Mini Q

[TangoCharlie27]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I take my Q and M most places but there are a few times when I cant and I would like a small quality camera to jam in my pocket. I'd love to have the same features as a Q and no thrills in a small pocket sized Leica.  I wonder if Leica have considered a small compact fixed lens camera, like a smaller Q.  Would would be the limitations of designing one?

[jaapv]

They have:
It preceded the Q by quite a few years and is called the X2.

It is quite possible that Leica is considering an APS-C Q-type camera, the same relationship as the CL bears to the SL, but they would certainly want the Q to be firmly established first.
The CL with 18 mm pancake lens performs this function now.

Another thing to consider: the competition is more than fierce in that market segment, it would not be a niche camera like the Q.

[frame-it]

its  called the GRIII 😋

[NigelG]

2 minutes ago, frame-it said:

its  called the GRIII 😋

+1 (though mine’s a GRII)

[M11 for me]

vor 18 Minuten schrieb frame-it:

its  called the GRIII 😋

With its weight of 257g its not equal 🤥

[piblondin]

8 hours ago, frame-it said:

its  called the GRIII 😋

Agree with this. 

[Leica Guy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hard to beat a Sony RX100 for a real compact camera. 

[DexL]

I also have the GRIII but to be honest... it just does not bring anything close the Leica Q joy for me.  Plan to sell it next week.  I have since gotten over my fever for a mini Q.

[analog-digital]

Fuji X-100 or X30 ....

[DaveCollins]

On 12/24/2019 at 3:48 AM, TangoCharlie27 said:

I take my Q and M most places but there are a few times when I cant and I would like a small quality camera to jam in my pocket. I'd love to have the same features as a Q and no thrills in a small pocket sized Leica.  I wonder if Leica have considered a small compact fixed lens camera, like a smaller Q.  Would would be the limitations of designing one?

Unless I am missing something, Leica makes what you are asking for. Both the C-Lux and D-Lux cameras seem to fit what you are describing, and in addition, you will have a zoom capability. If instead, you are asking for a full frame, fixed lens, machined body, great lens quality in a smaller package, I would claim that it probably isn't going to happen. If Leica could make the Q2 smaller than it already is, I suspect they would do so as long as ergonomics could be kept acceptable.

[Mr.Prime]

the concept of a mini Q isn’t quite satisfied by current offerings from anybody, at least in my mind. One niche that Leica does better than anyone is understanding the attractiveness of simplicity and image quality. Such a machine, the pocketable mini Leica would have the following non-negotiable features:

 

a) minimal features for long battery life, no lcd screen.

b) fixed non-extending (immediate ‘on’) 35mm equiv. lens

c) less than FF sensor size with, crucially, a modest pixel resolution (8Mp to 12Mp) implying large pixel size to achieve outstanding low light and highlight-saturation performance - a return to film like ‘s’ curves

d) available in colour or mono versions from the get-go

 

 

 

[M11 for me]

The more recent the cameras are the better (most anyway) they perform in low light. I would not buy an 8MP camera. Or do you believe that the Q2 is back in the year 2005 re low light capabilities? There must be something wrong with the correlation of size of pixels and low light capabilities. A first error might be looking at an individual pixel instead of the whole image 😋

Edited December 26, 2019 by M10 for me

[PhotoCruiser]

I had a lot of compact cameras for underwater photography and all did a good job.
Now i still have my Panasonic LX100 and basically it's a nice camera and fit me needs for everyday use.
I have also a Nikon D800 and the housing for it, but it's a big, heavy rig and i use it only for special photos.

As LeicaGuy already wrote, the Sony RX100 iseries s a highly appreciated camera, but i am not a big fan of SONY.

Chris

 

 

[Le Chef]

On 12/24/2019 at 2:48 AM, TangoCharlie27 said:

I take my Q and M most places but there are a few times when I cant and I would like a small quality camera to jam in my pocket. I'd love to have the same features as a Q and no thrills in a small pocket sized Leica.  I wonder if Leica have considered a small compact fixed lens camera, like a smaller Q.  Would would be the limitations of designing one?

I would look at a DL-7. It’s small, 17MP, has a fast f1.7 24-75mm equivalent lens, can shoot RAW and can be used from completely manual to all automatic. I have the previous “109” and quite often will stuff that into a Barbour jacket pocket and go somewhere when a bigger camera would not be a good fit.

[Ecaton]

As a "mini Q": the CL & 18mm is the one with true Leica genes. It complements the Q nicely, same battery, DNG RAWS, best compact non RF body for m-mount lenses, intuitive UI.

[dugby]

On 12/25/2019 at 7:57 AM, Leica Guy said:

Hard to beat a Sony RX100 for a real compact camera. 

Agree,.......

I too have a similar delemma as the OP,  when I don't want to carry my M240/50APO. 

The Leica D-Lux7 was still too big for my pocket so I bought a well priced......  Hasselblad Stellar 😎

which also doubles as my ultra-small backup camera when I travel with my M.

[frame-it]

On 12/30/2019 at 3:40 PM, Ecaton said:

As a "mini Q": the CL & 18mm is the one with true Leica genes. It complements the Q nicely, same battery, DNG RAWS, best compact non RF body for m-mount lenses, intuitive UI.

does it fit in your jeans pocket ?

[Javier_L]

On 12/25/2019 at 12:57 AM, Leica Guy said:

Hard to beat a Sony RX100 for a real compact camera. 

Ricoh GRIII much better image quality than RX100.

[Leica Guy]

3 hours ago, Javier_L said:

Ricoh GRIII much better image quality than RX100.

Thanks. Good to know. I’ll have to give the GRIII a look. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[Mr.Prime]

On 12/26/2019 at 9:28 AM, M10 for me said:

The more recent the cameras are the better (most anyway) they perform in low light. I would not buy an 8MP camera. Or do you believe that the Q2 is back in the year 2005 re low light capabilities? There must be something wrong with the correlation of size of pixels and low light capabilities. A first error might be looking at an individual pixel instead of the whole image 😋

Fair enough, 8Mp is a bit retro. Although sensor performance has improved with advances in the capabilities of the underlying silicon processing to smaller nodes (higher fill factors, lower noise readouts) there will always be a relative benefit to larger pixels in terms of light sensitivity and full well as well as fill factor. The number of pixels I need maybe less than others because I would not be aiming for poster sized prints from a pocket-sized mini-Q. The 24Mp of the M10 is already sufficient for poster-sized prints of outstanding quality so I would guess fewer pixels would still be great.