How about a QT?

[clasami]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

One of the great benefits of the Q2 is the ability to do quite some cropping. Even 75mm is pretty usable. But I still carry a second body with me for short telefoto images. It is a Sony a7c with the Sigma 90mm f2.8C. Small (about the same size as the Q2), but good quality up to 135mm. But it is a 24MP sensor. Not sure if Sony will ever offer an a7cR with a 47MP sensor. But what if Leica would offer a "tele" Q. The Q with a 90mm lens about the same size as the Sigma lens, and with a 47MP sensor? I would buy one.

[M11 for me]

Would there be a market for that? I doubt it. But I might be wrong as one of these cameras are already sold. To you 😀

Edited October 24, 2022 by M11 for me

[Advertisement]

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

[jankap]

There was a hint somewhere: If you are not pleased with your photos, you take them too far away.

Edited October 24, 2022 by jankap

[clasami]

I am very pleased with my photos. Just love the compressed perspective of short tele.

[bobtodrick]

I think the strongpoint of the Q is it’s wideangle…it is the most useable for compact vacation/street/all around camera. Sometimes I wish for something longer, but not often.

Guaranteed if it came with a 90 there would be to many times indoors or tight spaces I’d be wanting something wider.

why end up with two cameras…get an M with a couple lenses

 

[clasami]

vor 1 Minute schrieb bobtodrick:

I think the strongpoint of the Q is it’s wideangle…it is the most useable for compact vacation/street/all around camera. Sometimes I wish for something longer, but not often.

Guaranteed if it came with a 90 there would be to many times indoors or tight spaces I’d be wanting something wider.

why end up with two cameras…get an M with a couple lenses

 

Thought about the M. But all MF is not for me, and I think the EVF of teh Q suits me better with a short tele lens. Carrying two small bodies is no issue for me. Alrready I am carrying the Q2 and the Sony a7c with the short tele.

[bobtodrick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

15 minutes ago, clasami said:

Thought about the M. But all MF is not for me, and I think the EVF of teh Q suits me better with a short tele lens. Carrying two small bodies is no issue for me. Alrready I am carrying the Q2 and the Sony a7c with the short tele.

Now…a Q with an A/F version of the Tri-Elmar…if they could keep it relatively compact…

[clasami]

vor 1 Minute schrieb bobtodrick:

Now…a Q with an A/F version of the Tri-Elmar…if they could keep it relatively compact…

That is a nother highly interesting thought which I am ready to entertain.

[PaulJohn]

If they were to do a QT I wonder what focal length they would pick? Maybe 75? That would give you 75-200 using the same crops as the Q2. I guess it would need to be f2.8 to remain relatively compact.

Meanwhile which camera would best give you that in a small package? Fujifilm X-T5 + 50mm f2?

[ynp]

I will be happy to have a fast 50mm lens with the leaf shutter. It’s the most versatile portrait focal length for work outside. 

[darylgo]

Sigma had a series with different focal lengths.  I would love to see Leica do this also, there’s a hint of a longer than 28mm Q from Leica, we’ll see. 
 

The issue when leaving 28mm is focus accuracy, shallow depth of field, size.  Success with a 28mm lens is universal, notice most camera manufacturers choose this or its equivalent for their high end quality compacts.  Ricoh recently went higher however its aps-c and the Q will crop to about the same focal length at aps-c equivalent. 

[Herr Barnack]

On 10/24/2022 at 9:01 AM, clasami said:

I am very pleased with my photos. Just love the compressed perspective of short tele.

When you are photographing people, cram all of your subjects into a phone booth or a Port-A-Potty.

(sorry, couldn't resist 😊 hope you won't hate me)

 

Edited December 19, 2022 by Herr Barnack

[DenverSteve]

On 10/24/2022 at 7:32 AM, bobtodrick said:

Now…a Q with an A/F version of the Tri-Elmar…if they could keep it relatively compact…

To me, one of the attractive aspects of the Q2 is its fast, Summilux lens.  Tri-Elmars are slow by comparison and would remove a great deal of the benefit and attractiveness of the Q.  I don't believe it's possible or Leica would have, long ago, produced a Tri-"Lux" lens. 

[Farrell Gallery]

If they made a 75 or even 85mm version of the Q2, I'd buy one....though it would seldom be used for anything except a second body at weddings (mostly during ceremony) and for headshots....is it a practical invention for Leica? Probably not. The Q2 is perfect as is for what it is, and handles most situations....more versatile than an 85, though it too has its uses. 

[Phil75]

A Q Vario 28-70 mm would be great, if they managed to keep the lens (an Elmar) relatively small. 

[Le Chef]

As has been written many times here and elsewhere, the lens for the Q and Q2 contains the shutter mechanism and of course does not need a lens mount as the lens is fixed and part of the camera structure. It’s also a cleverly sized lens in terms of focal length and Aperture.

If you want to know what a 28-70mm Q2 would look like then look across at the SL2 with the 28-70 f2.8 zoom lens. The lens alone is 850g or so. The body alone weighs 835g. The Q2 complete is 718g so you can see the advantage of a fixed lens with built in shutter just on weight alone.

It’s likely a Q2 “Vario” with 28-70mm would be closer to the size and weight of the SL + 28-70mm than the current Q2. We believe from gossip that the next generation Q will have a 60MP sensor and will possibly have “pixel binning”. If so why do you need to add more weight, more complexity, greater size and greater cost, when you can achieve all the zooming of a 28-70 lens simply by using a more densely packed sensor?

[Phil75]

With an aperture of 2.8 the lens size would increase considerably, right. That's why I wrote "Elmar": f3.x-5.x/6.x or a continuous f4.0 would be sufficient in my opinion. And one would still be able to crop at physical 70mm FL and get high quality 135mm equivalent cropped photos.

[Pelu2010]

On 10/24/2022 at 2:56 PM, jankap said:

There was a hint somewhere: If you are not pleased with your photos, you take them too far away.

I am specializes in making 28mm portraits.  I love those images. 
But if there were a 75mm or 50 mm 1.2 QT3 , I would buy it. And I think that I would not be the only one. 
I usually take two cameras if I work. 
So I can set up the cameras for the different tasks. 

and just for the sake of the argument. 
i started with an Olympus OM10 with 1.8 50 mm. So I know what the lake of possibilities means. It’s good and it teaches you, but then comes a time where  you what to expand your creativity. 
 

but you are right, sometimes you need to get closer. 
 

even if the subject is a 75mm Q3 
 

[clasami]

Good arguments for and against a QT here. Let's say there won't be Q with a short tele lens - what about this thinking: Fuji has a wide and tele converter for their x100. The wide is actually resonably sized and doesn't impact IQ negatively, if at all. Never tried the tele converter as it was too big for my taste. Would converters for the Q be possible at all? Like one that turns the 28 into a 24 or 22? And one that turns the 28 into a 50?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[Pelu2010]

This is the nearest I got with a portrait. 

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!