Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 2/10/2023 at 2:05 AM, Genoweffa said:

Dear Chef....one can not read 'nothing'

But one can quickly 'check' that there is 'nothing'...

And of course, my comment should not stop anyone from 'contributing' to 'nothing', so there will be way more of 'nothing'..

10-4

One cannot* check nothing either. Even nothing is something and there are now 17 pages of something even if you believe it is nothing 😁 this is going to get confusing quickly 😆

 

Edited by Daniel B
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Le Chef said:

What is that and how would it improve your photography?

Hi , I think he means Phase detect af. 
And it would not make the images better, but it would make them sharper. And if the are not good: then you get bad sharp images. 
but some people might like that ….

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Pelu2010 said:

Hi , I think he means Phase detect af. 
And it would not make the images better, but it would make them sharper. And if the are not good: then you get bad sharp images. 
but some people might like that ….

And if „they“ are not good: 

then you have bad sharp looking images. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 3 Stunden schrieb Pelu2010:

And if „they“ are not good: 

then you have bad sharp looking images. 

Hmm, so a better AF could be worse. Because, if you have a bad image and it is a bit blurry, you suddenly might end up with something that gets an artistic justification with that ‚intentionally‘ great of blurriness to point out the fogginess of our  existence per se and the surrealism of our society … or so :D 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

33 minutes ago, Daniel C.1975 said:

Hmm, so a better AF could be worse. Because, if you have a bad image and it is a bit blurry, you suddenly might end up with something that gets an artistic justification with that ‚intentionally‘ great of blurriness to point out the fogginess of our  existence per se and the surrealism of our society … or so :D 

Thanxs Daniel, 

Can't explain that better than >  heisenbergs dead or alive cat  < 

But I watch a lot of my old images that I had taken on film and many of them are good but unsharp. 

I think that a new camera can't improve you skill. 

But a coach can. 

Like all the people on this forum, that are experiencing a live coaching. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I just got myself the Q2 few days ago and AF had been reliable, except when the subject is too small in the frame and the spot focus hit on the background instead of the subject. I blame myself for that and I don't think having phase detect helps. But I can imagine having phase detect going to help subject tracking tremendously as the lens seems to focus very quickly.

I guess they're left with the Sony 60mp sensor as a meaningful upgrade to the Q2, which I'm not optimistic about as I didn't like the color signature of the M11. The color signature of the Q2 is just perfect.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Question  - assuming the new chip would have a resolution of 60 MP instead of 47 of the Q2 at 28 mm. How much would be left at 50 and 75 mm - digital basis. Would there be a remarkable difference ? At 28 mm and 35 mm the resolution of the Q 2 is better than good for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Smart-ass Mode on: It‘s Schrödinger ;) ,but I like the joke that Heisenberg was not sure if the cat belonged to Schrödinger, or not, or both :D

As an engineer I of course love the thought process around Schrödinger‘s Cat and its analogy to a good or bad photo is cleverly placed :) 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Olaf_ZG said:

Why are we talking cats? Shouldn’t we photograph them?

Yes . . . and with a Q2.

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!

  • Like 10
Link to post
Share on other sites

I had an interesting conversation with my younger family member, a 26 year old choreographer . We gave her the Leica Q1 a year and a half ago and it’s her only camera. I asked what she is lacking in her Q, mostly wanting to get a hint what photography gift we might have to prepare for her next birthday.
 

She said she is happy with her Q1, it documents her life and work well. As far the camera is concerned, she wondered if Leica could introduce some computational photography tricks into the Q. She is interested in a night mode and the option of some kind of multi-frame fusion to bracket shots together at different exposures like her phone does but with the Leica look and texture in the JPEG files. She does not shoot DNGs, she is a dancer after all, not a Leica purist. 


I found it’s interesting that younger people want to have a powerful computer in their cameras. Maybe it’s a good idea to get some computational technology into the new Q3.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Photography for me is about light. When I take a photo what comes SOOC has to reflect my feeling towards what made me take the shot.

Almost 50 years shooting with film before deciding to try digital.

What puzzles me is how complicated cams became, inferno of programs in most, sofisticated post processing as a must do. 

I have the feeling when I listen or read some photographers that we are far from photography as I see it, as film photographers did. 

Therefore Ms were perfect for me, but too heavy to always carry even with just one favorite lens (50 lux) and then the lens I needed was too often the ones I had left home. 

When Leica issued the Q I was really happy: light weight and covering about 90% of my needs with the macro feature as bonus, allowing manual shooting and focusing as I enjoy, no program parafernalia to get me drowned… and always in my bag.

Upgraded to the Q2 (the Q makes happy a close relative) because longer lasting battery, the ISO 50 which is very useful when like me you live in a very sunny country, the 47mp useful when you need serious crop. And some more little improvements. 

I think the Q3 should be in the same photographic philosophy, it is what makes Qs so popular: performant, versatile and simple at the same time. I don’t think I will upgrade, the only thing that would make me fall for it is impossible: a 1.4 aperture…

Sorry for the font size, tried to reduce them but could not find how as I am on ipad, being not home with iMac…

Edited by Lucena
Tried to reduce font size but did not succeed
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

So… In short… After lots of views on the subject, I still have a question related to Leica’s choices for the Q3…

If (and that is conditional of course) you were given the choice between - let’s say - a Q3 28mm and a Q3 40mm, (both Summilux) which one would you pick ?

I thought 28 would be the obvious answer, but it seems that it’s not… Pure speculation, obviously 😉

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...