Wish the Q2 came with a 35mm lens

[Steven]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4 minutes ago, mcpallesen said:

Too true. When will people on this forum get this basic point. This is so imperative to understanding photography and composition. Much more than discussing character between 24MP and 40MP sensors or whether to upgrade once again after only shooting a camera for 12 months. Shoot, study and learn more - chase gear less. I’m trying (and struggling) to adhere to this mantra. 😊

This is true, but what the person who started this discussion originally stated is NOT. 
he said that if you crop in the 28mm image, you have the equivalent of a 35image. NO!!! Because cropping doesn’t make you feet move. To get the equivalent of a 35, he would have had to step back a few steps in order to achieve the same perspective. That being said, that still wouldn’t fix the compression difference, as well as the fact that cropping increases the depth of field. I think that most people when they talk about perspective actually think about bokeh. They think that cropping into a 28mm image is going to give you a 35mm image, but that’s not true. Never. Not even if you step back enough with your feet. Sorry ! 

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Steven said:

This is true, but what the person who started this discussion originally stated is NOT. 
he said that if you crop in the 28mm image, you have the equivalent of a 35image. NO!!! Because cropping doesn’t make you feet move. To get the equivalent of a 35, he would have had to step back a few steps in order to achieve the same perspective. That being said, that still wouldn’t fix the compression difference, as well as the fact that cropping increases the depth of field. I think that most people when they talk about perspective actually think about bokeh. They think that cropping into a 28mm image is going to give you a 35mm image, but that’s not true. Never. Not even if you step back enough with your feet. Sorry ! 

I won’t lecture any more. But you are clearly mixing several concepts.

Perspective is decided by the position of the photographer/camera relative to the subject (and fore-/background). Nothing to do with focal length - FACT!

DOF and hence “what people call bokeh” is decided by the size of the “eye” of the lens. This is determined by (focal length) / aperture. I.e. 35mm @ f/1.4 corresponds to 50mm @ f/2 in relation to bokeh. Hence a 300mm @ f/8 will yield a much smaller DOF than 28mm @ f/1.4 - do the math.

All this is true on both the M10, M10R and even the M2 😉 Go figure. 

[Advertisement]

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

[Steven]

Just now, mcpallesen said:

I won’t lecture any more. But you are clearly mixing several concepts.

Perspective is decided by the position of the photographer/camera relative to the subject (and fore-/background). Nothing to do with focal length - FACT!

DOF and hence “what people call bokeh” is decided by the size of the “eye” of the lens. This is determined by (focal length) / aperture. I.e. 35mm @ f/1.4 corresponds to 50mm @ f/2 in relation to bokeh. Hence a 300mm @ f/8 will yield a much smaller DOF than 28mm @ f/1.4 - do the math.

All this is true on both the M10, M10R and even the M2 😉 Go figure. 

I’m not mixing anything, I’m saying the same thing than you and pointing out that other posters Are mixing it. 

[Guest]

I just do not understand why camera companies keep producing lenses of various focal lengths?

Why bother when all we have to do is crop to get any focal length required?

[sfphoto]

24 minutes ago, steve 1959 said:

I just do not understand why camera companies keep producing lenses of various focal lengths?

Why bother when all we have to do is crop to get any focal length required?

Maybe this helps: Let me give you the answers to a few possible questions you may have about. Let's just choose the 50mm crop on the Leica Q2:

1. Can I crop to 50mm and still get great images? Yes.
2. What if I rather wanted a 54mm crop? No problem, the raw is still the full 28mm and you can crop in post. Only the JPG is cropped.
3. Will the perspective be the same as if I had used a 50mm lens? Absolutely the same.
4. What about my 47MPx? At 50mm you are only getting the central 15MPx, still not bad.
5. Will my exposure time be the same? Yes, you are still taking images at f/1.7 (or whatever you set your lens to). And your EXIF will still say f/1.7 even if you crop to 50mm.
6. What about the beautiful bokeh that those 50mm lenses have? On the Q2 you get the DOF of a 50mm lens at f/3.0 (i.e. similar to the typical 24-70mm/2.8 lens at 50mm).
7. What about compression? Again, perspective is the same. It only depends on where you stand.
8. Why do people buy all these lenses? A. Because their camera does not have 47MPx and they cannot crop so well. B. They want the shallow DOF of a 50mm/1.4. C. Because it does not make sense to crop to 90mm, 135mm, 300mm,… If you want to use focal lengths 21mm and 300mm, you need to change lenses.
9. Why do so many people want a 35mm Q2? I do not know, maybe because they think they will never be in front of a tall building or inside a small room where they could need a 28mm. 

