Jump to content

Wish the Q2 came with a 35mm lens


biswasg

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

@sfphoto I experienced that this is always a very difficult discussion in this forum. Most people accept that a 35mm lens on an APS-C should be replaced by a 50mm lens on a FF camera in order to get the same angle of view. But when it comes to mathematics and adapting the aperture as well then the brains close (I know no better expression as I am not of english mother tongue).

I think that first of all we have to understand that aperture is written as f/x. This is a fraction. And here start the maths. The x is your max aperture and the f is your focal length. You can not see one without the other. And this x is NOT mm or inches or something else. Think of it: Just x with nothing behind.

Tony Northrup has quite a bunch of excellent videos. Her shows you how the dof is keept equal by applying equivalence. It should then get clear. But Tony can be as professional as one can be a pro, he has an awful lot of people who see him as an enemy. Probably these people do not want to accept that their 400mm 2,8 lens is meant to be a 400mm equivalent lens on their small sensor but then they do not apply the crop factor to the 2.8. Many camera producers do this. Leica is here much better. You find well the correct numbers in the specs. Not everywhere but sometimes.

Nevertheless coming back to the original question: I like the 28mm on my Q2. With 35mm I would miss the wider angle.

Edited by M10 for me
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sfphoto said:

Why is it not the same? Please explain. 

Let’s take the “native” 28 perspective and compare it to the 70mm digital zoom option. At “native” 70mm you would get some of the “compressed” background you tend to get with telephoto lenses. With the digital zoom at 70mm you will get the image as shot with the 28mm but zoomed in. Maybe I am not explaining it well and somebody more eloquent than myself can chime in, but there is no doubt as to the validity of what I am saying. If the contrary was indeed true, there would be no need for longer lenses, we would all have a fisheye and crop as much as the sensor would allow (in terms of what detail has been recorded) and we’d be done. Unfortunately this is not the case:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, acg69 said:

... there is no doubt as to the validity of what I am saying. 

You are wrong, sorry. Try it yourself. The perspective ("compression") changes with the distance to the subject. Take a portrait with a 70mm lens. Change to the 28mm lens and do not change the distance! Take a photo and crop. It is the same perspective. DOF etc. are different of course, but I have explained that in my previous posts.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, sfphoto said:

You are wrong, sorry. Try it yourself. The perspective ("compression") changes with the distance to the subject. Take a portrait with a 70mm lens. Change to the 28mm lens and do not change the distance! Take a photo and crop. It is the same perspective. DOF etc. are different of course, but I have explained that in my previous posts.

I will try it, sure. Even if compression changes only with the distance to the subject and not with the focal length of the lens used, the DoF does change as you correctly mentioned. My premise was that cropping to 35 does not give you the full 35mm (or 75 for that matter) effect, which I suppose you agree with.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 11/14/2019 at 3:49 AM, Viv said:

On a more serious note, I recently acquired a CL and passed my Q on to my daughter, who is a better photographer than me. I must confess that the 35 mm on the CL is fine, but its 50 mm equivalent FOV is sometimes too narrow for me. I need to consider a wider lens for the CL. But which one??????

The tiny 18 or the small 23 or the heavier 11–23

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, sfphoto said:

You are wrong, sorry. Try it yourself. The perspective ("compression") changes with the distance to the subject. Take a portrait with a 70mm lens. Change to the 28mm lens and do not change the distance! Take a photo and crop. It is the same perspective. DOF etc. are different of course, but I have explained that in my previous posts.

So really interchangeable lenses is just a marketing ploy to sell products to people who should just get the Q and use the digital zoom function?

Edited by steve 1959
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

17 minutes ago, steve 1959 said:

So really interchangeable lenses is just a marketing ploy to sell products to people who should just get the Q in use the digital zoom function?

