Q2 35mm Crop Mode vs. 35 Summicron M

[nicci78]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, sfphoto said:

For those of us shooting RAW, the cropping is done in post processing anyway, so the exact position of those lines does not matter that much. The central crop to 35mm or 50mm is also easy to imagine while you are taking the photo.

Actually. The crop is done automatically by Lightroom according to frame lines selected. Of course you can change the crop afterwards when shot in DNG  

So it is way better to select the right crop when shooting. You will save a lot of time later on. Especially if you only shoot in 35mm crop.

Imagine, if you have to manually crop 1000+ photos, when you get back from holiday ? 

[Ecaton]

Why buying a V8 to have it run on 4 cylinders only?

[Advertisement]

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

[PhotoCruiser]

Am 25.3.2020 um 12:45 schrieb nicci78:

Imagine, if you have to manually crop 1000+ photos, when you get back from holiday ? 

When i come back from Holiday i crop the best/most important probably around 20-50 as i would not use/watch/show 1000 cropped photos for my holiday album.
Actually i should start to delete (or save on a external disk) the restant 950 as space becomes short.

Chris
 

 

 

Edited March 31, 2020 by PhotoCruiser

[KenBennett]

So, here is a serious question.

What is the real difference between a Q2 shot with the 35mm crop lines, and a Fuji X100v? The image sizes are about the same, the field of view is equivalent, in both cases you are shooting with a "cropped sensor." (You are cropping out the middle of the Q2 sensor.) Both have excellent lenses and create high quality image files. The Fuji is about 1/4 the cost. 

Of course, one is a Leica and the other is not. Whether that is worth the extra cost is for each individual to decide. 

(FWIW, I own a Q2 and complete Fuji X and GFX systems, though I don't currently own an X100 of any sort. I like the 28mm field of view and use the Q2 all the time for that reason.) 

Not trying to start a flame war. But the OP said they liked the look of a full frame sensor, whatever that means, but that they also plan to never actually use the whole sensor. So I am curious. Also, I am putting on my flame-proof underwear

[bail]

vor 19 Stunden schrieb KenBennett:

So, here is a serious question.

What is the real difference between a Q2 shot with the 35mm crop lines, and a Fuji X100v? The image sizes are about the same, the field of view is equivalent, in both cases you are shooting with a "cropped sensor." (You are cropping out the middle of the Q2 sensor.) Both have excellent lenses and create high quality image files. The Fuji is about 1/4 the cost. 

Of course, one is a Leica and the other is not. Whether that is worth the extra cost is for each individual to decide. 

(FWIW, I own a Q2 and complete Fuji X and GFX systems, though I don't currently own an X100 of any sort. I like the 28mm field of view and use the Q2 all the time for that reason.) 

Not trying to start a flame war. But the OP said they liked the look of a full frame sensor, whatever that means, but that they also plan to never actually use the whole sensor. So I am curious. Also, I am putting on my flame-proof underwear

I had the X100F and loved it. But as I said in my first post, after using the M10 + Summicron 35 I was quite impressed by the feel and quality of the images compared to years of using Fuji cameras. If the difference has nothing to do with sensor size, so be it. Sorry for mentioning it. But I absolutely love the look of the Leica images. That's why I considered the Q, because I prefer having an EVF and autofocus.

And the Q has two main advantages over the X100V to me. 1.25x crop instead of 1.5x for 35mm, resulting in a DOF of f2 when used in crop mode (compared to the DOF of f3 on the Fuji). I can reframe each shot in post without losing megapixels, so it's a 30MP file every time. Of course, those two points alone won't justify the price difference for everybody and the X100V is a beautiful and very capable camera as well.

[M11 for me]

The maths are:

35/28=1.25, so that is the Crop.

The equivalent aperture would be 1.25x1.7=2.1, so that is the aperture of about the summicron

The equivalent ISO is 1.25 square= 1.6. Then 100 ISO should be about 160 ISO on the M10. So when you use the 200 base ISO then you are about there and you have a picture of the same brightness on both cameras, same DOF and same noise.

Forget then about the "Full Frame Look". The pictures are the same and you can not make out any difference unless the sensores and lens renderings are a bit different which they are indeed (e.g. Q2 renders more blue that the M10 etc.).