I will stop here. Tired of this discussion. Sad to see that some experienced photographers still do not get it...

[Guest]

7 hours ago, sfphoto said:

Maybe this helps: Let me give you the answers to a few possible questions you may have about. Let's just choose the 50mm crop on the Leica Q2:

1. Can I crop to 50mm and still get great images? Yes.
2. What if I rather wanted a 54mm crop? No problem, the raw is still the full 28mm and you can crop in post. Only the JPG is cropped.
3. Will the perspective be the same as if I had used a 50mm lens? Absolutely the same.
4. What about my 47MPx? At 50mm you are only getting the central 15MPx, still not bad.
5. Will my exposure time be the same? Yes, you are still taking images at f/1.7 (or whatever you set your lens to). And your EXIF will still say f/1.7 even if you crop to 50mm.
6. What about the beautiful bokeh that those 50mm lenses have? On the Q2 you get the DOF of a 50mm lens at f/3.0 (i.e. similar to the typical 24-70mm/2.8 lens at 50mm).
7. What about compression? Again, perspective is the same. It only depends on where you stand.
8. Why do people buy all these lenses? A. Because their camera does not have 47MPx and they cannot crop so well. B. They want the shallow DOF of a 50mm/1.4. C. Because it does not make sense to crop to 90mm, 135mm, 300mm,… If you want to use focal lengths 21mm and 300mm, you need to change lenses.
9. Why do so many people want a 35mm Q2? I do not know, maybe because they think they will never be in front of a tall building or inside a small room where they could need a 28mm. 

I will stop here. Tired of this discussion. Sad to see that some experienced photographers still do not get it...

Thanks good answers of course but i always feel Q users over play the crop issue to justify the camera.

If i had a Q i would use it as a 28mm camera and never worry or bother with cropping .

 

[PhotoCruiser]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 3 Stunden schrieb steve 1959:

If i had a Q i would use it as a 28mm camera and never worry or bother with cropping .

I believe that most of us Q/Q2 users use the camera for what she was designed for, a wide-angle camera.
But the excellent optical quality and the high pixels gives us the possibility to realize also substantial crops, and that is a great feature.

I have to admit that i crop almost all photos as it's my workflow to download the photos to my computer and view them on my 27 or 32 inch monitor.
It was the workflow, in earlier years blowing them up and cropping them in the darkroom and now it's cleaner and less stinky to do that on the computer.
I think except stillife in a studio some cropping or leveling is often necessary and i see nothing bad in doing that, it was always a part of photography.

Chris

[ianforber]

20 hours ago, Steven said:

This is true, but what the person who started this discussion originally stated is NOT. 
he said that if you crop in the 28mm image, you have the equivalent of a 35image. NO!!! Because cropping doesn’t make you feet move. To get the equivalent of a 35, he would have had to step back a few steps in order to achieve the same perspective. That being said, that still wouldn’t fix the compression difference, as well as the fact that cropping increases the depth of field. I think that most people when they talk about perspective actually think about bokeh. They think that cropping into a 28mm image is going to give you a 35mm image, but that’s not true. Never. Not even if you step back enough with your feet. Sorry ! 

I think this might have hit the nail on the head - I suspect there may be parallel discussions here. For some people, cropping involves what @Steven says: they simply crop out the bits of a 28mm image to produce one they like more. For some, cropping involves using the frame lines in the EVF to position themselves where they would have stood had a different lens been fitted, and then crop out the deliberate excess in post. I do both, although it is much harder to do with the 50mm or 75mm framelines. Obviously, the two approaches will give you different perspectives. 

[sfphoto]

I agree. I also mostly crop in post. But sometimes it helps to see the frame. It would be nice if there was a way to zoom in the viewfinder. The range-finder-look of the 35mm frame is nice, but the 50mm frame gets pretty small. It would be cool to automatically zoom to the 35mm field of view on the full screen, when you select the 50mm frame and zooming to the 50mm field of view when selecting the 75mm frame. 

