LPC (Leica Perspective Control) on Q2 and Q2M.

[thomasvr71]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Do you know if this interesting feature available for the M10, M10M and M10R will arrive also for the Q2 and Q2M?

Edited May 10, 2021 by thomasvr71

[acg69]

1 hour ago, thomasvr71 said:

Do you know if this interesting feature available for the M10, M10M and M10R will arrive also for the Q2 and Q2M?

No word yet. It would be nice and it is one of the features that could definitely be implemented. Whether they do it or not, is probably up to their mapping of the market and the segmentation they see. May be they see this as a differentiating factor between the two series.

[insomnia]

They are probanly still trying to figure out how to extract money from such a feature addition.

[acg69]

16 hours ago, insomnia said:

They are probanly still trying to figure out how to extract money from such a feature addition.

Oh I know they are and that's fine in my book. They are in business to make money. There was a line of questions in a Leica questionnaire not too long ago that was sort of pointing to this direction. I, for one, would be willing to pay for features through firmware if said features added significantly to the functionality of the camera; I see nothing wrong with that. Perspective control may or may not be that kind of feature for me, but a different digital zoom implementation would most definitely is. After all, this is an expensive tool / toy and I would like to extract as much utility / fun from it as possible and I know that there may be a price for that:)

[Leica Guy]

I’m being honest. I do not understand the attraction of the perspective control feature. Does this work on both the jpg and RAW image in the M10 cameras? It would seem to me that it takes a lot of compute power to alter the images in this way. I generally do not trust in camera image manipulation. I want to keep it as simple as possible then use a powerful desktop computer for post processing including perspective fixes. 
 

I’m probably just showing my age and not embracing new features so if that’s the case, so be it. I’m guilty. I just try and hold my camera level and angled buildings are not a big challenge. 
 

What am I missing that makes Perspective Control desirable in camera? 
 

Thanks,

Dan

[Anakronox]

Perspective control tags the raw with the geometry to correct.  It is reversible in post.  If shooting jpeg, the image is cropped after the correction applied and is not reversible.  The feature relies on the built-in level of the M10-P, M10-M, and M10-R.  It is not available on the M10 and I am not sure the Q2 and Q2 Monochrom will get this software update, but one can always hope (and write Leica).

[trickness]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

When I was on the Leica website recently it asked me to take a survey for some marketing questions and there was quite an extensive section pondering whether I would be willing to pay for additional firmware features like Perspective control. I ticked the box that said no, and there was a field where you could elaborate on your answer. I responded that many of the competing Japanese cameras were loaded with features for a fraction of the price of Leica, and that given the high price of Leica cameras they should not nickel and dime their customers with offers like this. If you’re paying 6-9000 for a body and five or six thou for lens, I think it’s pretty tacky asking for more money for a feature like perspective control. 

[acg69]

I took that same survey and I answered positively to that comment. I see your point about nickel and diming their customers, but at the end of the day, if a feature is over and above what they had in mind to include in a firmware update, I consider it fair for them to charge. It is the client's prerogative whether to pay or not for the feature. This would add a bit of complexity, but we could have cameras that are more closely matched to our needs without the need to search elsewhere. Adding a feature from a more premium line to "lesser" lines does have its problems of course, but doing it this way may alleviate some of these problems. 

[trickness]

2 hours ago, acg69 said:

I took that same survey and I answered positively to that comment. I see your point about nickel and diming their customers, but at the end of the day, if a feature is over and above what they had in mind to include in a firmware update, I consider it fair for them to charge. It is the client's prerogative whether to pay or not for the feature. This would add a bit of complexity, but we could have cameras that are more closely matched to our needs without the need to search elsewhere. Adding a feature from a more premium line to "lesser" lines does have its problems of course, but doing it this way may alleviate some of these problems. 

Unique camera features/functionality are the bedrock of competitive advantage, key differentiators and a marketing/sales tool. Bake it into the price of the camera. They already keep jacking the price of bodies up almost every year to the point where it’s nine grand to get a new M. You really wanna have to pay more money for firmware features on that camera, when similar functionality will very likely be included on bodies that are half the money or less from other manufacturers? Paying more money for better glass or a unique shooting experience is one thing, paying for software upgrades is quite another. Ask people how much they like paying subscription fees for Adobe cloud.