Edited April 1, 2020 by M10 for me

[Q2ER]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I own the Q2 and M 262 with the Summicron 35. 
The difference you will see in the pictures are minimal put next to each other it’s still hard to see difference. BUT what you don’t get with the Q2 is the range finder experience focusing a range finder if a pleasant experience that Q2 can’t deliver. Manuel focus on the Q2 is actually good but still not the same. 
I wouldn’t wanna be without any of them they both have their place and time. 

[k2kv]

Sorry for being so late to this discussion, but i need to say this for anyone else who happens to land here in the future:

Cropping an image does NOT alter DOF. Whatever your original range of focus was when you captured your frame with that gorgeous 28 f1.7, that will remain the same, no matter how you crop your final image/print. Whatever bokeh was created in your image, will remain in your image, no matter how much you crop. 

I questioned this myself before I committed to my Q2 and while there are many explanations to be found online (many of which are incorrect), the only concept that actually makes sense is, “a 28mm lens set to f1.7 will always render as a 28mm set to f1.7, with its normal DOF by design, no matter what camera it is on, or how you might crop pre or post.”

If you can get past the brilliant frame lines, you must remember that you are still simply shooting with one specific lens, according to its intrinsic design, creating one actual raw FF image. You capture one image and then, in post, like with any photo process, you simply crop as you see fit. Does DOF change in your print? No, it does not. Your 28mm lens will never render exactly as a 50mm, all else being equal. That is not to say that it cannot be utilized as such - with rather remarkable results!

Hope this helps to clarify.

[Ecaton]

You are right, but the point was that a 28 f1.7 dof compares with a dof of a 35mm @around f2.1. I.e. a Summicron 35 almost fully open would give you a comparable dof.

[nicci78]

I got rid of my Summilux-TL 35mm on CL. Because rendering of Q2 crop at 50mm at f/1.7 is almost indistinguishable from Summilux-TL 35mm at f/2. 
Let’s say that it is too close. 
 

Q2 crop at 35mm f/1.7 is better in every regards than Summicron-M 35mm asph at f/2 on M10. 
 

Q2 crop at 75mm f/1.7 render a more pleasant image than Summarit-M 50mm close down to f/2.8 on CL. 
 

I made several comparison shot between native lenses vs Q2 crops. The latter is so good (except resolution limiting your ability to print big at 50 and 75) that it make no sense to keep dedicated equivalent lens for CL. 
 

 

Obviously if you compare Q2 crop against equivalent APO-Summicron-SL on SL2. The latter will win hands down. Those lenses are so good. 
But against CL it does more than the job. 
 

 

By the way focal length did not affect DoF ! It is the distance between the subject and the camera ! Which is why crop mode offer the same DoF as the equivalent focal length. Because you alter the distance by being closer and closer. 

Edited December 8, 2021 by nicci78

[jaapv]

6 hours ago, k2kv said:

Cropping an image does NOT alter DOF. Whatever your original range of focus was when you captured your frame with that gorgeous 28 f1.7, that will remain the same, no matter how you crop your final image/print. Whatever bokeh was created in your image, will remain in your image, no matter how much you crop. 

Sorry, this is only true if you print correspondingly smaller/display the cropped image smaller and view them at the same distance. The magnification by printing the cropped image to the same size as the uncropped one will decrease DOF.
When you crop you alter the angle of view, which means that you must move away to get the subject the same size, which in turn means that you alter the perspective and increase DOF.

DOF is not the same as bokeh.
Nor is DOF an absolute on/off value. It is the gradually decreasing zone of acceptable UNsharpness. 

[AlexeyGE]

On 3/24/2020 at 2:14 PM, bail said:

I prefer the look of full-frame

Cropping Q2 to 35mm will give you the look of a cropped sensor so it is not right solution for you.

[nicci78]

There is almost no difference between 24x36 and 1.25x crop for 35mm is bigger than APS-H size. 

So don't worry, there is not such thing as full frame look when you stop down your precious full frame 😉

 

[k2kv]

Quote

Sorry, this is only true if you print correspondingly smaller/display the cropped image smaller and view them at the same distance. The magnification by printing the cropped image to the same size as the uncropped one will decrease DOF.

With all due respect, the image as originally rendered when you released the shutter simply does NOT change regardless of how you eventually decide to crop/print/display. Any bokeh that was present (the result of focal length x aperture x distance) will appear in the final image, regardless of print magnification. If the background was in focus when captured, it will remain so in print. If it was out of focus, it will likewise remain that way forever. You simply cannot alter DOF by way of print magnification.

