Which Lens to replace Leica Q

[Andrea Bianchi]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi everyone,

I'm a happy owner of Both M and Q. Right now the perfect match is a 50mm on the M and the Q with it's extraordinary 28mm.

Unfortunately I'm not always able to carry around both of them and I was thinking about buying 1 or 2 lenses to replace the Q.

 

The answer is not that obvious because a 28mm M can not focus at 0.3m like the Q, losing it's "closeup distortion". 

An alternative could be 35mm + 21mm; what do you think about? The wide angle lens is able to replicate the same effect?

 

 

[wda]

Whatever extra lenses you choose, changing lenses will slow you down. Think about it.

An alternative might be to add a C-Lux or D-Lux camera to pair with either your M or Q. They need not be current models if your budget does not allow. That would allow you to enjoy the best of both main cameras plus the benefit a smaller versatile compact camera when one main camera is left behind. I often work like that.

[Herr Barnack]

I would urge you to keep your Q.  It is a world class camera and selling/trading it will bring you regrets down the road.

28mm and 50mm are a great combo - those two focal lengths cover about 80-90% of my needs and I think many others in these parts would say the same.

Quote

...Unfortunately I'm not always able to carry around both of them...

For day to day shooting, do you really need two cameras/lenses?  Probably not so much.  This is where the Q excels:  One camera, one lens, no burdensome bag full of gear to weigh you down on a daily basis.

If you travel to an exotic location, bring both Q and M, of course.  But for daily photographing, the Q is king.

Edited August 24, 2020 by Herr Barnack

[Andrea Bianchi]

Oh, I'm not selling the Q!

I'm considering to buy those lenses for when I decide to carry the M10 alone.

Edited August 24, 2020 by Andrea Bianchi

[Andrea Bianchi]

I was thinking about 7Artisans 28 or TTArtisans 21+35 since it is an extra; Q + M is already perfect IMHO.

[carbon_dragon]

37 minutes ago, Andrea Bianchi said:

Hi everyone,

I'm a happy owner of Both M and Q. Right now the perfect match is a 50mm on the M and the Q with it's extraordinary 28mm.

Unfortunately I'm not always able to carry around both of them and I was thinking about buying 1 or 2 lenses to replace the Q.

 

The answer is not that obvious because a 28mm M can not focus at 0.3m like the Q, losing it's "closeup distortion". 

An alternative could be 35mm + 21mm; what do you think about? The wide angle lens is able to replicate the same effect?

 

 

What about the 28 and 50 along with the macro adapter? You won't get autofocus on the M though. 

[jdlaing]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, Andrea Bianchi said:

Hi everyone,

I'm a happy owner of Both M and Q. Right now the perfect match is a 50mm on the M and the Q with it's extraordinary 28mm.

Unfortunately I'm not always able to carry around both of them and I was thinking about buying 1 or 2 lenses to replace the Q.

 

The answer is not that obvious because a 28mm M can not focus at 0.3m like the Q, losing it's "closeup distortion". 

An alternative could be 35mm + 21mm; what do you think about? The wide angle lens is able to replicate the same effect?

 

 

Look for a Konica Hexanon Dual 21/35mm.

Problem solved.

[Andrea Bianchi]

15 minutes ago, jdlaing said:

Look for a Konica Hexanon Dual 21/35mm.

Problem solved.

Way too expensive.

[jdlaing]

Just now, Andrea Bianchi said:

Way too expensive.

Not really. Two outstanding lenses for less than the price of one decent one.

[Andrea Bianchi]

1 hour ago, jdlaing said:

Not really. Two outstanding lenses for less than the price of one decent one.

Maybe, but that's over my budget.

[Stuart Richardson]

The Zeiss ZM lenses are relatively inexpensive for their quality, and they focus to 0.5m instead of 0.7m, so you can get a bit closer. I have the 25mm Biogon and it works pretty well on the M digital cameras...not great on adapted bodies. It is not as sharp at the edges as it is on film, but it is still quite sharp when stopped down. Very sharp through most of the image. Well built and not too big and heavy. It is worth looking into. Another to consider would be something like the Voigtlander Ultron, which is a stop faster and closer to the Q in that sense.

 

[MFT-Lehrling]

You could sell your 50mm and get the Tri-Elmar (Mate) 28-35-50mm F4. 

It also has a "40mm-makro-mode", that allows you to get with ~40mm  at CFD ~40cm. Only usable via LV! It's not perfect by any means... 
I also have a Q and a M... but if the weather is good and i have limited space, i only pick the M& Tri-Elmar. Today with M10 ISO-Perfomance, F4 mostly does the Job. 

Positive:
+no lense swap (For hikes this is crucial for me)
+space (no 2nd Body, or 2nd Lense, just 1 Camera in its small bag)

Negative:
-slow F4
-"big" lense (compared to e.g. Summicron 50 or Summarit 28)
 

I do not think that you can (fully) replace your Q on the M-System, when you are on a budget... the 28mm F1.7 is just too good for the money. 

The above mentioned Konica Hexanon Dual 21/35mm is only good, if you can embrace the 21mm... if not, you are better off with the Tri-Elmar. Cropping the Q will get you enough "35mm", but "50mm" is often too much. That is why I decided against the Konica. (i admit, sometimes i snack a 21mm Elmarit in the bag, just to be sure :D)

 

[Ko.Fe.]

