 00:28 schrieb Herr Barnack:

if you do not need long lenses as wildlife and sports photographers do.

or macro photography

From May 2019 when i bought my first Q my poor Nikon D800 is totally abandoned as i use only the Q2 as she fit my needs.
The only two leses i miss sometimes is the 105mm macro and the Sigma 15mm diagonal fisheye for landscapes.

But i don't do sports nor wildlife, if i would do a longer Safari or Jungle trip i would take with me the D800 with only the 105mm macro attached.
If the bank would allow it would be a SL2 with the corresponding 105mm Leica macro tele and a teleconvertor for far away wildlife.

Chris

[davidginNYC]

On 12/7/2020 at 2:37 PM, LondonL said:

I wonder if @davidginNYC is still going strong with 1 camera 1 lens?

Well, almost.  I liked the Q2 so much that I got a Q2 Monochrom also!  

(Sorry I sort of disappeared - life got busy.)

[FrankA]

A great thread.  If I could only have one camera it would be the Q2.  However, another Q2 with a 75 or 90 to go along with the 28 would be perfect for 90% of the time.  For the 10% the Olympus EM1X and long lenses for birds and wildlife works.  

[Marc B-C]

I recently sold all of my Fuji kit and now only have a Q2 as my sole camera (if you discount my iPhone 12 pro max).

I had the X-T3 and five prime lenses from 16mm (23mm FF rough equivalent up to 90mm (approx 135mm). I also had an X100F. In the time I had the kit, I used the 90mm for genuinely three shots, the 23mm (rough 35mm) some of the time, the 35mm (50mm) very rarely and the 56mm, which I loved as a lens, also some of the time. My most used, however, were the 16mm and 23mm. Even then the X100f was my go to camera for most outings.

I was lucky enough to get to Corfu in between lockdowns in 2020 and I only used the X-T3 and 23mm exclusively whilst there.

I am not going to have an issue with the Q2 as far forward as I can currently see, but that is just my situation. 

[i-Leica]

Am 28.8.2019 um 18:01 schrieb lykaman:

Unforunately, I tried that (1 Camera 1 Lens) sadly although liberating, it soon got boring & to many opportunities missed.. L

exactly!!! thats why I sold the Q2 and got a SL2s

I had a Sony too but now I get SL2s and a Q2mono - and thats it :))) really

[Marc B-C]

3 hours ago, Steven said:

You didn't say how do you like the Q2 compared to your Fujis? It's what we want t know ! 

The full story is I went from a pair of Nikons D2x and D3 and another basket of lenses to the first Fuji X-Pro1 with a 35mm lens. That was superb and I loved it. Photo, build and lens quality. I also bought an X100. I enjoyed having the Fuji stuff. Over time I moved through the X-Pro and X100 range ending up with the kit above. They gave great results and the lenses were mostly superb (especially the 56mm f1.2). 

By the time I sold the Nikons, I had done enough safaris and sports photography (carrying a Nikon 300mm f2.8 around for weeks on end was not fun) with my photography moving to landscape and events. I only used aperture priority but was constantly fiddling with or worrying about all the other settings to "suit". The Fujis were nicely built but not "wow" and had become computers first and cameras second in my mind. I don't do video (shudder) and just wanted to get back to enjoying photography, which is where the X100f fitted but that was not weather sealed. I had a Leica M6 some time ago so knew how beautiful it was as a piece of engineering but also how happy I was with nothing more than a single (35mm) lens. When I saw a You-tube video on the simplicity of the Q2 a couple of months ago I made the switch (I also looked at the M10R but manual focus is not ideal for me nowadays). 

Fuji is good but not a patch on the Leica build quality. Fuji colours are wonderful, but so are the Q2 colours. The Q2 lens is sharper than the Fujis, mostly, but most important to me and to answer to your question: the Q2 has made me love holding a camera and taking photos again. I am not constantly fiddling and worrying about setting something that was probably fine where it was already set.  The Q2 just feels good in my hands. My only complaint is that after a spare battery, a grip and/or protector there is nothing more for me to buy! 

Edited March 15, 2021 by Marc B-C

[ravinj]

Q2 is the best 28-50 zoom camera Leica ever made. For my use case, it also pairs well with SL series, because of the same battery/charger - something that seems trivial, but comes in handy while traveling. 

Q2 + SL2 with SL 90. My ideal kit. Now only if I could travel again.

[T25UFO]

And the Q2 is also good for bird photography 🙂

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!

[AllanC]

And dog photography.

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!

[microview]

Great. But may we see some cats?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[ravinj]

So we covered birds and other wildlife with Q2. Just want to point out that it makes for a mediocre camera for rocks and pebbles:

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!

[Leica28]

Absent of the skies, those pictures could pass for Mars