Does anyone have both a Q2 and Q2M?

[ejg1890]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have a Leica Q2M along with Leica M10-R and M2 film camera. I do enjoy the Q2M, but I am considering a Q2 for the convenience of video along with point & shoot for color. This is all quiet an investment. Has anyone gone down the road of both Q2 Q2M?  Also, if that is the case how often have you used your M10(-R)?  My thinking is I would still use the M10-R for 21mm 35mm, 50mm, & the periodic 75mm. But as stated above this route is quiet an “investment” in camera gear.  

[Anakronox]

Yep, I have a Q2 to complement the Q2M.  However, I still mostly shoot color stocks on the MP and the M10M is my most used digital.  I honestly don’t use any of the video features beyond having tested the Q2M video.  It’s okay but video isn’t for me. 

[LocalHero1953]

I have tried video on the Q2, with a view to having it as a second or third camera for performance recording. But it has the 30min limit that my SL2-S and Sigma fp have done away with. It would have been a useful extra, but it’sa minor fault. 

[nicci78]

Don’t see the point to own twice the exact same camera : same strengths, same drawbacks and same 28mm. 
Q2 converted to black and white is close enough to Q2 Mono. So I won’t bother. 

[nicci78]

Reality check with my Lightroom classic database :

Over 89 K photos with Q & Q2 since mid 2015 until today : 

• only 2.5% were shot with higher than 6400 ISO. 
• a mere 0.4% over 12800 ISO
• a rounding error of 0.03% over 25000 ISO = only 30 shots in 7 years

Just to sum up : 

1. Do you really need the Q2 Mono very very high ISO performance ? Quite unlikely due to fast f/1.7 ; OIS and wide angle 28mm focal length
2. 47MP is more than plenty for colour shot. Don't need more perceived sharpness. Summilux-Q 28mm is not able to provide sharper results anyway. So don't bother. 
3. Giving up amazing post production with colour channels against the hassle to use actual optical colour filters does not make sense nowadays. 
4. Q and Q2 colors are amazing. Do you really want to get rid of them ? 

Edited August 3, 2022 by nicci78

[SrMi]

46 minutes ago, nicci78 said:

Reality check with my Lightroom classic database :

Over 89 K photos with Q & Q2 since mid 2015 until today : 

• only 2.5% were shot with higher than 6400 ISO. 
• a mere 0.4% over 12800 ISO
• a rounding error of 0.03% over 25000 ISO = only 30 shots in 7 years

Just to sum up : 

1. Do you really need the Q2 Mono very very high ISO performance ? Quite unlikely due to fast f/1.7 ; OIS and wide angle 28mm focal length
2. 47MP is more than plenty for colour shot. Don't need more perceived sharpness. Summilux-Q 28mm is not able to provide sharper results anyway. So don't bother. 
3. Giving up amazing post production with colour channels against the hassle to use actual optical colour filters does not make sense nowadays. 
4. Q and Q2 colors are amazing. Do you really want to get rid of them ? 

There is more than one stop difference in DR between ISO 100 to 800 (P2P). Shooting wide open is often not an option because of necessary DOF.

There is more aliasing with Q2 than Q2M. It bothers some photographers.

Q2M has a real raw histogram, which makes it easier to expose correctly.

[FoleyAMG]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I just picked up a Q2 trading a couple Sony Lenses on Fred Miranda to add to my Q2 Monochrom...

[acg69]

On 7/27/2022 at 11:25 AM, nicci78 said:

Don’t see the point to own twice the exact same camera : same strengths, same drawbacks and same 28mm. 
Q2 converted to black and white is close enough to Q2 Mono. So I won’t bother. 

That post just about sums it up. It makes no sense at all to own both.

[RaenaeVae]

I love to do things that make no sense. So I have both. My wife occasionally uses the Q2 and I mostly use the Q2M

[nicci78]

On 8/3/2022 at 5:40 PM, SrMi said:

There is more than one stop difference in DR between ISO 100 to 800 (P2P). Shooting wide open is often not an option because of necessary DOF.

There is more aliasing with Q2 than Q2M. It bothers some photographers.

Q2M has a real raw histogram, which makes it easier to expose correctly.

By using an actual colour filtre you'll lose 1 stop (yellow) 2 stops (orange my favourite or green) 3 stops (light red) or 4 stops (dark red)

So you'll end up a the same or worst place compare to Q2. 

I understand the pleasure to shoot with Monochrom cameras, I used to own an original M Monochrom. Awesome camera especially compare to really bad M9 (I mean it, it is one of the worst with M8) 

However since M10, SL, Q and even CL, the difference between desaturated colours and pure monochrom is small enough for not wanting to give up on colour channels editing in favour of clunky optical colour filtres.

Tailor made B&W with colour channel mixing is way better than naked Monochrom. However Monochrom with Orange filtre for example is awesome. However you are stuck with the colour chosen before the shot. A very annoying issue. 

Edited August 5, 2022 by nicci78

[Viv]

On 7/27/2022 at 10:25 AM, nicci78 said:

Don’t see the point to own twice the exact same camera : same strengths, same drawbacks and same 28mm. 
Q2 converted to black and white is close enough to Q2 Mono. So I won’t bother. 