Well, here is the table (again):
28 mm, f/1.7, 47 MP
35 mm, f/2.1, 30 MP
50 mm, f/3.0, 15 MP
75 mm, f/4.6, 7 MP
Up to you when you feel you need a different lens (and camera). But I would say, if you are ok with 15MP at the longest focal length, you have a pretty decent 28-50mm f/1.7-3.0.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sfphoto said:

Well, here is the table (again):
28 mm, f/1.7, 47 MP
35 mm, f/2.1, 30 MP
50 mm, f/3.0, 15 MP
75 mm, f/4.6, 7 MP
Up to you when you feel you need a different lens (and camera). But I would say, if you are ok with 15MP at the longest focal length, you have a pretty decent 28-50mm f/1.7-3.0.

isn't it always f/1.7? you are just cropping from the 28/1.7; that doesn't change the aperture. When we crop in Photoshop, for example, the pic doesn't get darker.....

 

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sfphoto said:

Well, here is the table (again):
28 mm, f/1.7, 47 MP
35 mm, f/2.1, 30 MP
50 mm, f/3.0, 15 MP
75 mm, f/4.6, 7 MP
Up to you when you feel you need a different lens (and camera). But I would say, if you are ok with 15MP at the longest focal length, you have a pretty decent 28-50mm f/1.7-3.0.

And this table is complete nonsense... The lens is 1.7 at all crops.

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, sfphoto said:

Well, here is the table (again):
28 mm, f/1.7, 47 MP
35 mm, f/2.1, 30 MP
50 mm, f/3.0, 15 MP
75 mm, f/4.6, 7 MP
Up to you when you feel you need a different lens (and camera). But I would say, if you are ok with 15MP at the longest focal length, you have a pretty decent 28-50mm f/1.7-3.0.

Never used zoom lenses in my life and never will and that includes digital crop zoom.

I like my 35mm summarit on my m262 which i use most of the time.

Dislike EVF's and 28mm lenses but still find the Q an interesting camera all the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, evikne said:

I guess the table only means DOF equivalent to these f-numbers.

Actually a very useful table and helps explain why shooting at 1.7 has its advantages if you want a more shallow DOF but cannot get close and relying on cropping. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 11/15/2019 at 2:21 AM, terry b said:

Not me, while I love my Fuji X100F, I really dislike the 35mm equivalent. Causes way more problems than it solves. I fell out of love with it standing on a corner in Milan and trying desperately to frame a row of Roman columns and realizing that I would have to step out into traffic to get it. 

IMO, the beauty of a decent camera with a wider lens is that crops work out nicely. I'd be happy if there was a fixed lens offering at 24mm.

This!! - much easier to crop than get run over, fall in the sea etc etc. I’m lucky that I have 35 and 50 millimetres on my M10 so the Q2 is perfect for me, the extra resolution mean I can get away with only carrying that for a lot of trips, especially close to water 😉😂

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Leica could end this discussion if they would offer a fully identical Q2 with either a 28, 35  or 50 mm fixed lens. Then every client could select the lens that suits him best. And I would chose a 35mm version.

I understand that's expensive and perhaps too complicated to offer such an option. So it seems logic they took a 28 because you can crop to 35 and higher, where with a 50mm you can not "uncrop" to a 28.

After a M9-P with multiple lenses of which 80% of the time I used the Summilux 35mm, I'm very happy with my new Q2, it's lighter, more compact and offers a lot of nice to haves. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 3 Stunden schrieb Gijs-Jan:

After a M9-P with multiple lenses of which 80% of the time I used the Summilux 35mm, I'm very happy with my new Q2, it's lighter, more compact and offers a lot of nice to haves. 

After D90 / D7000 / D800 with about 10 lenses and a 17 Kilo photo trolley to haul around the world and/or a photo backpack or bag with
lately with my D800:
Sigma 15mm EX DG
Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm f/4G ED VR
Nikon AF-S VR Micro-NIKKOR 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED
Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/4G ED VR

Now i shoot only the Q2 and the only lens i miss is a macro lens and sometimes a diagonal fisheye for really wide landscapes.

Should i feel the need to have interchangable lenses i would opt for a Leica SL2 or the smaller, lighter, aps-c and less resolution but still great CL

Chris

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, PhotoCruiser said:

After D90 / D7000 / D800 with about 10 lenses and a 17 Kilo photo trolley to haul around the world and/or a photo backpack or bag with
lately with my D800:
Sigma 15mm EX DG
Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm f/4G ED VR
Nikon AF-S VR Micro-NIKKOR 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED
Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/4G ED VR

Now i shoot only the Q2 and the only lens i miss is a macro lens and sometimes a diagonal fisheye for really wide landscapes.

