How accurate is the Q2 at zone focus

[Guest]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

11 hours ago, jaapv said:

Given that zone focussing is something invented for the Kodak Brownie (face symbol-stick man- family group- mountain) and managed to endure  in a limited fashion for rangefinder cameras, which has been replaced by autofocus, it is not surprising that it doesn't work as well on modern cameras. Why should you want to zone focus using the Q2? Set it to face recognition and forget about it - it will even revert to multifield if it does not see a face. I guarantee excellent results.

Have they sorted out the reported dreadful face detection on the Q2 now?

[jaapv]

No idea.

[Tom Hills]

7 hours ago, jaapv said:

Remains the fact that tha Q2 is not conceived to be a dedicated landscape camera. It is intended as a high-level travel and reportage camera. Obviously it can do it within limits, but there are better choices. 
Leica’s do-it-all camera’s are the SL and CL with the former more aimed at the heavy-duty professional market and the latter at the high-end amateur. 

Nor is the M but that’s my preference, I didn’t start at these choices - goodness knows I’ve tried every system under the sun - but this is where I’ve ended up. Whether the Q2 is a dedicated landscape camera or not is by the by frankly, that’s what I use it for and it should be perfectly competent to perform in much the same way my M10 does. 
I’ll contact Leica UK about my copy and see whether or not it’s sample variation or a design fault, I’m assuming it’s the former.

[Chippy_boy]

12 hours ago, Tom Hills said:

No it’s not but whatever mate. 

Why do you believe so?

All material I have read, and indeed common logic, suggest that you get the best performance from the sensor by giving it as much light as possible. And therefore best practice is to expose to the right as far as possible without clipping, and then if you want the photo darker for "artistic" reasons, then adjust in post.

I am intrigued as to why you believe this not to be the case?

[jaapv]

For deep-focus landscape photography my absolute favourite camera would be the Panasonic S1R. With 6K post-focus capacity it will allow flawless in-camera focus stacking. Traditional hyperfocal photography cannot begin to compete.

That does not mean that everything else on the market is rubbish. Too many excellent landscape photographs out there. It is just that technology marches on and the goal posts keep moving

[Guest]

11 hours ago, jaapv said:

No idea.

But you advised a poster to "set it to face recognition  and forget it" ?

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yes - all cameras have this now.

[Tom Hills]

5 hours ago, Chippy_boy said:

Why do you believe so?

All material I have read, and indeed common logic, suggest that you get the best performance from the sensor by giving it as much light as possible. And therefore best practice is to expose to the right as far as possible without clipping, and then if you want the photo darker for "artistic" reasons, then adjust in post.

I am intrigued as to why you believe this not to be the case?

How do you know the OP didn’t do that? There are many times that I personally would shoot a scene a third or two underexposed if we’re going by the average light in the scene. This would simply be because I prefer the look of the image that way, nothing technical just personal preference. 
the perceived wisdom is to expose to the right and process to the left, certainly all my landscape friends do this, along with luminosity layers etc etc and a mountain of time in front of a computer!

after over a decade of going down that road I ended up with a Leica, I actually expose for the highlights (often the sky) and work back from there as in my personal experience, the M files respond better to shadows being lifted than highlights pulled back. 
 

just my own POV, wouldn’t tell anyone to follow this but I’ve tried every method under the sun and have settled on what works for me personally. 
 

I also don’t use a tripod any more, unless I want a long exposure, I just bump the iso and live with it as the sun goes down - you won’t find anyone in the landscape fraternity telling you to do that either but each to his own, it works for me!

[Tom Hills]

5 hours ago, jaapv said:

For deep-focus landscape photography my absolute favourite camera would be the Panasonic S1R. With 6K post-focus capacity it will allow flawless in-camera focus stacking. Traditional hyperfocal photography cannot begin to compete.

That does not mean that everything else on the market is rubbish. Too many excellent landscape photographs out there. It is just that technology marches on and the goal posts keep moving

I’m rarely close enough to a subject to need focus stacking but it’s great the tech is evolving to allow for more creative opportunities. I like to keep it simple myself but look forward to seeing what people can do with this sort of thing.