Jump to content

Leica Q2 or M10P?


Steven

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi guys, 

Im new here, but not new to the Leica world. I have been shooting for years with the M series. Started with an M6/M7, and now my main photo camera is the M10P. I adore it. I only own one lens, which is the 35 lux ASPH 1.4. 35mm is my preferred focal length, and I can live with it for the rest of my life without needed anything wider or tighter. 

I mainly shoot street and city scapes, sometimes portraits, but I recently got kids, so now I also shoot family stuff. I consider myself pretty good at focusing with an RF, but with the kids I just cant. I get too tired bending over to make myself at their height and align my RF on their face. So it got me thinking wether it was time to go to an autofocus system. 

I have been considering the Q2. It seems to be a perfect all around camera. The lens is brilliant. I could live with 28mm although I prefer a little more compression on the 35 (and I do not consider, like some say, that the Q2 in a 4 lens in 1 camera. To me, its a 28mm with enough MP to crop and readjust, but in no way its comparable to my 35). The only problem is that I cannot afford both. I love range finders, but I also really need autofocus. 

So eventually, I think it will come down to the image produced by the camera to make my choice, cause eventually the end result is more important to me than the whole process. I went to the Leica shop today and I compared the Q2 and the M10P side by side. Both photos shot manual with exactly the same settings, except that on the Q I'm at 1.7 while on the M I'm at 2.0. I can't help but notice that the 35 lux has much more character than the Q2. It looks more cinematic to me, less clinically sharp. But the Q2 is still an amazing piece of gear, im amazed by it. 

 

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1YtZbcLOWQ2niaa54a1CBhO78zkDQbwa6?usp=sharing

Based on this photo, which result do you like better? and what is your experience with Q2 and M10? if you could chose only one, which one would it be and why? 


PS: the photo where the salesperson of the Leica shop smiles is the M, and the one where he doesn't smile is the Q! 

 

Cheers, 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The choice has nothing to do with image quality. That is ample in both cases.
You should consider:

Do you want interchangeable lenses or do you want to crop?

Do you want AF or manual focus with  -if applicable- the attendant learning curve?

Do you want an optical viewfinder or an EVF?

Do you want to pat a sizeable sum and be done or buy into a system that could easily set you back five times the initial price or more?

 

Those are your choices

 

 

 

 

 

 

Y

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

- I do not need interchangeable lens. I plan to only own one Leica lens for the rest of my life. If I go for the Q2, it'll be a 28 lux. If I keep the M10, I already own the 35 lux ASPH 1.4, which I adore. I guess that's 1 point for the M. 

- I don't dislike the range finder experience, but would be so relieved to have the option to have autofocus, to make me assured that I'll be fine in every situation. Here, I'm referring to the pictures of my kids. That's 1 point for the Q. 

- I do not care for EVF or OVF. None gets the points here.

- I am not sure that I understand you last criteria, but in theory money is not a concern here. I already own the M10 with the 35. Wouldn't get any extra lens. I could also sell it to easily finance the Q2. So money is not part of my consideration. I won't have to spend anything regardless of what I choose. 

It's a TIE! I still don't know what to do.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Steven said:

- I do not need interchangeable lens. I plan to only own one Leica lens for the rest of my life. If I go for the Q2, it'll be a 28 lux. If I keep the M10, I already own the 35 lux ASPH 1.4, which I adore. I guess that's 1 point for the M. 

- I don't dislike the range finder experience, but would be so relieved to have the option to have autofocus, to make me assured that I'll be fine in every situation. Here, I'm referring to the pictures of my kids. That's 1 point for the Q. 

- I do not care for EVF or OVF. None gets the points here.

- I am not sure that I understand you last criteria, but in theory money is not a concern here. I already own the M10 with the 35. Wouldn't get any extra lens. I could also sell it to easily finance the Q2. So money is not part of my consideration. I won't have to spend anything regardless of what I choose. 

It's a TIE! I still don't know what to do.  