Should i feel the need to have interchangable lenses i would opt for a Leica SL2 or the smaller, lighter, aps-c and less resolution but still great CL

Chris

this was me too:

Nikon D700 w/ 35f1.4 / 50f1.4 / 85f1.4 / 24-70f2.8

Never gonna haul that around again. While I don't have the reach with the Q2, tele was never my style. I just can't see hauling another camera at the same time otherwise for the weight of two cameras approx 6 lbs, I would have kept the Nikon. As I get older, I know my hand is not as strong as it used to be. At less than 2lbs on the Q2, this is ideal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 3/5/2020 at 1:29 PM, Ko.Fe. said:

I missed this one. :)

If I recall it correct the wider lens get under Leica the bigger it is. 21 Lux is a monster, 28 Lux isn't far from it, but 35 FLE isn't this big.

The focal length and focus speed is good theory for plastic film P&S. With wide lenses they have close and else focus modes. With more advanced lenses it is irrelevant.

I had Canon 50 1.2L and still have L zooms, they are made for sports, BIF and they focus instantly. On correct cameras :). Canon has 50mm 1.2 RF L lens now R series camera. Those are like Q series. EVF, FF. It is fast to focus.

Q(2) with 28 1.7 is already disproportional camera. Lens is big, IMO. While with high ISO and IS same (in practical photography) results are achievable with much compact 28 f2.8 lens. 

And as I mentioned before, Q-X. If Leica made X and X Vario, why no Q with 28 or 35, 50? Even Sigma did it. Some of their cameras are on waiting list. 

 

 

X Vario had a pretty slow lens, and the X, X2, X113 and the Vario all focused quite slowly compared to the Q. I also mentioned to the rep the fact that the wider fast lenses are bigger compared to the 35/50 Summilux/Summicron and he told me that the SL lenses are more of an accurate comparison, given that they're full-frame with autofocus that's fast and are weather sealed (the latter-two of which the M lenses are not, of course). 

Wider lenses being bigger is also not always true with R lenses, and definitely not true with the TL lenses. Still, since not all the lenses have the same max aperture, it's not always a direct comparison. Pretty sure the canon lens is bigger on their mirroless camera than a Q is. Their new f/1.2 50mm is quite large, isn't it? 

 

Still, don't get me wrong, I would totally drool at the chance to own a 50mm Q. As for 35, I shoot with the 35 framelines sometimes with the Q2 and love it. I also enjoy the 28, but at 35 you're cutting away the stretchy parts of the image and still get ~30MP, which is...a 35mm Q with more resolution than the original Q!

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 3/6/2020 at 3:10 PM, sfphoto said:

Excuse me?

You're missing an "equivalence" disclaimer on the crop aperture values.

f/1.7 will always be f/1.7. But if you imagine an f/1.7 lens with an infinite image circle, the larger you make the sensor, the more of a Brenizer Method effect it has on the image rendering at the same f-stop and camera position. If you reverse that by cropping in, the more you crop, the more apparent bokeh blur you lose (even though the bokeh is still identical, seeing less of it affects our perception of the rendering). This is what drives the use aperture equivalence values such as the ones you posted. These values help us understand the effect of sensor size on the rendering at wide apertures and closer distances. But really to see significant differences in a blind test, you need to be comparing APS-C to small medium format or full frame/35mm to 6x7 medium format. If you're talking about comparisons stopped down, then you need to jump even further – full frame to 4x5 or 8x10 large format.

Edited by hdmesa
Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 21 Stunden schrieb PhotoCruiser:

Now i shoot only the Q2 and the only lens i miss is a macro lens and sometimes a diagonal fisheye for really wide landscapes.

What's wrong with the Q2 Macro? I have not found the downsides of it yet, but I'm always interested to learn from someone elses views or experiences. 

Edited by Gijs-Jan
typo
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.

×
×
  • Create New...