Q2 test drive - CL owner's thoughts

[rob_w]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

So ... I posted recently re a test drive of the SL2-S with the SL24-70 zoom.  In that post I conceded that the SL2, wonderful in many ways, is just too heavy for many out-and-about photographic purposes.  Reflecting on that experience, I decided to test drive the Q2 next, while Leica are offering the opportunity.  Here are some thoughts which might be of interest to other CL users.

In the hand: just lovely.  The form factor and controls will be familiar to anyone who has used Leica equipment for some time.  I do prefer the visibly marked dials for aperture and shutter speed and the option of setting either or both to 'A' for automatic.  For my purposes I would want to add the handgrip (I think I have purchased so many Leica handgrips over the years the cost would be enough to buy another lens).  Viewfinder is excellent.  Menu system is familiar.  Weight is quite acceptable for a day's carrying and shooting.

The zoom:  The big difference with the Q2 is the opportunity to use digital zoom.  I was sceptical about it, but the system is beautifully implemented and even the 75mm equivalent crop gives plenty of rich file quality to work with.  The framelines approach suits me as a former M user.  In fact, nicer than the M as there is only one, correct, frameline in the viewfinder at a time.  The only thing I wish is that the cropped image could be displayed as an option.  The table below is copied from Jono Slack's excellent review.  I found it very useful and I do hope Jono does not mind me repeating it here (if you do, Jono, happy to delete it!)

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

The images: The lens itself is very sharp and detailed.  Obviously of very high quality.  I would just say, I thought for some images it was too contrasty.   And even with cropping, it is still just the one lens with its particular characteristics and look.  Also, you will note from Jono's table the the depth of field corresponds to a much reduced effective aperture when you start to use the crop facility.  For photos at 28mm the results are fine.  If you are happy all day with a 28mm lens, or even at a pinch a 35mm, this camera will keep you smiling.  All those shots came out beautifully.  For longer effective focal lengths, this is just not the same as switching to, say, a 50mm Summilux-M.  Overall, I think I liked the images better from the SL2-S and 24-70 zoom combination, but only by a hair’s breadth and only as far as I have had time to process the initial batches.  

Finally, I did not notice the image stabilisation (on either camera, actually) so not sure it was needed at the focal lengths and lighting conditions I would typically use.  I mention this because IBIS is frequently on the wish list for a hypothetical "CL2".  With longer lenses I'm sure I would want it on the next CL too, but for 28mm to 50mm at least, I would not miss it.

One significant weakness of the Q2 IMHO is the noise at higher ISOs - quite a lot of noise at 6400 compared to the SL2-S.   In fact, many images at 6400 were just unusable.  Maybe specialist software such as Topaz could help, but the starting position was poor.  

The leaf shutter is very quiet and discrete.  Often I could not hear myself that the picture had been taken.

Initially comparing the images to similar ones taken with the CL and TL23 or TL35 or the TL18-55 zoom, I would say it is difficult to see much difference at typical screen resolutions.  The Q2 lens is sharper, as I mentioned, so the pictures have more zing than, say, the TL23 can provide.  But I don't think they match the TL35, which is equally as resolving but with better and more subtle gradation - less "in your face".  These are only provisional results because I want to work with the files some more during the week and do some more detailed comparisons.  The high ISO noise performance of the CL is not very good either, of course.  The old saying is, it takes a year to evaluate a lens properly, so I don't want to rush it.

Would be delighted to hear how these experiences compare to others from CL users on this forum.

Cheers

Robert

 

 

Edited July 5, 2021 by rob_w

[Advertisement]

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

[SoCalLeicanator]

I am pretty close to getting a Q2 and this was an interesting read.

For me, the lack of weather sealing on the CL prevents a lot of shots.  Maybe I baby it too much, but I am fortunate enough live one km from a beach and have never been on the sand.  The sand and salt air seems to get in everything around here and just walking around BY the beach leads to sand in the little flutes on the lens.  Don't care to risk walking on it.  Maybe some out here has done a fair bit of this and could set me straight.