Same here.

[M11 for me]

vor 34 Minuten schrieb nicci78:

By using an actual colour filtre you'll lose 1 stop (yellow) 2 stops (orange my favourite or green) 3 stops (light red) or 4 stops (dark red)

Just to start with: I have no idea about b&w sensors. Still I know 2 people owning b&w Leicas. But none uses filters. Could you not add in post?

[SrMi]

25 minutes ago, M11 for me said:

Just to start with: I have no idea about b&w sensors. Still I know 2 people owning b&w Leicas. But none uses filters. Could you not add in post?

Yes, using filters is optional. The filters are typically not used at night, when light is low and high ISO is necessary. I use them rarely at daylight. 
You can add filters in post only for images that contain color information in their original form.

[SrMi]

1 hour ago, nicci78 said:

By using an actual colour filtre you'll lose 1 stop (yellow) 2 stops (orange my favourite or green) 3 stops (light red) or 4 stops (dark red)

So you'll end up a the same or worst place compare to Q2. 

I understand the pleasure to shoot with Monochrom cameras, I used to own an original M Monochrom. Awesome camera especially compare to really bad M9 (I mean it, it is one of the worst with M8) 

However since M10, SL, Q and even CL, the difference between desaturated colours and pure monochrom is small enough for not wanting to give up on colour channels editing in favour of clunky optical colour filtres.

Tailor made B&W with colour channel mixing is way better than naked Monochrom. However Monochrom with Orange filtre for example is awesome. However you are stuck with the colour chosen before the shot. A very annoying issue. 

Most famous shots taken with B&W film Leicas do not seem to have used any color filters. Using filters is not mandatory with B&W cameras.
As you write, there is a difference. Whether a different work constraint matters or not (focus on B&W), the main question is how much the difference matters. For some, the difference between a Sony and Leica does not matter.
I would not say that adding a monochrome camera makes or does not make sense in general. However, I think it is a personal decision, and it could matter.

 

[liggy]

5 hours ago, Viv said:

Same here.

Me three.  Love the idea of a Monocrom and originally preordered one but the more sensible side won out.  Mono processing is good enough for me.  

[mikelevitt]

On 8/5/2022 at 10:15 AM, SrMi said:

Most famous shots taken with B&W film Leicas do not seem to have used any color filters. 

 

How do you possibly know that?

[mikelevitt]

On 8/5/2022 at 9:13 AM, M11 for me said:

Just to start with: I have no idea about b&w sensors. Still I know 2 people owning b&w Leicas. But none uses filters. Could you not add in post?

No.  The filters change the relative brightness of various colors.  For example, a red filter transmits red light, and blocks cyan.  Red things in the frame are rendered as almost white and it turns skies and water dark.  A green filter makes foliage brighter.  A yellow filter generally makes caucasian skin a bit brighter.

I have both Q2 and Q2M and it is a JOY and PLEASURE to shoot the Q2M with colored filters.

[SrMi]

13 minutes ago, mikelevitt said:

How do you possibly know that?

I admit it, it was a very speculative assumption that most famous B&W shots with film Leicas did not use any filters. I was hoping somebody would prove me wrong with examples.

HCB said that he did not use filters (link). Garry Winogrand does not seem to use a filter in his documentary (link).

[hansvons]

2 hours ago, SrMi said:

I was hoping somebody would prove me wrong with examples.

As stated above, colour filters, especially the dramatic dark red filter, take a considerable amount of light out of the equation, bringing an ISO 100 film down to ISO 25 and below (you want some leeway when shooting negative). When you take photos with a film camera (no IBIS), typically, you want your exposure time to be no slower than 1/125 sec. The action must be frozen for many street shots, meaning a 1/500 is even more desirable. At some point, inevitably, you will run out of light when using strong colour filters like Red 25 for that dramatic sky.

Considering all that above, and the fact that Leica film cameras have been used mostly for documentary/journalistic photography rather than landscape work on a tripod and that ISO 400 films came later to the game, your assumption is probably not wrong.

(I don't use a colour filter when shooting film B&W on the street or occasional doc shoots. Don't want to scarify a safe shutter speed and aperture for sky drama or brighter foliage.)

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[pgh]

20 hours ago, SrMi said:

I admit it, it was a very speculative assumption that most famous B&W shots with film Leicas did not use any filters. I was hoping somebody would prove me wrong with examples.

HCB said that he did not use filters (link). Garry Winogrand does not seem to use a filter in his documentary (link).

These people relied on the content for the strength of their work - and the content of their work had nothing to do with color no with what could be emphasized using color channels to edit. Unless the filter is somehow emphasizing the content itself (maybe you're doing some sort of very particular landscape work) it's really going to be pretty arbitrary and only affect your pictures in a lateral way (ie not make them better, or worse, just different). I did printing for a pretty renowned documentary photographer who shot film for his well known work through about 2008. Didn't use filters. Didn't even fuss with Leicas. Just focused on the story and on seeing - he still does, and is still one of the best. Now he just does pretty straight conversions from a digital slr of japanese make - work still is unmistakably his. It's how he sees not how he tones.