[Steven]

29 minutes ago, sfphoto said:

I agree. I also mostly crop in post. But sometimes it helps to see the frame. It would be nice if there was a way to zoom in the viewfinder. The range-finder-look of the 35mm frame is nice, but the 50mm frame gets pretty small. It would be cool to automatically zoom to the 35mm field of view on the full screen, when you select the 50mm frame and zooming to the 50mm field of view when selecting the 75mm frame. 

One thing that always frustrated me with my Q2 was that. But for me the worst was not shooting through the frame lines (I understand why they do that, it's to preserve the quality of the EVF and not ruin the shooting experience). The worst part was the fact that in playback mode I still had to see the image through the frame lines again instead of the cropped jpeg. That's so stupid. 

By the way, I sold my Q2 yesterday and I cannot sleep anymore. I miss it so much. I feel like a guilty traitor, like crap all day long. 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, PhotoCruiser said:

I believe that most of us Q/Q2 users use the camera for what she was designed for, a wide-angle camera.
But the excellent optical quality and the high pixels gives us the possibility to realize also substantial crops, and that is a great feature.

I have to admit that i crop almost all photos as it's my workflow to download the photos to my computer and view them on my 27 or 32 inch monitor.
It was the workflow, in earlier years blowing them up and cropping them in the darkroom and now it's cleaner and less stinky to do that on the computer.
I think except stillife in a studio some cropping or leveling is often necessary and i see nothing bad in doing that, it was always a part of photography.

Chris

When i said "cropping" i meant i personally believe the Q should be used as a 28mm camera and not as some kind of super zoom.

If you really like a 28mm lens the Q is in theory a great option but if you dislike that focal length it makes no sense at all to buy it in my view.

[PhotoCruiser]

vor 14 Stunden schrieb steve 1959:

If you really like a 28mm lens the Q is in theory a great option but if you dislike that focal length it makes no sense at all to buy it in my view.

Please explain me what is the big difference between a 28mm and a 35mm lens, except that the 28mm capture more field of view?

Chris

[Steven]

1 hour ago, PhotoCruiser said:

Please explain me what is the big difference between a 28mm and a 35mm lens, except that the 28mm capture more field of view?

Chris

A photo, for example a portrait, taken on a 28 and a 35 at the same aperture and same distance will look more compressed, less distorted, and have a much more shallow depth of field. It would look a little more “cinematic” on a 35 (depending on which film director you use as the standard for cinematic!) 

[jaapv]

That is completely wrong.  The perspective of a  photograph is only determined by the distance between the camera and the subject. In no way by the focal length.

The only thing a wideangle lens does is to allow you to move in closer.

As to DOF, it is more complicated, but similar  applies:

https://completedigitalphotography.com/2018/08/focal-length-and-depth-of-field/

https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/depth-of-field.htm

 

[Steven]

22 minutes ago, jaapv said:

That is completely wrong.  The perspective of a  photograph is only determined by the distance between the camera and the subject. In no way by the focal length.

The only thing a wideangle lens does is to allow you to move in closer.

As to DOF, it is more complicated, but similar  applies:

https://completedigitalphotography.com/2018/08/focal-length-and-depth-of-field/

https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/depth-of-field.htm

 

This is why i said that if you take a portrait at the same distance. Which would mean that in real life your feet wouldn’t be in the same place... still not clear ? 

[jaapv]

No. If you take it at the same distance your feet wouldn't move. Nor the subject's chair. The only thing that. would happen is that your framing would be a different size

[Steven]

Just now, jaapv said:

No. If you take it at the same distance your feet wouldn't move. Nor the subjects' chair.

I meant the same distance when you look at the image. Meaning that both images would be identically framed and composed. You’d need your feet to move for that, or am I going crazy ? 

[Steven]

5 minutes ago, jaapv said:

No. If you take it at the same distance your feet wouldn't move. Nor the subjects' chair.

In that case yes you would get the same perspective as a 35 by cropping into the 28. 
The only impact would be on the depth of field which would be less shallow than the 35 after cropping on the 28thThe only impact would be on the depth of field which would be less shallow than the 35 after cropping on the 28

[Steven]

1 minute ago, jaapv said:

So you mean that the subject/framing would be the same size but you are moving in and out viewing. the print? 

I mean that you take exactly the same picture twice, once on the 28 and once on the 35 meaning than the for the 28 shot you would have to step forward (or step backward with the 35). 
Therefore the image on the 28 would be more distorted than the one on the 35 and the background would also look less compressed 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[jaapv]

Yes, but that has nothing to do with the focal length, only with the change in distance thus the perspective.