It also seems from my flickr/facebook searches that the images of the Q2 have even more of the 3D "pop" than the CL images.   I posted on the Q side of things referencing Ken Rockwell's put down of the Q2 (says iPhone 11 pro max is better) to see what people had to say and interestingly no one referenced this intangible that to my eye is THE difference between cell phone and APS-C and larger size sensors.  It's a CD/Vinyl sort of thing and in spite of all the engineering that goes into a phone I wonder if this will remain an intangible that a pure digital image will never be able to meet, much like the sound of an LP.  It also seems like the Q2 is even more dependent on post processing than the CL to get every last kernel from your image.  Downloading the source DNGs from Leica's proof of concept really drove that home.  I would have ditched each and every one of those DNGs that they turned into the archetypes of lens performance.

I know I will never want the accoutrements of an SL-2 size camera (not to mention potential financial ruination from lens purchases.  I'd want the 24-90 to start) and the Q2 seemed like a nice way to go full frame in a self contained package.  

Also agree that it takes years to evaluate a lens.  I was disappointed in the TL23 until I came back to it after a period of months and now love it.  

[jaapv]

5 hours ago, SoCalLeicanator said:

I am pretty close to getting a Q2 and this was an interesting read.

For me, the lack of weather sealing on the CL prevents a lot of shots.  Maybe I baby it too much, but I am fortunate enough live one km from a beach and have never been on the sand.  The sand and salt air seems to get in everything around here and just walking around BY the beach leads to sand in the little flutes on the lens.  Don't care to risk walking on it.  Maybe some out here has done a fair bit of this and could set me straight.
 

What can I say? I live within walking distance off the beach and my CL goes there at least twice a week in all weather, sun, storm or rain, hundreds of times over the years- and I have posted images on the forum to prove it. It may not be formally weather- and dust-proofed but I can testify that it is not made of sugar either. Of course one should take reasonable care and only take it out of the bag to use in inclement weather and be careful changing lenses, but that goes without saying.

[ramarren]

Not the Q2 but the Q2M is on my short list of cameras I'd be interested in obtaining if I am interested in anything more at all. I have too many cameras better than I am already; the CL is already in that class. 
 

No matter, the impressions are all fine to read. And it might be that I enjoy the extravagance at some point. 

[nicci78]

I am using Q2 and CL together. 
They are made for each other. Same UI (95%) same handling. 
For some tasks Q2 is better. For others CL is. 
Q2 is excellent for 28mm and 35mm. CL is best for any other focal lengths. 
My main focal length has always been 28mm for decades. So Q2 is a no brainer for me. 
Summilux-Q 28mm is a fantastic lens. 
And CL can use every Leica lenses from L-mount, M-mount and R-mount. 
My best lens for the CL ? TL 18-56mm. Underestimated but excellent in its field (outdoor photography at daytime) 

[nicci78]

I have also test driven the SL2-S for four days. And the SL2 during another two days. 
My conclusion : Both are way too heavy. 24MP is not enough to make any meaningful difference with the CL. Except at night. 
SL2 47MP is more versatile with the ability to use smaller TL lenses with 20MP. 
 

I hated all SL lenses. Even smaller but still big APO-Summicron-SL lenses. They are too big and too heavy. 
SL2-S excels at night. But its sheer size defeats the purpose. You will not bring it at any party. Or for a night walk across the city. 

For daytime, SL2 is better than SL2-S. I love the ability to crop into any desired aspect ratio. 

In the end of my test drives, I prefer using TL and M lenses with them. And loved using my CL and Q2 again. They are smaller and more enjoyable to use. 
IQ wise ? Q2 is the same as SL2. 
CL is not that much different than SL2-S in daytime. 
In APS-C mode CL is better than SL2 and SL2-S. 