Of course, you are correct that DOF is not the same as bokeh; I never said it was. But bokeh results from the combined optical phenomenon of focal length x aperture x distance. Crop factor does not enter into this calculation and, in fact, the lens-aperture design and resulting DOF never changes, even if light transmission does. You cannot alter the optical design qualities of any lens by cropping or magnifying a print. This does not mean that results must therefore be inferior in any way. Not at all. I'm a big fan of the remarkable Q2 lens and high-res capabilities of the camera, and can easily accept the limits of its design. 

You are correct in that you can move closer or further away to alter the equation and therefore alter resulting DOF and other image qualities. But you cannot turn a 28mm lens into a 50mm or 75mm by cropping either in-camera or in post, any more than you can change the view through my living room windows by reducing the size of the wall in which they are mounted. Moving closer or further away was not at question, nor what I was referencing.

Rather, since this question comes up so frequently around the net (fuji-x owners lose sleep over this) I only wanted to politely add some clarity to the very confusing issue of how cropping any lens in-camera (or utilizing crop-sensor cameras) might affect actual final output. 

 

[hdmesa]

22 hours ago, k2kv said:

With all due respect, the image as originally rendered when you released the shutter simply does NOT change regardless of how you eventually decide to crop/print/display. Any bokeh that was present (the result of focal length x aperture x distance) will appear in the final image, regardless of print magnification. If the background was in focus when captured, it will remain so in print. If it was out of focus, it will likewise remain that way forever. You simply cannot alter DOF by way of print magnification.

Of course, you are correct that DOF is not the same as bokeh; I never said it was. But bokeh results from the combined optical phenomenon of focal length x aperture x distance. Crop factor does not enter into this calculation and, in fact, the lens-aperture design and resulting DOF never changes, even if light transmission does. You cannot alter the optical design qualities of any lens by cropping or magnifying a print. This does not mean that results must therefore be inferior in any way. Not at all. I'm a big fan of the remarkable Q2 lens and high-res capabilities of the camera, and can easily accept the limits of its design. 

You are correct in that you can move closer or further away to alter the equation and therefore alter resulting DOF and other image qualities. But you cannot turn a 28mm lens into a 50mm or 75mm by cropping either in-camera or in post, any more than you can change the view through my living room windows by reducing the size of the wall in which they are mounted. Moving closer or further away was not at question, nor what I was referencing.

Rather, since this question comes up so frequently around the net (fuji-x owners lose sleep over this) I only wanted to politely add some clarity to the very confusing issue of how cropping any lens in-camera (or utilizing crop-sensor cameras) might affect actual final output. 

 

Enlarging doesn't change DOF, but it can make DOF appear more shallow depending on the magnification. For example, imagine using the same lens+subject+distance+sensor size but change the resolution from 50 to 100mp (GFX 50S/R vs GFX 100/S) – then view both at 1:1 magnification. Since you're zooming in much farther on the 100mp image to attain 1:1, DOF on the 100S will appear more shallow. So yes, DOF does not change, but perception can if you view compared images on unequal terms. Same way bokeh appears to become less prominent the more you crop – the bokeh didn't change, but the perception of it did (or becomes more prominent by reversing the crop with the Brenizer effect (pano bokeh)).

[hdmesa]

In any case, as was already pointed out, a crop from 28mm to 35mm on the Q is so minimal as to be irrelevant – but you do get the benefit of having perfect corner sharpness and less distortion. I've often considered the Q as a 35mm-lens camera with a slightly smaller than full frame sensor – and 28mm is an expansion bonus

Edited December 10, 2021 by hdmesa

[LondonL]

I found this thread fascinating. 

Do many of you use and shoot in the 35mm crop mode regularly?

[Corius]

I'm new to the Q2 and have been experimenting with the various crops.

I addition to helping me visualise the final image the camera takes the exposure setting from the cropped area and not from the full frame. Some people have commented that non-cropped RAWs are the same as in-camera cropped so you might as well do the cropping in post, but this is not the case.

[Einst_Stein]

Q2 cropped to 35mm equivalent in now way matching the look of true 35mm summicron SL or M on SL or M. Any other expectation is simply unrealistic. 

Whether you will like or accept the cropped Q2 is another story. Admit it, it is a compromise.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[T. McCool]

this thread has been very entertaining... the lack of references or sample images to show any side of the 'debate'' equally amusing