50, 35 and 21 on M10 to jiggle on M10? Make sure you have budget for sensor cleaning. And time. I would rather upgrade to Q2 and use it as the single camera for 28, 35 and 50.

[previlo]

Question regading the „optical illusion“ of out of focus rendering/ Bokeh and more, would the 28 Summilux be „needed“ or do you guys believe that the 28 Summicron already is close „enough“ to the Q/Q2?

Assuming that the Q/Q2 lenses are rumored to be a bit wider, more 26mm in reality than 28mm, which should give the conclusion that the out of focus area/ behaviour might be a bit „less“ than 1.7 - more towards 2.0 and as such the 28 Summicron is closer to the Q/Q2 look than the 28 Summilux?

Opinions?

[MFT-Lehrling]

vor 51 Minuten schrieb previlo:

Question regading the „optical illusion“ of out of focus rendering/ Bokeh and more, would the 28 Summilux be „needed“ or do you guys believe that the 28 Summicron already is close „enough“ to the Q/Q2?

Assuming that the Q/Q2 lenses are rumored to be a bit wider, more 26mm in reality than 28mm, which should give the conclusion that the out of focus area/ behaviour might be a bit „less“ than 1.7 - more towards 2.0 and as such the 28 Summicron is closer to the Q/Q2 look than the 28 Summilux?

Opinions?

@Nick De Marco Has posted a real Comparison on his blog (highly recomend to check it out!): http://rangefinderchronicles.blogspot.com/2015/07/leica-q-photo-review-part-3-street.html
Original l-forum-discussion  (Summicron 28 on the M240 vs the 28mm Q)

Bokeh is subjective... i would check out his comparison and decide for yourself (i think he even uploaded the pictures on flickr)... for me the difference is minor. I think the main difference is in the sensors (of the Q, M10, M240). 

For me:
It comes down to personal preference in terms of handling. I prefer the Q for all 28mm work. The bokeh you get in Makro mode, although it is just F2.8, is something that you can not achieve without adapter on the M's, if staying with wide-angle Lenses. Even the beautiful 21mm Summilux has the CFD of 0,7m (and given it's pricetag, unfit for comparison)...That the Q is more likely to be 26mm, was one of my many reasons, for this intriguing little masterpiece. The M-Summilux-Line is highly priced, which only makes sense, if you can't get close anywhere else. (21mm, 50mm is the only consideration (in terms of Summilux) iam doing for myself, having the Summilux F1.7 28mm on my Q)

[Andrea Bianchi]

I prefer the Q over the Q2 for it's High-Iso performances and lightweight files.

 

I'm considering the 28 Elmarit vs 35 Summicron plus a super cheap 21 for particular shots.

I love the 28 but maybe a 35 is a good choice to change field of view.. I don't care If the 28 is not fast, I'll use scale focusing for 90% of the work.

[MFT-Lehrling]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb Andrea Bianchi:

I'm considering the 28 Elmarit vs 35 Summicron plus a super cheap 21 for particular shots.

Be  carful with the "super cheap 21mm", i wanted the same... But the problem is: the good&cheap ones from Voigtländer or Zeiss all have weird colour-Shifts on Digital M (till M9). It is a real shame, the VL 21mm F4 is a realy good and compact lense. I ended up with a used 21mm Elmarit. Zeiss also has a 21mm, but only the F2.8 is useable.. (Same Problem with colour-Shifts for the F4.5) 
If you just use scale focusing, the 28 Elmarit is the perfect choice... But i somehow doubt, that it will be able to replace the q.
The Tri-Elmar V1 is not realy good for scale focusing... and the V2 is a bit too expensive. 

[martinot]

On 8/24/2020 at 7:34 PM, Stuart Richardson said:

The Zeiss ZM lenses are relatively inexpensive for their quality, and they focus to 0.5m instead of 0.7m, so you can get a bit closer. I have the 25mm Biogon and it works pretty well on the M digital cameras...not great on adapted bodies. It is not as sharp at the edges as it is on film, but it is still quite sharp when stopped down. Very sharp through most of the image. Well built and not too big and heavy. It is worth looking into.

 

I love the 25/2,8 ZM Biogon - excellent choice and suggestion!

I would suggest a trio of 25 (above Biogon), 35 (Cron ASPH choice being my fav) and 50 (Cron v5, or ZM Planar) mm for replacing the Q with just one M camera.

[Andrea Bianchi]

On 8/25/2020 at 4:10 PM, MFT-Lehrling said:

Be  carful with the "super cheap 21mm", i wanted the same... But the problem is: the good&cheap ones from Voigtländer or Zeiss all have weird colour-Shifts on Digital M (till M9). It is a real shame, the VL 21mm F4 is a realy good and compact lense. I ended up with a used 21mm Elmarit. Zeiss also has a 21mm, but only the F2.8 is useable.. (Same Problem with colour-Shifts for the F4.5) 
If you just use scale focusing, the 28 Elmarit is the perfect choice... But i somehow doubt, that it will be able to replace the q.
The Tri-Elmar V1 is not realy good for scale focusing... and the V2 is a bit too expensive. 

As it will be used only for particular shots it is fine even if the IQ isn’t the best.

 

I think that “replace the q” isn’t the best choice of words. What I’m looking fore is a wide angle lens to use in combination with my 50 lux for those situations where I don’t want to bring two bodies.

The main lens will be another 28 or a 35; both Leica. The 21 will be a plus.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jdlaing]

28 Summilux