[acg69]

2 hours ago, trickness said:

Unique camera features/functionality are the bedrock of competitive advantage, key differentiators and a marketing/sales tool. Bake it into the price of the camera. They already keep jacking the price of bodies up almost every year to the point where it’s nine grand to get a new M. You really wanna have to pay more money for firmware features on that camera, when similar functionality will very likely be included on bodies that are half the money or less from other manufacturers? Paying more money for better glass or a unique shooting experience is one thing, paying for software upgrades is quite another. Ask people how much they like paying subscription fees for Adobe cloud.

Different strokes for different folks:) Between not having a feature I need / want and paying for having it, I choose the latter.  I  invested in Leica; not looking to switch to other manufacturer for a feature or two. Don't mind the incremental cost if It does the trick for me and the camera I like 95% of the time:)

[trickness]

5 minutes ago, acg69 said:

Different strokes for different folks:) Between not having a feature I need / want and paying for having it, I choose the latter.  I  invested in Leica; not looking to switch to other manufacturer for a feature or two. Don't mind the incremental cost if It does the trick for me and the camera I like 95% of the time:)

To each his own - but are you saying you wouldn’t rather have it included with the purchase of the camera? 

[PhotoCruiser]

Isn't the LPC not the same/similar software correction that a good photo editing software offers?
Or is there a special advantage of the LPC?
Should I need to shoot architecture I would get a shift lens to correct the falling lines optically rather than software wise.

Chris

[SrMi]

5 hours ago, PhotoCruiser said:

Isn't the LPC not the same/similar software correction that a good photo editing software offers?
Or is there a special advantage of the LPC?
Should I need to shoot architecture I would get a shift lens to correct the falling lines optically rather than software wise.

Chris

Leica's perspective correction offers following advantages:

- Framing guidance in live-view. The users sees what will be cropped out after perspective correction is applied, which helps with framing.

- The roll and pitch values are stored in the DNG file and can be applied in Adobe software. Sometimes, this approach is easier and more natural than the manual one.

- It can also be used as automatic leveling only.

A dedicated shift lens is the better solution. Leica's perspective correction can be applied when shift lens is not carried along.

[PhotoCruiser]

Well then it could be useful for some Q2 photographers.
Chris

[Leica Guy]

I expect my smartphone (iPhone) will have perspective control soon. With the compute power in that device I expect it to be superior to any similar in-body camera feature by any manufacturer. Feature creep of just one more feature is a slippery slope to ending up with a Leica camera that resembles the bloated menu system on Canon, Nikon, Sony..

Not my cup of tea. I want Leica to continue to deliver a user experience that is more about quality of the image not manipulation of it. I want a simple user interface with obvious controls for the big three exposure elements. Lenses and bodies that are differentiated and better than the big camera brands and that I feel justify the premium price. 
 

Keep it simple and differentiated based upon value!! 

[acg69]

20 hours ago, trickness said:

To each his own - but are you saying you wouldn’t rather have it included with the purchase of the camera? 

I 'd rather have everything included along with the kitchen sink and my grandpa. But as this is never the case, I am looking for incremental utility out of the one camera I have and love, so paying for something extra (that came in as a feature after the Q2's introduction anyway) doesn't sound all that bad anyway. And to put it all in perspective, I am not saying I'd pay 500 dollars for it, but if it was something reasonable (~100 dollars for the digital zoom implementation for example), I'd pay it in a heartbeat.

[Stuart Richardson]

I just don't understand the play here...if it is a feature they have developed for the camera, it should be included in the cost of the camera. There is no physical cost involved for them, just development costs. It just serves to anger loyal customers who are already paying huge premiums on the body. Rather than ask people to pay whatever additional cost (surely the number of people who will buy it will be low), why not just add a fraction of the cost into every body? Leica as a company has always been about making the best cameras they can even if that means they are expensive. Meanwhile, this is an abrupt about face...to build cameras that are NOT the best cameras they can make, but instead have features disabled via firmware for which the customer has to pay extra to unlock. To me it seems antithetical to the das Wesentliche philosophy of the company. I understand paying extra for accessories or other actual physical or electronic changes to equipment, which have associated costs, but it has always struck me as incredibly chintzy to charge for things like video codecs or log formats etc. I hope Leica does not go in this direction, as it seems so antithetical to the company's values.