If as you say money is not a consideration, purchase what you do NOT have.. Your stable will be enlarged and happiness will surround you.. L

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

but would be so relieved to have the option to have autofocus, to make me assured that I'll be fine in every situation. Here, I'm referring to the pictures of my kids. That's 1 point for the Q.

You could add a third way which would be a simple used point and shoot fixed lens camera to cover autofocus.

You probably already have the fourth way which is an iPhone, with a 28mm lens, autofocus. The later the version the better the lens and sensor, and you can edit images on your computer screen if you wish.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Le Chef said:

but would be so relieved to have the option to have autofocus, to make me assured that I'll be fine in every situation. Here, I'm referring to the pictures of my kids. That's 1 point for the Q.

You could add a third way which would be a simple used point and shoot fixed lens camera to cover autofocus.

You probably already have the fourth way which is an iPhone, with a 28mm lens, autofocus. The later the version the better the lens and sensor, and you can edit images on your computer screen if you wish.

I actually already have that 3rd way. Ricoh griii. What a beats. Even better than my iPhone. But with a f4 aperture, it lacks a bit of depth of field for the portrait of my kids. Bokeh addiction. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Leica28 said:

I’m not sure what you want us to say to you.  We cannot make up your mind for you.  Toss the dice and live with it.  Your indecisiveness is not getting you anywhere but frustration.  Put a clamp on it and get on with enjoying your family.  

I’m sorry, I might have misexpressed myself from the start. 
i own a Leica m10p with a 35 lux. It’s already paid for. I love it a lot. It’s my favorite camera to use. BUT, the lack of autofocus limits me a lot. 30% of the use I have for it is documenting my family life. I can’t shoot my kids too easily with it. I miss too many moments. 
i CANNOT afford to keep my m10p and add a q2 to the shelf. But I could sell my m10 to finance the q2. I have to chose only one. 

so my question is, if I échange my m10 for a q2 for the sake of autofocus, will I be happy or will I regret the m10 ??? 
 

im not looking for you to tell me what to do. Just for some advice, some past experiences from people in the same situation than me, and if it’s not too much, maybe some wisdom .. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, stevej2001 said:

Maybe I'm missing something here, but the 10P doesn't do video. If you have kids, you're going to want to do video. Of course a smartphone can do a good job at that, as mentioned above.

I gave up on the dream to have a hybrid camera that does great video and great photos. 
i have one great system for video (a7siii, received last week) and one great body for photos: Leica m10p. Considering to exchange it against the q2, but fearing I might regret. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

And the Sony wouldn’t suffice for when you need AF for still pics?

Jeff

I’m not even going to go into the 12MP debate.  
i used to have the 61MP a7riv. The pictures don’t look good. Or at least they don’t compare to the Leica M stills I get. It’s probably mainly the lenses, but I just love the stills I get from the Leica so much more than the Sony. They have more character. They look less digital. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Steven said:

I’m not even going to go into the 12MP debate.  
i used to have the 61MP a7riv. The pictures don’t look good. Or at least they don’t compare to the Leica M stills I get. It’s probably mainly the lenses, but I just love the stills I get from the Leica so much more than the Sony. They have more character. They look less digital. 

A new CL bundled with 18-56 lens is about $3600, if you could afford to keep the M. Personally I couldn’t give up my M system, but that’s partly due to the RF, for which you seem indifferent.  The SL2 satisfies my complementary needs; seems that the CL system might serve that role for you, at a lower cost of entry. And you could use your M lens on it. These matters are quite personal.  Nobody else knows what gear was used for my display prints.

Jeff
 

 

Edited by Jeff S
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jeff S said:

A new CL bundled with 18-56 lens is about $3600, if you could afford to keep the M. Personally I couldn’t give up my M system, but that’s partly due to the RF, for which you seem indifferent.  The SL2 satisfies my complementary needs; seems that the CL system might serve that role for you, at a lower cost of entry. And you could use your M lens on it. These matters are quite personal.  

Jeff
 

 

Interesting, I never really looked at the CL before. Will investigate. Thanks. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...