 

So I am still using my Q2+CL combo. 
The SL2/SL2-S itch is over. 
Size does matter. And they are way way too big and heavy. For very little gain. 

When mixing all photos altogether. My wife were able to point out Q2 ones. (Due to Summilux-Q 28mm specific draw) But CL, SL2 and SL2-S are almost indistinguishable. So why bother to haul around a ton of aluminium ?

[nicci78]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

little hint : the best way to use Q2 75mm crop is with manual focus with viewing magnification set to the right function button. Like that you get almost a full view of 75mm field of view. Otherwise, it is way too small for composition. 

Sadly no work around for 50mm crop. It is small, but at least not too small. 

35mm crop mode is the best, you can set the screen to show all shooting information and still got some room left for out of field view. À la M cameras. Very nice, my favorite crop mode. 

 

Don't be put off by Q2 6400 ISO noise. You can trade 47MP for better noise reduction. With proper treatment SL2 and Q2 can get to SL2-S level at 6400 to 12800 ISO. Only after 25000 ISO, SLS-S will have a definite edge. But it is not that useful with a fast lens. Never need to go higher than 6400 with my Q2. However under 6400 ISO, Q2 and SL2 are better than SL2-S, due to high megapixel versatility. 

 

 

Edited July 6, 2021 by nicci78

[nicci78]

Of course using SL2 or SL2-S does make sense for several reasons :
- serious video works. 
- studio tethering with CaptureOne. 
- very very thin depth of field. 
- using ultra wide angle lenses as god intended it : as proper ultra wide angle. Or just buy the excellent TL 11-23mm. 
 

So if you got several ultra wide angle M and R lenses. SL line up makes sense 

 

But if you are a fan of telephoto. CL is unbeatable with its 24MP 1.5x crop sensor. 
Even more interesting. Almost every telephoto range lenses have optical stabilisation. Making them idéal for CL.

Leica OIS two lenses :
SL 24-90mm f/2,8-4 (35-135mm)
SL 90-280mm f/2,8-4 (135-420mm)

Lumix OIS four lenses : 
S 24-105mm f/4 (35-155mm)
S Pro 70-200mm f/2.8 (105-300mm)*
S Pro 70-200mm f/4 (105-300mm)*
S 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 (105-450mm)

Sigma OS one lens : 
100-400mm f/5-6.3 DG DN (150-600mm)*
 

* compatible with their own brand 1.4x or 2x teleconverters. 

 

Yes, they are all heavy. But I treat my CL as a rear lens cap. And hold the whole through the lens. 

Edited July 6, 2021 by nicci78

[rob_w]

6 hours ago, nicci78 said:

little hint : the best way to use Q2 75mm crop is with manual focus with viewing magnification set to the right function button. Like that you get almost a full view of 75mm field of view. Otherwise, it is way too small for composition. 

Good tip Nicci, thanks.  I did not think to try that but will if/when I get another chance.

Re the Q2 lens.  I did find it very high contrast for people portraits.  For 28mm scenic shots the detail capture is stunning.  Can see why people would love it on a monochrome sensor on the Q2M.  The colour science is great, too, on the colour Q2.  For portraits, I thought the results were a bit "etched" for want of a better term.  It reminded me of the Summicron-M 28/2.8 released with the M8.  I used to own that lens and loved it for many applications.  But for portraits, you needed a child subject with smooth, blemish-free skin.  On any other portrait subject it was disappointing.

Agree with your other points - pretty well all of them.  It was nice to scratch the itch, as you say.

[Simone_DF]

7 hours ago, rob_w said:

For portraits, I thought the results were a bit "etched" for want of a better term.  It reminded me of the Summicron-M 28/2.8 released with the M8.  I used to own that lens and loved it for many applications.  But for portraits, you needed a child subject with smooth, blemish-free skin.

For Q2 portraits, you could try putting a Tiffen Black Pro Mist filter on the lens, it will help smooth the skin and reduce the contrast.